Columbia River Estuary Data Development Program plan of study

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

Coastal Zone
information
center

CDC coilection

PLAN OF STUDY

FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE

COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY
ATA EVELOPMENT ROGRAM

COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY STUDY TASKFORCE

GC JULY 23,1982
E
astal Zon
for io
lonat no]
m
Center

ORE

856
.C63
1979

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

COVER
River Spirits, by Gayle McKennon, is based on traditional Northwest I
Indian motifs. This graphic is projected on a map of the estuary.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

U. S . DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
CHARLESTON , SC 29405-2413

Property of CSC Library

PLAN OF STUDY

For the Completion of the

COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY

DATA DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

Prepared under a Cooperative Agreement between

CREST (Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce)
P.O. Box 175
Astoria, Oregon 97103

and the

U.S. Water Resources Council
2120 L Street NW, Suite 800
Washington, D.C. 20037

JULY 23, 1982

CIO,

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY

1. INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Program History 1
1.2 The Revised Plan of Study 2
1.3 Program Design and User Needs 5
1.4 The Columbia River and Its Estuary 5
1.5 The Study Area 8

2. USERS AND THEIR INFORMATION NEEDS 9

1.1 Introduction 9

1.2 Land and Wate r Use Decisions 9

3. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 12

3.1 Introduction 12

3.2 Goals 12

3.3 Objectives 14
3.4 The Relationship Between-Goals/
Objectives and Estuarine Management 17

4. WORK PROGRAMS 30

4.1 Introduction 30
4.2 Emergent Plant Primary Production 32
4.3 Benthic Primary Production 36
4.4 Water Column Primary Production 40
4.5 Zooplankton and La rval Fish 44
4.6 Benthic Infauna 48
4.7 Epibenthic Organisms 52
4.8 Fish 56

4.9 Avifauna 62

4.10 Wildlife 66

4.11 Marine Mammals 69
4.12 Sedimentation and Shoaling 72
4.13 Currents 77

4.14 Simulation 82

4.15 Integration 86
4.16 Cartographic Contractor 90
4.17 Data Management 94

5. INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 99

5.1 Introduction 99

5.2 Information Dissemination 99

5.3 Final Products 99

5.4 Quality Assurance 102

6. PROGRAM ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT 103

6.1 Introduction 103
6.2 Program Organization 103
6.3 Program Management 109
6.4 Program Schedule 112
6.5 Program Budget 115
6.6 Additional Work Tasks 115

APPENDICES

A CREDDP Chronology of Events

B CREDDP Contracts

C Bibliography of CREDDP Publications
D Plan of Study Distribution List
E Reviewers of the Draft Plan of Study

F Staff and Consultants List

G Relationship Between Goals and Objectives

List of Figures

Figure Title Page
1.1 Study Process 4
1.2 Estuary Map between 8 & 9
4.1 Schedule for the Emergent Plant Primary Production work unit 35
4.2 Schedule for the Benthic Primary production work unit 39
4.3 Schedule for the Water Column Primary Production work unit 43
4.4 Schedule for the Zooplankton and Larval Fish work unit 47
4.5 Schedule for the Benthic Infauna work unit 51
4.5 Schedule for the Epibenthic Organisms work unit 55
4.5 Schedule for the Fish work unit 60

4*8 Schedule for the Avifauna work unit 65

4.9 Schedule for the Wildlife work unit 68

4.10 Schedule for the Marine Mammals work unit 71
4.11 Schedule for the Sedimentation and shoaling work unit 76

4.12 Schedule for the Currents work unit 81

4.13 Schedule for the Simulation work unit 85

4.14 Schedule for the Integration work unit 89
4.15 Schedule for the Cartographic work unit 93
4.16 Schedule for the Data Management work unit 98
6.1 Program Organization 104
6.2 Program Schedule 113

List of Tables

Table Title Page
4.1 Preliminary list of number and type of maps by work unit 91
6.1 CREDDP Staff 107
6.2 Program Cash Flow Needs 110
6.3 Program Management Budget by Object Classification 116
6.4 Program Budget 117
6.5 Additional work tasks and approximate costs 118

SUMMARY

The Columbia River Estuary Data Development Program

The. Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce (CREST), in cooperation with the
U.S. Water Resources Council, has prepared this Plan of Study for the completion
of the Columbia River Estuary Data Development Program (CREDDP). I CREDDP was
originally authorized in October 1978 as a 6-year, $6,204,000 interdisciplinary
applied research program. It, was administered by the 'Pacific Northwest River
Basins Commission until September 30, 1981 when the Commission was abolished, and
the completion of CREDDP was left in abeyance. In recognition of the regional
importance of*. CREDDP information, Congress appropriated funds for the orderly
completion of the program (in December 1981). A revised Plan of Study 'is needed
because of changes in both the schedule and the funding available to complete the

program.
On September 7, 1982, CREST entered into a cooperative agreement with the
U.S. Water Resources Council to administer the completion of the program. The
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration will assume the role of the U.S.
Water Resources Council as the federal representative in this co-operative

agreement.
The purpose of CREDDP is twofold: to increase understanding of the Columbia
River Estuary ecosystem and to provide information in a form suitable for use in
making water and related land use management decisions. The program and its
products are designed with the needs of users of the information in mind. These
users include resource managers, developers and other commercial interests,
interested citizens, scientists, and educational institutions.
The goals and objectives of CREDDP specify the scientific research to be
completed and its relation to planning needs. To assure that the technical goals
and objectives are achieved, work programs are presented in detail for each of the
CREDDP work units. Individual work units will be integrated in order to produce a
more complete understanding of the estuary, and emphasis will be placed on the
development of useable resource management documents.
CREDDP will have an information management program to provide for data
archiving and for the production and distribution of final products. These
respective functions will be handled by a Data Management contractor and Program

management.

The Plan of Study establishes a Program Control Board consisting of CREST and
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. This group will provie
executive direction for the completion of the program. A Federal Advisory Panel
will advise program management on policy. In addition, there will be a Users
Advisory Panel consisting of federal, state, and local agency representatives and
other interested parties to work with program management and advise CREST on
product development. The program manager and staff will be responsible for
day-to-day program management.
Program management activities, research activities, and product development
are scheduled to allow for efficient completion of CREDDP. The Plan of Study
presents a program budget with preliminary work unit and management allocations.
The Water Resources Council has advised CREST that the amount of funding available
for program activities from the Congressional appropriation will be 1.22 million
dollars and that all CREDDP activities must be completed by June 30, 1984. The
Plan of Study also itemizes additional work tasks that can be completed if

additional funds.become available.
The Plan of Study is intended to be flexible, and it may be amended by a
consensus of the Program Control Board.
All program activities during the completion of CREDDP will conform to the
regulations of the National Environmental Policy Act.

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Program History

CREDDP is an applied research program with two purposes: to increase
understanding of the ecology of the Columbia River Estuary and to provide
information useful in making land and water use decisions. The origin of the
program can be traced to the concerns o f local governments and citizens for a
clearer understanding of the estuarine ecosystem. They saw a .need for a better
information base for use in managing natural resources and in planning
development. Local governments, planning commissions, and state and federal
agencies involved in making land and water use decisions were seen as the
principal users. Because of these-concerns, the Governors of the States of Oregon
and Washington requested in 1974 that the Pacific Northwest River Basins
Commission (PNRBC)' undertake an interdisciplinary ecological study of the estuary.
At approximately the same time, local governments and port districts formed CREST,
the Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce, to develop a regional management plan
for the Estuary.
The Commission accepted the Governors' requests and'in June 1976 published a
"Proposal to Study" which outlined the need for an estuary study, how such a study
would be organized and managed, and an estimated budget. This proposal was
submitted to the Water Resources Council (WRC as part 'of PNRBC's total program
budget request for FY 1978, and was endorsed by the Governors of the two states

and the members of CREST.

The program received an authorization for federal funding in 1979, and the
proposed $6,204,000 six-year program received first year appropriated funds in the
amount of $828,900. Through September 30, 1981, the Pacific Northwest River
Basins Commission administered CREDDP and obligated approximately $3,600,000 to
the program. The chronology of CREDDP events up to July 19 82 is shown in Appendix
A. A list of the former CREDDP contracts and contractors is given in Appendix B.
When PNRBC was abolished in September 1981, the completion of the program was
left in abeyance. 'This termination of CREDDP occurred at a mid-stage of the
program. Much of the f ield work had been carried 'Out and some of the data
analysis had been completed, but few final products had been produced. Completed
products included the literature surveys, the final reports f rom some of the
smaller work units, and reports such as the historical "Columbia's Gateway.11

Otherwise, the only products from most of the major work units were the 1980 annual
reports, which generally presented only raw data and a summary of the work
completed with some preliminary findings (Appendix C).
In December 1981 Congress recognized that data already collected were in
danger of being wasted, and provided funds for the orderly completion of the
study.

1.2. The Revised Plan of Study
The original Plan of Study approved by PNRBC in March 1979 describes CREDDP
as a six year effort. A new plan is needed to reorganize the program within a
shorter time frame and decreased funding. The new completion date is June 1984,
and the available funding is $1.22 million. During the past three months CREST,
in cooperation with WRC, has drafted and revised this new Plan of Study describing
the completion of CREDDP and this Plan of Study supercedes the Plan of Study dated
March 1979. The Plan of Study describes program activities, staff
responsibilities and organization, and presents a program budget together with
time and cost estimates for the revised work units. The draft Plan of Study was
circulated to the distribution list (Appendix D). Comments from numerous
reviewers were received (Appendix E) and have been incorporated where appropriate.
This revised Plan of Study describes the steps necessary to bring CREDDP to
an orderly conclusion. Sections I and 2 provide the historical,.geographical and
scientific background to the program, and discuss the users of the final products

and their information needs.

The revised list of CREDDP goals and objectives, described in Section 3, was
derived from the original Plan of Study and modified with advice from potential
information users and the Data Evaluation Team consultants. General goals and
specific objectives are defined in terms of information needed to make management
decisions for the Estuary. A CREDDP users workshop was held to solicit
suggestions from local, state and federal agencies on the most useful produ
needed from the program. Interested citizens and other groups also participated.
These users reviewed a preliminary list of goals and objectives and made
recommendations for completing data analysis and preparing maps, reports and other
products. Many of the objectives in the original Plan of Study were deleted
because of insufficient time and funds. The highest priority was assigned to the
objectives that would lead to the most useful products within the revised time
frame and budget.
CREST assembled a Data Evaluation Team of six scientists to provide technical

assistance during the drafting of the new Plan of Study, particularly-with Section
4 (Work Programs). Five of the Data Evaluation Team members were former CREDDP
researchers while the sixth was familiar with similar applied estuarine research
programs. Two Data Evaluation Team meetings were held to review the status of
program data and to recommend a plan for completing data set S* The Data
Evaluation Team also recommended a method for integrating 'the data of different
work units to complete the program. An Integration Team will be established
during the completion of the program, whose duties will include a study of
ecosystem level processes using the results from the program's work units. The
steps necessary for completion of the program are shown in Figure 1.1.
Two other consultants assisted in preparing this Plan of Study., A Data
Management Consultant reviewed the status of program data in the scientific work
units and made recommendations on assembling completed CREDDP data into a data
management system. Another scientific consultant reviewed the Currents and
Simulation work units in CREDDP and made recommendations on the quality and future
use of the physical data and related modelling. A list of the CREST and WRC staff
and consultants on the Plan of Study is included in Appendix F.
The work programs present detailed plans and schedules for the tasks
requiring completion. Such tasks typically fall into the following categories:
- processing of stored samples to obtain the raw data;
- analyzing the raw data;
- filling gaps in the program's data by whatever means are feasible (mainly
using information from scientific literature);

- integrating the data from different work units;
- preparing the final products.
The Work Programs Section also describes relationships between the different work
units, and how they are linked to the objectives and final products.
Section 5, Information Management, describes the kinds of final products the
program will produce, and how information will be disseminated and used. Section
6, Study Organization and Management, describes the management structure needed to
complete the program and defines the responsibilities of program management and
other agencies involved in the study. Staffing requirements and study contracting
procedures are described in this section. Milestones for completing management
activities are identified, and report and completion dates are scheduled.
Finally, a budget is presented for completing the program.

Figure I.I.Study Process.

Data Integration
Sample analysis, Integration r-eport
process ing interpre- team preparation
tation and
validationi _.j
T

Final work
unit
Submission report pr
paration
of data to
Data Mana-
ger

Report
review

Incorpora-
tion into
computer
system

Report
publication

Users of
CREDDP e00000,
information

1.3. Program Design and User Needs

CREDDP will develop technical reports, maps, and nontechnical interpretive
summaries that can be used in making land and water use decisions. The us ers of
this information, described in Section 2, include organizations and individuals
involved in estuary planning and resource managemen.t. CREDDP's broad,
ecosystem based approach will provide a basis for assessing the potential effects
of developments.
Program goals and objectives for the individual work units are intended to
provide this information. the goals include gathering information and developing
products which describe both the structure and processes of the estuary.
In addition, the integration of data from the individual biological and
physical units is a -necessary step in developing useable pr oducts. Data
integration is the synthesis of a multidisciplinary information base so that
generalizations about ecological processes can be drawn. This will lead to a
clearer understanding of the likely impact of estuarine alterations on the

ecosystem.
These integration activities will give cohesion to the program and will
convert the work unit products into a broader ecosystem view, providing many of
the program's process-oriented products. From the users' point of view, this will
be very valuable, since a major insight into the interrelatedness of the di fferent
estuarine properties will be provided. It 'can therefor e form a basis for
predicting the impacts on the ecosystem of site specific alterations.

1.4. The Columbia River and Its Estuary

The Columbia, the largest river on the' Pacific Coast of North America, is
approximately 1,200 miles long and drains over 250,000 square miles. Initially it
was the route which opened the region to commerce and settlement, and industries
developed based on the vast fisheries and timber reso urces. Since then, the
economy has diversified. Numerous dams have provided generating capacity for
hydroelectric power, and water appropriations from the river allow fo r the
irrigation of arid lands. Forestry is the major industry over the western part of
the basin, and the river continues to play an important role in log transportation
and storage. Major ports have developed along the river and water-borne commerce
exceeds 30 million tons annually, with a 40' navigation channel inland to
Portland. Although fisheries are an important regional industry, they have

declined steadily since dam construction and large scale logging began. The
salmon industry has been particularly hard hit: the lac k of resource management
during regional development led to the catastrophic decline of some of the world's
largest salmon runs through dam building, logging practices, overfishing and
wetland destruction. Dam related losses to salmon and steelhead fisheries since
1960 alone have been valued at over $300 million annually.
The need for sound management to protect natural resources during regional
development is obvious, and ecosystem studies like CREDDP are necessary for
informed decision making.
Like most large west coast rivers, the Columbia is characterized by very high
flows during late spring and early summer, generated by melting snows in the
mountainous watershed. Even with 13 mainstream and numerous tributary dams,
monthly average flows in the lower river sometimes exceed 600,000 cfs during
spring freshets. In addition, winter freshets are common, caused by storms
concentrated in the Cascade Mountains. The flows of late summer are no longer as
low as before dam construction, due to regulation for hydropower generating needs.
In the estuary, salinities are constantly changing in response to semidiurnal
tides, spring/neap cycles, river flow and wind effects.
Patterns of circulation are unique in every estuary, and because of the
profound effects of currents on sediment, transport, water chemistry and plankton,
current measurements and circulation modelling are important elements in CREDDP.
Studies of estuarine sediments, including their composition, distribution and
transportation, are an imp ortant part of the Columbia River Estuary Data
Development Program. Information derived from sediment studies forms an important
contribution to the biological work units and is also of direct interest to

estuary managers.
The stability, grain size and organic content of sediments -influence the

structure of the invertebrate communities which inhabit them as well as the levels

of benthic primary producti vity. Sediments are therefore important in determining
the productivity of numerous biological communities in the estuary.
The characteristics of shoaling in the estuary are of interest to those users
of the program data who are involved in maintaining navigation channels and
disposing of dredge materials. It is evident that far more river-borne and
bedload sediment enters the estuary than leaves it, and the effects of this
shoaling on navigation and on biological resources needs to be evaluated.
Comparisons should be made of present day shoaling patterns with those which
occurred before the estuary was extensively altered.by man. Information needed

for predicting the effects of future alterations on sediment transport will be
provided by the Sedimentation, Currents, and Simulation work units.
Water chemistry has an important influence on the productivity of biological
communities in the estuary. The availability of river and ocean derived nutrients
is likely to be limiting to populations of planktonic organisms in particular,
while salinity levels in the water play an important role in structuring
communities. Since there is no single work unit in CREDDP responsible for
collecting water chemistry data, close attention will be paid to this topic in
integration activities.
Sources of primary productivity in the estuary need to be quantified in order
to model the first trophic level and the estuary carbon budget. Primary
productivity supports all the higher trophic organisms through direct grazing,
detritus production or dissolved organics. The individual sources, such as tidal
marshes, benthic plants, phytoplankton and river-borne detritus should be
quantified in space and time so that their individual importance can@ be
appreciated. This information is central to developing an 'ecosystem view of the
estuary. It is also directly useful to estuary managers, who can estimate the
importance of tidal marshes and tideflat areas, for example, to the carbon budget.
Invertebrates which occupy the sediments and water column of the estuary
depend directly or indirectly on the primary producers. These invertebrates are
of great importance to the food web, since they are the major food source for many
commercially important species of fish and wildlife. Characteristics of the
habitats and life cycles of important invertebrates, together with abundance and
biomass data, are needed to estimate food supplies available to the higher trophic
levels. This information can also be used by estuary managers to identify areas
of high invertebrate productivity. Also, some species such as sand shrimp,
Dungeness crab and crayfish have direct economic importance, and information on
these species can be used in the management of stocks.
Many finfish and wildlife species found in the estuary support commercial and
recreational harvest. Information on the habitats, life cycles, feeding,
population sizes and migrations of these species is of prime importance to
resource managers who have the responsibility for preserving stocks. Commercial
fish include salmonids, starry flounder, English sole, smelt, American shad,
herring and anchovy. Harvesting these species is a major part of the local
economy. Economically important wildlife which depend on the estuary include many
species of waterfowl and aquatic furbearing mammals. Research on higher trophic
organisms will focus on the requirements of different life cycle stages, the

importance of the estuary to each species, and their interactions with organisms

lower in the food chain.

1.5. The Study Area

The CREDDP study area extends from the Columbia River Bar upstream to River
Mile 46 at the southeastern end of Puget Island (Figure 1.2). This includes the
main body of the estuary, semi-enclosed by land, where ocean and river waters mix.
It also includes a riverine, freshwater area (above RM 23) where current reversals

as a result of tidal action are common. Excluded is the 100 mile tidal section of

the river where current reversals are rare or absent, and the plume which extends

far offshore in the form of mixed river and ocean water. These three areas are

not normally encompassed by definitions of an estuary. Along the estuary
shoreline, the study area extends up to the line of non-aquatic vegetation, where
the tidal vegetation is replaced by upland communities, or up to mean higher high
water where vegetation is absent.

Fig. 1.2 - ESTUARY MAP

124* 12345' 1273W

VICINITY MAP

ILWAC

WASHINGTON
0

Grays Bay

P., d
Baker 831

OREGON

. ..... .. .... ..

. ...... .....

.t.
....... ... CATHLAMET
HAMMON
-------- ----------------- ---
----------- CaMmet Bali
ASTORIA
Younp Bay

. . ... Pu at Islan
WARRENTON COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY

.. . ........

----------- --- ---------- --
X Statute Miles FT-`-@@
1 0 1

124 123*45' .123'301
P0, @WA H.1N.GT.N
.d

ORE

2. USERS AND THEIR INFORMATION NEEDS

2,1, Introduction

The original aims of CREDDP emphasized the common desire of all information
users for a well designed scientific study of the physical and biological
structure and processes of the estuary. An assessment of specific user needs in
this Plan of Study will ensure that the products from the program are structured
so as to be of greatest value.
The principal user group, specifically identified in the original Plan of
Study, includes local government officials, planning commissions, CREST, state and
federal agencies, and others involved with carrying out the Columbia River Estuary
Regional Management Plan. These users can be divided into two categories:
specialist and nonspecialist. The former includes scientists and estuary managers
who would use the program's detailed technical reports. The nonspecialist user
would be anyone with insufficient training or time to study the technical reports,
but who needs easy access to the major findings of the program. This category

includes interested citizens such as commercial and recreational fishermen,
educators, planners, developers and scientists who are not specialists in all of
the areas covered by CREDDP.

2.2. Land and Water Use Decisions

CREDDP's focus on providing information for land and water use
decision making stems from the early involvement of CREST in the program. The
major objective of CREST was to produce a regional management plan for the
Columbia River Estuary under the auspices of the Oregon and Washington Coastal
Zone Management Programs. The CREST Plan aims at protecting natural resources
while allowing for economic development in the form of necessary water dependent
projects.
These decisions can be divided into planning and permitting activities, and
both involve CREST, local governments, planning commissions, and state and federal
agencies. For Oregon, there is a comprehensive land use planning program, with
special "Goals" which apply to the coastal zone. This is administered by the
Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD). Relevant sections of the
CREST Plan have been incorporated into local jurisdictions' land use plans. These
local plans are reviewed by DLCD and other state agencies such as Oregon

Department of Fish and Wildlife for compliance with Statewide Planning Goals.
Federal resource agencies such as the National Marine Fisheries Service and the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service also comment on local plans under the state and
federal consistency provision of the Coastal Zone Management Act.
In Washington, a parallel system exists in the form of the state's Coastal
Zone Management Program, administered by the Washington Department of Ecology. As
in Oregon, relevant parts of the CREST Plan are used by local jurisdictions and
reviewed by state and federal agencies including the Washington Department of Game
and the Washington Department of Fisheries. The planning processes outlined above
are almost complete. There is still, however, a need for additional information
on the management of natural resources, particularly fish and wildlife species,
which could be used during plan implementation and incorporated into plans during
future updates.
Of particular importance in planning is ecosystem level research which
identifies and maps important estuarine resources. Equally important is research
on the roles of the different trophic levels and identification of the linkages
between sources of carbon, nutrients, detritus, detritivore populations and higher
trophic levels.. this information may be used to predict the effects of estuarine
alterations on natural resources. Similarly, there is a need for information on
currents and sediment transport which could be used in formulating dredge material
disposal plans. Particularly useful would be data collected from critical areas
in the estuary, such as areas designated as suitable for development.
The permit process involves two groups: the applicants, who may be citizens,
corporations or a government body, and reviewers, mostly local governments and
state and federal agencies together with occasional participants from the public.
As with the planning process, a complicated system surrounds the permit process:
estuarine permits are reviewed by local governments, either directly or through
CREST, and also by state agencies. In addition, a federal section 404 permit from
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is required. This permit is reviewed by federal
agencies such as the National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service and Environmental Protection Agency, as well as by state agencies. They
can recommend project modifications, mitigation or permit denial, on the grounds
of impacts to fish and wildlife populations or degradation of environmental
quality. The permit applicant must furnish site specific information on the
impacts of the project, and may have to fund additional research. Both permit
applicants and reviewers will therefore need access to the raw and processed data
from CREDDP. 10

Inf ormation in two areas is of value here. First, ecosystem data will be
needed to predict the importance of development sites to the estuary. This will
be used to compare the values of different sites, and also for deciding whether or
not additional research is needed. Second, any sampling carried out in the
vicinity of development sites will be especially-useful since it can also be used
in site specific studies and will, as a result, reduce the cost of the projec t.
Major developments are anticipated in the following areas: the main navigation
channel, the Port of Astoria docks, the @kipanon River-Tansy Point area and the
Tongue Point docks.
Alterations to the estuary fall into two categories: first, the filling of
-areas, usually intertidal flats or tidal marshes, to provide space for cargo
handling and access to deeper water, and second, the dredging of areas for
navigation channels with the associated problems of dredge material disposal.
Resource managers will therefore need to apply CREDDP products to these kinds of
problems. The Corps is likely to be a major user of data on dredging, since they
are actively studying the feasibility of a deep draft coal export channel in the

estuary.
Scientists conducting research on the Columbia or other estuaries will be
another major group of specialist users who will need the technical reports and
data from the program. Program findings published in scientific journals should
also be of value to this group, 'and contractors are therefore encouraged to
publish their research from the program.
In addition to the specialist users described above there are likely to be a
large number of nonspecialist users who would need the program products presented

in an edited and lucid f orm. These users would include the local citizens who

have supported the program and who are involved in the citizen based land and
water use planning activities, commercial fishermen and others who depend on
natural resources for a livelihood, recreational fishermen, and local educators
focusing student science and geography classes on the estuary. The relationship
between the program's Goals and Objectives and the information needs of estuarine
managers is discussed in the section 3.4.

3. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF CREDbP

3.1. Introduction

The goals and objectives of CREDDP specify the research activities to be
completed and their relationships to resource management needs. In order to
provide an ecological information base suitable for use in making estuarine
management decisions, resource management questions and issues must be broken-down
into specific scientific objectives. This is necessary because resource managers
tend to be confronted with multidisciplinary problems, such as assessing the
impacts of dredging projects on structural and functional aspects of the estuary,
while scientists usually ask specific questions within narrow disciplines. The
CREDDP goals are a list of resource management information needs while the
objectives are the specific research tasks which will be used to accomplish these
goals. In order for the scientific results to be useful to resource managers,-
they must be placed in a form that is easily understood and referenced.
The process, then, consists of reducing estuarine management questions to
goals and objectives (i.e., research questions), which in turn yield products
useful in making management decisions. The purpose of this section is to list the
goals and objectives and to describe the relationships between objectives and
general questions of resource management.

3.2 Goals

The goals of CREDDP are grouped into 5 categories: 1) first trophic level,
2) higher trophic levels, 3) sedimentation and shoaling, 4) currents and
simulation, and 5) integration. First trophic level and higher trophic levels
goals include data interpretation and product development that describe the
structure and function of the biological component of the ecosystem. Maps of
abundance and production, and assessments of functional linkages among various
biological groups are included. These goals include de*scribing the relationships
between physical and biological factors, critical information needed to develop
predictive capabilities required by resource managers. The structure and function
of the physical portion of the ecosystem are described by the sedimentation and
shoaling, and currents and simulation goals. Bottom sediment distribution,
sediment transport, circulation and salinity patterns, and the underlying
processes accounting for these patterns are included. This information provides

an essential base upon which to support resource management decisions.
The f inal goal, integration, is very important because it leads to a more
complete understanding of estuarine ecological structure and function.
Integrating the results from all of the work units is the key to a successful
interdisciplinary program, giving resource managers a better understanding of,the
ecosystem and improving their predictive capability. The goals of CREDDP are

listed below.

A. First Trophic Level

1. Describe and map productivity and biomass patterns of Columbia
River Estuary primary producers.

2. Determine to the extent possible the carbon budget of primary
producers.

3. Describe the relationships among primary producers and productivity
levels and physical factors.

B. Higher Trophic Levels

1. Describe and map abundance patterns of the invertebrate and
vertebrate groups.

2. Determine functional relationships among higher trophic groups.

3. Describe the relationships among vertebrate and'invertebrate
species and physical and biological factors.

C. Sedimentation and Shoaling

1. Character ize and map bottom sediment distribution.

2. Characterize sediment transport.

3. Determine (qualitatively) the causes of historic and modern
bathymetric change.

D. Currents and Simu lation

1. Evaluate and model circulation patterns.

2. Evaluate and model vertical mixing and salinity patterns.

E. Integration

1. Integrate program information for a more complete understanding of
biological and physical structure and processes.

3.3. Objectives

The objectives of CREDDP are designed ..to answer research questions and,
because they depend on spe cific research tasks, they are classified by work unit.
The objectives listed below are related to the goals in Appendix G and the
specific tasks needed to achieve each objective are outlined in the work programs

section.

Each of the objectives is assigned a priority on a three part scale. These
priorities are based on comments received from user reviewers and the results of
the Users Workshop on June 2, 1982. The major emphasis is on classifying
habitats, describing abundance and distribution of organisms, describing important
physical processes, and relating the biological information to physical factors.
A lower emphasis is placed on biological process information as it relates to the
estuarine carbon budget. Although the most effort will be expended on completing
the high priority items, the intent of the program is -to complete all of the
objectives listed. The following list itemizes the CREDDP objectives and their
priorities (H = high; M = medium; L low).

Emergent Plant Primary Production

H 1. Describe and map emergent plant biomass and primary productivity
patterns.

H 2. Relate marsh vegetation types and productivity to elevation, salinity,
and other pertinent physical and chemical factors.

M 3. Estimate the export of detritus from marshes.

L 4. Determine the emergent plant carbon budget.

Benthic Primary Production

H 1. Describe and map benthic microalgal productivity, biomass, and related
variable patterns.

H 2. Relate benthic microalgal productivity to sediment parameters, salinity,
and other pertinent physical and chemical factors.

L 3. Determine the benthic microalgal carbon budget.

Water Column Primary Production

H 1. Describe and map phytoplankton productivity and biomass patterns.

H 2. Relate phytoplankton productivity and biomass to light, salinity,
currents (null zone), nutrients, and other pertinent physical and
chemical factors.

M 3. Measure or estimate phytoplankton an.d other organic particulate inputs
and outputs.

L 4. Determine the phytoplankton carbon budget.

Zooplankton and Larval Fish

H 1. Describe and map key and selected other zooplankton and larval fish
species, by principal life history stages, or.assemblages in terms of
occurrence, density and standing crop over time.

H 2. Quantify functional relationships among zooplankton and larval fishes
and physical (salinity, temperature, tide stage) and biological
(planktivorous predators) factors.

M 3. Describe population structure and dynamics and.life history of
Eurytemora.

Benthic Infauna

H 1. Describe and map key and selected other benthic infauna species or
assemblages in terms of density, standing crop, and production over
time.

H 2. Quantify relationships among benthic infauna and physical (salinity,
sediments, depth) and biological factors.

M 3. Determine the population structure and dynamics, life history, and
turnover rates of Corophium, Macoma, Hobsonia, and Pseudopolydora.

L 4. Define functional relationships of benthic infauna in the ecosystem
including predator-prey linkages, population movements, and role in the
estuary carbon budget.

Epibenthic Organisms

H 1. Describe and map key and selected other epibenthic species or
assemblages in terms of density, standing crop, and production over
time.

H 2. Quantify relationships among epibenthic organisms and physical
(salinity, sediments, depths) and biological factors.

M 3. Describe the population structure, dynamics, life history, and trophic
relationships of Dungeness crab, crangonid shrimp, and mysids.

L 4. Define functional relationships of epibenthic organisms in the
ecosystem, including pr6dator-prey linkages, emigration and immigration,
and role in the estuary carbon budget.

Fish

H 1. Describe and map key and selected other fish species by life history
stage or assemblages in terms of density and standing crop over time.

H 2. Quantify relationships among key fish species-and physical (salinity,
temperature, tide stage) and biological factors.

H 3. Describe and map migration routes and timing (seasons, residence time)
of juvenile and adult salmon and the feeding habits of juvenile salmon
in different estuarine habitats.

M 4. From the stomach analyses, tabulate composition, abundance, and biomass
of prey in the dietsof key fish species and life history stages, with
emphasis on diel samples.

L 5. Generate estimates of growth over time of identifiable cohorts of key
fish species residing within the estuary.

L 6. Estimate mean consumption rates of key fish species/life history stages
and proportional contribution of principal prey taxa in different
regions/habitats of the estuary. Discuss the role of a key species in
the estuary's carbon budget.

Avifauna

s
H 1. Describe and map key avifauna pecies abundance and habitats.

M 2. Determine avifauna food requirements and prey composition.

Wildlife

H 1. Describe and map key wildlife species occurrence and density.

L 2. Estimate the rate of consumption of food/prey by wildlife.

H 3. Identify possible factors that limit key wildlife species use of
particular habitats.

Marine Mammals

H 1. Describe and map key marine mammal species occurrence, density, and
standing crop.

Sedimentation and Shoaling

H 1. Characterize and map bott om sediments.

H 2. Perform grain-size analysis of sediment samples collected by biologists.

M 3. Characterize and map bedform types and migration directions.

M 4. Characterize the estuarine suspended sediment field.

H 5. Define modern sedimentary environment s and processes (including
important temporal and spatial scales) in the Estuary.

H 6. Investigate causes of modern and historical bathymetric change.

Currents

H 1. Describe and analyze tidal circulation.

M 2. Incorporate NOS data into CREDDP data base and use in all analyses, as
appropriate.

M 3. Describe and analyze low frequency flow, including "null zone" location
and processes.

H 4. Describe and analyze salinity and temperature patterns.

H 5. Describe and analyze vertical mixing processes.

Simulation.

L 1* Model circulation patterns.through the use of a two-dimensional.,
horizontal model. Use the model to study atmospheric, freshwater and
tidal forcings to analyze circulation in peripheral bays, and to assist
the Sedimentation work unit in determing shoaling patterns.

L 2. Formulate and use a two-dimensional multichannel vertical model to
examine tidal forcings, salinity intrusion, freshwater inflow,
atmospheric forcing, vertical.mixing, and residual flow processes.

Integration Objectives

M 1. Analyze effects of physical processes on key species and the taxonomic
structure of communities.

L 2. Integrate program information to define functional linkages among
organisms, to develop a carbon budget, and relate these to the.physical
processes in the Columbia River Estuary.

H 3. Classify and map habitat types in relation to appropriate physical and
biological parameters (depth/elevation, salinity, sediment, emergent
vegetation type).

H 4. Using information developed by work unit contractors, describe the
biological communities in each habitat type.

M 5. Integrate current and salinity results and sediment results to develop
an understanding of the estuarine sedimentological processes.

3.4. The Relationships Between Goals/Objectives and Estuarine Management

Because of the narrow scope of research questions, science often. becomes
divorced from resource management and, as a result, valuable scientific
information is often overlooked in making important resource management decisions.
In order to demonstrate how the information base developed by CREDDP applies to
resource management, the scientific objectives are discussed in the context of

general resource management questions.
The following discussion is organized into broad areas of re source management
concerns. These concerns f all into t he categories of tidal marshes, salmonid
fish, birds and wildlife, key species, habitat classification, dredging, shoaling,
and freshwater flow alterations. Each category is headed by a series of estuary
management questions followed by a discussion of how CREDDP data can lead toward
answering the questions. The management questions are derived from the Columbia
River Estuary Regional Management Plan.

Tidal marshes

Management Questions: What is the importance of the estuary's tidal marshes to
estuarine food chains? For fish and wildlife habitat and
feeding?

Key factors for answering these questions include:

a) tidal marsh distribution
b) marsh assemblage classification
c) marsh productivity measurements
d) assessment of detrital export
e) information on other food sources in the Estuary
0 fish utilization
g) bird and mammal utilization

Related CREDDP objectives include:

1. Describe and map emergent plant biomass and primary productivity patterns.

2. Relate marsh vegetation types and productivity to el evation; salinity, and
other pertinent physical and chemical factors.

3. Estimate the export of detritus fr om marshes.

4. Determine the emergent plant carbon budget.

5. Determine the benthic microalgal-carbon budget.

6. Measure or estimate phytoplankton and other organic particulate inputs and
outputs.

7. Determine the phytoplankton carbon budget.

8. Describe and map key and selected other fish species by life history stage or
assemblages in terms of density and standing crop over time.

9. Describe and map migration routes and timing (seasons, residence time) of
juvenile and adult salmon and the feeding.habits of juvenile salmon in
different estuarine habitats.

10. From stomach analyses, tabulate composition, abundance, and biomass of prey
in the diets of key fish species and life history stages, with emphasis on
diel samples.

11. Describe and map key avifauna species abundance and habitats.

12. Determine avifauna food requirements and prey composition.

13. Describe and map key wildlife species occurrence and density.

14. Integrate program information to define functional linkages among organisms,
to develop a carbon budget, and relate these to the physical processes in the
Columbia River Estuary.

15. Classify and map habitat types in relation to appropriate physical and
biological parameters (depth/elevation, salinity, sediment, emergent
vegetation type).

16. Using information developed by work unit contractors, describe the biological
communities in each habitat type.
Tidal marshes are often significantly affected" by estuarine development.
Resource managers on the Columbia River Estuary have little information concerning
the importance of marshes to the estuarine ecosystem and are often hard pressed to
make and justify decisions on tidal marsh alterations.
In order to assess the importance of tidal marshes to the estuary's food
chain, the amount of "food" produced by marshes relative to other sources must be
quantified. Information to be developed by CREDDP on the areal distribution and
productivity of tidal marshes is the first step toward answering this question.
Once the total marsh productivity for the estuary is known, estimates of the
portion exported as useable food (detritus) can give an idea of th e potential use
of this production. Detrital export will be roughly estimated by CREDDP. In
order to place this useable food into the broader context of the entire estuary,

the relative contribution of other food sources must be determined. These

estimates will be attained by the Benthic Primary Production and Water Column
Primary production work units studying algal productivity and particulate budgets.
When integrated into a carbon budget for the estuary, the relative importance of

tidal marshes to the food chain can be better understood.

Beside the estimates of detrital export, another criterion which can show the
importance of tidal marshes to the food chain is the proportion of the detritus
feeder's diet contributed by this source. CREDDP will not have sufficient data to
deal with this topic.
The importance of marshes to fish, birds and wildlife is addressed by those
work units. The CREDDP fish studies are not specifically designed to show the

degree of marsh utilization so information will be sparse, depending mainly on
stomach analyses which may, for example, show an abundance of marsh dwelling prey
organisms. The Avifauna and Wildlife work units, on the other hand, have studied
these animals' use of tidal marshes and will provide a great d eal of new
information concerning the importance of these areas as "habitat".
When all of the above information is integrated the importance of marshes in
the Columbia River Estuary will be better understood and resource managers will
begin to be able to predict some of the effects of altering these areas.

Salmonid Fish

Management Questions: How important is the estuary to juvenile salmonids? What
is the carrying capacity of the estuary for juvenile,
salmonids and what are the limiting factors?

Key factors for answering these questions include:

a) residence time
b) feeding habits
c) prey abundance and distribution
d) timing and migration routes
e) growth rates
f) juvenile population sizes
g) transition zones

Related CREDDP objectives include:

1. Describe and map key and selected other fish species by life history stage or
assemblages in terms of density and standing crop ove Ir time.

2. Quantify relationships among key fish species and physical (salinity,
temperature, tide stage) and biological factors.

3. Describe and map migration routes and timing (seasons, residen ce time) of
juvenile and adult salmon and the feeding habits of juvenile salmon in
different estuarine habitats.

4. From stomach analyses, tabulate composition, abundance, and biomass of prey
in the diets of key fish species and life history stages, with emphasis on
diel samples.

5. Generate estimates of growth overtime of identifiable cohorts of key species
residing within the estuary.

6. Estimate mean consumption rates of key fish species/life history stages and
proportional contribution of principal prey taxa in different.
regions/habitats of the estuary. Discuss the role of a key species in the
estuary's carbon budget.

7. Describe and map key and selected other zooplankton and larval fish species,
by principal life history stages, or assemblages in terms of occurrence.-
density, and standing crop over time.

8. Quantify functional relationships among zooplankton and larval fishes and
physical (salinity, temperature, tide stage) and biological (planktivorous
predators) factors.

9. Describe population structure and dynamics and life history of Eurytemora.

10. Describe and map key and selected other benthic infauna species or
assemblages in terms of density, standing crop, and production over time.

11. Determine the population structure and dynamics, life history, and turnover
rates of Corophium, Macoma, Hobsonia, and Pseudopolydora.

12. Define functional relationships of benthic infauna in the ecosystem,
including predator-prey linkages, population movements., and role in the
estuary carbon budget.

13. Describe and map key and selected other epibenthic species or assemblages in
terms of density, standing crop, and production over time.

14. Define functional relationships of epibenthic organisms in the ecosystem,
including predator-prey linkages, emigration and immigration, and role in the
estuary carbon budget.

15. Analyze effects of physical processes on key species and the taxonomic
structure of communities.

16, Integrate program information to define functional linkages among organisms,
to develop a carbon budget, and relate these to the physical processes in the
Columbia River Estuary.

17. Classify and map habitat types in relation to appropriate physical and
biological parameters (depth/elevation, salinity, sediment, emergent
vegetation type).

18. Using information developed by work unit contractors, describe the biological
communities in each habitat type.

The management of economically important species, especially salmonids, is a
major concern of local, state and federal interests. CREDDP has emphasized
investigations of juvenile salmonids because their survival rate in the estuary
determines the success of the returning adults and, ultimately, the value of the
fishery. In order to determine the estuary's importance to juvenile salmonids
several important factors must be resolved, including salmonid residence time,
feeding habits, migration routes, growth rates, and the sizes of salmon
populations entering the estuary.
The length of time juvenile salmonids spend in the estuary is a major factor
determining its value to them. Species such as steelhead pass through the estuary

rapidly with little feeding or growth. Subyearling fall chinook, on the other
hand, spend considerable time in the estuar Iy., Their feeding success and grow---
appears to influence their survival in the ocean and subsequent return. The
question of juvenile salmonid residence time will be addressed by CREDDP.
Juvenile salmonid feeding information, coupled with information on the
abundance and distribution of prey items, gives additional information on the
importance of the estuary. The feeding information will be developed from stomach
analyses undertaken by CREDDP. Information on the prey organisms will be
developed by the Zooplankton, Benthic Infauna, and Epibenthic Organism contractors
studying the abundance and distribution of invertebrates, their life histories,
and carbon budgets.
Tied directly to feeding and residence time is the growth rate of juvenile
salmonids. Because residence time is generally short and hatchery releases
confuse analysis of individual cohorts, CREDDP will not be able to make definitive
conclusions concerning the estuary's contribution to salmonid growth.
CREDDP will describe the routes and timing of adult and juvenile migration in
relation to biological and physical factors; conclusions related to these factors
help to show how the physical aspects of the estuary affe ct salmonids.
To assess the carrying capacity of the estuary, population sizes of salmonids
must be known. Since this information will not be obtain ed by CREDDP, the
question of carrying capacity and limiting factors will only be addressed
qualitatively.

Birds and Wildlife

Management Questions: Which bird species play an important role in the
estuarine food chain? Which habitats are most important
for resident and migrant water fowl, shorebirds, wading
birds, raptors, etc.? Which habitats are most important
for wildlife?

Key factors for answering these questions include:

a) bird and wildlife density by habitat
b) bird and wildlife feeding requirements
c) critical bird and wildlife habitats

Related CREDDP objectives include:

1. Describe and map key avifauna species abundance and habitats.

2. Determine avifauna food requirements and prey composition.

3. Describe and map key wildlife species occurrence and density.

4. Estimate the rate of consumption 'of food/prey by wildlife.

5. Identify possible factors that limit key wildlife species use of particular
habitats.

6. Describe and map key marine mammal species occurrence, density, and standing
I
crop.

7. Classify and map habitat types in relation to appropriate physical and
biological parameters (depth/elevation, salinity,,sediment, emergent
vegetation type).

8. Using information developed by work unit contractors, describe the biological
communities in each habitat type.

The management of bird and wildlife species and their habitats is important
to resource agencies, sportsmen and many other 6 itizens of the estuary area.
CREDD11 will indirectly assess which birds are important to the estuarine food
chain by combining density estimates with food habit information derived from the
literature. This, along with other information developed by the Avifauna work
unit will give an approximate idea of bird species' importance to the food chain.
The important bird and wildlife habitats can be determined from density
estimates, feeding information, and nesting/denning information. Because bird and
wildlife research for CREDDP was undertaken in several different, well defined
habitat types, the definition and mapping of important habitats will be a major
outcome of the program. These maps will offer resource managers a more accurate
picture. of the distribution of important habitats and will facilitate prediction

of the effects of estuarine alterations.

Key Species

Management Questions: What are the key plant and animal species that play a
crucial role in the estuarine food chain or are
particularly important for management of the estuary?
What is the life cycle, habitat requirements, and
ecological interactions of each?

Key factors for answering these questions include:

a) definition of key species
b) abundance and distribution of key species
c) production of key species
d) trophic relationships and carbon budget
e) life history information

Related CREDDP objectives include:

1. All objectives from the Zooplankton and Larval Fish, Benthic Infauna,
Epibenthic Organisms, Fish, Avifauna, Wildlife, and Marine Mammals work
units.

2. Analyze effects of physical processes on key species and the taxonomic
structure of,communities.

3. Integrate Program information to define functional linkages among organisms,
to develop a carbon budget, and relate these to the physical processes in the
Columbia River Estuary.

4. Classify and map habitat types in relation to appropriate physical and
biological parameters (depth/elevation, salinity, sediment, emergent
vegetation type).

5. Using information developed by work unit contractors, describe the biological
communities in each habitat type.

Key species important to the food chain have already been designated by
CREDDP. Where they occur and in what numbers are important resource management
concerns. Development of this information and presentation in easily referenced
maps is a high priority of CREDDPi Data on the feeding relationships among key
species, their production levels, and the carbon budget provide information on
their relative importance in the food web. This information, coupled with
descriptions of the relationships between key species and physical factors, can
help resource managers to predict the outcome of disturbing one or more of these
species and to trace these effects to various parts of the food chain.
The integration of CREDDP information is extremely important to key species
questions. The objectives addressing interrelationships among all of the key
species of the estuary and between species and physical factors, the estuarine
carbon budget, and habitat classification go beyond the scope of individual work
units. These integration objectives are essential to achieve the predictive
capabilities described above.

Habitat Classification

Management Questions: What is the distribution of the major benthic, marsh, and
shoreland habitats? What is the importance to fish,
birds, and wildlife?

Key factors for answering these questions include:

a) habitat classification system
b) habitat type mapping

c) abundance and distribution of organisms
d) relationships between assemblages and physical factors
e) descriptions of biological communities in each habitat type

Related CREDDP objectives include:

1. Describe and map emergent plant biomass and primary productivity patterns.

2. Relate marsh vegetation types and productivity to elevation, salinity, and
other pertinent physical and chemical factors.

3. Describe and map benthic microalgal productivity, biomass, and related
variable patterns.

4. Relate benthic microalgal productivity to sediment parameters, salinity, and
other pertinent physical and chemical factors.

5. Describe and map phytoplankton productivity and biomass patterns.

6. Relate phytoplankton productivity and biomass to light, salinity, currents,
nutrients, and other pertinent physical and chemical factors.

7. Describe and map key and selected other zooplankton and larval fish species,
by principal life history stages, or assemblages in terms of occurrence,
density and standing crop over time.

8. Quantify functional relationships among zooplankton and larval fishes and
physical (salinity, temperature, tide stage) and biological (planktivorous
predators) factors.

9. Describe and map key and selected other benthic infauna species or
assemblages in terms of density, standing crop, and production over time.

10. Quantify relationships among benthic infauna and physical (salinity,
sediments, depth) and biological factors.

11. Describe and map key and selected other epibenthic species or assemblages in
terms of density, standing crop, and production over time.

12. Quantify relationships among epibenthic organisms and physical (salinity,
sediments, depths) and biological factors.

13. All Fish work unit objectives.

14. All Avifauna work unit objectives.

15. All Wildlife work unit objectives.

16. All Marine Mammals work unit objectives.

17. Classify and map habitat types in relation to appropriate physical and
biological parameters (depth/elevation, salinity, sediment, emergent
vegetation type).

18. Using information developed by work unit contractors, describe the biological
communities in each habitat type.

Many of the CREDDP biological objectives apply to defining habitats or, more
precisely, habitat types in the Columbia River Est uary. A habitat type is defined
here as an area occupied by an entire community of organisms. This differs from
the narrow ecological definition of a habitat as the physical space occupied by
one particular species or population. Habitat types are ideally based on easily
mapped physical and biological criteria; examples include low tidal marsh. and

intertidal soft-sediment flats.
Habitat type classification and mapping with accompanying biological
descriptions are important management tools. These are used to apply
generalizations about biological communities to areas where no site specific
information is available. For example, if a small site is to be filled somewhere
in the estuary it is probable that no directImeasurements of the organisms present
there are available. However, this information is essential information for
managers to determine which biological resources are being lost by the filling
action. A site specific study can be avoided by determining which habitat types
are being affected. by the fill and then going back to a description of the
communities in each habitat type to assess the resource loss. This can also be
applied to mitigation where the habitat types that are lost can be replaced during

a restoration action.

The habitat classification system is not intended to replace site specific
studies which give a much higher resolution of resources. However, the system is
extremely valuable for situations where site specific studies are not possible,
such as in very small alterations or in assessing the potential transformation of
a non-estuarine area when restored to the estuary.
Organism abundance and distribution, organism relationships to physical
factors, and the integration of these results into a habitat classification scheme
with accompanying community descriptions are primary objectives of CREDDP.

Dredging

Management Question: How should the main and peripheral channel dredging and
dredged material disposal be managed?

Key factors for answering this question include:

a) tidal circulation
b) vertical mixing, salinity, and null zone patterns
c) sediment distribution
d) sediment transport rates and direction
e) knowledge of organism timing and location (to determine dredging timing
and disposal location)

Related CREDDP objectives include:

1. Characterize and map bottom sediments.

2. Characterize and map bedform types and migration directions.

3. Characterize the estuarine suspended sediment field.

4. Investigate causes of modern and historical bathymetric change.

5. Describe and analyze tidal circulation.

6. Describe and analyze low frequency flow, including "null zone" location and
processes.

7. Describe and analyze salinity and temperature patterns.

8. Describe and analyze vertical mixing processes.

9. Model circulation patterns through the use of a two-dimensional, horizontal
model. Use the model to study atmospheric, freshwater and tidal forcings, to
analyze circulation in peripheral bays, and to a ssist the Sedimentation work
unit in determining shoaling patterns.

10. Formulate a two-dimensional multichannel vertical model to examine tidal
forcings, salinity intrusion, freshwater inflow, atmospheric forcing,
vertical mixing, and residual flow processes.

11. Integrate current and salinity results and sediment results to develop an
understanding of the estuarine sedimentological processes.

Management for dredging operations can be broken into two broad categories:
the physical design of the dredging operation and the biological impacts of
dredging. All CREDDP biological objectives are relevant, at least in part, to the
latter category. These can help to determine the optimal time for dredging and
the best locations for dredged material disposal. The physical design of the
dredging operation 'requires information on circulation and sediment movement
patterns. CREDDP will provide detailed descriptions and models of tidal
circulation. The sediment transport and dynamics will be approached by the
Sedimentation work unit by describing suspended and bedload sediment transport and
analyzing historic shoaling patterns. Other information on the dynamics of
sediment movement will come from an analysis of vertical mixing, salinity, and
null zone patterns. All of the above information will be integrated to develop a
more complete understanding of estuarine sedimentological processes.
Ideally, a sediment transport model should be developed to aid in planning
dredging operations. CREDDP will not develop such a model, so the indirect

information described above must be utilized instead.

Shoaling

Management Questions: What are the mechanisms causing shoaling and erosion in
bays, sloughs, side channels, marinas, etc.? What are
the effects of large scale estuarine alterations on
peripheral areas?

Key factors for answering these questions include:

a) sediment transport rates and direction
b) quantification of historical shoaling
c) sediment distribution
d) tidal circulation (present and historic)

Related CREDDP objectives include:

1. Characterize and map bottom sediments.

2. Characterize and map bedform types and migration directions.

3. Characterize the estuarine suspended sediment field.

4. Define modern sedimentary environments and processes (including important
temporal and spatial scales) in the estuary.

5. Investigate causes of modern and historical bathymetric change..

6. Describe and analyze tidal circulation.

7. Describe and analyze low frequency flow, including "null zone" location and
processes.

8. Model circulation patterns through the use of a two-dimensional, horizontal
model. Use the model to study atmospheric, freshwater, and tidal forcings,
to analyze circulation in peripheral bays, and to assist the Sedimentation
work unit in determining shoaling patterns.

9. Integrate current and salinity results and sediment results to develop an
understanding of the estuarine sedimentological processes.

Large scale alterations have caused considerable shoaling problems in the
Columbia River Estuary. In order to avoid this problem as much as possible,
estuarine managers must know the mechanisms which have caused historic shoaling.
To approach this, CREDDP will analyze and interpret historical shoaling patterns
and the dynamics of modern sediment transport. This, integrated with information
on past and present circulation, should yield substantial information on the
causes of shoaling. Without a sediment transport model, these causes will only be
discussed in qualitative terms. However, it will be a major step in determining
the mechanisms of shoaling in the estuary. Conclusions on shoaling can help in
the design of future projects which will avoid the shoaling problem.

Freshwater Flow

Management Questions: How are salinity, currents, mixing processes, sediment
transport, shoaling patterns, anadromous fish transit and
feeding, marsh productivity and benthic habitats
influenced by the fresh water flow cycle? What have been
the effects of the managed flow cycle? What would bethe
effects of future water withdrawals on the estuary?
Should seasonal minimum flows be established to protect
important ecological patterns or influence sediment
movement?

Key factors for answering these questions include:'

a) estuarine biological attributes and processes
b) estuarine physical attributes and processes
c) biological - physical interactions

Related CREDDP objectives include:

All CREDDP objectives.

Questions regarding freshwater flow are extremely important to resource
managers on the estuary. These questions are so broad that they encompass the
entire scope of CREDDP. Although the questions will never be answered completely
and the program is not specifically designed to address them, CREDDP should
supply a great deal of pertinent information.
In relation to physical attributes, the salinity, currents, and mixing
processes will be described and modelled in the context of freshwater forcing.
From this, predictions can be made concerning the alterations of freshwater flow.
Sediment transport and shoaling patterns will be described in more qualitative
terms but when integrated with the circulation work, the effects of altered flow
will become apparent.
Conclusions concerning the biological outcome of freshwater flow alterations
will be much more speculative. CREDDP will determine the relationships between
biological and physical factors such as salinity and flushing characteristics.
The nature of these relationships can be used to explain the effects of an altered
flow on biological species and processes. Integration is the key here; when
biological and physical attributes and processes are brought together and
discussed in the same context, a better capability is developed to predict changes
in estuarine conditions resulting from freshwater flow alterations.

4. WORK PROGRAMS

4.1 Introduction

The following section presents the work programs for completing each of the
CREDDP work units. These work units will be undertaken by individual cont-ractors
or groups of contractors and, for the most part, correspond to the work units of
the original program. They are classified into research and non-research work
units with the former being further broken down into biological, physical, and
integration elements. The work unit classification is shown below.

Research Work Units

Biological

Emergent Plant Primary Production
Benthic Primary Production
Water Column Primary Production
Zooplankton and Larval Fish
Benthic Infauna'
Epibenthic Organisms
Fish
Avifauna
Wildlife
Marine Mammals

Thy sical

Sedimentation and Shoaling
Currents
Simulation

Integration

Integration work unit

Non-Research Work Units

Data Management
Cartographic work unit

The purpose of the work programs is to d4scribe the research activities,
products, and schedules on which the contracts will be based. The work programs
assume that: 1) $1.22 million will be available for study completion; 2) the
completion date set for the program is June 30, 1984; and 3) for the biological
and physical work units, researchers familiar with the past CREDDP work (not nec-

essarily the same contractors) will complete their respective work units. ' The
activities and schedules are considered flexible so that they can be altered if
more than $1.22 million is available. The specific alterations are referred to in
the work programs and discussed in section 6.6, Additional Work Tasks. The work
programs and objectives have not, been formally approved by the research
contractors and therefore do not represent contracts. .Changes in the work
programs and objectives may have to be made for some work units during contract
negotiations (see section 6.3). Because of the fu nding constraints it will not be
possible to analyze all of the CREDDP data. Optimum sub-samples of data sets will
be selected in order to ensure that the objectives will be fulfilled to the
greatest extent possible.
The biological and physical work program descriptions are organized according
to a standard format. First, an introduction is presented which states the
purpose of the work unit, the factors being studied, and how the original sampling
design relates to these factors. Following this, three sections list the work
unit objectives and data sets, and show their interrelationships. The analysis
steps used to achieve the objectives are summarized in the section entitled
"Tasks". Additionally, the adequacy of the data for completing the objectives and
the integration and data exchange requirements are described. Throughout the task
sections, reference is made to the implications of increased funding. The
products section describes the final and interim products and the schedule diagram
depicts the objective and product time lines, assuming a contractor starting date
of November 1, 1982 and a program completion date of June 30, 1984. The interim
products include bimonthly progress reports to be submitte d to the Program
Manager. The integration and non-research work programs follow slightly different

formats.

4.2 Emergent Plant Primary,Production

Introduction

Emergent vegetation (tidal marshes) is a major component of the estuarine
ecosystem, both as a contributor to the food web and as areas of feeding, rearing,
and shelter for invertebrates, fish, avifauna, and wildlife. The majority of
tidal marshes in the Columbia River Estuary are composed of freshwater assemblages
and differ markedly from the east and west coast salt marshes which have been
extensively studied. Information on Columbia River Estuary tidal marshes is
presently scarce, leaving little to base resource management decisions regarding
these commonly affected areas.
The purpose of the Emergent Plant work unit is to fill this information gap
by investigating and describing some of the key functional characteristics of
emergent vegetation in the Columbia River Estuary. The research is designed to
determine the annual production of selected emergent plant species and assemblages
using both above ground and below ground biomass data. The approximate rate of
detritus export from marshes will be determined by combining the above values with
results of litterbag studies and literature information. Ultimately, the emergent
plant contribution to the estuarine food web will be estimated and integrated into
a total estuary carbon budget.

Objectives

1. Describe and map emergent plant biomass and primary productivity patterns.

2. Relate marsh vegetation types and productivity to,elevation, salinity, and
other pertinent physical and chemical factors.

3. Estimate the export of,detritus from marshes.

4. Determine the emergent plant carbon budget.

Data sets

a) Unprocessed samples from the May 1980 and August 1981 sampling. Variables
measured include emergent plant above and below ground biomass and species
identification.

b) Raw data from the May, June, and October 198 0 samples. Variables measured
include emergent plant above and below ground biomass and species
identification.

c) Analyzed data from the April and July 1980 samples. Variables measured and
analyses include above and below ground biomass, species identification,
various statistical tests and correlations, and calculations of productivity.

d) Elevation data at the marsh sampling sites.

e) Raw and partially analyzed data from the litterbag samples taken from May to
October 1980.

Objective/data set relationship matrix

Objective a b Datacset d e
1 x x x

2 x x x x

3 x x x x x

4 x x x x

Tasks Analysis summary. To complete the mapping objective (objective 1), the
remaining CREDDP emergent plant samples will be processed and the data analyzed
for the purpose of describing emergent plant productivity, seasonal dynamics,
and community structure. The results will be combined with the existing emergent
vegetation maps to create estuary wide maps of marsh productivity and monthly/

seasonal biomass levels.

The second objective requires quantitative correlations and qualitative
generalizations concerning the relationship between vegetation communities,
species, and productivity with factors such as salinity, sediment, and elevation.
The marsh elevation data are currently being developed by CREST.
Objective 3, detrital export, will use the productivity analyses from
objective I along with an analysis of the litter bag raw data. These, combined
with literature values, will yield rate estimates for potential detrital export ,
Determining the emergent plant carbon budget (objective 4) will require
analyses from objectives 1 and 3. Marsh production and detrital export rates will
be use d to assess and "quantify" the carbon inputs and outputs. The budget will
be submitted to the Integration Team to become part of an ecosystem carbon budget.
Data Adequacy. The data sets of this work unit are adequate to achieve the
objectives with some limitations. For example, production estimates will not be
available for all types of emergent plant communities because some were not

sampled. Additionally, the estimates of detrital export rates and, consequently,
the emergent plant carbon budget will represent only rough approximations.
Literature information may fill some of the gaps here. Under the probable funding
situation, statistical analyses of the data sets will be severely curtailed,
reducing the quantitative resolution of the objectives (see section 6.6,
Additional Work Tasks).

Integration and data exchange. Information such as emergent plant annual
production rates, seasonal biomass dynamics, detrital export dynamics, and the
emergent plant carbon budget will be submitted to the Integration Team to be used
in the final integration product. This information will b e used to determine
functional linkages among the emergent plant system and other estuarine systems.
The most important data exchange for the Emergent Plant work unit is with
CREST for the marsh vegetation community maps and the marsh elevation data.
Additionally, information on salinity and sediment distribution may be required
from the Currents and Sedimentation work units respectively. The Wildlife work
unit can supply information on the food types and, perhaps, consumption rates of
herbivorous mammals residing in marshes.

Products
The products of the Emergent Plant work unit under objective I will include a
draft map of marsh production and monthly/seasonal biomass which will be submitted
to the Cartographic contractor for final production. A final report consisting of
a narrative with graphics will summarize the findings from objectives 1 through 4.
Also included in the report will be background literature information, study
methods, and other incidental results and conclusions not included in the
objectives. The schedule for the Emergent Plant work unit is shown in Figure 4.1.

Figure 4.1. Schedule for the Emergent Plant Primary Production work unit.

1982 1983 1984
Objectives Iand Products S 01 N I D J IF MI AIM J I J I A S 0 IN D J IF M

1. Describe and map emergent plant biomass and pro-
ductivity patterns.

2. Submit draft maps to the Cartographic contractor.

3. Relate marsh vegetation types and productivity to
elevation, salinity, and other pertinent physical
and chemical factors.

4. Estimate the export of detritus from marshes.

5. Determine the emergent plant carbon budget.
t-n 6. Submit pertinent information to the Integration
Team.

7. Transfer data to the Data Manager.

8. Submit bimonthly progress reports.

9. Prepare draft work unit rep ort.

10. Review and finalize work unit report.

4.3 Benthic Primary Production

Introduction

Benthic primary producers include microalgae (mainly diatoms) macroalgae,
and submergent aquatic plants in intertidal and shallow subtidal regions of the
estuary. The latter two are not conspicuous on the estuarine tidal flats; for
example, eelgrass has only a sparse, patchy distribution in Baker Bay. The
benthic diatoms, however,, may represent a major food source to benthic
invertebrates, and their dynamics need to be better understood.
The general purpose of the Benthic Primary Production work unit is to
determine mechanisms which control the production dynamics of benthic plants in
the Columbia River Estuary. The research is primarily concerned with the effects
of chemical and physical processes on the structure and function of microalgal
assemblages. This work unit is also investigating the spatial and temporal extent
and productivity of microalgal assemblages. The design of the research allows for
the direct integration of the results into the estuary carbon budget.

Objectives

1. Describe and map benthic microalgal productivity, biomass, and related
variable patterns.

2. Relate microalgal productivity to sediment parameters, salinity, and other
pertinent physical and chemical factors.

3. Determine the microalgal carbon budget.

Data Sets

a) Raw and analyzed data from sampling 5 intensive survey sites from May 1980 to
April 1981. Variables measured include chlorophyll a, gross primary
production, oxygen consumption, sediment organics, sediment grain size
parameters, temperature, and light intensity.

b) Unprocessed samples and raw data from the sampling survey of May and June
1981 to identify validation sampling sites. Variables measured include
chlorophyll a and sediment properties.

c) Unprocessed samples an d raw data from the validation sampling sites.
Variables measured include chlorophyll a, primary production, oxygen
consumption, sediment properties, temperature, and light intensity.

d) Experimental data collected at the Oregon State University,Marine Science
Center with the support of the EPA. These data include measurements of gross
and net primary production in assemblages of isolated benthic diatoms,
measurements of primary production in relationship to light intensity and

temperature, and the examination of the ratio of microalgal biomass to the
concentration of chlorophyll a.

Objective/data set relationship matrix

Data set

Objectives a b c d

I x x x x

2 x x

3 x x x X

Tasks

Analysis summary. The first objective will be accomplished by processing the
remaining stored samples and analyzing the raw data in order to determine the
spatial and temporal patterns of microalgal productivity and related variables.
Productivity estimates can be expanded to the entire estuary by 1) estimating
productivity levels at sites where only chlorophyll a samples were taken by using
established statistical relationships between chlorophyll a and 2) productivity
using sediment information developed by the Sedimentation and Shoaling work unit
(either maps or raw data) in conjunction with established statistical
relationships between sediment parameters and productivity.
The second objective, relating benthic microalgal productivity to physical
factors, requires an examination of statistical relationships between production
and selected physical and chemical variables. , Much of this has been completed
but the raw data from intensive samples taken after October 1980 must be added to
the analyses. Additionally, laboratory data suitable for examining relationships
between microalgal productivity and light intensity and temperature will be used to
help meet this objective.
Estimates of the benthic microalgal carbon budget (objective 3) will be
prepared by drawing on the analyses described above as well as on established
ratios between chlorophyll and carbon and between net and gross primary
production. These analyses and estimates will provide benthic microalgal inputs
and outputs for the different regions of the estuary. The carbon budget will be
submitted to the Integration Team to be incorporated into the ecosystem carbon
budget.
In addition to the above, a fourth objective of mapping eelgrass beds and
estimating their productivity can be added if more funding becomes available (see
section 6.6, Additional Work Tasks).

Data adequacy. The data sets are adequate to describe the biological
processes and structure outlined in the objectives. However, because of the
limited number of samples taken, extrapolating. productivity levels to produce
estuary-wide maps (objective 1) will be difficult without further field w,ork (see
section 6.6, Additional Work Tasks).
Integration and data exchange. Pertinent inf ormation developed f rom each
data set will be submitted to the Integration Team to be used in the final
integration product. This information will be used for examining some of the
functional relationships among benthic primary production, benthic infauna, and
emergent plants.
The most important data exchange for the Benthic Primary Production work unit
is with the Sedimentation work unit. This may include sediment maps or
appropriate raw data and the results@ of sediment grain size analyses. In
addition, data on light intensity and light extinction from the Water Column
Primary Production work unit and the -prediction of water depth over the tidal
flats from the Currents work unit will be helpful in assessing primary production
in areas where direct measurements were not obtained. Any information on food
consumption rates for deposit feeders from the Benthic Infauna work unit would
also be useful to the Benthic Primary Production work unit.

Products

The products of the Benthic Primary Production work unit under objective I
will include draft maps of benthic microalgal biomass, productivity, and possibly
benthic oxygen consumption. These will be submitted to the Cartographic
contractor for final production. A final report consisting of a narrative with
graphics will summarize the findings from objectives 1, 2, and 3. Also included
in the report will be study methods, background literature information, and other
results and conclusions not included in the objectives, such as the ecological
role of eelgrass beds, other aquatic angiosperms, and benthic macroalgae. The
schedule for this work unit is shown in Figure 4.2.

Figure 4.2. Schedule for the Benthic Primary Production work unit.

Objectives and Products 1982 1983 1984
S 0 IN ID J F IzM I A M I J I J JA S 0 IN D J IF IM

1. Describe and map benthic microalgal productivity,
biomass, and related variable patterns.

2. Submit draft maps to Cartographic contractor.

3. Relate microalgal productivity to sediment para-
meters, salinity, and other pertinent physical and
chemical factors.

4. Determine the microalgal carbon budget.

W 5. Submit pertinent information to the Integration
Team.

6. Transfer data to Data Manager.

7. Submit bimonthly progress reports.

8. Prepare draft work unit report.

9. Review and finalize work unit report.

4.4 Water Column Primary Production

Introduction

Water column primary producers generally referred to as phytoplankton, may
represent a significant fraction of the primary food supply in the estuary,
contributing to the diets of some zooplankton, epibenthic invertebrate, and
benthic infaunal populations. The latter organisms in turn supply food to many
commercially important fish species. , Therefore, to properly manage these
commercially important species it is.neces sary to understand the abundance and
dynamics of phytoplankton and other suspended organic.particulates.
The purpose of the Water Column Primary Production work unit is to provide
information on phytoplankton biomass and productivity over space and time, the
concentration of other water column particulates, and physical and chemical
factors such as salinity, temperature, and nutrients. This. extensive data set
will @lead to a detailed understanding of this highly dynamic water column system
and will be synthesized into a predictive model of phytoplankton productivity.

Objectives

1. Describe and map phytoplankton productivity and biomass patterns.

2. Relate phytoplankton productivity and biomass to light, salinity, currents
(null zone), nutrients, and other pertinent physical and chemical factors.

3. Measure or estimate phytoplankton and other organic particulate inputs and
outputs.

4. Determine the phytoplankton carbon budget.

Data sets

a) Analyzed data from the April 1980 to August 1981 sampling cruises. Variables
measured include extracted chlorophyll a, in vivo fluorescence, organic
seston, particulate nitrogen, particulate carbon, carbon productivity,
inorganic nutrients, and phytoplankton species identification.

b) Predicted carbon productivity for full estuarin e coverage,approximately every
other month from April 1980 to August 1981 from a model based on light input
and chlorophyll biomass.

c) Analyzed data on the incoming light field.

d) Analyzed data on water transport in and out of the estuary.

e) Analyzed data from the June and July 1981 time-series zooplankton grazing
experiments.

f) Estimates of particle sinking rates.

Objective/data set relationship matrix

Data set

Objective a b c d e f

x X

2 x X x x

3 x x X X X x

4 x x X X X X

Tasks Analysis summary. The first objective, mapping water column primary
production and biomass, requires no further data analysis. The spatial and
temporal coverage of the samples allows for mapping directly from the data and
analyses on hand. Draft maps will be produced showing productivity; such biomass
variables as Chlorophyll a, particulate organic matter, and fluorescence; and,
perhaps, nutrients.
Major work on the second objective has essentially been completed in the form
of space-time plots relating physical and nutrient data to water column primary
biomass and production, and a model to predict primary production from these
physical and nutrient variables. Determining the relationships between
phytoplankton and the null zone is an additional part of objective 2. This
analysis has been partially completed but requires further identification and
enumeration of phytoplankton species to better define spatial and temporal aspects
of the null zone. Although a desirable task, this further processing cannot be
funded under the anticipated funding level (see section 6.6, Additional Work
Tasks).
The third objective will be accomplished by combining the grazing,
import-export, and sinking rate information with water transport information
developed by the Currents and Simulation work units. Characterizing sinking rates
requires further analysis which will be curtailed under the anticipated funding
level (see section 6.6, Additional Work Tasks). The input and output rates will
be incorporated into a predictive model of phytoplankton dynamics.
The carbon budget will be determined from the results of objectives 1, 2, and
3. This budget will be completed by the contractor and used by the Integration
Team in characterizing the total estuarine carbon budget.

Data adequacy. All of the data sets, are adequate to fulfill the objectives
with some limitations. Grazing and sinking rate information needed.for objective
3 are sparse, and rate information on the carbon loss due to phytoplankton
respiration is nonexistent. Additionally, the importance of the null zone (under
objective 2) will be difficult to determine without further identification of
phytoplankton species.
Integration and data exchange. Information required by the Integration Team,
such as phytoplankton input and output rates and carbon budget calculations will
be submitted as it becomes available. The major data exchange required by the
Water Column Primary Production work unit is with the Currents and Simulation work
units for water transport information. The latter will be used to better
understand phytoplankton import, export, and dynamics within the estuary.
Calculations of the surface area at various depth intervals in the estuary (funded
under another project) are needed in order to compute estuary-wide production and
biomass levels. In addition, the Water Column Primary Production work unit may
require information on abundance and distribution from the Zooplankton and Larval
Fish work unit to better,interpret the grazing rate determinations.

Products

The products of the Water Column Primary Production work unit under objective
I will include draft maps of phytoplankton productivity, biomass, and, perhaps,
nutrients. These will be submitted to the Cartographic- contractor for final
production. A final report consisting of a narrative with graphics will summarize
the findings from objectives 1, 2, 3, and 4. Also included in the report will be
study methods, background literature information, and other incidental results and
conclusions not included in the objectives. The schedule for the Water Column
Primary Production work unit is shown in Figure 4.3.

Figure 4.3. Schedule for the Water Column Primary Production work unit.

1982 1983 1984
Objectives and Products S 1 0 1 N ID J IF I M A I M I J IJ A IS 10 N ID J IF IM

1. Describe and map phytoplankton productivity and
biomass patterns.

2. Submit draft maps to the Cartographic contractor.

3. Relate phytoplankton productivity and biomass to
light, salinity, currents, nutrients, and other
pertinent physical and chemical factors.

4. Measure or estimate phytoplankton and other organ-
ic particulate inputs and outputs.

4-
5. Determine the phytoplankton carbon budget.

6. Submit pertinent information to the Integration
Team.

7. Transfer data to Data Manager.

8. Submit bimonthly progr ess reports.

9. Prepare draft work unit report.

10. Review and finalize work unit report.

4.5 Zboplankton-a-nd Larval Fish

Introduction

Pelagic zooplankton are small water column animals that drift with water
currents. They represent a major food source to commercially important fish and
are therefore a concern of resource managers. Prior to CREDDP, only cursory
studies of zooplankton populations had been undertaken on the Columbia River
Estuary. The purpose of the Zooplankton and Larval Fish work unit is to examine
the abundance, distribution, and population dynamics of important pelagic
zooplankton species. Because larval fish are sampled with the same gear and
techniques, this work unit also examines their abundance and distribution. The
research is primarily focused on spatial and temporal population distributions, on
relationships with physical factors, and on life histories of key species.
The sampling strategy of this work unit was such that temporal variations of
the zooplankton assemblages.could be examined on.a.biweekly time scale in the main
channel from the mouth of the estuary to Cathlamet Bay. Additional samples were
taken to define the depth distribution of Eurytemora in relation to tidal and diel
cycles. The results from this work unit will enable the functional relationships
of zooplankton and larval fish in the ecosystem to be defined, including
predator-prey linkages, emigration and immigration, and their role in the
estuary's carbon budget.

Objectives

1) Describe and map key and selected other zooplankton and larval fish species
by principal life history stages, or assemblages, in terms of occurrence,
density, and standing crop over time.

2) Quantify functional relationships among zooplankton and larval fishes and
physical (salinity, temperature, tide stage) and biological (planktivorous
predators) factors.

3) Describe population structure and dynamics, and life history of Eurytemora.

Data sets

a) Unprocessed samples, raw data, and partially analyzed data,from the biweekly
April 1980 to April 1981 samples. Variables measured include species
identification, life history stage, abundan 'ce, sex, and maturity, and
physical factors such as temperature, salinity, and water transparency.

Objective/data set relationships

Data set (a) is used in all objectives.
Tasks Analysis summary. To accomplish the mapping objective (objective 1), the
work unit contractor will use data from the April to October 1980 processed
samples. The maps will show zooplankton and larval fish abundance and standing
crop in the main channel to Cathlamet Bay during spring and summer seasons only.
To expand the temporal coverage of the maps to an annual cycle, additional samples
will need to be processed (October 1980 to April 1981). This can be accomplished
only if additional funding is available (see section 6.6, Additional Work Tasks).
The second objective requires relating zooplankton density to physical
factors using statistical analyses. The second part of the objective,
relationships with biological factors, will require information on zooplankton
species which are consumed by fishes and on fish standing stock. This wi 11 be
supplied by the Fish work unit in order to define predator-prey relations . with
zooplankton.
The detailed description of Eurytemora. life history and population dynamics.
(objective 3) will be accomplished by interpreting the data sets and results from
objectives I and 2 to generate estimates of Eurytemor2, growth, duration of
development by life history stage, fecundity, and production. As in objectives 1
and 2, the temporal coverage will be limited to the spring and summer seasons
under present anticipated funding (see section 6.6, Additional Work Tasks).
In addition to the above objectives, a fourth objective, describing vertical
and horizontal variation in Eurytemora populations over diel and tidal cycles, can
be completed if samples from the depth/ tidal/diel surveys are processed and
analyzed. Information from these analyses would also augment objective 1.
Analysing these samples would require fund.ing beyond the anticipated level (see
section 6.6, Additional Work Tasks),
Data adequacy. The data are adequate to complete the objectives listed;
however, coverage will be limited to the main shipping channel from the mouth of
the estuary to the western portion of Cathlamet Bay during the spring and summer
seasons only. As discussed above, the temporal coverage can be increased to an
entire annual cycle with increased funding for this work unit.
Integration and data exchange. The combined data sets, reports, and other
products generated in meeting objectives 1 - 3 will provide the basis for the
Integration Team's synthesis of the functional relationships of pelagic
zooplankton and larval fish in the estuary's ecosystem. Included will be an

analysis of predator-prey linkages, emigration and immigration, and the role of
zooplankton and larval fish in the estuary's carbon budget.
The primary data exchange required by this work unit is inf ormation about
predation on zooplankton and fish standing stock from the Fish work unit.
Information on salinity distribution and circulation will also be required from

the Currents work unit.

Products

The products of the zooplankton and larval fish work u nit under objective 1
will include draft maps of key species density and standing crop. These will be
submitted to the Cartographic contractor for final production. A f inal report
including a narrative with graphics will summarize the findings from objectives I '
2, and 3. Also included in the report will be study methods, background
literature information, and other results and conclusions not included in these
objectives, such as the results of the fourth objective (discussed above), if
funded. The work unit objectives and products are scheduled in Figure 4.4.

Figure 4.4. Schedule for the Zooplankton and Larval Fish work unit.

1982 1983 1984
Objectives and Products S 0 N D J F M M J J A I S 1 0 IN D J I F IM

1. Describe and map keyand selected other zooplank-
ton and larval fish speciesp by principal life h
history stages, or assemblages in terms of
occurrence, density, and standing crop over time.

Submit draft maps to the Cartographic contractor.

3. Quantify functional relationships among pelagic
zooplankton and larval fishes and physical (salin-
ity, temperature, tide stage), and biological
(planktivorous predators) factors.

4. Describe population structure and dynamics and
life-history of Eurytemora.

5. Submit pertinentinformation to the Integration
Team.

6. Transfer data to Data Manager.

7. Submit bimonthly progress reports.

8. Prepare draft work unit report.

9. Review and finalize work unit report.

4.6 Benthic Infauna

Introduction

Benthic inf auna are important as food organisms for many fish and bird
species and are commonly studied as indicator organisms of ecosystem change.
Although infauna have been studied intensively in some areas of the estuary, there
have been few life his to ry /production studies and no estuary-wide studies. The
purpose of the Benthic Infauna work unit is to fill this gap by describing the
temporal and spatial distribution of infauna and determining the life histories
and production of key species. In the first phase of research, intensive field
investigations were set up at a few selected sites to acquire life history
information and to describe the seasonal changes in benthic infaunal assemblages.
The second phase was the collection of an estuary-wide sample set upon which the
mapping of infaunal density will be based. The combination of the data sets from
these two research phases allows for an understanding of seasonal changes in
benthic infauna over the entire estuary.
Site-specific information from past studies on benthic infauna will be
incorporated into the CREDDP results. . After all of the results have been
integrated with other work units, a more complete understanding of processes

associated with benthic infauna will be attained.

Objectives

1. Describe and map key and selected other benthic infduna species or
assemblages in terms of density, standing crop, and production over time.

2. Quantify relationships among benthic infauna and physical (salinity,
sediments, depth) and biological factors.

3. Determine the population structure and dynamics, life history, and turnover
rates of Corophium, Macoma, Hobsonia, and Pseudopolydora.

4. Define functional relationships of benthic infauna in the ecosystem,
including predator prey linkages, population movements, and role in the
estuary carbon budget.

Data sets

a) Unprocessed samples from the September 1981 distributional survey. Variables
measured include species density and biomass and sediment samples for
standard grain size analysis.

b) Raw and partially analyzed data from the October 1979 and April 1980
preliminary samples. Variables measured include species identification and
density.

c) Data from National Marine Fisheries Service studies.

d) Data from past studies of infauna in Youngs Ba y.

e) Unprocessed samples and raw data from the August 1980 to September 1981
monthly (or biweekly) intensive studies. Variables measured include species
density, biomass, and life history information on.Corophium, Macoma,.Hobsonia
and.Pseudopolydora.

Objective/data set relationship matrix

Data set

Objective a b c d e

I x x x x x

2 x x x

3 x

4 x x x x x
I

Tasks

Analysis summary. To complete the mapping objective, the estuary-wide survey
samples will be processed and species density and biomass statistically correlated
with sediment parameters. This information may be combined with the sediment
distribution maps to expand the point data to cove@ the entire estuary. The
results will then be combined with the seasonal dynamics data from the intensive
studies to expand the fall survey data to cover an annual cycle. CREDDP cannot
fund processing the entire distributional survey under the present funding
assumptions (see section 6.6, Additional Work Tasks). Data from the preliminary
survey (data set b) and past studies (data sets c and d) will aid in the mapping.
After the samples from the estuary-wide and intensive surveys are processed
infauna density and standing stock will be correlated with physical factors such
as sediment grain size (discussed above), salinity, and depth (objective 2). The
relationships among infauna species and biological factors will come mainly from
correlations with other species and inferences from other work units, particul arly

Fish and Avifauna.

The third objective requires completing the processing and analysis of the
intensive survey data set. From this information, life history and turnover
estimates can be generated for Corophium, Macoma, Hobsonia, and Pseudopolydora.

To complete obj ective 4, literature information on - f eeding rates,
respiration, and food requirements of benthic infauna will be gathered. Coupled
with standing stock estimates for benthic assemblages in the estuary, these will
allow estimation of energy flow passing th rough this portion of the estuarine
community which will, in turn, allow for carbon budget formulation by the
Integration Team.
Data adequacy. The data sets are adequate to complete the objectives with a
few constraints. First, because biomass was not measured in all samples,
producing biomass maps will require conver ting density to biomass. Additionally,
production can only be calculated for a few species (see data set e) so mapping
the production of the entire infaunal assemblage will depend on indirect estimates
based on biomass. Objective 4 also depends on the production estimates as well as
other estimates such as food consumption and respiratory loss rates. if
additional funding becomes available, the resolution of all the results will be
increased by processing additional samples, such as the quarterly survey and
vertical distribution samples. (see section 6.6, Additional Work Tasks).
Integration and data exchange. The Benthic Infauna contractor will submit
pertinent information to the Integration Team as it is produced. The information
required to complete objective 4 is especially important.
Work unit data exchange will consist primarily of sediment maps or
appropriate habitat maps, raw data from sediment analyses, and salinity
distribution information to be supplied by the Sedimentation and Currents work
units respectively. The Benthic Infauna contractor will submit information on the
distribution of infauna species to the Fish and Avifauna work units. The benthic
infauna information will be used to analyze feeding relationships between infauna
and their predators.

Products

The products of the Benthic Infauna work unit under objective 1 will include
draft maps of benthic infaunal density, biomass, and production. These will be
submitted to the Cartographic contractor for final production. A f inal report
consisting of a narrative with graphics will summarize the findings from
objectives 1-4. Also included in the report will be study methods, background
literature information, and other results and conclusions not included in the
objectives, such as the vertical distribution of benthic infauna in the sediment
and the effects of the Mt. St. Helens eruption on benthic infauna. The schedule
for the Benthic Infauna work unit is shown in Figure 4.5.

Figure 4.5. Schedule for the Benthic Infauna work unit.

1982 1983 1984
Objectives and Products SI 01 N I D J I F1 M Al MI J I J A IS 1 0 N I D J IF IM

1. Describe and map key and selected other benthic
infauna species or assemblages in terms of density,
standing crop, and production.

2. Submit draft maps to the Cartographic Contractor.

3. Quantify relationships among benthic infauna and
physical (salinity, sediments, depth) and biologi-
Cal (other species) factors.

t-n 4. Determine the population structure and dynamics,
life history, and turnover rates of Corophium,
Macoma, Hobsonia, and Pseudopolydora.

5. Define functional relationships of benthic infauna
in the ecosystem, including predator-prey linkages
population movements, and role in the estuary car
bon budget.

6. Submit pertinent information to the A-vifauna and
Fish work units.

7. Submit pertinent information to the Integration
Team.

8. Transfer data to Data Manager.

9. Submit bimonthly progress reports.

10. Prepare draft work unit report.

11. Review and finalize work unit report.

4.7 Epibenthic Organisms

Introduction

Epibenthic organisms are animals that exist on or just above the estuary's
bottom. These organisms include epibenthic zooplankton and mobile
macroinvertebrates such as Dungeness crab and sand shrimp. Many of these
organisms are important links between primary production and fish, yet they are
rarely studied adequately. The purp ose of the Epibenthic Organisms work unit is
to describe key species distribution and population dynamics, secondary
production, life histories, and predator-prey interactions.
The sampling of the work unit was habitat-stratified so that species density
and standing crop information could be extrapolated to cover the entire estuary-
Four types of sampling gear were used to assure representa tive catches of most of
the organisms in the diverse epibenthic assemblage. The information generated by
this work unit should be easily integrated with other work units for' formulating
the estuary-wide carbon budget.

Objectives

1. Describe and map key and selected other epibenthic species or assemblages in
terms of density, standing crop, and production over time.

2. Quantify relationships among epibenthic organisms and physical (salinity,
sediments, depths) and biological factors.

3. Describe the population structure, dynamics, life history, and trophic
relationships of Dungeness crab, crangonid shrimp, and mysids.

4. Define functional relationships of epibenthic organisms in the ecosystem,
including predator-prey linkages, emigration and immigration, and role in the
estuary carbon budget.

Data sets

a) Unprocessed samples, raw data, and analyzed data from the March 1980 to July
1981 sampling. Variables measured include species identification, life
history stages, abundance, weight, carapace length, sex, and maturity with
corresponding data on tidal elevation, temperature, salinity, tidal stage,
and sediment grain size.

Objective/data set relationships

Data set (a) is used in all of the objectives.

Tasks

Analysis summary. To complete the first objective, the remaining raw data
must be analyzed and tabulated to give information on density, standing crop, and
production for an annual cycle. Because the sampling was habitat-stratified, the
data can be easily extrapolated over the total estuary on either the habitat-type
maps produced by the Integration Team or a sediment map used in conjunction with
bathymetric and salinity distribution information.
Various statistical analyses on the biological and physical data collected in
data set (a) must be performed in order to relate epibenthic assemblages to
physical factors (objective 2). The relationships among epibenthic organisms and
biological factors will originate from correlations with other taxa and from
inferences from work units studying their predators, particularly Fish, Avifauna,
Wildlife, and Marine Mammals.
Objective 3 will be completed using the life history and population
information developed from the data set. Describing trophic relationships of
Dungeness crab, crangonid shrimp, and mysids cannot be completed, because stomach
analyses of macroinvertebrates cannot be funded under the present assumptions (see
section 6.6, Additional Work Tasks). Literature information may help to fill this
gap. Completing objective 4 requires information on macroinvertebrate feeding and
literature information on respiration and food requirements of epibenthic
zooplankton. Direct or metabolic measures of consumption rates, coupled with
standing stock estimates for epibenthic assemblages, will allow estimation of
energy flow. This will be incorporated into the estuary-wide carbon budget by the

Integration Team.
Data Adequacy. The data are adequate to complete all of the objectives
except objec. tive 3. The trophic relationships portion of objective 3 requires
further analysis of macroinvertebrate stomachs which, as discussed above, will not
be funded under current assumptions. If funding becomes available, the stomach
analysis data will be adequate to complete this objective. The resolution of
objective 4 may be limited because literature information related to epibenthic
zooplankton is sparse and quantitative data on macro invertebrate feeding are
lacking.
Integration and Data Exchange. The Epibenthic Organisms contractor will
submit pertinent information to the Integration Team. Of particular importance is
the information required to formulate the carbon budget.
The Epibenthic Organisms work unit will require sediment and salinity maps or

appropriate habitat type maps and also the data from analysis of some of its
sediment samples. Additionally, the Epibenthic work un it will exchange data with
the Fish, Avifauna, Wildlife, and Marine Mammal work units for the purpose of
analyzing predator-prey relationships.

Products

The products of the Epibenthic Organisms work unit under objective 1 will
include draft maps of epibenthic organism density, standing crop, and secondary
production. These will be submitted to the Cartographic contractor for final
production. A final report consisting of narrative with graphics will summarize
the findings from objectives 1-4. Also included in the report will be study
methods, background literature information, and.other results and conclusions not
included in the objectives, such as a qualitative assessment of the importance of
the estuary to Dungeness crab and crangonid shrimp. The schedule for the
Epibenthic Organisms work unit is shown in Figure 4.6.

Figure 4.6. Schedule for the Epibenthic Organisms work unit.

Objectives and Products 1982 -1983 1.984
S 0 N D J F I M IA MI JIJ AIS OINID_ JIF IM

1. Describe and map key and selected other epiben@.
thic species or assemblages in terms of density,
standing stock, and production.

2. Submit draft maps to the Cartographic contractor.

3. Quantify relationships among epibenthic organisms
and physical (salinity, sediments, depth) and bi-
ological factors.

U1 4. Describe the population structure, dynamics, life
history, and trophic relationships of Dungeness
crab, crangonid shrimp, and mysids.

5. Define functional relationships of epibenthic or-
ganisms in the ecosystem, including predator-
prey linkages, emigration and immigration, and
role in the estuary's carbon budget.

6. Submit pertinent information to the integration
Team.

7. Transfer data to Data Manager.

8. Submit bimonthly progress reports.

9. Prepare draft work unit report.

10. Review and finalize work unit report.

4.8 Fish

Introduction

Fish, because of their commercial and recreational value, are one of the most
important concerns of resource management agencies. In order to properly manage
fisheries, the seasonal abundance and distribution of fish species must be known
along with the interaction of these species and other aspects of the ecosystem.
The purpose of the Fish work unit is to determine the spatial and temporal
distribution of salmonid and non-salmonid fish in the estuary. The research is
focused on distributional studies and temporal population changes using both
estuary-wide and diel sampling. Four types of sampling gear were used to assure
sampling of as many fish species as possible. In addition to distributional data,
the fish contractor collected extensive data on feeding habits and growth rates.
The work unit will be able to generate extensive distributional information and
upon integrating the data with other work. unit results, define the functional
relationships among fish and other trophic levels. Moreover, the relationships
between fish species and physical factors will be described. Because the Fish
work unit has collected a vast amount of data, and some of the data may have been
biased by the Mt. St . Helens eruption, extreme care will be used to select only
those data sets for processing which will allow the objectives to be achieved.

Objectives

1. Describe and map key and selected othe r fish species by life history stage or
assemblages in terms of density and standing crop over time.

2. Quantify relationships among key fish species and physical (salinity,
temperature, tide stage) and biological factors.

3. Describe and map migration routes and timing (seasons, residence time) of
juvenile and adult salmon and the feeding habitats of juvenile salmon in
different estuarine habitats.

4. From stomach analyses, tabulate composition, abundance, and biomass of prey
in the diets of key fish species and life history stages, with emphasis on
diel samples.
1 1
5. Generate estimates of growth over time of identifiable cohorts of key species
residing within the estuary.

6. Estimate mean consumption rates of key fish species/life history stages and
proportional contribution of principal prey taxa in different
regions/habitats of the estuary. Discuss the role of a key species in the
estuary's carbon budget.

Data sets

a) Raw and partially analyzed data from the February 1980 to July 1981
distributional surveys. Variables measured include species identification,
life history stage, abundances, weights, lengths, and physical factors
(temperature, salinity, depth).

b) Raw and partially analyzed data from the April to September 1980 diel
surveys. The same variables were measured as in data set (a).

c) Unprocessed samples, raw data, and partially analyzed data from the fish
stomach samples taken during the distributional and diel surveys.

d) Non-CREDDP data and reports involving juvenile salmonid catches,
mark-recapture of tagged juvenile salmonids, and commercial salmon catches.

Objective/data set relationship matrix

Data set
Objective a b c d

1 x

2 x x

3 X x x x

4 x

5 x x

6 x x x

Tasks
Analysis summary. To complete the first objective, the relative abundance
and weight data must be converted to density and standing crop estimates. This
requires standardized effort computations for each type of sampling gear.
Seasonal maps can then be produced directly from the converted data. Because of
the large number of key fish species (17), information on several species or an
assemblage may have to be displayed on a single map. Although fish population
sizes in the estuary cannot be estimated, the density and standing crop estimates
will allow for approximations and descriptions of the functional relationships
between fish and their predators and prey.
Relating fish species to physical factors (objective 2) will require
combining the biological and physical data from the surveys and performing various
statistical analyses in order to examine the relationships. The second part of

this objective will be based on, analytical correlations of fish and other
estuarine organisms as well as inferences on the results of the Zooplankton,
Benthic Infauna, Epibenthic Organisms, Avifauna and Marine Mammals work units.
The third objective requires a synthesis of both CREDDP and non-CREDDP data
on distribution and feeding ecology of salmonids. Integrating these will permit a
detailed description of salmon movement, timing, and feeding.
Analyzing key fish species feeding habits (objective 4) will require
additional processing of fish stomach sample s. About 200 selected stomachs will
be processed with emphasis placed on the diel surveys so that the 24 hour feeding
chronologies can be quantified. If additional funding is available, more stomachs
can be analyzed resulting in a better understanding of feeding habits (see section
6.6, Additional Work Tasks). Adequate time and money will not be available to
process all of the thousands of fish stomach samples taken under CREDDP so care
must be taken to select a representative sub-sample of stomachs for processing.
Because the eruption of Mt. St. Helens may have temporarily changed feeding habits
of fish species, stomach samples collected before the May 18, 1980 eruption will
be selected for processing.
The growth rates of key fish species (objective 5) will be generated for
those species where data are complete enough to identify specific cohorts. Both
length and weight data will be used in these analyses.
Consumption rates (objective 6) will be estimated by using the diel stomach
analyses combined with information from the literature. The diel feeding
chronologies will be quantified and gastric evacuation rates estimated. This
information will be used by the Integration Team to determine the role of fish in
the estuary's carbon budget.
Data adequacy. The data are adequate to achieve all of the objectives with
some constraints. For example, the sampling design of the surveys do not adapt
easily to estimating and mapping fish density and standing crop and, because of
the lack of replication, sampling variability cannot be interpreted. Additionally,
the eruption of Mt. St. Helens severely biased the catches and other samples from
May to July 1980. The feeding habit data set is only complete for juvenile
salmonids; therefore, as many non-salmonid stomach samples as possible should be
processed.
Integration and data exchange. All, pertinent results will be submitted to
the Integration Team as they are produced. The major submission will be the
results of objective 6 to be integrated into the estuary's carbon budget.
The main data exchange will be with those work units studying fish prey

species and predators to further define trophic linkages.

Products

The products of the fish work unit under objective I will include draft maps
of key f ish species density and standing crop. These will be submitted to the
Cartographic contractor for final production. A final report consisting of a
narrative with graphics will summarize the findings from objectives 1 through 6.
Also included in the report will be study methods and background literature
information. The schedule for the Fish work unit is shown in Figure 4.7.

Figure 4.7. Schedule for the Fish work unit.

1982 1983 1984
Objectives and Products S1 01 NJ D J1 F1 M Al MI J1 J Al S1 0 NJ D i IF I M_

1. Describe and map key and selected other fish
species (by life history stage) or assemblages
in terms of density and standing crop.

2. Submit draft maps to the Cartographic contractor.

3. Quantify relationships among key fish species and
physical (salinity, temperature, tide stage) and
biological factors.

4. Describe and map migration routes and timing (sea-
sons, residence time) of juvenile and adult salmon
0 and the feeding habits of juvenile salmon in dif-
ferent estuarine habitats.

5. From stomach analyses, tabulate composition, abun-
dance, and biomass of prey in the diets of key
fish species and life history stages with emphasis
on diel samples.

6. Generate estimates of growth over time of identi-
fiable cohorts of key species residing within the
estuary.

7. Estimate mean consumption rates of key species/
life history stages and proportional contribution
of principal prey taxa in different regions/habi-
tats of the estuary. Discuss the role of key spe-
cies in the estuary's carbon budget.

8. Submit pertinent information to the Integration
Team.

Figure 4.7. Schedule for the Fish work unit (continued).

1982 1983 1984
Objectives and Products S 10 IN I.D J IF M A M J I J A IS 10 N I D J IF IM

9. Transfer data to Data Manager.
10. Submit bimonthly progress reports. 0 0

11. Prepare draft work unit report.

12. Review and finalize work unit report. -4

4.9 Avifauna

Introduction

The Columbia River Estuary supports a diverse assemblage of resident and
migratory birds. While information is available on the d iversity of avifauna in
the estuary and on the numbers of waterfowl in particular, there has been no
concerted effort to determine the use of estuarine habitats by bird species and to
link avifauna with the estuarine carbon budg et. Key avifauna for CREDDP include
some of the most abundant, and economically important, and endangered species.
The purpose of this work unit is to &ther information on the role of these
avifauna in the estuary and to assess their abundance and distribution through
habitat stratified sampling. The avifauna data are relatively well processed, and
a draft final report has already been submitted by the previous contractor. The
inclusion of this work unit in the revised Plan of Study is intended to
re-evaluate and reformat the data and make them more useful to the Integration
Team and to product users.

Objectives
1. Describe and map key'avifauna species-dbundance and habitats.

2. Determine avifauna food requirements and prey composition.

Data sets

a) Raw line census and point census data taken twice seasonally from spring 1980
to winter 1981. Variables measured include number of birds/km by species,
distance from the observer and activities.

b) Partially analyzed variable circular plot data taken twice seasonally from
spring 1980 to winter 1981. Variables measured include species densities,
species diversity (richness and eveness), and consuming biomass@

c) Raw data from incidental bird sightings and nesting survey.

Objective/data set relationship matrix

Data sets

Objectives a b c

I x x x

2 x x

Tasks

Analysis summary. Objective 1, describe and map key species abundance and
habitats, will be achieved using the variable plot density' data and the line
transect abundance data converted to densities for each habitat type. These
habitat/density data will be directly comparable to a habitat type map produced by
CREDDP. Critical areas identified in -data set (c) will also be included on the

maps.
Objective 2, estimate food requirements and prey composition of key species,
will be achieved by apportioning consuming biomass for each key species according
to prey composition values from the literature. A review of existing literature
will be used to obtain inferences about food requirements and food composition for
selected key species. Additionally, information from the Benthic Infauna, the
Epibenthic Organisms, and the Fish work units will be needed to complete this
objective. Feeding rates and probable prey consumption will be described, and
this information will be combined with the avifauna densities from objective 1.
If additional funding becomes available, new objectives may be added which
describe 1) possible factors that limit bird use of particular habitats and 2)
the importance of the Columbia River Estuary within the Pacific Flyway as an
overwinterin8 and migration route (see section 6.6, Additional Work Tasks).
Data adequacy. Although the avifauna data. and the findings expected from
literature searches are adequate to achieve the objectives, many results will be
approximations at best. The variable circular plots, density data are more
accurate than those derived from the line transects. These data give approximate
densities for habitat types, and further extrapolation of these data with feeding
habits to predict impacts on prey species will be even more approximate.
Integration and data exchange. The data from the Avifauna contractor on prey
items and consuming biomass will be submitted to the Integration Team. Good co-
ordination between the Avifauna contractor and the persons responsible for draft-
ing habitat type maps is essential to the success of objective 4. The habitat
types for which avifauna densities are calculated must correspond to those drafted
on the habitat-type maps, so that the information can be overlayed. A second area
where data exchange is needed is objective 2, estimates of food requirements.
Work units studying potential avifauna prey species must submit
distribution/density information on these before the avifauna food sources in the
estuary can be predicted. These work units include Benthic Infauna, Epibenthic
Organisms, and Fish.

Products
The products from 'objective 1 will be data on key species densities in
habitat types which can be overlayed on a habitat type map. Also, the locations
of critical feeding and nesting areas for rare, threatened and endangered species
will be mapped. Objective 2 will yield a report summarizing the likely prey
species and consuming biomass of key species. The work unit's objectives and
products are scheduled in Figure 4.8.

.64

Columbia
River
Estuary
Data
Development
Program

Post Office Building, Room 214 P.O. Box 175 Astoria; Oregon 97103 [503)325-0405
8 February 1983

MEMORANDUM RICHARD M. MORSE
FEDERAL REPRESENTATIVE PROGRAM
COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY DATA DEVELOPMENT P

TO: CREDDP Users Advisory Panel U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION
FROM: Jack Damron, Michael DeLapa NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE - OFFICE OF THE CHIEF SCIENTIST
1801 FAIRVIEW AVENUE EAST
SUBJ: Interim progress report SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98102 (206), 442-4567

Five months have passedsince CREST and the U.S. Water Resources Council
signed a cooperative agreement to--. resume the Columbia River Estuary Data
Development Program (CREDDP), and the program is well underway. The attached
Proposal Review Schedule shows our progress(attachment 1). Except for the Fish
,and Avifauna work units, all othet contractors have begun work following work
programs structured after those established in the final Plan of Study. We
would like to tell -you about our progress and future plans, and solicit your
help in developing reports,-maps, charts and other products that will meet.your
needs.

User and Integration Meetings

On. November 18, 1982, twenty-three representatives of local, state and
f ederal agencies, 'citizen groups, and other parties interested in estuarine
managefiient attended the first. CREDDP Users Advisory Panel. meeting. In the,
morning,"1pEDDP -technical coordinators. reviewed the progress in issuing, - -
contracts. ...In the Afternoon,IDavid McIntire, O.S.U. Estuarine Botanist and a
member of theIntegration-Team,. presented some preliminary thoughts on our data
integration effort and responded to participants' comments. Brad Harvey, from
Northwest Cartography, presented his proposal for a program atlas and
participants discussed this and other ideas for final products. It became clear
that no consensus was possible on which final products were best, and that the
Program should seek to develop a mix of different products to meet the varied.
needs of estuary manageis and citizens.

On December 2, 1982, users met with the CREDDP Integration Team members.
The purpose of this meeting was to allow interested users to communicate their
needs directly to the team of scientists responsible for analyzing and
synthesizing'- the multidisciplinary data base. Seventeen persons attended the
session which began with a discussion of different approaches to final products-
The Integration Team responded to specific questions about work progress and the
application of research results. Several users requested a more detailed
conceptual modelling scheme. The Users Panel and Integration Team met
separately in the afternoon with the users attempting to better define their
needs and the Integration Team working on the conceptual model.
CREST

needs and the Integration Team working on the conceptual model.
CREST

MEMO: INTERIM PROGRESS REPORT
8 February 1983
-- page 2 --

On December 3, the Integration Team met in -the CREST office where they
continued to discuss the conceptual approach. The biological members of the
Integration Team (Simenstad, Small and McIntire) met again on January 12-14,
1983 and the entire team will meet again on Feturary 14-16 to refine their
ideas. The Team plans to develop an outline of the final integration report
late February to distribute to CREDDP users. Anyone interested in following the
progress of the team more closely should contact Jack.

Delays and Problems

The. Fish work unit is several months behind schedule due to problems in
agreeing to a Scope of Work, but we are hopeful that work can begin by the
second week in February.

The Cartography work unit contract has been let and it is structured with.
substantial flexibility to define and revise the mix of final products.'

... The Avifauna work uni t proposal has not yet been finished but this-poses no
problem at this time.

User'Needs and Final Products

Although there have been no major changes to.the Plan of Study, some of our
ideas about final products have changed 'and we expect them to continue to
change. For CREDDP products to be fully responsive to user needs we will need
your assistance. Attachment 2 is a preliminary listing of possible products,
and-we would appreciate your views. Which products do you feel are important
and useful? Are there other things you would like to see? Please call or write
and let us know your ideas.

The Integration Team has suggested that users provide-potential development
scenarios (e.g. river flow levels,-possible dredging projects, etc.) to.test the
numeric'al 'and' other models. The users guide could be designed to show how
CREDDP data might be used to assess the impacts of these activities.

In late February, you will be receiving a draft outline of the final
integration report. Before then, we would appreciate any comments or questions
you might have.

Future Activities

The next scheduled User Advisory Panel meeting is in May when we plant o
have a two day symposium of .research results on May 24-25, 1983. We could
schedule.another users meeting in March or April if there is a sufficient demand
f or one. Otherwise, we will report our accomplishments in another progress
report next month. Thank you for your interest in CREDDP.

Attachments

t-4 C)
:j 0 :3@ lu P. H fD cu m
rt r? 0 CL vi m 0 P. 9) :3 ril 0 ri
rt :3, pi cu r-T m CL r?
3Q fu fu (D rt (M a
H ;j M r) P.
r? 0
r? r? r? pa o .4 n
rt P. W JQ cl ru "I. 7v :3r, 0 H.
@-4 rt rt 0 0 H. rt P. 1-1 0 Ili
0 rt in 0 a 0
H. :;r @3 0 9
C6 :j
0 C
r)
LA W r-r
0 P.
r-4 0 tj :j
En L4
x >< '><

>< ><
X-,

Attachment 2

POSSIBLE CREDDP PRODUCTS (not in any particular order)

Trogram Data Archive
-Inventory of data sets and formats from each work unit (index to the
archive)
-Storage of non-machine readable data
-Storage of machine readable data at Portland office of the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers

Work unit reports

_8Y1 x 11" format reports from each work unit with black and white graphics

Integration report

-Same format as work unit reports

Users Guide(s)

x 11" format report referring to management issues and the use of
CREDDP information
-(Possibly some shorter summary reports)

Atlas

-Large-format atlas with color maps and summaries-of all work unit reports
flat copies of all color maps.
-8@" x 11" copy of text.from atlas

Other Products

-Copies of 1:12,000 orthophotos of the es'tuary @should be available at a.
moderate cost)
-Possibly, a 1:12,000 base map made from these orthaphotos showing the line
of aquatic vegetation, 3 vegetation types (low marsh, high marsh, swamp),
and bathymetric contours.',_(should be available at a moderate cost)
-Estuary base maps:
1:40,000 (7 segment orthophoto based) produced from the 1:12,000 map
above.
1:160,000 and 1:320,000 reductions of 1:40,000 map.
-Volume/surface area/historical bathymetry data.
-computer printouts of raw data in 8Y' x 11" tabulated format in.
5 volumes: I
1. Estuary Bathymetry for 1868, 1935, 1958, and 1982
2. Bathymetric Differences for .1868 vs. 1935, 1935 vs. 1958,
and 1958 vs. 1982
3. Surface Areas by Depth Regimes for 18-68, 1935, 1958, and 1982
4. Estuary Volumes for.1868 vs. 1935, 1935 vs. 1958, and 1958 vs.
1982
5. Similar information as in volumes 1-4 for the special studies
at the river mouth in 1852, 1868, 1855,-1895, 1902, and 1935
-above data on magnetic tape

COLUK@ZIA 'Z@GR,
'-DA-TA ZF=VGLIDPMEWT-@ .GQA@A

3 P41SICAL- 9-Gsc-AQcvA

I rA-TS(S R A-nog 2 L-,c, m F. o-r
CKOTI-OGRA?1A I C SLAPfo&T- LEM I A.)T-

(WCLVOES IAITA

Fce M [email protected]\/ A ?UGIZAOI& OF 11+-e W ATS f4L JZ G.- SO Rcl,-::-@ S
CokAAjCIL-/Nop,-I-@4UAST elJF-R Slh-714 CDkAOA%SSIOAJ
\PJQC VASSISO F'GDGaAL- Ov'GUiat4r @M N.LoAA P'.)
@AG' C P-C-"DD 9 CO kli-a A CTO jL I. z z I s cf Z G S T-

PaOGP-A&A, co?4T&OL. UoAgM
AA c &Gsr FGDIL

PIZOGIZAm mAnAWL
LSITAPF
-'LASEkS ADVISOAV
PAMEL-

AIM

Post Office Building, Room 202 P.O. Box 175, Astoria, Oregon 97103 (503) 325-0435

7 October 1982

MEMORANDUM

TO: Distribution

FROM: Norman Brateng, CREST Chairman

SUBJ: Columbia River Estuary Data Development Program (CREDDIP) Plan of Study

On September 7, 1982 CREST signed a cooperative agreement with the U. S. Water
Resources Council to administer the Columbia River Estuary Data Development
Program (CREDDP) in accordance with the enclosed Plan of Study. This Plan
describes how research efforts will be designed to meet the program's goals and
objectives, which are defined in terms of user needs. Program management and
organization, including the roles of advisory panels, are also described. The
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has succeeded the U. S.
Water Resources Council in this cooperative agreement.

A Program Control Board consisting of CREST and NOAA will oversee the management
of CREDDP. CREST director Michael D. DeLapa will represent the CREST Council on
this Board and Richard Morse will represent NOAA. John Damron will be the Program
Manager.

We have begun contract preparations and have requested proposals with the
objective of resuming the program as soon as possible. $1.22 million will be
available to complete the program and all activities must be completed by June 30,
1984. Emphasis will be placed on producing useful final products by thorough
analysis of existing data and , by processing selected portions of previously
acquired sample sets. New field work will not be possible given the constraints
of time and money.

the interdisciplinary nature of CREDDP will be stressed. Contractors' work will
be closely coordinated so that exchanges of data and ideas can occur, allowing
individual researchers to obtain -needed information to complete their
'investigations. Moreover, as one of the final products, the program will publish
an integration document that summar 'izes research results -in the context of the
entire ecosystem. This product will be directed toward resource managers - and
planners onthe estuary. The final technical reports submitted by each contractor
will also be important products, together with the machine-readable data in a
CREDDP data archive.

If you are interested in following the progress of CREDDP, please contact the
CREST office and we will add your name to our mailing list.
1111r1T

CREST MEMBERS -WASHINGTON: Pacific County, Port Dist. #2 (Wahkiakum Co.), Port of I Iwaco, Town of I Iwaco
OREGON: Clatsop County, City of Astoria, Town of Hammond, City of Warrenton, Port of Astoria

.an essential base upon which to support resource management decisions.
The f inal goal, integration, is very important because it leads to a more
complete understanding of estuarine ecological structure and function.
Integrating the results from all of, the work units is the key to a successful
interdisciplinary program, giving resource managers a better understanding of the
ecosystem and improving their predictive capability. The* goals of CREDDP are

listed below.

A. First Trophic Level

1. Describe and map productivity and biomass patterns of Columbia
River Estuary primary producers.

2. Determine to the extent possible the carbon budget of primary
producers.

3. Describe the relationships_among primary producers and productivity
levels and physicalfactors.

B. Higher Trophic Levels

1. Describe and map abundance patterns of the invertebrate and
vertebrate groups.

2. Determine functional relationships among higher trophic group s.

3. Describe the relationships among vertebrate and invertebrate
species and physical and biological factors.

C. Sedimentation and Shoaling

1. Characterize and map bottom sediment distribution.

2. Characterize sediment transport.

3. Determine (qualitatively) the causes of historic and modern
bathymetric change.

D. Currents and Simulation

1. Evaluate and model circulation patterns.

2. Evaluate and model vertical mixing and salinity patterns.

E. Integration

1. Integrate program information for a more complete understanding of
biological and physical structure and processes.

Figure 4.8. Schedule for the Avifauna work unit.

1982 1983 1984
Objectives and Products SIOINID JIFIM AIM i1i I A S 1 0 IN D J IF IM

1. Describe and map key avif auna species abundance
and habitats.

2. Submit draft maps to the Cartographic contractor.

3. Determine avifauna, food requirements and prey com-
position.

4. Submit pertinent information to the Integration
Team.

ON 5. Transfer data to Data Manager.
Cn

6. Submit bimonthly progress reports.

7. Prepare draft work unit report.

8. Review and finalize work unit report.

4.10 Wildlife

Introduction

Terrestrial and aquatic mammals associated with the estuary are
recreationally and, to some extent, commercially important and are a major concern
of many resource management agencies. Prior to CREDDP, there was little
information on the non-endangered mammals of the Columbia River Estuary. The
Wildlife work unit studied mammalian distribution and feeding habits in intertidal
marsh and swamp habitats. The work unit was completed as of September 1981 and
produced a final report summarizing, in detail, results and data analyses.
However, to fulfill the integration objective concerning the estuarine carbon
budget and to conform with the mapping format of other work units, some additional
work must be done. An additional objective which addresses the identification of
possible factors that limit key species use of particular habitats is added to
address some of the concerns of resource management agencies.

bjectives

1. Describe and map key wildlife species occurrence and density.

2. Estimate the rate of consumption of food/prey by wildlife.

3. Identify possible factors that limit key species use of particular habitats.

Data sets

a) Analyzed data on species distributi on and density collected under the former
Wildlife contract.

b) Vegetation type maps of the Columbia River Estuary.

c) Analyzed data on wildlife food habits collected under the former Wildlife
contract.

Objective/data set relationship matrix

Data set
Objectives a b c

1 x x

2 x x

3 x x x

Tasks

Analysis summary. The map ping objective will be completed by extrapolating
the species occurrence data on the existing vegetation type maps. Occurrence of
all species and relative density of a few species will be mapped.
Estimating consumption rates requires that literature information be combined
with the qualitative feeding habits data collected by the Wildlife work unit to
give approximate consumption rates of some prey items by some species.
The third objective can be accomplished using the data analyses already
produced by the Wildlife contractor. The objective is basically a restatement of
some of the information in the Wildlife final report.
Data adequacy. The data are adequate to fulfill the objectives listed with
limitations. For example absolute species density cannot be calculated or mapped
and relative density can only be mapped for a few wildlife species. The estimates
of consumption rates will be approximate and will be limited to only a few species
of wildlife and prey items.
Integration and data exchange. Pertinent information from the Wildlife work
unit will be submitted to the Integration Team, particularly the consumption rate
information as it relates to the estuarine carbon budget. Also, the feeding
habits information already produced will be essential for describing predator-prey
interactions and grazing effects. Information from the Emergent Plant, Epibenthic
Organisms, Fish, and Avifauna work units will be required to accomplish objective

Products

The products of the Wildlife work unit under objective I will include draft
maps of wildlife species occurrence and relative density. These maps will be
submitted to the Cartographic contractor for final production. A report
supplementing the September 1981 final report already submitted to the program and
consisting of a narrative presentation with graphics,will summarize the results of
objectives 1, 2, and 3. The schedule for this work unit is shown in Figure 4.9.

Figure 4.9. Schedule for the Wildlife work unit.

1982 1983 1984
Objectives and Products S 01 NJ D J I F1 M I A M I J I J A IS 10 N I D J IF IM

1. Describe and map key wildlife species occurrence
and density.

2. Submit draft maps to the Cartographic contractor.

3. Estimate the rate of consumption of food/prey by
wildlife.

4. Identify possible factors that limit key species
use of particular habitats.

5. Submit pertinent data to the Integration Team.
co
6. Transfer data to Data Manager.

7. Submit bimonthly progress reports.

8. Prepare draft work unit report.

9. Review and finalize work unit report.

4.11 Marine Mammals

Introduction

Marine mammals are of special concern to fishermen and fisheries management
agencies because of their high position in the food chain, This makes them
potential competitors with man for the estuary's food resources. Information on
the distribution of marine mammals in time and space, their prey requirements, and
their consuming biomass is therefore important in evaluating the role of marine
mammals in the ecosystem, and their impacts on fisheries.
The most important marine mammals using the Columbia River Estuary have been
identified as harbor seals and sea lions. The objective of the Marine Mammals
work unit has been to study the populations, feeding, seasonal distribution and
migration of these species, and their interaction with commercial fisheries. The

Marine Mammals work unit obtains most of its funds from other sources and is

included here principally for the purpose of producing abundance maps compatible
with the CREDDP mapping format.

Objecti e

1. Describe and map marine mammal species occurrence, density and standing crop.

Data sets

a) Partially analyzed data from monthly or biweekly aerial censuses from
September 1980 to September 1981.

b) Partially analyzed mark and relocate or recapture data from marked or
radio-tagged animals.

Objective/data set relationships
Tasks Objective 1 involves the use of data sets (a) and (b).
Analysis summary. Objective 1, will be accomplished through the analysis of
data sets (a) and (b). The data sets include raw and processed information on
marine mammal distribution in the estuary and along the adjacent coast. These
data will be analyzed to provide seasonal density maps, and will be converted to
standing crop for further mapping. Seal haulout areas and other critical habitat
will be identified and mapped.
Additional objectives can be added to this work unit if additional funding
becomes available. These objectives include 1) analyzing tagging data to des-

cribe marine mammal activity pat.terns,., @) estimating the consumption rates of
marine mammals, and 3) analyzing methods of avoiding marine mammal/ fisheries
interaction (see section 6.6, Additional Work Tasks).
Data adequacy. Good quantitative data are,available for haulout areas; data
are less reliable for non-haulout areas. Estimates of the . percentage of the
population in the water can be obtained from the tagging data, and these can be
combined with counts of haulout areas to give overall densities. Adequate data
exist in processed and unprocessed form to achieve this objective.
Integration and data exchange. Information concerning the standing crop and
seasonal movements of marine mammals is important to the Integration Team. In
order to draw a quantitative link between marine mammals and their prey, the
Integration Team requires estimates of marine mammal consumption rates. As
discussed above, the latter,estimates require additional funding.
Understanding seal movements requires information on prey (fish) abundance in
the estuary from the Fish work unit.

Products
The products of the Marine Mammals work unit will be draft maps of key
species critical habitat, density, and standing crop for the Columbia River
Estuary, accompanied by an explanatory narrativ e. The draft maps will be
submitted to the Cartographic contractor for final production. The schedule for
this work is shown in Figure 4.10.

Figure 4.10. Schedule for the Marine Mammals work unit.

Objectives and Products 1982 1983 1984
S 0 14 D J V M A M J J A S 0 N D J F M

1. Describe and map marine mammal occurrence, densi-
ty, standing crop, and critical habitats.

2. Submit draft maps to Cartographic contractor.

3. Submit pertinent information to the Integration
Team.

4. Transfer data to Data Manager.

5. Submit bimonthly progress reports.

6. Prepare draft work unit report.

7. Review and finalize work unit report.

4.12 Sedimentation and Shoaling

Introduction

The general purpose of the Sedimentation work unit is to develop an
understanding of the s ed imento logical processes in the estuary by describing 1)
the distribution of sediments in the estuary along with the processes accounting
for this observed distribution, 2) sediment transport, and 3) shoaling patterns.
The sampling strategy of this work unit involved extensive sampling of bottom
sediments throughout the estuary which, when analyzed statistically, will yield a
detailed characterization of bottom sediment-distribution. The sediment transport
work included field studies of bedform and suspended sediment movement. The
results of these studies should yield a characterization of bedform types and
migration directions and a characterization of the suspended sediment field. The
description of historical shoaling patterns.will rely heavily on information from

the literature and estuarine volume calculations which have been funded under

another project.
Because the Columbia River Estuary differs. markedly from other more
extensively studied estuaries, characterizing the sedimentary environment has
required innovative research and will require careful and extensive integration

with the Currents and Simulation work units. The results of the Sedimentation and

Shoaling work unit will be invaluable to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in
assessing the feasibility and impacts of deepening the Columbia River Navigation

Channel.

Objectives

1. Characterize and map bottom sediments.

2. Perform grain size analysis of sediment samples collected by biologists.

3. Characterize and map bedform types and migration directions.

4. Characterize the estuarine suspended sediment field.

5. Define modern sedimentary environments and processes (including important
temporal and spatial scales) in the estuary.

6. Investigate causes of modern and historical bathymetric change.

Data sets

a) Unprocessed samples, raw data, and partially analyzed data from the October
1979 through October 1980 bottom sediment samples. Variables measured in-

clude sediment grain size distribution and analyses include statistical
analysis of the data.

b) Unprocessed bottom sediment samples provided by biological contractors,for
sediment grain size analysis.

c) Raw and partially analyzed data from the October 1979 sampling cruise and
seven Columbia River tributaries. Variables measured include light, heavy,
magnetic mineral percentages, mineral-composition of sediments (spray
diffraction), and the physical structure of sediment and mineral grains
(photomicrographs).

d) Analyzed data from the October 1979 through October 1980 cruises. Variables
measured include bedforms (side-scan sonar data) and bathymetry.

e) Unprocessed samples, raw data, and partially analyzed data from the profiling
current meter cruise and instruments mounted on the Astoria-Megler Bridge.
Variables measured include turbidity (depth series and long term time
series), suspended,sediment grain size, and salinity and current profiles.

f) Analyzed data from the August 1980 fluorescent tracer study of bedload
sediment transport from a point near the mouth of the estuary.

g) Bathymetric and bathymetric differencing information (maps and volume
calculations) already produced or currently funded under another project.

Objective/data set relationship matrix

Data set
Objective a b c d e f

1 X X

2 x

3 x X

4 x

5 x x x x x

6 X X X x x

Tasks

Analysis summary. The first objective, mapping of bottom sediment
distribution, requires processing about 350 additional sediment samples in areas
where variability in grain size distribution was too great to map properly. Some
additional samples beyond the 350 may be processed if additional funding becomes
available (see section 6.6, Additional Work Tasks). The grain size data, along
with mineralogical data, will be statistically analyzed in order to group sediment
types and delineate and map sedimentary environments.
Processing sediment samples for biological contractors, the second objective,
requires analyzing grain sizes of approximately 80 samples from the Benthic

Primary Production, Benthic Infauna, and Epibenthic Organisms work units. These
,data will take the form of computer printouts of grain size distribution and
associated statistical parameters.
Objectives 3 and 4 have been completed and the results are included in a June
1982 U.S. Army Corp-s of Engineers report. These results will be used in other
analyses of this work unit and will be incorporated into the final CREDDP
products.
To accomplish the fifth objective of defining the modern sedimentary
environments and processes in the estuary, information from the bottom sediment,
bedform, and suspended sediment data sets will be combined and integrated with
current and salinity measurements and the output from the Simulation work unit.
The sixth objective requires integrating several data sets with information
obtained from the literature. In order to investigate the causes of historical
bathymetric change, this work unit will interpret historical bathymetric and
bathymetric differencing information along with the results of objective 6 and
literature descriptions of climatic, geologic, tectonic, and human influences on
the formation and evolution of the estuary.
In addition to the above objectives, a seventh objective which involves
estimating suspended sediment fluxes can be added if additional funding becomes
available (see section 6.6, Additional Work Tasks). This objective would involve
combining the current profile data and the suspended sediment data (from both
profiling and bridge-mounted instruments).
Data adequacy. Although the data sets are adequate to complete the work unit
objectives, there are some limitations and constraints. The characterization and
mapping of bottom sediments is difficult because of the spatial variability of
grain size in the estuary. However, processing additional samples, performing
further statistical analyses, and combining these results with the mineralogical

data should allow for a characterization of bottom sediments on which to base

mapping. The suspended sediment profile data used in the calculation of suspended
sediment fluxes only covered the low river discharge period and will therefore
limit the scope of this objective, if funded.
Integration and data exchange. 'The primary integration and data exchange of
this work unit will be with the Currents work unit. Both profiling and moored
current meter data are needed to formulate an integrated picture of
sedimentological processes. Also historical bathymetric and bathymetric
differencing information will be obtained from another project in order to
complete objective 6. The results of processing sediment samples from biological

contractors along with maps of sediment distribution will be provided to the
appropriate work units. Products
The product from objective 1 will be a draft map or set of maps of sediment
distribution or sedimentary environments. These will be submitted to the
Cartographic contractor for final production. A final report consisting of a
narrative with graphics will summarize the results of objectives 1 - 6. Also
included in the report will be study methods, background literature information,
and other incidental results and conclusions not covered by the objectives.
Additional products include a set of captioned photomicrographs of estuarine
minerals and the results of the analyses of sediment samples from the biological
contractors. The schedule for the Sedimentation work unit is shown in Figure

Figure 4.11. Schedule for the Sedimentation and Shoaling work unit.

Objectives and Products 1982 1983 1984
SI 0 IN ID J IF I M A I M I IJ A IS 0 IN D I JIF Im

1. Characterize and map bottom sediments.

2. Submit draft maps to Cartographic contractor.

3. Perform grain-size analysis of sediment samples
collected by biologists.

4. Characterize and map bedform types and migration corplete@
directions.

5. Characterize estuarine suspended sediment field. conplete@

6. Define modern sedimentallary environments and pro-
cesses (including important temporal and spatial
scales) in the estuary.

7. Investigate causes of modern and historical
bathymetric change.

8. Submit pertinent information to the Integration
Team.

9. Transfer data to Data Manager.

10. Submit bimonthly progress reports.

11. Prepare draft work unit report.

12. Review and finalize work unit report.

mm.@=M=

4.13 Currents

Introduction

The work to be carried out in the Currents work unit is designed to provide
both descriptive and process oriented physical information, with a strong emphasis
on understanding the functioning of the system. This work unit will f ocus on
analyzing tidal circulation and low frequency flow, processes. Emphasis will also
be placed on describing and analyzing vertical mixing processes and salinity and
temperature patterns. In addition to being individually important, the Currents
work is essential in understanding biological and all other phys ical processes in
the Columbia River Estuary. The Columbia River Estuary is sufficiently different
from other estuaries that an innovative combination of modelling, analytical, and
theoretical work is required to describe and understand the physical estuarine

processes.
The sampling scheme of this work unit was designed to describe physical
processes (currents, vertical mixing, etc.) in the main channels of the estuary
rather than in peripheral bays. The main body of the estuary has to be understood
before processes in the bays can be described. Information from the National
Ocean Survey (NOS) data base, once incorporated into the CREDDP data base, will
help to increase the understanding of the bays. The Currents work unit also
compliments the Simulation work unit, which emphasizes modelling the circulation

field.

Objectives

1. Describe and analyze tidal circulation.

2. Incorporate NOS data into CREDDP data base and use in all analyses, as
appropriate.

3. Describe and analyze low frequency flow, including "null zone" location and
processes.

4. Describe and analyze salinity and temperature patterns.

5. Describe and analyze vertical mixing processes.

Data sets

a) Current meter data from 1980 CREDDP sampling and 1975, 1977, and 1978 Corps
of Engineers sampling. The data include current velocity and direction,
temperature, salinity, and pressure.

b) Tidal height data from 1980 CREDDP sampling; 1977 and 1978 Corps of Engineers
sampling; 1977-80 NOS sampling; and 1977-81 USGS sampling. The data include
tidal height and temperature.

c) Current meter data from the 1981 NOS sampling. The data contain the same
information as described in (a).@

d) Tidal height data from the 1981 NOS sampling. The data contain the same
information as described in (b).

e) Anemometer data from the 1981 NOS sampling. The data include wind velocity
and direction.

f) Geostrophic wind and surface pressure data from NOAA.

g) Riverflow data from USGS.

Objective/data set relationship matr ix

Data set

Objective a b c d e f 9

X x X x

2 x X X

3 x x X X x X X

4 x X x x x

5 X X x x x

Tasks

Analysis summary. The first objective, tidal circulation analysis, will be
accomplished by performing harmonic analyses on the CREDDP and NOS current meter
and tidal height data. From these analyses will come descriptions of the
velocity, direction, and phasing of tidal currents.
Incorporating the NOS data base into the CREDDP system (objective 2) will
require similar processing as described under objective 1. The data will be used
extensively in describing low frequency flow (objective 3), analyzing vertical
mixing processes (objective 5), and describing the tidal circulation in peripheral
bays (part of objective 1). Processing NOS data will be curtailed under the
present funding assumptions (see section 6.6, Additional Work Tasks).
The purpose of objective 3 is to quantitatively analyze the estuary's low
frequency response to forcing by tides, river flow, density structure, local
winds, and continental shelf sea level fluctuations. The forcing functions will
be quantified by performing time series analyses and various statistical routines

on the tidal current, tidal height, atmospheric, and freshwater flow information.
The fourth objective., analysis of salinity and temperature patterns, requires
time series and various statistical analyses to relate the current meter data to
forcing functions such as river flow, tides, and atmospherically driven coastal
circulation. This is also closely related to the 5th objective on vertical

mixing.
The purpose of the 5th objective is to describe the processes related to
vertical mixing, essential information in analyzing currents, salinity, and other
physical and biological processes. This objective requires analysis of the
vertical profile data (included in data set a) to describe and classify the
density and velocity structure in terms of hydrodynamic parameters. The analysis
of the vertical profile data cannot be funded by CREDDP under the present funding
assumptions (see section 6.6, Additional Work Tasks). Without the vertical
profiling data the objective can only yield cursory and qualitative information on
vertical mixing processes.
Data adequacy. For objectives 1-4, the CREDDP data combined with the NOS
data are adequate to describe physical process during low river flow, high river
flow, and storm periods in the main body of the estuary and, to a lesser extent,
in the peripheral bays. The vertical profiling data (objective 5) are adequate to
describe the vertical mixing processes over a tidal-monthly cycle during low river
f low only. The level of statistical and descriptive analysis of the vertical
profile, salinity, and residual flow data will be increased if more funding
becomes available (see section 6.6, Additional Work Tasks).
Integration and data exchange. Information essential to the Integration Team
and other contractors includes salinity and temperature distribution, which will
be related to biological communities and processes. Tidal circulation, null zone
information, and vertical mixing processes will be related to the transport of
suspended and bedload sediment, and to the transport of water column organisms
such as phytoplankton and zooplankton. Additionally, the Currents work unit will
provide all the analyzed data to run and verify the models produced by the

Simulation work unit.

Products
The main product of this work unit will be a final report containing detailed
discussions of the results of all of the objectives. Graphics will be included
showing various physical oceanographic factors in relation to depth, longitudinal
and lateral position in the estuary, and time. Appropriate information will be

submitted to the Cartographic contractor for drafting and final production. Also
included in the final report will be background literature information and study
methods. The schedule for the Currents work unit'is shown in Figure 4.12.

Figure 4.12. Schedule for the Currents work unit.

Objectives and Products, 1982 1983 1984
S 0 1N ID i IF M JAI M J IJ JA IS 0 1 NJ D J F iM

1. Describe and analyze tidal circulation.

2. Incorporate NOS data into CREDDP data base and
use in all analyses, as appropriate.

3. Describe and analyze low frequency flow, including
11null zone" location and processes.

4. Describe and analyze salinity and temperature pat-
terns.

00
5. Describe and analyze vertical mixing processes.

6. Submit draft maps to Cartographic contractor.

7. Submit pertinent information to the Integration
Team.

8. Submit processed data to the Simulation Contractoi.

9. Transfer data to Data Manager.

10. Submit bimonthl y progress reports.

11. Prepare draft work unit report.

12. Review and finalize work unit report.

4.14 Simulation

Introduction

The purpose of the Simulation work unit is to produce a horizontal tidal and
storm surge numerical model to define circulation patterns and examine the effects
of atmospheric forcing, and a two-dimensional vertical model to examine vertical
current structure and the salinity intrusion processes in the deeper channels.
The circulation models proposed here are excellent descriptive and analytical
tools. Once verified, they can predict estuarine circulation over wide areas and
under conditions not observed in the field and can be used to investigate estu-
arine dynamics. It is the role of CREDDP to verify the models, provide appropri-
ate descriptive output, and use the models to answer dynamical questions posed by
the Simulation, Circulation, Sedimentation and Integration work units. The
results will be applicable to resource management concerns, such as circulation in
the peripheral bays, the causes of shoaling, the effects of channel deepening, and
the effects of restricting freshwater flow. The data used to verify and run the
models will be provided by the Currents work unit.

Objectives

1. Model circulation patterns through the use of a two-dimensional, horizontal
model. Use the model to study atmospheric and tidal forcing, to analyze
circulation in peripherial bays, and to assist the Sedimentation work unit in
determining shoaling patterns.

2. Formulate and use a two-dimensional multichannel vertical model to examine
tidal forcings, salinity intrusion, freshwater inflow, atmospheric forcing,
vertical mixing, and residual flow processes.

.Data sets

The Simulation work unit does not produce data but uses selected portions of
the data sets supplied by the Currents work unit. Therefore, the data sets listed
represent those from the currents work.

a) Current meter data from 1980 CREDDP sampling and 1975, 1977, and 1978 Corps
of Engineers sampling. The data include current velocity and direction,
temperature, salinity, and pressure.

b) Tidal height data from 1980 CREDDP sampling; 1977, 1978 Corps of Engineers
sampling; 1977-80 NOS sampling; and 1977-81 USGS sampling. The data include
tidal height and temperature.

c) Current meter data from the 1981 NOS sampling. The data contain the same
information as described in (a).

d) Tidal height datafrom the 1981 NOS sampling. The data contain the same
information as described in (b).

e) Anemometer data from the 1981 NOS sampling. The data include wind velocity
and direction.

Objectives/data set relationship matrix

Data set
Objective a b c d e

1 x x x x x

2 x x x x X

Tasks

Analysis summary. The first objective will be accomplished by refining the
already existing two-dimensional horizontal model and verifying it using CREDDP,
NOS, and Corps of Engineers data. The model's resolution in the bays and other
peripheral areas will be improved. The primary purpose of the model is to
illustrate the water transport patterns in the estuary and to test the dynamics of
the estuary using numerical experiments with the model. Tests to be carried out
include the estuarine system's response to various tidal forcing conditions,
coastal sea level changes, direct wind stress, and various riverflow conditions.
The second objective will be accomplished by modifying an existing

two-dimensional vertical model to include both the north and south channels. This

will be used to examine salinity intrusion, freshwater flow, atmospheric forcing,
residual flows, and vertical mixing processes. The model will be verified using
the CREDDP moored and profiling current meter data base (data set a). The latter
cannot be funded by CREDDP under present funding assumptions (see section 6.6,
Additional Work Tasks). As with the horizontal model, numerical experiments will
be performed once the model is verified. The purpose of these experiments will be
to graphically display salinity and current patterns and to investigate vertical
mixing and salinity intrusion processes. The results of these experiments will
augment the work of the Currents work unit.
Both the level of model refinement and the number of numerical experiments
can be significantly increased if additional funding is available (see section
6.6, Additional Work Tasks).
Data adequacy. For objective 1, the data from CREDDP, NOS, and the Corps of

Engineers are adequate to simulate circulation in the estuary including all
peripheral areas except Grays Bay. The CREDDP verti cal profiling data, along with
the NOS data, are adequate for completing objective 2.
Integration and data exchange. The Simulation work unit will contribute to
the Integration work unit in several ways. The horizontal tidal model will be
used to resolve problems regarding the circulation and distribution of planktonic
organisms in the estuary's main stem and peripheral bays. The vertical model will
play an important role in tying together circulation, sedimentation, and
biological information related to null zone processes and salinity distribution.
The numerical experiments described above will be important in resolving these
integration problems.
The main data exchange required by the Simulation work unit is processed data

from the Currents work unit which will be used in model verification.

Products

The main product of the Simulation work unit will be a final report
containing extensive graphics representing estuarine currents, the results of the
numerical experiments, and a narrative summary. The schedule for the Simulation
work unit is shown in Figure 4.13.

Milo M M M M M M M M M M-M M M M M M M

Figure 4.13. Schedule for the Simulation work unit.

1982 1983 1j984
Objectives and Products S 1 0 IN D J IF M I A I M IJ J JAI S 0 IN D J IF IM

1. Model circulation patterns through the use of a
two-dimensional, horizontal model. Use the model
to study atmospheric, freshwater, and tidal forc-
ings; to analyze circulation in peripheral bays;
and to assist the Sedimentation work unit in
determining shoaling patterns.

2. Formulate and use a two-dimensional, multi channel
vertical model to examine tidal forcings, salinity
intrusion, freshwater inflow, atmospheric forcing,
00 vertical mixing, and residual flow processes.
Un
3. Submit pertinent information to the Integration
Team.

4. Submit bimonthly progress reports.

5. Prepare draft work unit report.

6. Review and finalize work unit report.

4.15 Integration

Introduction

The purpose of the Integration work unit is to synthesize the results of the
various biological and physical work units and to produce a report describing the
structural and functional attributes of the estuarine ecosystem. Satisfactory
integration is particularly crucial for the successful completion of CREDDP, as
most of the important management concerns are related to the complex interactions
among the individual subsystems under examination by the work units. Most
management questions cannot be answered from information generated by an
individual work unit without a good knowledge of how that information couples with
the results of other work units. The Integration work unit will consist of a team
of five CREDDP researchers, each responsible for work units in his/her area of
expertise. These areas include the first trophic level, higher trophic levels,
circulation, sedimentation, and general estuarine ecology. These researchers will
work in close cooperation with each other and with program management to
accomplish the objectives of the Integration work unit.
Throughout the work unit programs section, reference is made to data and
analyses that will be submitted to the Integration Team. This work program will
present the strategy for synthesizing these work unit results. The schedule of
this work unit (Figure 4.14) represents the timing of the steps in this strategy
rather than individual objectives.

Objectives

1. Analyze effects of physical processes on key species and the taxonomic
structure of communities.

2. Integrate program information to define functional linkages among organisms
to develop a carbon budget, and relate these to the physical processes in tL
Columbia River Estuary.

3. Classify and map habitat types in relation to appropriate physical and
biological parameters (depth/elevation, salinity, sediment, emergent
vegetation type).*

A habitat type is defined here an an area occupied by a community of organisms.
This differs from the narrow ecological definition of a habitat as the physical
space occupied by one particular species or population. Habitat types are ideally
based on easily mapped physical and biological criteria, examples include low tidal
marsh and intertidal soft-sediment flats.

4. Using information developed by work unit contractors, describe the biological
communities in each habitat type.

1* Integrate current and salinity results and sediment results to develop an
understanding of the estuarine sedimentological processes.

Data sets

information developed by the physical and biological work units.

Tasks - Strategy for Integration.
Integration activities can be divided into two phases: 1) development of a
plan or conceptual structure for integration and 2) integrating results and
report writing. To accomplish the first phase, the Integration Team along with
will meet early in the program with program management to develop a conceptual
structure for synthesizing CREDDP information and producing the final integration
document. One suggested structure is a hierarchical process model which
identifies linkages among biological components (processes) and represents
physical processes as ecosystem driving and control variables. This, and other
conceptual structures such as the one presented in U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service's Ecological Characterization of the Pacific Northwest Coastal Region,
will be carefully evaluated during the planning phase. Moreover, there is a need
during this phase to begin defining exactly which work unit data sets and analyses
are required by the Team and which team member is responsible for each data set.
This is necessary so that the formidable logistics of data exchange and
integration can be overcome as early as possible. During phase 1, the Integration
Team and program management will also develop a habitat type classification system
and associated maps which will be used by other work units in their mapping. This
is directly applicable to integration objectives 3 and 4.
The second phase, integrating the work unit results and report writing, will
require periodic workshops involving the Integration Team and program management
with individual Team members working independently in the interim. A total of
four workshops will be held during phases 1 and 2. There will be continuous
interaction among the Integration Team, program management, the Cartographic
contractor, and other work unit contractors to assure the timely completion of the
final products.
Data adequacy. The adequacy of data sets used in integration varies widely
among the work units (see work unit programs). It is the responsibility of the
Integration Team, in conjunction with other work unit contractors, to ensure that
data are adequate and also to identify data gaps in the final integration product.

Products

The primary product of the Integration work unit is a comprehensive synthesis
of CREDDP information. This will contain a narrative summary with accompanying
maps of the work unit results and integration objectives presented within a
conceptual ecosystem framework. A second product which the Integration Team will
produce with program management is a guide to the use of CREDDP information.
These products are described in detail in section 5.3, Final Products. The
schedule for Integration activities is shown in Figure 4.14.

Figure 4.14. Schedule for the Integration work unit.

Activities 1 82 1983 1984
S 01 N ID J IF I M AIM I J J JAI S 0 IN D J IF IM

1. Develop conceptual framework for the comprehen-
sive synthesis of scientific information (Phase 1)

2. Receive data sets and analyses from the work unit
contractors (Phase 2).

3. Prepare a draft comprehensive synthesis of scien-
tific information (Phase 2).

4. Assist in preparing a draft guid e to the use of
00
CREDDP information.

5. Review and finalize reports.

6. Submit final text of the c6mprehensive synthesis
of scientific information to Cartog raphic contrac-
tor for final production.

7. Submit bimonthly progress reports.

8. Integration workshops. 0

4.16 Cartographic Work Unit

Introduction

One of the important products of CREDDP will be the final integration report
synthesing the program's scientific information and illustrated with high quality
maps and other graphics. Developing final maps from the draft maps submitted by
the various work unit contractors requires experienced cartographers with
production facilities. Moreover, because 'the narrative text of the final
integrated product will be combined with the maps, it is time and cost efficient
to have the Cartographic contractor lay out and produce the entire integration
report. Other reports, such as the final work unit reports and the guide to the
use of CREDDP information (see section 5.3, Final Products), can be printed and
reproduced by either the Cartographic contractor or program management.
An additional function of the Cartographic contractor will be to produce a
standard set of base maps for the work unit contractors to use in their draft
mapping. These maps will have the same scales as used in the final integration

document.

Mapping Products
The maps produced by the work units will probably follow three formats: (a)
a 1:40,000 scale 7 segment map set, (b) 1:160,000 scale I segment map, and (c) a
1:320,000 scale set of maps to display seasonal data (4 maps per page). The
1:40,000 scale is a standard scale used on National Oceanographic and Atmospheric
Association navigation charts and was used previously in the program. The other
scales are selected because they are the most appropriate given the amount of
information portrayed, the shape of the estuary, and the physical dimensions of
the final integration report. The maps will be either 1, 2, 3, or 4 color
depending on the optimal design for the amount of information portrayed. Table
4.1 gives a preliminary assignment of the number and types of maps by work unit.
This is a preliminary list; the total number of maps and plates will not change
appreciably under the present funding assumptions but the distribution of maps
among the work units may be altered. If more funding becomes available, the
number of maps may be increased (see section 6.6, Additional Work Tasks).
The estuary base maps will be produced using the most economical method and
will be distributed to the work unit contractors as early in the program as
possible.

Table 4.1. Preliminary list of number and type of maps by work*unit.

Work Unit holors format kaps #plates

Emergent Plants 4, b 1

Benthic Primary Production 2 b 3 3

Water Column Primary Production 2 c 6 6

Zooplankton and Larval Fish 3 C 3 3
if 2 C 4 4

Benthic Infauna 3 b
it of 2 b 2 2
if it I b 1 1

Epibenthic Organisms 3 b 2 2
it it 2 b 3 3

Fish 4 b 3 3
If it 4 c 3 3

Avifauna 2 b 2 2

Wildlife 2 b 1 1

Marine Mammals 2 b 2 2

Sedimentation and Shoaling 3 a 1 7
tf If 3 b 6 6
It of 1 b 1 1

Currents 2 b 4 2

Integration - habitat
classification 4 a 1 7

Additional maps:

Bathymetric differencing maps 3 a 3 21

Bathymetric maps 2 b 2 2

TOTALS 53 83

Final integration product
The final integration report (see section 6.6, Final Products) will contain
the maps listed above plus narrative text and other graphics such as charts and
graphs. The design, lay out, and print ing of the f inal product will be the
responsibility of the Cartographic contractor.

Other products
The final work unit reports and the guide to the use-of CREDDP information
(see section 5.3, Final Products) will be reproduced by the most economical method
by either the Cartographic contractor or program management. The schedule for
Cartographic work unit activities is shown in Figure 4.15.

@92

Figure 4.15. Schedule for the Cartographic work unit.

1 82 1983 1984
Activities S1 01 N ID J IF I M Al MI J I J A IS 1 0 N I D J IF M

1. Produce base maps and any other maps which are
immediately ready for production.

2. Receive draft maps from the work unit contractors.

3. Design, draft, and produce final maps.

4. Design, lay out, and produce final integration
report.

5. Submit bimonthly progress reports.

4.17 Data Manag ement

Introduction

The original CREDDP Plan of Study identifie'd..a Data Systems work unit,
responsible for developing data storage and management systems. Little progress
was made on this work unit up to September 1981. The CREST review of CREDDP and
the assessment of program user needs show that an easily accessed data archive at
a central location, containing most of the data from the work units, will be an
important final product of the program.
This section therefore describes the-establishment of a.data archive for the
program. The work unit contract will include a Data Manager, responsible for
compiling, archiving, and documenting the data base. Arrangements may be made
through an agreement to locate the collection and storage facility at the U.S.
Amy Corps of Engineers (Corps) North Pacific.Division Computer Services facility
in Portland. A data base will be produced during the program composed of data
files structured for convenient user access. An index will be prepared listing
the data files, and their contents.- Arrangements will probably be made with the
Corps for retrieving and copying data sets.

Meeting data management needs for the program

The data collection site. The Computer Services facility in Portland would
be the most suitable location for the collection and archiving of CREDDP data.

There are several reasons for this choice:

- Location. Portland is a central location for data users in Oregon and
Washington; it is very convenient for those organizations concerned with
the Columbia River based in and around Portland, and is relatively
accessible to users from the estuary area, the Willamette Valley and the
Puget Sound area;

- Equipment. The Corps' AMDAHL 470 computer is a large" high speed processer
with the necessary peripherals and 'software to accomodate many of the media
on which data will be submitted.

- Interest. The Corps is engaged in a study to deepen the ColumbiaRiver
navigation channel for coal export. They are very interested in some of
the CREDDP data and are likely to be a major user. They have indicated
that their facilities might be used (without charge) for the purpose of
collecting, initially processing, and archiving CREDDP data.

CROHMS. The Columbia River Operational Hydromet System (CROHMS), operated
by the Corps, is currently being revised to handle additional kinds of
ecological data. Revision should be completed in FY 84 and CROHMS should
then be capable of handling much of the physical and biological data from
CREDDP.

Possible interagency agreement for use of Corps facilities. The use of Corps
facilities for the collection, initial processing an d archiving of CREDDP data
will be secured through an interagency agreement between CREST and the Corps. The
agreement, if made, will address the following points:

- the Corps will provide adequate computer time during normal-working hours.

- the Corps will provide office space and use of their telephone system for
one CREDDP person.

- the CREDDP work will be coordinated with the Corps computer system managers
so that activities can be accomplished efficiently and with minimum impact
on Corps operations.

- the agreement will be active from September 1, 1982 through June 30, 1984.

- CREDDP will provide documentation to the Corps to facilitate retrieving
data following program completion.

- the Corps will outline their policies regarding future user access to the
archived data.

Possible use of the Corps facility as arepository. The Corps' policies
should be adequate to permit access at nominal cost to a wide range of potential
users and to store CREDDP data following program completion. These arrangements
would be discussed between CREST and the Corps as part of an interagency
agreement. Documentation of the contents of the data bank and methods of
retrieval will be prepared by CREDDP and distributed to potential users,
particularly those who have expressed an interest in incorporating data into their
data base management systems. These include but are not limited to the Corps, the
Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National
Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration and the Washington Department of

Natural Resources.

The data collection process

Contract provisions for data submission. Most CREDDP contracts will contain
provisions for the orderly submission of machine readable data. Work units will
coordinate with the Data Management contractor and will submit samples of all data

sets to be included in the -data base as -soon as possible. A sp'ecif ic date will be
negotiated with each contractor, for the submission of 1979, 1980,' and 1981 data.
The medium of transfer of the machine readable data sets will -also be negotiated
and specified in each contract.

Devising data transfer plans for each contractor. Data management activities
will begin with the development of plans for the transfer of data from each work
unit to the collection site. In this way, problems with incompatible media may be
avoided or, if necessary, conversion plans adopted in a timely manner. Travel to
meetings with contractors will be necessary during the initial phase of data
management to elicit exact information on the status of data sets and media.

Preparing data for archiving. Some work units hav e prepared their data in
ways suitable for their own uses, without consideration of its ultimate inclusion
in a data base. These files will need reformatting before being included in the
data base. To achieve better data consistency, any necessary reformatting will be
the responsibility of-the data management contractor. The work units' obligations
to provide sample data sets will enable the size of the reformatting effort to be
estimated early in the program and a schedule with priorities will be developed.
Following an interagency agreement, the Data Management contractor will coordinate
with the Corps CROHMS data base administrator to determine the suitability of
including each data set in CROHMS. Whenever possible, data preparations will..be
conducted in ways that will assist the transfer of data into CROHMS, when. that
system is ready.

Archiving and documenting the data base. Depending upon an interagency
agreement,,the active data base will be at the Corps facility on magnetic tape and
possibly also on disk. Documentation of the type of tape and disk structures and
automated procedures for retrieving and copyi ng f iles would be provided to the
Corps by the Data Management contractor.
An index to the data base will be compiled, printed, and distributed to
potential users of the CREDDP data. This document will describe the available
data and list the contents of the files. Procedures for requesting copies,of the
data files will be determined in cooperation with the Corps and contained in the
index. The index will also contain information on the source of each data set.
Since work unit contractors will retain copies of their own data, alternative
sources for the data will be given to these contractors if they desire.

The Data Management contractor's responsibilities and products.

The Data Manager will have the following responsibilities:

- working with individual work units to devise plans and procedures for the
orderly transfer of data to the Corps facility,

- compiling and reformatting the data sets to create a consistent collection
of data files suitable for future use,

- producing an index to the data,

- producing documentation of the data structures for the Corps,

- reviewing work unit data quality assurance activities as they relate to
data handling.

- providing computer tapes and other supplies necessary for establishing the
data archive.

Work schedule

A proposed schedule for the Data Management tasks is presented in Figure
4.16. The time required to accomplish some of the tasks is uncertain at present,
since precise information on the number and structure of the data sets is lacking.

Figure 4.16. Schedule for Data Management

1982 1983 1984
Tasks and Deadlines I
SJOINID JIF MIAIM'JIJ.IAIS OINID, JIFIM

1. Preliminary tasks: set up at Corps, learn Corps
system, learn CROHMS.

2. Interview contractors, devise data transfer plans,
arrange for inter-computer media conversion.

3. Sample data due from contractors.

4. Design data processing or reformatting programs,
code processing programs and test with sample A
data.
CO

5. Data processing procedures finalized.

6. Deadline for 1979 and 1980 data submission.

7. Deadline for 1981 data submission.

8. Process CREDDP data.

9. Create data index and data base documentation.

10. Submit bimonthly progress reports.

5. INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

5.1 Introduction

CREDDP is an applied research program whose products, though intended for a
wide audience, will be particularly useful to those people involved in making land
and water management decisions in the study area. These users are likely to
include both specialists and non-specialists (See Section 2). The program has
already published a variety of materials ranging from technical reports to
historical maps of general in terest (see Appendix C). However, because most of
the program data have not yet been analyzed, these products are only a small
portion of the eventual final output. This section therefore discusses the-,major
products which the program will publish and distribute, and shows how these
products relate to user information needs.

5.2 Information Dissemination

Distribution of the final products will be carried out by the program
management st aff, and will be the responsibility of the Information Specialist.
Pamphlets will be circulated to federal, state and local agencies, libraries,
universities, and interested citizens to advertise the availability of CREDDP
products. Policy will be developed during the program concerning the parties who
will receive copies of the final reports. These will include, at a minimum,
selected local, state and federal agencies, local high schools and libraries, and
university and college libraries in the region. The dissemination of the final
products will be one of the last program activities. It is scheduled to take
place in 1984, following completion of products by the Integration Team, the
Cartographic contractor, and the program staff.

5.3 Final Products

Final Reports. Each scientific work unit in CREDDP will produce a final
report. These reports will contain descriptions of the work carried out by each
contractor, and will include the following kinds of information as appropriate:

- Background information. Summaries of.rel.evant studies which develop a
context for the CREDDP work.

- An outline of the study approach and sampling program, with maps; key
species lists and descriptions of key species selection; description of the
data sets collected and their adequacy.

- Descriptions of the data processing methods.

- A clear presentation of the results, using narrative, figures and tables,
if applicable.

- A description of mathematical models, their verification and examples of
computer output products.

- Discussion of the results with conclusions on an d any relevant information
related to resource management.
- Appendices with relevant data sets'or other information.

These highly technical documents are intended for specialist users, mostly
scientists in the same or related fields, or resource managers with a scientific
background. These reports will be widely reviewed (Section 6.3), then edited,
copied, and distributed by program staff. Under the present funding assumption,
the level of detail in these reports will have to be reduced from an optimal

level.

Data Management. The establishment of a program data archive under a Data
Management work unit is described in detail in section 4.17. This archive is one
of the final products of the program, and will probably be established at the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers Computer Services Facility in Portland. . Archived
information is a product aimed at specialist users such as research or resource
management scientists who wish. to examine, reinterpret or build further research
projects on CREDDP data. An index to the data sets in the archive files will be
included in the. "Guide to the Use of CREDDP Information".

The Comprehensive Synthesis of Scientific Information. This comprehensive
view of CREDDP is, generally speaking, the most important product because it is
designed to reach a wide specialist and non-specialist audience. The results of
the individual contractors together with the syntheses developed by the
Integration Team will be presented in a lucid manner. The Data Integration Team
whose composition and functions are described in Section 4.15, will be
instrumental in producing this document.
The Integration Team, along with the program management, will be responsible
for developing the conceptual structure of the comprehensive synthesis and for
preparing and editing the narrative. They will play a major role in graphics
selection for this product.

100

Also vital to this product is the Cartographic contractor, described in
section 4.16. The Cartographic work unit will concentrate on the graphics,
formatting, and production of the synthesis document. Since the objective is to
present the CREDDP information in a concise and easily interpreted way, the
Cartographic work unit will be responsible for preparing color and black/white
graphics and for the text layout in coordination with the Integration Team and

program management.
The comprehensive synthesis of scientific information will focus on the
following important areas:

- the historical and geographical setting,

- a conceptual model of estuarine processes and its theoretical basis,

- physical attributes of the estuary: narratives, maps and diagrams
explaining the structural features and physical processes,

- biological attributes of the estuary: the spatial and temporal
distribution of key taxa and their bioenergetics; their relationships to
physical variables and to each other for primary producers,.deposit
feeders, suspension feeders, fish, avifauna and mammals,

- synthesis of the bioenergetics into annual or seasonal carbon budgets and
into energy flow estimates.

This product will be the optimal way of presenting the results of the entire
program to both specialists and non-specialists. The major findings of all work
units will be presented together with the ecosystem view developed by the
Integration Team. As a result, the functioning of the ecosystem and the
significance of its individual features can be appreciated either superficially
through the high quality graphics or in considerable detail through the narrative
and graphics combined.

The Comprehensive Guide to the Use of CREDDP Information. This product will
have two aims. First, it will describe the program for unfamiliar users through
illustrated summaries of the major scientific contributions, with a glossary and a
detailed index of the CREDDP data files. Second, it will discuss how the
information relates to current management issues in the estuary and how it might
be used in land and water use decisions. In the first section, the summaries will
be draf ted by the Integration Team and the data index will be a product of the
Data Management contractor. The second section, addressing management issues,
will be written by CREST staff with experience in both estuarine management and

CREDDP.

101

Other products. Several products have been (Appendix C) or will be produced
by CREDDP, including:

- Literature Survey of the Columbia River Estuary, Vols I & II. This product
was compiled at the beginning of the program. It contains an extensive
bibliography of literature on CREDDP work units and is of interest to
specialists in these fields.

- The two-dimensional vertical model. Although this product will generate
information for a number of purposes, it can only be used by those . I
experienced in such models, preferably the designer. For this reason, the
two-dimensional vertical model is a highly specialized product and
distribution will be limited to users with a specific interest in modelling
Columbia River Estuary circulation.

5.4 Quality Assurance.

Validation of the data sets will be the responsibility of individual work
unit contractors and the Integration Team. Work units supplying data to the Data
Manager and to the Integration work unit will be required to describe quality
assurance activities in their final reports. These descriptions will cover the
following areas as appropriate:
- relevant equipment specifications,

- method and frequency of instrument calibration,

- data collection procedures,

- verification of key-punched data,

- verification of transferred data,

- verification of computer program runs.

Final reports from work units will be subject to peer review by the
Integration Team and by specialists outside the program. Review comments on data
quality will also be solicited by program management. The Data Manager will
review work unit quality assurance activities for data handling. The Integration
work unit will use much of the program's data for computations of various
estuarine processes. The Integration Team will check the accuracy of the data
used for Integration as far as possible.
All program final products will be extensively reviewed by program staff, the
Integration Team, other technical experts and by potential users of the program's
products.

102

6. PROGRAM ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

6.1 Introduction

The organization for the completion of the Columbia River Estuary Data
Development Program will be based on a cooperative agreement signed by CREST and
the U.S. Water Resources Council (WRC) on September 7, 1982. The National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration, (NOAA) will assume the role of the U.S. Water
Resources Council as the federal representative in this cooperative agreement. A
Program Control board will establish policy and monitor alli aspects of the
program. The Program Manager and staff will conduct the day-to-day management of
the program. Allfunding for the program will come from the federal government
and the program will be completed by June 30, 1984.

6.2 Program Organization

Program Control Board. A Program Control Board, composed of a representative
from the CREST Council and a representative of NOAA will direct the completion of
CREDDP (Figure 6.1). The Board will establish program policy and direction,
provide oversight and make decisions by consensus to provide executive direction
for the conduct of the program. It will be responsible for approving contracting
procedures, setting staff salaries within CREST's structure, the approval of
fiscal and technical reports, and the selection of the Program Manager. The
Board will be responsible for approving changes to the Plan of Study during the
program. All agreements with technical advisors, consultants, and private
organizations or public agencies will require approval from the Board. The
Program Control Board shall be responsible for all federal funds provided to the
program. It will meet as required, and CREST wil 1 prepare written records of all
Board decisions. The Federal member of the Program Control Board may require
financial assistance to perform appropriate program related duties, and such funds
will be provided from the program budget.
As a member of the Program Control Board, CREST

- will serve as fiscal agent for the program, and will be responsible for the
receipt, disbursement and fiscal audit of program funds, and for the
submission of Reports of Federal Cash Transaction (SF 272) and Requests for
Advance or Reimbursement (SF 270).

- will return to the government all unused program funds within 30 days of
completion of the program's final fiscal audit.

103

Figure 6.1.Program Organization.

Program Control Board Federal
- CREST Council Advisory
representative Panel
- Federal Agency
representative

Legal and
Accounting Project
Counsel Officer

Users
Program Manager Advisory
Panel

Program Staff

Program
Contractors

104

will maintain a financial records system and certify contractor fees.

Program Staff. The Project Officer, Program-Manager and staff, will have the
following responsibilities:

Project Officer. The Project Officer will be the Director of CREST and will
serve a dual role for the Estuary Study.
As the Project Officer, the CREST Director will represent the CREST Council
chairman on the Program Control Board, supervise the Program Manager, assign CREST
staff and/or select staff for the program and recommend salary levels, secure
CREST Council approval for the employment of contractors and the disbursement of
program funds, keep the CREST Council informed of all Board decisions and program
status, coordinate the services of the legal and financial records system
advisors, and provide technical oversight and guidance to all contractors and for
technical reports prepared by the project staff.
As the CREST member of the Program Control Board, the CREST Director will
work closely with the Program Manager to ensure that the Study is conducted in
accordance with the Plan of Study and Board directives, and perform the duties and
responsibilities as a Board member which are described for the Board in this Plan
of Study.
From March 1984 until completion of the Study, the Project Officer will also
perform the duties of the Program Manager.

The Program Manaaer, selected by the Program Control Board and employed by
CREST, will report to the Project Officer. The Program Manager will be
responsible for the day-to-day management of the program and for ensuring that the
program is conducted in a manner consistent with the Plan of Study and Board
policy decisions. To accomplish this, he/she will:
- direct program staff, consultants and technical advisors;
- ensure adherence to schedules;
- secure Program Control Board approval for the disbursement of program
funds;
- provide financial and bimonthly status reports to the Program Control Board
members. These reports will include the Financial Status Report (SF-269),
and any others requested by the Board;
- prepare and negotiate agreements consistent with Plan of Study objectives
for Program Control Board approved technical advisors, consultants and
public and private organizations.

The Program Manager, assisted by staff, will manage all program contracts.
He/she will also chair, provide staff support and coordinate the activities of the

105

Users Advisory Panel, and will provide committee reviewsq comments and
,recommendations on program activities and policies to the Program Control Board.
Should the position of the Program Manager become vacant during the Program,
the Board will designate an Acting Program Manager, having the same powers,
authorities, and duties as the Program Manager until a replacement is appointed.

Program Coordinators. The Technical Coordinator and the S cienc e /Management
Coordinator will work closely with contractors and ensure that they are adhering
to schedules and to program objectives. They will evaluate the progress of
contracts in producing the information needed by the Integration Team and in
producing user-oriented products. They will work closely with the Integration
Team in preparing the integrated products and will produce portions of the Users
Guide (see section 5.3, Final Products). The Technical Coordinators will also
produce reports and recommendations on the program for the Program Manager.

Editor/Adminis t rat ive Officer. This staff member will oversee the fiscal

aspects of the program and will be responsible for editing program reports and
f inal products. He/she will coordinate the activities of the Word Processor
Operator and the Bookkeeper/ Secretary. The Editor/Administrative Officer will
assist in providing management oversight for the period of March to June 1984.

Information Specialist. The Information Specialist will supply information
as needed to all persons associated with the program. This staff member will also
manage the program library which is a specialized collection of scientific and
management literature on the Columbia River Estuary. The Information Specialist
will be responsible for disseminating CREDDP final products to appropriate

locations.

Cartographer. This staff member will be responsible for preparing the
in-house graphics for the program. This work will include assisting contractors
in drafting work unit maps and graphics for program reports.

These staff positions will either be filled by reassigning existing CREST staff,
or by hiring additional staff. CREDDP staff positions are listed in Table 6.1.

Federal Advisory Panel. Representatives from federal agencies involved in
estuarine management will be invited to advise the Program Control Board on how
program content and direction affects the implementation of federal policies.

106

Table 6.1. CREDDP Staff.

POSITION TIME ALLOTTED

Program Manager Full time/18 mos.,

Technical Coordinator Full time/18 mos.

Science/Mgmt. Coordinator Full time/18 mos.

Project Officer 33% time/22 mos.

Editor/Admin. Officer 33% time/22 mos.

Information Specialist 33% time/22 mos.

Cartographer 33% time/18 mos.

Word Processor Operator Full time/18 mos.

Bookkeeper/Secretary 45% time/22 mos.

107

The Panel will be invited to three workshops (or more if needed). The
federal representative on the Program Control Board will actlas Chairman and will
be responsible for scheduling meetings, coordinating the Panel's activities and
representing their interests in the program. All proposed technical contracts
will be forwarded to this Panel for their comment prior to approval by the Board.

Users Advisory Panel. A Users Advisory Panel will be established to assist
program management in providing continuity and direction to the program. The
Users Advisory Panel will be composed of representatives from federal, state, and
local government agencies with management responsibility in the Columbia River
Estuary. Agencies include but are not limited to: The National Marine Fisheries
Service, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington
Department of Ecology, Oregon Department of Land Conservation & Development,
Washington Department of Game, Washington Department of Fisheries and Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife. Other representative users and citizens will
also be invited to participate.

The Advisory Panel will review all program products in draft form and advise
the Program Manager on policy related to the information needs of users. The
Advisory Panel will be convened for three workshops (or more if needed) during the
completion of the program to monitor the program's progress. The workshops will
be chaired by the Program Manager.

Legal and Financial Counsel. The Board will request CREST to contract with
an attorney to provide legal advice to the program. The attorney will assist in
developing and issuing contracts and will provide other legal services as
necessary. The federal agency on the Program Control Board may also rely on its
legal counsel.
CREST will also contract with a Certified Public Accountant to provide
counsel and guidance on the preparation and maintenance of financial records to
comply with OMB Circular 102 (revised).

6.3 ProEram Management

Procedures for Amending the Plan of Study. This Plan of Study may be amended
as required by the Program Control Board either by its own initiative or in
response to staff or other participant requests. All proposed amendments will be

108

prepared and/or evaluated relative to program objectives, schedules and budgets by
the Program Manager. Copies of approved amendments will be distributed to
interested parties.

The Cooperative Agreement. CREST and the WRC enter into a cooperative
agreement to administer CREDDP to an orderly completion by June 1984. NOAA will
succeed WRC in that federal role. The Cooperative Agreement will describe the
responsibilities of CREST and the federal agency, financial controls, the duration
of the Agreement and other management activities as discussed in this Plan of
Study. The Agreement will include a budget listing management costs, including

staff salaries.

Fiscal Management. After approval of the Plan of Study and execution of the
Cooperative Agreement, CREST requested an advance of federal funds for the first
period as shown in Table 6.2. Cash Flow Needs. When received, these funds will be
deposited in a separate account with a federally insured bank. All interest paid
on funds advanced to CREST will be returned to the federal government. The
program will then request funds on a quarterly basis. The program will terminate
on June 30, 1984. Limitations on the expenditure of Federal funds will be
specified in the Cooperative Agreement.
CREST will have a close-out fiscal audit conducted by a Certified Public
Accountant other than the CPA providing fiscal records guidance selected by CREST.
This audit is to be paid with program funds and submitted to NOAA by July 31,

1984.

Technical Review of CREDDP Products. The Integration Team and other
contractors will assist in assuring the technical adequacy of program products by
providing scientific peer review. This will include the establishment of
guidelines for the quality assurance review of data sets, the review of data
analysis procedures and the development of guidelines for filtering aberrant data
values. In addition, peer review for all CREDDP products by federal, state and
local government agencies, and by university and other users will be provided
through the Users Advisory Panel. These products will include final reports from
each technical work unit, the data archive index, the management volume, and the
comprehensive synthesis volume. In addition, final reports from each work unit
will be sent for review to scientists independent from the program. These review
activities are listed on the program schedule, Figure 6.2.

109

Table 6.2. Program Cash Flow Needs

Start - October 30, 1982 $ 75,000

November 1, 1982 - January 31, 1983 125,000

February I - April 30, 1983 207,00.0

May 1 - July 31, 1983 227,000

November 1, 1983 - January 31, 1984 217,000

February I - April 30, 1984 92,000

May 1 June 30, 1984 50,000

TOTAL $1,220,000

110

Contract Management. Contracting procedures will conform to Program Control
Board requirements. The Program Manager will be responsible for the day-to-day
management of the program contracts. Following Board approval, CREST will
contract will technical advisors, consultants, and private organizations or public
agencies to meet the Goals and Objectives described in this Plan of Study. CREST
will prepare contracts for all work units described in Section 4 in order to
finish the scientific and support work on the program in the most efficient

manner.

Selection of Contractors. Most of the scientific contracts in prior CREDDP
activities have produced a substantial amount of data that have not been analyzed
or interpreted. As a result, it will be necessary to contract with many
investigators who were.previously active in the program and to consider these
contracts as noncompetitive negotiations (sole source) for the following reasons:

1) time savings - all program activities are scheduled to be completed by
June 30, 1984. This exigency requires immediate performance of the
investigation services and delivery of the data products;

2) sole source - only one source of supply for these data and services is
available for the scientific contracts because a large quantity of data
have been collected by each contractor and these data cannot be
easily transferred to another researcher;

3) professional services performed personally by a designated individual -
the services that are required are of a professional nature and are
required of the contractor in person because the services are an
extension of prior work;

4) competitive selection - a competitive selection procedure was used when
these contracts were initially awarded. Requests for proposals were
sent to prospective contractors and the proposals submitted to CREDDP
were reviewed and screened by a Technical Advisory Committee. A blind
initial review procedure was used and technical adequacy was the primary
consideration.

Contracting procedures used by the program will be consistent with OMB
Circular A-102 (Attachment 0). In each case, the program will select the
investigator who.can best perform the services needed in the least time and at the
lowest cost. In some cases a prior subcontractor or associate investigator may be

selected.

Contract Monitoring. The program staff will monitor the progress of program
contracts. Bimonthly reports will be submitted by all contractors and will

describe problems or delays, the implications of these problems, and
accomplishments in relation to the contract schedule and the Plan of Study. The
reports will also include financial assessments. The Program Manager will present
the reports to the Program Control Board and any significant problems will be
brought to their immediate attention. Program staff will monitor the - quality
assurance procedures discussed in Section 5.4. This includes ensuring that each
contractor performs quality assurance procedures prior to submitting that work
unit's data to program management and to the Integration Team and also overseeing
the quality assurance procedures of the Integration Team.

Contract Payment. Contractors will be paid quarterly upon receipt of
evidence of work accomplished and acceptance of a documented billing and receipt
and acceptance of bimonthly reports and the final report. Final billings from
Contractors will not be paid until all bimonthly reports and final products are
received and validated. The Program Manager will provide written comments to a
contractor if interim or final products or a billing justification is not
acceptable. Contracts in this program may provide for a retainage to be withheld
from quarterly payments until all contractural obligations have been met.

6.4 Program Schedule

The following schedule (Figure 6.2) for completing CREDDP on July 30, 1984
assumes a September 1, 1982 start-up date. The research analysis and report
writing activities of the research contractors, other than the Integration Team,
will occur between November 1, 1982 and mid-December 1983. Draft reports from the
program work units will be submitted to program management between July 1, 1983
and October 15, 1983. The period from the time each work unit draft report is due
until December 15, 1983 will be used for technical peer review and user review and
for final contractor corrections. The final technical contract reports will be
submitted to program management between September 1, 1983 and December 15, 1983.
The Integration Team will function between November 1, 1982 and January 31 ,
1984 with the principal portion of the Team's activities. occurring in Spring and
Summer 1983. The final Integration Report will be required in draft form by
December 1, 1983 and final form by January 31, 1984.

Program staff will be assigned to the program as indicated in Table 6.1.
After March 1, 1984, the information dissemination activities of the program will

112

MM@MMMMMW

Figure 6.2' Program Schedule

1982 1983 1984
Activities S 0 N D J F M A M J I J A S 0 N D J] F IM J_A M I J I J

Program Management
1. Coordination of research work
units, contracts, Integration Team
activities, data management,.fiscall
control, and final products.
2. Negotiation of research and non-
research contracts.
3. Bimonthly management reports. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00
4. Final fiscal audit.

Research Contracts

1. Biological and physical work unit
research and reporting.
2. Integration Team activi ties and
reporting.
3. Bimonthly contractor reports.

Data Management

Meetings and Workshops
1. Federal Advisory Panel meetings. 0
2. Users Advisory Panel workshops. 0
3. Integration Team workshops. 0 0 0 0
4. Contractors' symposium. 0

Figure 6.2. Program Schedule (continued)

1982 1983 1984
Activities S 0 N D J iF M A M J I J A IS 1 0 IN D J IF IM IA M ii Ii. -

Final Products

1. Receive draft work unit reports.

2. Review and finalize work unit reports.

3. Preparation of a draft guide to the use
of CREDDP information.

4. Preparation of a draft synthesis of scif
entific information (integration re-
port).

5. Preparation of a draft index to the
CREDDP data archive.

6. Review and finalize the reports des-
cribed in #2, 3, and 4.

7. Duplication of reports described in
#1, 2, and 4.

8. Design, lay out, and printing of report
described in #3.

9. Report distribution.

be carried out by the Project Officer, the Editor /Adminis t rat ive Officer, the
Information Specialist and the Bookkeeper/Secretary.

6.5 Program Budget

WRC has advised CREST during the preparation of the budget for this Plan of
Study that $1,220,000 will be available for the Study, and that figure has been
used. They further suggested that the Plan of Study inclu de information
reflecting high priority work which would be done should additional funds become
available (Section 6.6, Additional Work Tasks). Tables 6.3 and 6.4. summarize
t and program contr actor budgets.
program managemen

6.6 Additional Work Tasks

Table 6.5. lists work tasks that may be completed if funding beyond the $1.22
million base becomes available for the completion of the program. The additional
benefits for each work unit are discussed in Section 4, Work Programs. Possible
new tasks may become known as the program proceeds; therefore, this list is not be
considered complete. Moreover, the costs are only approximations intended to give
an idea of how increased funding@ could be apportioned among tasks.
The order of

asks on the list in no way reflects their level of priority. The decision on
which additional tasks will be funded, if any, will be the responsibility of
t

program management,

115

Table 6.3. Program Management'."Budget by Object Classification.

A. Total Personnel $ 200,465.

B. Overhead, (15%)* 30,070.

C. Personnel Benefits (12% of Line A) 24,055.

D. Travel and Conferences 10,000.

E. Rent, Utilities, Communications 17,600.

F. Printing and Reproduction (other than final
products) 6,000.

G. Other Professional Services 5, 000.

H. Supplies 3,4 10.

I.' Equipment Rental** .23,400.

$ 320,000.

Estimated, subject to experience

Word Processor, Photocopier, Typewriters

116

Table 6.4. Program Budget $1,220,000

Emergent Plant Primary Production $25,000

Benthic Primary Production 40,000

Water Column Primary Production 40,000

Zooplankton and Larval Fish 50,000

Benthic Infauna 50,000

Epibenthic Organisms 40,000

Fish 79,000

Avifauna 10,000

Wildlife 10,000

Marine Mammals 20,000

Sedimentation and Shoaling 83,000

Currents 73,000

Simulation 65,000

Integration 110,000

Data Management 35,000

Program Management 340,000

Final Products (including Cartographic 150,000
work unit)

TOTAL BUDGET $10220,000

117

.Table 6.5. Additional work tasks and approximate costs.

Task Cost

Emergent Plant Primary Production

1) Increased data analysis and interpretation up to $10,000
and a more detailed final report (all objectives).

Benthic Primary Production

1) Increased data.analysis and interpretation and a $3,000
more detailed final report (all objectives).

2) Survey and subsequent data analysis to gather information $5,000'.
for more accurate mapping (objective 1) and to assess the-
distribution and productivity of eelgrass (new objective).

Water Column Primary Production

1) Increased data analysis and interpretation and a $10,000
more detailed final report (all objectives).

2) Process phytoplankton samples for species identification $10,000
and enumeration to better define the relationships
between phytoplankton and the null zone (objective 2).

3) Perform additional analyses in order to refine the $8,000
estimates of particle sinking rates and zooplankton
grazing rates (objective 3).

Zooplankton and Larval Fish

1) Process selected samples from the October 1980 to April $7,500
1981 sampling set and analyze data (objective 1).

2) Process selected tidal/diel/depth samples and $7,500
analyze data (new objective).

Benthic Infauna

1) Process 100 of the distributional survey biological $19,000
samples and analyze data (objectives 1 and 2).

2) Process 200 of the distributional survey sediment $12,000
samples and analyze data (objectives I and 2).

3) Process quarterly survey samples and analyze data $4,000
(objectives 1 and 2).

4) Process vertical distribution samples and analyze $1,800
data (objectives 2 and 3).

118

Task Cost

.Epibenthic Oraanisms

1) Process selected stomach s.amples of Dungeness crab, $5,000 $10,0 00
crangonid shrimp, and mysids, and analyze data
(objectives 3 and 4).

Fish

1) Process up to 250 additional stomach samples from the up to $10,000
diel and distributional surveys, and analyze data
(objectives 3, 4, and 6).

Avifauna

1) Identify possible factors that limit bird use of $2,000
particular habitats (new objective).

2) Determine the relative importance of the,Columbia River $500
Estuary within the Pacific Flyway as an overwintering
ground and migration route (new objective).

Wildlife

1) Increased data interpretation, increased mapping accuracy, $3,000
and a more detailed final report (all objectives).

Marine Mammals

1) Analyze tagging data to describe marine mammal $5,000
activity patterns (new objective).

2) Estimate the consumption rates of marine mammals $8,000
(new objective).

3) Analyze methods of avoiding marine mammal/fisheries $5,000
interactions (new objective).

Sedimentation and Shoaling

1) Calculate suspended sediment fluxes (new objective). $21,000

2) Process up to 60 additional sediment samples in up to $3,600
order to increase mapping accuracy (objective 1).

Currents

1) Preliminary processing of vertical profile data $16,000
(Dobrocky data) (objective 5).

2) More statistical and descriptive analysis of $5,800
the vertical profile data (objective 5).

119

Task Cost

3) More analysis of salinity and residual flow data $3,0007 $8,000
with more detailed reporting (objectives '3 and 4).

4) Process and analyze additional National Ocean $1,000
Survey (NOS) data (objective 2).

Simulation

1) Increased effort on final report (all objectives)., $4,000 $6,000

2) Additional refinement of two-dimensional horizontal $5,000 $9,000
model (objective 1).

3) Additional numerical experiments on two-dimensional $2,000 $11,000
horizontal model (objective 1).

4) Additional refinement and verification of two- $5,000
dimensional vertical model:,(objective 2).'

Cartographic Work Unit

1) Increase the number of maps and/or length of text up to $20,000
in the final integration,report.'

120

APPENDIX A

CREDDP Chronology of Events

A Chronology of the Development of CREDDP, and
Meetings of the PNRBC Estuary Program Subcommittee,
the CREDDP Technical Advisory Committee (TAC),
and the Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC)

1975

October First draft of "Federal-state study program to assist CREST
management program development"

Nov. 21 Draft Columbia River Estuary Special Study Proposal to Study
submitted by PNRBC

1976

June PNRBC FY 79 budget request for Special Estuary Study submitted

Aug. 31 PNRBC TAC meeting -- discussion of Special Study proposal

1977

June PNRBC FY 79 budget request for Special Estuary Study submitted

1978

February Interim Project Director, Dr. Robert Holton, hired

April 4 CREST Director testifies before Senate and House Public Works
Committee on appropriation for CREDDP funding

Sept. 27 1st CREDDP Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) meeting held (PNRBC
office, Vancouver, WA)

October PL 89-90 appropriates $828.,900 in FY 79 to PNRBC for Special
Study

November Program Director, Mr. Robert Moulton, hired

Dec. 8 CREST submits draft CREDDP Plan of Study outline to Moulton

Dec. 18 CREST submits report "The Columbia River Estuary R esearch Program:
Purpose, Objectives, Structure"

Dec. 22 Revised draft CREDDP Plan of Study sent for review

1979

Jan. 3 Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) designated

Feb. 7 Second CREDDP TAC meeting held to review preliminary draft Plan of
Study (PNRBC office, Vancouver, WA)

1979 continued

Feb. 15 PNRBC Briefing.on Study

March 15 Plan of Study approved by PNRBC

April 16 CAC meeting (Pier 11, Astoria)
May 11 TAC meeting (PNRBC office, Vancouver, WA)

? May 21 CAC meeting (Ilwaco, WA)

June 4 CAC meeting (Ilwaco, WA)

July 11-12 TAC meeting (PNRBC office, Vancouver, WA).

Aug. I CAC meeting (Pier 11, Astoria)

Sept. 19-20 Contractors' coordination meeting

Oct., 3' TAC meeting (PNRBC office, Vancouver, WA)

Oct. 16 CAC meet i ng (Ilwaco WA)

Nov. 14 CAC meetin g (CREST office)

Dec 6 Contractors? coordination meeting

Dec. 14 Estuary Program Subcommittee meeting (PNRBC office, Vancouve r, WA)

Dec. 19 CAC meeting (Port of Ilwaco, WA)

1980'

Jan. 16-17 TAC.meeting, (PNRBC office, Vancouver, WA)

Feb. 2 CAC meeting (Port of Ilwaco, WA)

Feb. 27-28 Contractors' coordination meeting (NMFS Montlake Lab., Seattle)

? March I Field collection begun in earnest

May 6
CAC.meeting.in Skamokawa, WA with editorial contractor

June 18-19 Contractors quarterly meeting; Estuary Program Subcommittee
meeting Thunderbird, Astoria)

July 14 Interactions workshop -- Biophysical contractor (Ilwaco, WA)

August 11 Estuary Program Subcommittee meeting (PNRBC office, Vancouver, WA)

August 22 CAC meeting in Skamokawa, WA with Bob Moulton

? Sept. -25 TAC meeting

1980, continued

Oct. 7 Estuary program Subcommittee.meeting.(PNRBC.office, Vancouver,,WA)

Oct. 13 Estuary program Subcommittee 'meeting (PNRBC office, Vancouver, WA)

Oct. 17 CAC meeting (Port of Ilwaco, WA)

Oct. 27-28 Contractors' quarterly meeting (PNRBC office, Vancouver, WA)

Nov. 12 Estuary Program Subcommittee meeting

1981

? Jan. 15 TAC meeting

Jan. 22 Estuary Program Subcommittee meeting (PNRBC office, Vancouver,
WA)

March 18-19 Contractors' q uarterly meet ing (PNRBC office, Vancouver, WA)

March 31 CAC meeting (Port of Ilwaco, WA)

April 16 Estuary Program Subcommittee meeting (PNRBC office, Vancouver,
WA)

April 27 CAC meeting (Warrenton, OR)

May 14 TAC meeting

May 11 Estuary Congressional Tour

May 16 Estuary Program Subcommittee meeting (PNRBC office, Vancouver, WA)

May 22 CREST-CREDDP workshop preparation meeting (CREST office)

June 5 CREST workshop, "How Will Research Assist the Management of the
Columbia River Estuary?"

July 29 CAC meeting (CREST office) -- joint CREST and CREDDP

Aug. 3 Dr. John Damron replaces Bob Moulton as CREDDP Program Manager

Aug. 4 Estuary Program Subcommittee meeting (PNRBC office, Vancouver, WA)

Aug. 14 CAC -- Management Contractor (Port of Ilwaco, WA)

Aug. 26 CAC meeting (Astoria)

Aug. 29 Notice of program termination sent to contractors

Sept. 30 Program terminated

Nov. 1-5 CREDDP session at Estuary Research Federation Conference
(Salishan, OR)

1981 continued

Dec. 11 President signs Energy & Water Development Bill appropriating
funds for completion'of CREDDP

Dec. 16 CREST Contracts to prepare for U.S. Water Resources Council an.
evaluation of previous CREDDP contracts and billings.

1982

Feb. 15 CREST submits "Evaluation of Contracts .and Billings" to WRC

Mar. 15 CREST submits '@Status of Work: The Columbia River Estuary Data
Development Program.

May 1 CREST begins Cooperative Agreement with WRC to prepare Plan of
Study for completion of CREDDP

June 2 CREDDP Users Workshop to evaluate Revised-Goals and Objectives.
for completion of CREDDP

July 2 Draft Plan of Study distributed for review

July 23 Final Plan of Study submitted to U.S. Water Resources Council

Appendix B

Past CREDDP Contracts.(1979 1981)

Contract Contract Titles. Contractor

79-1 Guide to Aquatic Oraanisms VTN Oregon, Inc.
79-2 Historical Maps, 1792-1900. Oregon Historical Society
79-3 Wetland Mapping U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
79-4 Bibliography Oregon State University
79-5 Personal Services- Wildlife Washington Department of Game
79-6 Computer Equipment Northwest Economic Associates
79-7 Computer Services Boeing Computer Services
79-8 Information Transfer Services CREST
79-9 Management Contractor Envirosphere, Inc.
79-10 Editorial Contractor Oceanographic Institute of Wa.
79-11 Benthic Primary Production Oregon State University
79-12 Water Column Primary Production Oregon State University
79-13 Benthic Infauna Oregon State University
79-14 Currents and Shoaling Patterns Mathematical Sciences Northwest

79-15 No Contract Issued
79-16 Historical Bathymetric Maps Northwest Cartography, Inc.
79-17 Sedimentation University of Washington
79-18 Epibenthic Organisms Dames and Moore, Inc.
79-19 Salmonid and Non-Salmonid Fishes National Marine Fisheries Service
79-20 Avifauna Jones and Stokes, Inc.
80-1 Zooplankton and Larval Fish University of Washington
80-2 Emergent Plant Production Science Applications, Inc.
80-3 Vessel Lease Oregon State University
80-4 Wildlife Washington Department of Game
80-5 Current Studies Dobrocky Seatech, Ltd.
80-6 Characterization of Water Quality Envirosphere, Inc.
80-7 Log Storage Envirosphere, Inc.
80-8 Biophysical Interactions Science Applications, Inc.
80-9 Data Systems Boeing Computer Services
80-10 Marine Mammal's Washington Department of Game
80-11 Simulation Science Applications, Inc.
81-1 tareboat Charter Sea Lease, Inc.

APPENDIX C

Publications Available from the
COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY INFORMATION CENTER

CREST

Columbia River Estuary Inventory. (1977). Library

Columbia River Estuary Regional Policies. (1977). Library

Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan. (1979). $25,.00

An Economic Analysis of the Columbia River Estuary. (1981). 16.00

Historical Analysis of the Columbia River Estuary: An
Ecological Approach. (1981). 8.00'

A Review of Recent Scientific Literature on-the Columbia River
Estuary, Emphasizing Aspects "Important to Resource
Managers. (1981). 15.00

Mitigation Policy Paper for the Columbia River EstuarX. (1982). 5.50

CREDDP

Annual Report. (1979). Pamphlet. No charge

Plan of Study. .(1979). 144pp. Library

Style Guide. (1979). 40pp. Library

A Review of Numerical Models of the Columbia River Estuary.
Lewis, James K. and Peter Hamilton. (1980). 2.00

A Review of the U. S. Army Engineers Waterways Experiment
.Station Sed7ime-nt Transport Model. Mathematical Sciences
Northwest. (1980). 34pp. Library

Annual Data Report. 2 Vol. (1980). Vol. 1: 2.00
Vol. 11: 15.00

Literature Review of Nitrogen Fixation in the Colu mbia River
Estuary. Lawley and Zamber. (1980). 16pp. Library

Literature Review of Reptiles and Amphibians in the Columbia
River Estuary. Beyer et @-1. (1980). 15pp. Library

Publications with the number of pages indicated after the title are
available for purchase at a copying charge of 10@ a page (20o, if over 100
pages).
C1

PUBLICATIONS AVAILABLE FROM THE COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY INFORMATION CENTER'
PAGE TWO

Literature Review of Seed Production in the Columbia River
Estuary. Beyer et al. (1980). 15pp. Library

Literature Review of Terrestrial Insects of the Columbia
River Estuary. Caldwell et al. (1980). 11pp. Library

Literature Survey of the Columbia River Estuary. Vol. I: $ 3.00
2 Vol. (1980). Vol. 11: 10.00

Procedures Manual. (1980). 415pp. Library

Vegetation Survey and Herbarium. Thomas, Duncan.
(1980). 19pp. Library

Water Quality Summary. Envirosphere. (1980)., 5.00

Water Quality Appendices. Envirosphere. (1980). 642pp. Library

Avifauna Draft Report. Jones and Stokes Associates. (1981). No charge

Columbia's Gateway. 1 book; 45 maps. Oregon Historical
Society. (1981). 3.00
($13.00
Columbia River Estuary Hydrodynamic Modeling. Hamilton, Peter. w/maps)
(1981). 40pp. Library

Marine Mammals - Fisheries Interactions on the Columbia River
and Adjacent Waters. Everitt et al. (1981). 24pp. Library

Salmonid and Non-Salmonid Fish. NMFS. (1981). 146pp. Library

Wildlife Final Report. Wash. Dept. of Game. (1981). 224pp. Library

Status of Knowledge on the Effects of Log Storage on the
-@-stuary. Envi -
Columbia River rosphere. (1981). 5.50

Water Column Primary Production in the Columbia River Estuary.
Frey, B. et al. (1981). 4 appendices. Library

Juvenile and Adult Steelhead and Sea-Run Cutthroat Trout Within
the Columbia River Estuary. Wash. Dept. of Game. Library

Plan of.Study for the Completion of the Columbia River Estuary
Data Development Program. (1982). 121pp. + appendices. Library

PUBLICATIONS AVAILABLE FROM THE COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY INFORMATION CENTER
PAGE THREE

MAPS: Bathymetric and Differencing Series. Northwest Cartography. 2.00
(1980). DATES: 45.00
Bathymetric: 1968-1977; 1926-1937;
@1949-1958.

Dif ferencing: 1868-1877 vs. 1926-1937;
1926-1937 vs. 1949-1958;
1852 vs. 1868-1877.

Special Differencing Edition on the River
Mouth: 1868-1877 vs. 1885;
1895 vs. 1902-1911;
1895 vs. 1926-1935.

Appendix D

DRAFT PLAN OF STUDY DISTRIBUTION LIST

Members of Congress and Congressional Staff

Senator Mark 0. Hatfield
Tom Imeson, Portland
Steve Crow, Appropriations Committee, Washington, D.C.
Senator Robert Packwood
Bill McClusky, Washington, D.C.
Senator Slade Gorton
Senator Henry Jackson
Congressman Les AuCoin
Suzanne Bohn, Washington, D.C.
Mark Gaede, Portland
Congressman Don Bonker

Federal Agency Representatives

Dave Askren, COE (Portland)
Ted Blahm, NMFS (Seattle)
Capt. Edmund Case, U. S. Coast Guard (Seattle)
Tom Chaney, WRC
Steve Chesser, COE (Portland)
Bob Cleary, USFWS (Portland)
Terry Durkin, NMFS (Hammond)
Wes Ebel, NMFS (Seattle)
Nancy Ellifrit, USFWS (Portland)
Joel Frisch, WRC
Jack Frost, WRC
John Hinman, NOAA (Seattle)
Gordon N. Johnson, Dept. of HUD (Seattle)
Bob Kaighn, COE (Washington, D.C.)
Bernard E. Kelly, Dept. of HHS (Seattle)
Jeff Klapper, COE (Portland)
John Kincheloe, USFWS (Ridgefield, WA)
Kim Larson, COE (Portland)
Don Leach, SCS (Astoria)
Ron Lee, EPA (Portland)
Brig. General James van Loben Sels, COE (Portland)
Robert McConnell, NMFS (Prescott, OR)
Claire Newcomer, Dept. of the Interior (Washington, D.C.)
Delbert Olson, COE (Portland)
Derrell P. Thompson, Dept. of the Interior (Denver)
Jay Watson, USFWS (Portland)
Jackie Wyland, NMFS (Portland)
EPA Regional Administrator, Seattle
Department of Energy, Seattle
Regional Director, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Bothell, WA

Oregon State Agencies

Governor Victor Atiyeh
Al Burns, DLCD
Jon Christensen, ODOE

D1,

Brent Forsberg, ODFW
Stan Hamilton, DSL
Don Oswalt, DLCD
State Conservationist, SCS, Portland

Washington State Agencies

Governor John Spellman
Glen Crandal, WDOE
John DeMeyer, DNR
Jack Howerton, WDG
Mary Lou Mills, WDF
Don Moos, WDOE
Duane Phinney, WDF
Steve Tilley, DNR

CREST Council

Norman Brateng, Pacific County
Dennis Dunn, City of Warrenton
Bob Westerberg, Clatsop County
Everett Groves, Wahkiakum Port District #2
Henry Desler, Port of Astoria
Frank Heer, Port of Ilwaco
Mayor Robert Chopping, City of Astoria
Mathew Higgins, Town of Hammond
Mayor Les Peterson, Town of Ilwaco
Bill Crossman, Pacific County
Gilbert C. Gramson, City of Warrenton
Curt Schneider, Clatsop County
Roger Shannon, Port of Astoria
Bob Petersen, Port of Ilwaco
Jean Hallaux, City of Astoria
Al Gibbons, Town of Hammond
Frank Unfred, Town of Ilwaco

Data Evaluation Team

Donald Heinle, CH2M Hill, Inc.
David Jay, Univ. of Wash.
David McIntire, Oregon State Univ.
Ed Roy, Univ. of Wash.
Charles Simenstad, Univ. of Wash.
Lawrence Small, Oregon State Univ.

.Other Plan of Study Contractors

Richard Callaway, Consultant
Howard Mercier, Consultant

Past CREDDP Contractors

Rocky Beach/Steve Treacy, WDG
David Bella, Oregon State Univ.
Joe Creager, Univ. of Wash.
Dan Edwards, Consultant
Tom English, Univ. of Wash.

D2-

Peter Hamilton, Science Applications, Inc.
Brad Harvey, Northwest Cartography.1 Inc.
Charles Hazel, Jones and Stokes
Bob Holton, Oregon State Univ.
Jonathan Ives, Jones and Stokes, Inc.
Robert Peterson, Consultant
Gilbert Stegen, Science Applications Inc.
Virginia Tinling, Consultant
Ted Winfield/Keith Macdonald, Woodward-Clyde, Inc.
Ed Wolf, SAI

Others

John E. Accord, Dept. of Nat. Res. and Conserv., Helena, Montana
Bill Bach, Port of Portland
Greg Baker, Port of Astoria
Jim Bergeron, Oregon State Univ.
Russ Bristow, Astoria, OR
E.M. Clark, Dept. of the Environment, Vancouver, BC
David Flemer, Chesapeake Bay Program
Jim Good, Oregon State Univ.
Gordon Haynes, BPA (Portland)
James Heckman, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, Olympia, WA
John Palensky, BPA (Portland)
Mike Josselyn, San Francisco State University
Mel Karr, Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Portland
Ken Kimura, Pacific County, WA
Duncan Law, Oregon State University
L.H. McCarter, Seaside, OR
Irene Martin, Skomokawa, WA
Don Mathison, CWIC, Kelso, WA
Eric Metz, California Coastal Commission
Mike Morgan, CTIC, Cannon Beach, OR
Gary Muhlberg, Clatsop Community College, Astoria
Tom Niesen, San Francisco State University
Chris Onuf, UC Santa Barbara, California
John Platt, Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Portland
George Proctor, Proctor, Puckett, and Fairclo Attorneys, Klamath Falls, OR
Peter Ramatowski, Vancouver, WA
Scott Reed, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho
Anne Saari, Ilwaco, WA
Paul N. Schervel, Jackson, Wyoming
Tim Wapato, Columbia River Inter-Tirbal Fish Commission, Portland
Janice Wilson, Lindsay, Hart, Neil, and Weigler Attorneys, Portland
Joy Zedler, San Diego State Univ., California

APPENDIX E

Reviewers of the Draft Plan of Study: Written or verbal comments on the Draft
Plan of Study were received from the following people:

Federal Agency Representatives

Dave Askren, COE (Portland)
Tom Chaney, WRC
Bob Cleary, USFWS (Portland)
Terry Durkin, NMFS (Hammond)
Wes Ebel, NMFS (Seattle)
Nancy Ellifrit, USFWS (Portland)
Joel Frisch, WRC
Jack Frost, WRC
Robert Henney, COE (Portland)
Jay Watson, USFWS (Portland)

Oregon State Agencies

Jack Kanalz, State Conservationist, SCS, Portland

Washington State Agencies

James Fenton, WDG

CREST Council

Norman Brateng, Pacific County
Dennis Dunn, City of Warrenton
Everett Groves, Wahkiakum. Port District #2
Jean Hallaux, City of Astoria
Frank Heer, Port of Ilwaco
Bob Petersen, Port of Ilwaco
Curt Schneider, Clatsop County.
Data Evaulatio'n Team

Donald Heinle, CH2M Hill
David McIntire, Oregon State Univ.
Ed Roy/Chris Sherwood, Univ. of Washington
Charles Simenstad, Univ. of Washington
Lawrence Small, Oregon State Univ.

Other Plan of Study Contractors

Howard Mercier, Consultant

Past CREDDP Contractors

Rocky Beach/Steve Treacy, WDG
Tom English, Univ. of Wash.
Peter Hamilton, SAI
Virginia Tinling, Consultant
Ted Winfield/Keith Macdonald, Woodward-Clyde Consultants
Ed Wolf, SAI

Others

L.H. McCarter, Seaside, OR
Irene Martin, Skomokawa, WA
Mike Morgan, CTIC, Cannon Beach, OR

APPENDIX F

STAFF AND CONSULTANTS LIST FOR

THE PLAN OF STUDY

CREST Staff

Michael DeLapa Project Officer representing the CREST Council
John Damron Study Manager
David Fox Principal Investigator
Duncan Thomas Principal Investigator

U.S. Water Resource Council Staff

John E. Frost Acting Assistant Director for Operations
Joel Frisch Director, Regional Planning
Tom Chaney Regional Water Planning Specialist

Data Evaluation Team consultants

Don Heinle CH2M Hill, Bellevue, Washington
David Jay University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
David McIntire Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon
Ed Roy University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
Charles Simenstad Universtiy of Washington, Seattle, Washtington
Larry Small Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon

Data Management Consultant

Howard Mercier Corvallis, Oregon

Currents Consultant

Richard Callaway Corvallis, Oregon

APPENDIX G

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

LOWER TROPHIC LEVELS

A. Describe and map productivity and biomass patterns of Columbia River
Estuary primary producers.

Objectives:

1., Describe and.map emergent plant biomass primary productivity
patterns.

2. Describe and map benthic microalgal productivity, biomass, and
related variable patterns.

3. Describe and map phytoplankton productivity and biomass patterns.

B. Determine to the extent possible the carbon budget of priarmy producers.

Objectives:

1. Estimate the export of detritus from marshes.

2. Determine the emergent plant carbon budget...

3. Determine the benthic microalgal carbon budget.

4. Measure or estimat,e phytoplankton and other organic particulate
inputs and outputs.

C. Describe the relationships among primary producers and productivity
levels and physical factors.

Objectives:

1. Relate marsh vegetation types and productivity to elevation,
salinity, and other pertinent physical and chemical factors.

2. Relate benthic microalgal productivity to sediment parameters,
salinity, and other pertinent physical and chemical factors.

3. Relate phytoplankton productivity and biomass to salinity, currents,
nutrients, and other pertinen t physical and chemical factors.

II. HIGHER TROPHIC LEVELS

A. Describe and map abundance patterns of the invertebrate and vertebrate
groups.

Objective's:

1. Describe and map key and selected other zooplankton and larval fish
species, by principal life history stages or assemblages in terms
of occurrence, density and standing stock over time.

2. Describe population structure and dynamics and life history of
Eurytemora.

3. Describe and map key and selected other benthic infauna species or
assemblages in terms of density, standing stock, and production
over time.

4. Determine the population structure, dynamics, life history
and turnover rates of Corophium, Macoma, Hobsonia, and
Pseudopolydora.

5. Describe-and map key and selected other epibenthic_species or
assemblages in terms of density, standing stock,-and production
over time.

6. Describe the population structure, .. dynamics, life history, and
trophic relationships of Dungeness crab, crangonid shrimp, and
mysids.

7. Describe and map key and selected other fish species by life history
stage, or assemblages in terms of density and standing stock over
time.

8. Describe And map migration routes and timing (seasons, residence
time) of juvenile and adult salmon and the feeding habits of
juvenile salmon in different estuarine habitats.

9. Describe and map key avifauna species abundance and habitats.

10. Describe and map key wildlife species occurrence and density.

11. Describe and map key marine mammal species occurrence,,density, and
standing stock.

12. Generate estimates of growth over time of identifiable cohorts of
key fish species residing within the estuary.

B. Determine function relationships among higher trophic groups.

Objectives:

1. Define functional relationships of benthic'infauna in the ecosystem,
including predator prey linkages, emigration and immigration, and
role in the estuary carbon budget.-@

2. Define functional relationships of epibenthic organisms in the eco-
system, including predator prey linkages, emigration and immigration,
and role in the estuary carbon budget.

3. Estimate mean consumption rates of key fish species/life history
stages and proportional contribution of principal prey taxa in
different regions/habitats of the estuary. Discuss the role of a
key species in the estuary's carbon budget.

4. Tabulate composition, abundance, and biomass of prey of. key fish
species and life history stages with emphasis on diel samples.

5. Determine avifauna food requirements and prey composition.

6. Estimate the rate of consumption of food/prey by wildlife.

C. Describe the relationships among vertebrate and invertebrate species
and physical factors.

Objectives:

1. Quantify functional relationships among zooplankton and larval
fishes and physical (salinity, temperature, tide stage) and bio-
logical (planktivorous predators) factors.

2. Quantify relationships among benthic infauna and physical (salinity,
sediments, depth) and biological (other species) factors.

3. Quantify relationships among epibenthic organisms and physical
(salinity, sediments, depths) and biological factors.

4. Quantify relationships among key fi sh species and physical
(salinity, temperature, tide stage) and biological factors.

III. SEDIMENTATION AND SHOALING

A. Characterize and map bottom sediment distribution.,

Objectives:

1. Characterize and map bottom sediments.

2. Perform grain-size analysis of sediment samples collected by
biologists.

3. Define modern sedimentary environments and processes (including
important temporal and spatial scales) in the estuary.

B. Characterize sediment transport.

Objectives:

1. Characterize and map bedform. types and migration directions.

2. Characterize estuarine suspended sediment field.

C. Determine (qualitatively) the causes of historic and modern shoaling.

Objective:

1. Investigate causes of modern and historical bathymetric change.

IV. CURRENTS AND SIMULATION

A. Evaluate and model circulation patterns.

1. De scribe and analyze tidal circulation.

2. Incorporate NOS data into CREDDP data base and use in all analyses,
as appropriate.

3. Describe and analyze low frequency flow, including "null zone"
location and processes.

4. Model circulation patterns through the use of a two-dimensional,
horizontal model. Use the model to study atmospheric, freshwater
and tidal forcings. To analyze.circulation in peripheral bays,
and to assist the Sedimentation Unit in determing shoaling patterns.

B. Evaluate and model salinityand mixing patterns.

Objectives:

1. Describe and analyze salinity and temperature patterns.

2. Describe and analyze vertical mixing.processes.

3. Formulate and use a two-dimensional'multichannel verticaLmbdel,
to examine tidal forcings, salinity intrusion, freshwater inflow,
atmospheric forcing, vertical mixing, and residual flow processes.

V. INTEGRATION

A. Integrate program data for a more complete understanding of biological
and physical structure and processes.

Objectives:

1. Analyze effects of physical processes on key species and the
taxonomic structure of communities. - . . 1
2. Integrate program information to define functional linkages among
organisms, to developa carbon budget, and relate these to the
physical processes in the Columbia River Estuary.

3.. Classify and map habitat types in.relation to appropriate physical
and biological parameters (d-epth/elevation, salinity, sediment,
emergent vegetation type).

4. Using information developed by work unit contractors, "characterize"
(i.e., describe) the biological communities in each habitat type.

5. Integrate current and salinity results and sediment results to
develop an understanding of the estuarine sedimentological
processes.

I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ll I 1 111111
3 6668 00001 0183 1

kk-