Estuary planning guidelines

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

Coastal zone
information
Center

Estuary Planni*ng Guideli'nes

"'J

GC
97.8
o7
07
@7
*07
07
1973

Oregon Coastal Conservation & Development Commission

OREGON ESTUARIES

COLUMBIA
RIVER ESTUARY

YOUNG'S BAY

NEHALEM BAY-3,770 ACRES

-TILLAMOOK BAY-8,840 ACRES
NETARTS BAY-2,41 0 ACRES
SAND LAKE-700 ACRES
N ESTUCCA BAY- 1, 150 ACR ES

SALMON RIVER ESTUARY-440 ACRES
SILETZ BAY-1,200 ACRES

YAQUINA BAY-2,850 ACRES

ALSEA BAY-2,230 ACRES

SIUSLAW BAY-1,590 ACRES

WINCHESTER BAY (UMPQUA)-5,710 ACRES

COOS BAY-9,540 ACRES

COQUILLE RIVER ESTUARY-700 ACRES

ROGUE RIVER

CHETCO RIVER

@'V

M I

vji
N,

frontispiece
Tillamook Bay, Oregon, at low tide (0.5') August 24, 1971. Bayocean
Peninsula at left; partially completed south jetty at entrance; city of
Garibaldi north; Bay City right center; and city of Tillamook at lower
right. Photograph by Western Aerial Contractors, Inc. , Eugene, Ore.

about the frontispiece-
The photograph was made available through the courtesy of Thos. J. Murray &
Associates, Portland, Oregon.

AN ESTUARY IN TROUBLE??
The picture illustrates the impact of man's and nature's activities on an
estuary over a period of time. The head of Oregon State University's Marine
Advisory Program has expressed concern that Tillamook Bay, along with certain
other Oregon estuaries may require extensive restoration in an attempt toiB-
establish the ecosystem. A description of the problem and possible solution
are contained in a letter on page 36.

Property of CSC Library

OREGON COASTAL CONSERVATION
AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

WILBUR TERNYIK, CHAIRMAN P. 0. Box N Phone (503) 997-8248
JEFF BRENNAN, VICE CHAIRMAN Florence, Oregon 97439
ROBERT YOUNKER, SECRETARY-TREASURER
JAMES F. ROSS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR January 31, 1973

The 1971 session of the Oregon Legislature created the
Oregon Coastal Conservation and Development Commission
to develop a natural resource management plan for the
coastal zone, with emphasis and priority placed on the
land and water relationships within each estuary. In
addition, a number of state natural resource agencies
indicated that no permits, of any kind, would be per-
mitted within an individual estuary until long-range
land and water use planning programs were underway.

With these points in mind, the OCC&DC encouraged the
formation of several estuary planning groups on differ-
ent estuaries and turned to the state natural resource
agencies, and subsequently to the federal level, for a
set of planning guidelines. After an exhausting search,
none were found.

Subsequently, the OCC&DC developed the planning guide-
lines contained in this document to assist local estuary
planning groups, emphasizing the need for complete, coor-
dinated land and water use planning efforts for all of
Oregon's estuaries. Though somewhat patterned after the
process used in developing the Yaquina Bay plan, the guide-
lines explicitly spell out the need for maximum public
involvement in the planning process and emphasize the im-
portance of sound management of the entire watershed of
each estuary.

Appreciation must be extended to local public officials,
individual members of the Oregon Coastal Conservation and
Development Commission, coastal planners, state and federal
natural resource agencies and interested citizens who, in
reality, wrote this document. A special note of gratitude
must go to Herb Riley of the State Executive Department
and Paul Coyne, vice-president of the Oregon Public Ports
Association.

Sincerely,

7
Q
V S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
IC3 COASTAL SERVICES CENTER Wilbur E. Ternyik
c, Chairman
Am 2234 SOUT@, AVENUE
CHARLE,.,"'N
@C

OREGON COASTAL CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

S T A F F

James F. Ross Executive Director
Clarence R. Parker OSU Extension Service*
Glenn J. Akins Planning Coordinator
Mary K. York Staff Secretary
Sonja K. Stokes Report Typist

*The OCC&DC has contracted with Oregon State University,
Cooperative Extension Service for specific assistance
in developing education programs regarding coastal zone
management and assisting the commission inmaximum pub-
lic involvement in the planning process.

REPORT FINANCED IN PART BY GRANT
FROM U. S. DEPT. OF HOUSING &
URBAN DEVELOPMENT.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

II. GETTING STARTED . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

III. OBJECTIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

IV. ACHIEVING OBJECTIVES . . . . . . . . . 7

V. PARTICIPANTS IN AN ESTUARY PLAN . . . . 10

VI. STEPS IN THE PLANNING PROCESS. . 16

VII. CONTENTS OF AN ESTUARY PLAN . . . . . . 25

VIII. APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

A. FUNDING . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

B. DEFINITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . 34

C LETTER REGARDING TILLAMOOK BAY 36

INTRODUCTION

Estuary Planning Guidelines are a result of a demand
for an approach to resolving conservation and devel-
opment conflicts and to establish effective management
tools useful in meeting economic as well as the environ-
mental needs of today and tomorrow.

Emphasis is placed on a "partnership" arrangement in-
volving local, state and federal interests in both plan
development and plan implementation efforts.

Guidelines attempt to set forth a process which (1) in-
volves people from varying backgrounds and disciplines,
(2), provide a step by step method of putting a plan
together and gaining committment to implementing your
plan, and (3) outlining the basic content to be consi-
dered in a plan

People, process and content are closely tied and in
total represent a method of achieving maximum oppor-
tunity for success in your planning efforts. However,
the document does not represent a rigid set of rules
but suggests an approach developed from experience
with a liberal sprinkling of "common sense."

ET T

*00-

GETTING STARTED

A first question may be, "Are the guidelines suitable
or do they apply to our estuary?" The process sug-
gested for preparing a plan remains the same for a
large or small estuary. Differences may occur in the
number and type of people involved or the depth to
which certain aspects of the estuary are studied.
Each estuary has its own "unique" characteristics and

should be treated as such.

After once reading through the document it will be
apparent there are three major tasks: (1) To decide
who will be involved, (2) how these people will be
involved and (3) what characteristics of the estuary
need to be studied. In carrying out these tasks it
is advisable to capitalize on the experience ofothers
who are noti involved or have completed an estuary
plan. This advice may save a great deal of time and
needless frustration.

Organizing a group or groups to prepare a plan is
obviously fundamental to the success of your efforts.
Care must be taken that no one group or interest dom-
inates development of the plan.

Because of the county's and city's authority to zone
and carry out land use control measures it is impera-
tive that each unit of government including port dis-
tricts cooperate from the very outset of the planning
effort. There must be mutual agreement and under7
standing in the preparation, adoption and implementa-
tion stages. The activities of each jurisdiction will
affect the other's ability (in a negative or positive

sense) to implement the decisions contained in a plan.
The terms conflicts and problems have been used rather
extensively in this document. The words, at times,
may be used interchangeably. However, there are indeed,
conflicts arising from the use of estuarine resources

or between users of the same resource. A MAJOR TASK

OF A PLANNING GROUP IS TO RESOLVE THESE CONFLICTS.

One last thought that may be ofvalue. Advertise your
activities. In addition to special interest groups,
let the general public know about your program, your
concerns, achievements and progress towards prepara-
tion of a plan. This can beaccomplished through news
media, special reports, meetings and minutes of meet-
ings, etc. One caution regarding news worthy items -
from the outset of the program, the planning group
should establish methods of preparing and providing
information to news media. Obviously inaccurate or
misleading information regarding the group's actions
or attitudes could be detrimental to the program.

-7- At
40r, 1*34

liar.

O"BJECTIVES

OBJECTIVES

Regardless of the planning effort to be undertaken two
basic ideas must be central to that effort. First,
those who have a responsibility for decision making
in estuarine areas must share in preparing plans that
direct solutions to estuarine problems. Secondlyr
these same people must have a commitment to carry out
the proposals of the plan. This commitment occurs
as a result of sharing in the plan development pro-

cess.

For these reasons the following are basic objectives
for a planning program.

Development of a coordinated plan-
ning and implementation effort by
local, state and federal agencies
for the conservation and use of
natural resources in the estuaries

adjacent lands.

Development of a program to achieve
local, state and federal consensus
and commitment to solve estuarine
problems.

ACHIEVING- OBJECTWES

Zl@i
4k
'iiii'k , @:'z'@-

ACHIEVING OBJECTIVES

A good question is, "How can these objectives be
reached?" Perhaps the most significant aspect of pre-
paring plans for estuaries is the method of achieving
local, state and federal consensus and commitment to
solve estuarine problems. The focus of planning ef-
forts, therefore, is in solving problems and resolv-
ing conflicts, rather than producing a planning docu-

ment.

We might look to commitment as the key word in pre-
paring a plan and solving problems identified by the
plan. In this regard, commitment has a special mean-
ing. By definition, it is an agreement or pledge to
carry out a specific course of action--in a sense, a
determination to see that the job gets done. Without
commitment planning is an exercise in futility and
will result in frustration and meaningless expenditures
of time, effort and public monies.

In addition to commitment, consensus isveryimportant
in reaching decisions. Consensus by definition means
general agreement. Consensus is reached when all mem-
bers of a group (rather than a simple majority) agree
to a particular course of action or statement of policy.
Consensus relies upon good interpersonal relationships
and common understanding among those involved in the
planning process.

How then can consensus and commitment be achieved?
The most successful method has been by involving lo-
cal decision-makers along with state and federal agen-
cies in the following planning (and problem solving)

process.

Step 1: Problem identification and
information gathering
Step 2: identify and anaZyze aZter-
native solution
Step 3: DeveZop plan
Step 4: Adopt plan
Step 5: ImpZementati.on-carry out plan
Step 6: Periodically review, evaluate
and up-date plan
(The steps are described in detail begin-
ning on page 19)

The above steps are simplified to provide an overview
of the process and do not reflect the ef fort and coop-
eration necessary to prepare and carry out a plan.
For example the previously mentioned necessity for city
and county cooperation is not readily apparent. How-
ever, the method does provide groups with a time tested
approach to developing solutions to problems.

While each phase of the process is obviously impor-
tant, Step 6 is particularly significant. PLANNING
FOR AN ES TUARY MUST BE VIEWED AS A CONTINUOUS EFFORT.
A conscious effort must be iiade to review, evaluate
and change to reflect the needs and aspirations of
people, simply because planning is for people. This
does not mean changing a plan atthe whim of a special
interest group but rather changing to insure maximum
present and future returns from resources and balanc-
ing the rights of the present generation against the
rights of future generations.

There undoubtedly will be times when decisions re-
garding development Issues must be made during prepa-
ration of the plan. In so far as is practical, reach-
ing these decisions should be based on a methodical
approach such as is outlined in the "Steps in the Plan-
ning Process."

44@
TV

'17, -c-

% Z
TO
-IIHVd
N4 S-1

jiml whd

Ow-

PARTICIPANTS IN AN ESTUARY PLAN

The major responsibility for the planning effort is
shared by five specific groups, which in a general
sense, form. a team. The participants, their respec-
tive roles and methods of appointment are:

TASK,FORCE: Local representatives of each group hav-
ing an interest or responsibility in the estuary,
(i. e., port districts, city councils, county
boards of commissioners, school districts and
other special districts.) The task force should
also include in its membership interested citi-
zens who may represent commerce, industry, en-
vironmental or other interests. Also special
advisory groups may be appointed representing
these interests.

ROLE: To prepare plan drafts for review and to
recommend plans and methods of imp@lementation
for adoption by policy bodies. The task force
also serves as a catalyst in providing ideas,
reports, and recommendations towhich others may

react.

APPOINTMENT: An acceptable method ofappointing
members is by mutual resolution of several elect-
ed bodies, i.e. , county commissioners, city coun-
cil and port commission.

Each governmental unit. or organization provide
the names of those pe--sons whom they wish to

serve.

TECHNICAL ADVISORY GROUP: Composed of agency repre-
sentatives who have a responsibility and/or in-
terest in the estuary and adjacent lands. Parti-

cipants have a special knowledge or expertise
which is a source of factual information for both
the task force and staff. Representatives may
include:

State Water Resources Board

State Game Commission

Fish Commission of Oregon
State Department of Transportation

State Land Board

State Marine Board

OSU Marine Science Center
Oregon Institute of Marine Biology - U of 0
Dept. of Environmental Quality
Corps of Engineers
U.S. Forest Service
Bureau of Sport Fisheries & Wildlife
Soil Conservation Service

Other local, State and Federal Agencies
including colleges and universities.
Local people who may have special capa-
bilities, i.e. attorney, engineer, archi-
tect, etc.

It may be well to form a "core" group of agen-
cies who have coast-wide concerns in estuaries.
The group should include State Water Resources
Board, Department of Environmental Quality, State
Game Commission, Fish Commission of Oregon, Corps
of Engineers and Bureau. of Sport Fisheries and
Wildlife. A member of this group also may be

asked to become a member of the task force.
other agencies mentioned above are invited to
participate as the situation demands.

ROLE: Provide factual information and expertise
regarding specific technical concerns to task

force and staff. Participants willalso provide
information regarding planning and regulatory
policies of their respective agencies. The "core"
group is to meet for the purpose of reviewing
and responding to concerns and technical ques-
tions. In addition the group may suggest addi-
tional agency input.

APPOINTMENT: Suggested methods of appointment
include:

1. By task force chairman request-
ing Oregon Coastal Conservation
and Development Commission to
coordinate agency involvement.
2. By task force chairman request-
ing agency participation.

STAFF AND/OR CONSULTANTS: Person or persons capa-
ble of providing, organizing, coordinating and
managing efforts of the task force.

ROLE: Under direction of the task force, pro-
vide overall management and coordination of the
program on a continuous basis. Role includes
coordination and supervision of consultants who
may work on specif ic portions of the plan. Staf f
will also coordinate activities of the task force
and technical advisory group. In addition the
staff assumes the management responsibility for
the planning process. Amount of involvement and
time spent depends upon the complexity of the
situation.

APPOINTMENT: It is essential that competent
staff be assigned to the program. Normally,

county planner will assume this position. The
council of governments, depending upon the sit-
uation, may become involved in a staff role.

PUBLICS: "Publics" may be composed of civic or-
ganizations, environmental groups, chambers of
commerce, industrial and commercial groups, rec-
reational interests, property owners, employment
groups, age groups, churches, granges, League of
Women Voters, fraternal organizations, as well
as general citizenry.

ROLE: Reviewing and responding to recommenda-
tions, suggested alternatives and plan draft's
prepared bythe task force. Provide input, par-
ticularly in specific areas of interest. "Pub-
lics" can contribute significantly to the devel-
opment and success of a program. If ignored,
these same "publics" may actively oppose efforts
to implement a plan.

POLICY BODIES: Local elected bodies, state and fed-
eral boards and commissions responsible for mak-
ing decisions and directing solutions to problems.

Involves:

LOCAL: County boards of commissioners,
city councils, planning commissions,
port authorities, council of govern-
ments, and other special districts
such as water districts, sewer dis-
tricts, school districts, etc.

STATE: State Water Resources Board,
Department of Environmental Quality,
Oregon Coastal Conservation and

Development Commission, State
Department of Transportation,
State Game Commission, Fish
Commission of Oregon, Gover-
nor is Executive Department,
State Land Board, State Marine
Board, etc.

FEDERAL: Corps of Engineers, U.S.
Forest Service, Bureau of Land
Management, Soil Conservation
Service, Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, etc.

ROLE: Review of planning efforts at each step
of the process. Official adoption of mutually
agreed upon plan. In addition to adoption, com-
mitment to take action to carry out the objec-
tives of the plan must come from the policy bod-
ies for the successful resolution of problems.

.Ai _TJ
STEPS

PRI1,10M)"ll., cul,@,,,-,
PLAWN,
7",-- 7,:

.. ....... ..

1, "o, io-o 00,00, 0
V -V

MRQ ik,

STEPS IN THE PL.,

STEP I
n ormation Compile And repare Draft
Gathering Identify Actual Of Problems
S -TAG Problems F-TAG-S
S-TAG
Problem [Cd:e n f y
Identif 1 i t@ @ P@ble
f Y@
rj
cation t c a I P-b )m s
(Perceived) F T G-S
TF- G - S

TF Task Force

TAG Technical Advisory
Group
S Staff

,0@
Re@solv@e. Second
C fl, s Draft Of Plan
TF-TAG-S
Expar

Review Responses Repeat First Review
nd raft Process Consequence
Recommend Plan As Necessary And Make
TF Decision
TF
STEP 4

Formal
Adoption
Of Plan
By N
I
Policy Bodies

ather
Proposed
j
"re Draft
I
f Prob ; s
T S
form at' 0n e An [!:T
d
oGathen i fD
[I@Odmenp ual
il
ri g t y Ct
S.TAG Prob le Is
.,Jr 1,
A Sub'
U
TO
0
0" e A
den m
(P ived)
T @FA

Fo @,na
d r t n
op io@
Plan
By
Pol, cy Bo

Management Draft Overall ulli,
I
Programs Program fPoli,
STEP 5 G - S S

Task Force Review

4LNNING PROCESS

FinalI ze
Statement Of
Problems
Identif y
TF- S Alternative
mit Draft Solutions
"Publics" S-TAG
@nd Policy Bo ies Statement Of
--TF,/ Goals And
Objectives
STEP 2 TF, TAG * I
Analyz Submit
e TO
Solutions V \ s')
TF-TAG- S ublic
And Policy
Bodies

STEP 3

First
Draf t Of Plan
TF-TAG-'

id Consequen@e Review Response
,:)f Preferred , ;s, /*And Combine
, oices PreferredAlter atives
And P ble s TF-TAG Review Draft
And Select Preferred Alternatives
Identify C i ts "Publics"And Policy Bodies
7D Among Pr rre
Alternati s D
TF

ACTION
0
b m"

b
@Apnud
Poli
B dies
0
Fir t
ft f P1
TFTAG@'

ro
Og2D
-@@-Prs M D
7n @i I c
0 f'icts
e0tif y @fejrred
ng Pef
I tt. ties
(]!A rna ve
TF

STEP 6
,s" And
.y Bodies Review Periodic Review
a@Finalize And FAnd Updtate Of Plan
Adopt Plan -----,,TF-TAG?S
Policy Bodies & TF

STEPS IN THE PLANNING PROCESS

The following describe in detail the steps in the plan-
ning process. Included is the development oftwo sep-
arate but interrelated plans. Steps I - IV outline a
plan of what needs to be done. Step V describes the
development of a management plan or how these needs
are to be met.

The steps are portrayed graphically in a condensed form
on pages 17 and 18 to give a comprehensive view of how
a program progresses f rom problem identif ication through
implementation and-up-dating of the plan.

STEP I - PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION AND INFORMATION

GATHERING:

PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION: It is essential to
clearly identify specific problems for which
plans are to be prepared. The initial step is
the identification or listing of problems as seen
by the task force, technical advisory groupf
staff and "publics". This initial listing will
reveal what are perceived to be the problems.
After thorough' examination, the actual or real
problems will be identified. The real problems
may be quite dif f erent from those initially out-
lined.

The task force may bewell advised to distribute
a questionnaire particularly to various "pub-
lics" asking for their opinions as to the prob-
lems they feel are significant in the estuary.
Another suggestion for public input in problem
identification is to hold meetings throughout

the study area. An advantage of meetings, if
properly conducted, allows not only discussion
of problems, but may answer questions as to the
whys" of an estuary plan.

INFORMATION GATHERING: A substantial amount of
information that relates directly to the problems
identified will begathered throughout the plan-
ning program. However, some basic types of in-
formation can be compiled during the problem
identification process. (See Contents of an
Estuary Plan, page 26). Information should also
be identified that is needed but not available.
Perhaps studies can be undertaken to meet these
needs. It isimportant that "facts", not unsub-
stantiated opinion, form the basis for decision
making. Also, participants must be able to trust
and have faith in the information used in re-
solving conflicts and preparing the plan.

Suggested steps in problem identification are
as follows:

1. Task force and technical advisory group
.discuss and prepare initial list of
problems.
2. Staff, with assistance of technical ad-
visory group prepare discussion draft
of problem statements, including iden-
tification of critical problems.
3. Draft reviewed and revised by task force
4. Discussion draft submitted to "publics"

for comment.
5. Draft revised and sent, together with
comments, to policy bodies for review

and comment.

6. Task force finalizes statement of prob-
lems and sends copies to policy bodies
and interested "publics".

STEP II - IDENTIFY AND ANALYZE ALTERNATIVE SOLU-
TIONS: Suggested steps for the development and
evaluation of alternative solutions are:

1. From problem statements task force pre-
pares draft statement of goals and ob-
jectives to be accomplished by plan.
2. Submits draf t to polic y bodies and "pub-
lics" for review and comment.
3. Task force resolves conflicts and pre-
pares final statement of goals and ob-
jectives.
4. Staff and technical advisory group iden-
tify alternative solutions and prepare
a discussion draft including a quick,
rough estimate of the direct and indirect
consequences for each alternative, in-
cluding the effect on natural resources,
local and coastal economy, human re-
sources and social values, livability,
and dollar cost. Staff and technical
advisory group identify and evaluate
who has responsibility and management
authority and whether the present mechan-
isms are adequate to solve problems.
5. Discussion draft reviewed and revised
by task force.
6. Draft submitted to "Publics" for com-
rLient and indicate their first, second
and third choices and/or identify other

alternatives.

7. Staff and technical advisory group re-
vise draft and send with comments-to
each policy body for review and comment,
including specific response and direc-
tion.

8. Staff and technical advisory group com-
bine preferred alternatives, identify
conflicts among alternatives, expand con-
sequences of preferred choices and eval-
uate effects of conflicts.

STEP III - DEVELOP PLAN:
Suggested steps for the development of a plan are:

1. Task force reviews conflicts and selected
alternatives and prepares first draft
of plan.
2. Task force submits draft plan to "pub -
lics" and policy bodies for response
and proposals for conflict resolution.
"Publics" and policy bodies select pre-
ferred alternatives.
3. Task force, technical advisory group
and staff review response from "publicd'
and policy bodies and recommends plan

on areas of agreement to each policy
body for their adoption.
4. Task force identifies and recommends
means for resolving conflicts among pre-
ferred alternatives.
5. Staff expands consequences of preferred
choices and conflicts.
6. Task force reviews consequences and makes
decisions.

7. Second draft of plan prepared by task
force.

8. Repeat first draft process as necessary.
9. Task force resolves remaining conflicts
and recommends plan.

STEP IV - ADOPTION OF PLAN
In order for the effective use and implementation
of the plan, experience has shown that not only
must all parties have an opportunity to partici-
pate in the plan-making process, but also there
must be formal adoption into public record of
these plans for long-term recognition and guid-
ance for implementation. The most binding meth-
od available to the policy bodies should be used
(i.e., ordinance, rule or resolution). The plan
is then filed with the appropriate keeper of
public records, local and statewide.

STEP V - IMPLEMENTATION - CARRY OUT PLAN
Implementation of the plan is accomplished pri-
marily through policies, ordinances, rules, reg-
ulations, orders and codes, together with capi-
tal improvement programs for necessary projects.
Implementation may also involve preparation of
more precise plans for certain aspects of estu-
ary conservation and development.

Suggested steps informulating an implementation
or management plan are:

1. Each agency and local governmental unit
is to draft their element of the man-

agement plan.
2. Staff and"technical advisory group com-
bine discussion plan drafts into one
overall action handbook.

3. Task force reviews and revises draft.
4. "Publics" and policy bodies review (in-
formally, and return corments to task

force.
5. Task force revises plan and recommends
to each policy body for appropriate pub-
lic hearings and adoption. Policy bodies
conduct hearings (joint if possible) ,
consider formal comments, and take appro-
priate action.
6. Policy bodies take action by enacting or-
dinances, rules, regulations, and other im-
plementing devices.

Policy bodies, especially local units ofgovern-
ment may wish to call upon the task force and
technical advisory group in carrying out the
plan to assist on questions of implementation,
i.e. zoning, development in critical areas and
other issues involving land and water use.

STEP VI - REVIEW, EVALUATE, AND UP-DATE
Follow up with regularly scheduled review and up-
dating processes to keep program current with
changing needs. The purposes of a plan are to
solve problems and resolve conflicts. Without
periodic evaluation and up-dating it isdoubtful
that a plan can fulfill these purposes.

This aspect of the program should utilize the
same approach as that of developing the plan.

ig lb,

Ai-
A

CONTENTS OF AN,

-AN
Sl"T OAR Y

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

CONTENTS OF AN ESTUARY PLAN

The participants in the estuary planning process and
the steps they take in building a plan already have
been discussed. The subject matter that must be dealt
with in the planning process is also of great impor-
tance. This subject matter is discussed in the fol-
lowing section, a suggested guide to the contents of
the estuary plans.

The suggested contents are divided into two main cate-
gories:' INFORMATION GATHERING which is a necessary
first step in understanding the characteristics of the
local area; and IDENTIFICATION OF PROBLEMS, which fo-
cuses on the major issues of estuary management.

INFORMATION GATHERING

I. Resources of the Natural Environment
1. Climate (precipitation, temperature,
wind)
2. Geology (historical, bedrock, surface,
foundation condition, economic materials)
3. Physiography (of the estuary area and
watershed)
4. Hydrology (surface water characteristics
such as tides, currents, water quality;
ground water characteristics such as
aquifers, recharge areas, quality)
5. Soils (agricultural types, drainage,
structure, texture, fertility, erodi-
bility, stability, slope)
6. Shoreland characteristics (slope,drain-
age, vegetation)
7. Channels (water movement, depths, modi-
fications)

2 8

8. Floodplains (extent, water levels, haz-
ard potentials)
9. Tideflats (extent, importance in the
estuary ecosystem)
10. Wetlands (values, resources, character-
istics)
11. Fish, 8hellfish and Invertebrate Re-
sources (populations, habitats, values)
12. Wildlife Resources (populations, habi-
tats, values)
13. Water Quality (chemical, physical, bio-
logical)

The thirteen categories as listed above are, of course
interrelated, and only a general guide to the major
concerns affecting an estuary region. In some areas
one or more of these concerns may not be of signifi-
cance or even present. In other areas one feature may
overshadow all others.

In all estuaries however, the value and usefulness of
the estuary resources motivate concern for protection
and management. An understanding of the characteris-
tics of these resources and their function in the es-
tuary system is an essential step in the development
of a management plan. Of special importance is an
understanding of the dynamic nature of the natural en-
vironment and an appreciation of the great differences
which may occur from one location to another in the
estuary. An assessment of the recreational and aes-
thetic values of individual resources,is also signifi-

cant.

An understanding of physical features such as tidal
movements, channel shifts and the mixing of fresh and
salt water is important inthe management of biological

2 7

resources and in maintaining the economic activities
of the estuary.

The physical system of the estuary is affected by the
adjacent shorelands, and indeed, bythe entire estuary
watershed. A consideration ofthe land area in suffi-
cient proximity to the estuary to enable appropriate
siting of water-related activities should be of special
concern in estuary planning. The activities taking
place in the estuary watershed which could significantly
affect the physical, chemical or biological character-
istics of the estuary also should be of concern inthe
planning process. Examples of such activities could
include forest practices affecting siltation, discharge
of sewage or chemical wastes or filling or dredging
which would modify the hydrological characteristics of
the estuary.

Assessment of resource values should bebased not only
on the fish, shellfish and wildlife harvested from the
estuary, but on the overall importance of the estuary
in the coastal and marine ecosystem.

II. Resources of the Man-Made Environment
1 . Population (numbers, density and distri-
bution, seasonal shifts)
2. Land Ownership and Use (types, charac-
teristics, impacts)
3. Local and Regional Economy (character-
istics of the lumber and wood products,
agriculture, commercial fishing, tour-
ist, and other industries of signifi-
cance in the coastal zone)
4. Historical and Scientific Sites (loca-
tions and values)

5. Local Communities and State and Federal
Agencies (ordinances, regulations, man-
agement policies and plans.)

The significance ofthese five general components also
varies widely from estuary to estuary. However, each
estuary is a focal point for human activities in that
part of the coastal zone, and consideration of social
and economic factors is essential for the development
of a sound and balanced estuary plan. Important con-
cerns include the demands of present and future popu-
lation and the location and potential values of histor-
ical and scientific sites. Characteristics of land
ownership and use must be evaluated in regard to con-
straints and potentials for estuary management.

A primary concern in this stage of information gath-
ering is the characteristics, requirements and poten-
tials of the local and regional economy.

The impact of management policies and plans by state
and federal agencies, local jurisdictions, corpora-
tions, and public and private groups must beevaluated
in the initial development of the estuary planning

process.

Although information gathering is an important first
step in the planning process, it is essential that a
constant up-dating of information take place through-
out the development of the plan. The currency (and
therefore, the effectiveness) of an estuary plan will
depend to a large degree on the availability of accu-
rate and appropriate information. Assistance from
county staffs or council of government or from con-
sultants may be of great value in conducting these
activities.

The preliminary information gathering activities will
lead naturally to the initial identification of prob-

lems.

IDENTIFICATION OF PROBLEMS

As information is gathered regarding estuary charac-
teristics and resources, the problems of the estuary
and its management begin tobe apparent. This step or
problem identification is a basic and essential part
of the plan. Indeed, the purpose of estuary planning
is to solve the problems of estuary use.

Essential in problem identification is aproper under-
standing of the aspects and consequences of resource
use in the estuary and the estuary watershed. Two ma-
jor areas ofconcern should be emphasized in the iden-
tification of problems. These are resource preserva-
tion and resource utilization. Interrelationships of
these concerns are the subject of the subsequent step
in the estuary planning process.

Problems of resource preservation may include concern
for wildlife habitat, fish spawning areas, wetlands,
shorelands, and areas of special recreational or aes-
thetic significance. Maintenance of water quality,
shoreland vegetation, shellfish resources, and fragile
biological communities (such as tidepools) may be
identified as concerns at the local and statewide
levels. The long-term ecological consequences ofman-
induced changes in the estuary should also be of spe-
cial consideration.

Identifying concerns of resource utilization will in-
volve the demands of present levels of use, and the

impact of future growth in the individual sectors of
the coastal economy. Such factors as population changes
and seasonal imbalances, the long-term consequences
of estuary modifications, and the levels of economic
activity necessary to support environmental quality
programs should be considered.

The suggested contents as identified herein are of pri-
mary use in the initial steps of the estuary planning
process. However, a refinement of both the information
gathering and problem identification stages will be
experienced throughout the planning process, as these
steps are inherent in an effective management system.

IN "R

APPENDIX

FUNDING

Local estuary planning groups may wish to seek fund-
ing to support their efforts. Funds may be available
from a variety of state and federal sources, including
"701" planning program ofthe U.S. Department of Hous-
ing and Urban Development, the Land and Water Conser-
vation Program of the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation,
and the Coastal Zone Management Program of the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Assistance in identifying the availability of and ap-
plying for funds is available from the Local Govern-
ment Relations Division of the Executive Department,
240 Cottage Street,*Salem, Oregon 97310.

DEFINITIONS

Comprehensive Plan: The legal document through which
a community's ideas, goals and programs for
future development are expressed. The plan
includes policies, goals, and interrelated
plans for private and public land use, trars-
portation systems, community facilities, and
all other elements and features that, in can-
posite, represent the decisions of local
people.

Estuary: A tidal bay or arm of the sea where fresh-

water from streams and rivers mix with salt-
water from the sea forming habitats for marine
life.

Land Use: The activities and purposes to which land
and water areas are put, including public and
private uses of property.

Planning: Used in the context of land use planning, the
process of identifying public goals, developing
a coordinated, orderly approach to achieve
thos6 goals and periodically updating plans to
meet the demands of change. A PLAN may be
thought of as a "scheme" to solve a problem
and shape the future.

Subdivision Regulations: Subdivision regulations are
guidelines for the approval of plats which
divide land into lots for development purposes.
They relate to the zoning ordinances since
zoning sets standards for the use ofland and
are an important tool in implementing a plan.

3 4

Water Relatedness: A development which is primariZy
or secondariZy dependent on an estuary loca-
tion or resource is def ined as water-related.
Primary Dependency is a development requir-
ing a specific estuary location or-resource
such as water, access, a beach, or a naviga-
tion channel. Secondary Dependency isa dev-
elopment seeking proximity to a use or acti-
vity which has primary dependence.

Zoning: The legal tool which regulates the use of land
and, thus, helps to implement planning goals.
A zoning ordinance delineates exact bounda-
ries of various use districts and specifies
the detailed district regulations.

0 5

COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE

OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY
MARINE SCIENCE CENTER
MARINE SCIENCE DRIVE
Phone (503) 867-3011 NEWPORT, OREGON 97365

September 7, 1972

Mr. Ted Cornett
Port of Tillamook Bay
Tillamook, Oregon 97141

SUBJECT: Reasons for and benefits that might be derived
from renovation of the Tillamook Bay ecosystem.

Dear Ted:

As we discussed in May, I am concerned that certain Oregon estuaries may
require extensive renovation in an attempt to reestablish the ecosystem. A
prime example of this need is found in Tillamook Bay. We all recognize that
estuaries are filling in in a gradual, perhaps dignified manner. Man's activ-
ities tend to accelerate this process to the point of possible destruction of
the system. The watershed of Tillamook Bay has been subjected to catastrophic
fire damage during the last 50 years. This, combined with salvage logging and
other uses of the watershed, has resulted in a tremendous silt and sediment
load deposit in'the Bay.

The Tillamook Bay of today does not resemble the Tillamook Bay of 1900.
Is there a way to reestablish the estuarine system? It would seem to me that
if a positive cost-benefit relation could be shown, a multi-step program could
be activated.

Stage 1 would involve some of the work going on now in reestablishing the
river channels on the Wilson, Trask, Tillamook and perhaps Kilchis.

Stage 2 would involve reestablishing the flow channels through the Bay,
including making the appropriate gradients and curves necessary to stimulate
the original system. This would contrast with the straight-line, sharp-angle
approaches which are not natural and which tend to speed runoff without the
additional value of trapping nutrients, etc.

Stage 3 could accompany the second and would involve shaving the Bay down
to former tidal levels. An example of this would be on the west side, where
the 1952 Bay Ocean breakthrough occurred. I haven't measured the gradient,
but my eye tells me that 4 to 6 feet of sand blew in during the break. If
this were removed to the outer beaches, we should be able to establish produc-
tive intertidal lands as they were before. It is my understanding that this
0SU

was some of the prime oyster growing ground and clam production ground in the
Bay.
@A NE OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY, U. S. DE PT. OF AGRICULTURE, EXTENSION MARINE ADVISORY
@04 PROGRAM, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, AND OREGON COUNTIES
A COOPERATING.

Mr. Ted Cornett
September 7, 1972
Page 2

An approach as described here would be very expensive, and to some might
seem to be disruption of the environment. The environment, however, has been
artificially disrupted already. We would be attempting to reestablish the
former productive Tillamook Bay system. Let's talk more specifically about
this plan at your convenience.

Very truly yours,
qa, 0
William Q. Wick, Head
Marine Advisory Program,
Sea Grant
(Professor)

WQW:mal

3 7

Photo credits

Page 2, Eugene Register-Guard
Page 5, top, OSU Sea Grant; bottom, Salmon River
entrance, State Highway Division
Page 7, top, Siuslaw River entrance, Eugene Register-
Guard; bottom, Salmon River, State Highway
Division
Page 10, top, OCC&DC; bottom, OSU Sea Grant
Page 16, Umpqua estuary, State Highway Division
Page 25, top, Bolin Island, Umpqua estuary, OCC&DC;
bottom, Siuslaw River wetlands, OCC&DC
Page 32, top, Siletz estuary and spit, OCC&DC;
bottom, Winchester Bay harbor, OCC&DC

ONNIMMUM
3 6668 00001 0266