Columbia River Estuary regional management plan

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

4L
COLUMBIA" RIVER

'L. Z 1APIT a
ESTUARY

(1 -117, all
Wr
'E
REGIONA A( ENT

PLAN
:t

A fi
e t0l'
Ci

""-Zyn

-14

HD
1695
.C73
C7

COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY REGIONAL
MANAGEMENT PLAN

Revised edition
September 1987

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
CHARLESTON, SC 29405-2413
Columbia river Estuary Study Taskforce
David Fox
Mark barnes
Hiller West
John Marshall

Preparation of this plan was financially aided through a grant from the
National Coastal Resources Research and Develpoment Institute with funds
obtained from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminintration, and
appropriated for Section 309 of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE#
1.INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.1 Background 1-1
1.2 content and Use of this document 1-2
1.3 CREST Organization 1-3
1.4 Issues and Information Addressed in the Plan Revision 1-5
1.5 Oustanding Planning Problems, Issues and Needs 1.8

2.MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 2.1
2.1 Introduction 2.1
2.2 Aquatic and Shoreland Deisgnations 2.2
2.3 Designation/Use lists 2.2

3.DEFINITIONS, POLICIES,AND STANDARDS 3.1
3.1 Introduction 3.1
3.2 Definitions 3.1
3.3 Policies and Standards 3.9
3.3.1 Agriculture 3.10
3.3.2 Deep water Navigation, Port and Industrial
Development 3.11
3.3.3 Diking 3.12
3.3.4 Dredging and Dredged Material Disposal 3.15
3.3.5 Estuarine Construction 3.28
3.3.6 Filling Aquatic Areas and Non-Tidal Wetlands 3.31
3.3.7 Fish and Wildlife Habitat 3.32
3.3.8 Fishieries and Aquaculture 3.34
3.3.9 Land Transportation Systems 3.35
3.3.10 Log Storage 3.37
3.3.11 Mining and Mineral Extraction 3.37
3.3.12 Mitigation and Restoration 3.39
3.3.13 Public Access 3.53
3.3.14 Recreation and Tourism 3.53
3.3.15 Residential, Commerical,Industrial Development 3.54
3.3.16 Shallow Draft ports and Marinas 3.56
3.3.17 Shoreland Hazard Areas 3.57
3.3.18 Significant Area 3.58
3.3.19 Water Quality maintenance 3.59
3.3.20 Water-Dependent Development Area 3.60
3.3.21 Implementation 3.61
3.4 Environmental Assessment 3.61

4.LAND AND WATER USE PLAN 4.1
4.1 Introduction 4.1
4.2 Mouth of the Columbia River 4.5
4.3 Estuary Channels 4.8
4.4 Estuary Sands 4.12
4.5 River Channels 4.15
4.6 Snag Islands 4.18
III

4.7 Cathlamet Bay 4.21
4.8 Upper Marsh Islands 4.24
4.9 Tenasillahe Islands 4.29
4.10 Fort Stevens State Park 4.33
4.11 Hammond 4.38
4.12 Tansy Point 4.43
4.13 North Warrenton 4.50
4.14 Middle Skipanon River 4.53
4.15 Mouth of the Skipanon River 4.58
4.16 Youngs Bay 4.66
4.17 Airport ans Vicinity 4.72
4.18 Lewis and Clarke River 4.75
4.19 Miles Crossing 4.81
4.20 Youngs River 4.85
4.21 South Astoria 4.91
4.22 Port of Astoria 4.95
4.23 Downtown Astoria Waterfront 4.99
4.24 Uppertown/Alderbrook 4.103
4.25 Tounge Point 4.108
4.26 John Day River 4.119
4.27 John Day Point to Eddy Point 4.124
4.28 Big Creek/Little Creek/Fertile Valley 4.128
4.29 Brownsmead/Gnat Creek 4.132
4.30 Clifton Charmel 4.136
4.31 Bradwood 4.139
4.32 Wauna/Westport 4.142
4.33 Puget island 4.147
4.34 Eastern Wahkiakum County 4.154
4.35 Cathlamet/Whitetail deer Refuge 4.158
4.36 Skamokawa to Three Tree Point 4.164
4.37 Three Tree Point to Harrington Point 4.170
4.38 Grays Bay and Tributaries 4.174
4.39 Kanppton/Frankfort 4.183
4.40 McGowan 4.187
4.41 Chinook 4.190
4.42 Chinook River 4.194
4.43 Baker Bay 4.197
4.44 Wallacut River 4.204
4.45 IIwaco 4.207
4.46 Fort Canby North 4.210
4.47 Cape Disappointment 4.213

5.CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 5.1
5.1 Introduction 5.1
5.2 Scope 5.1
5.3 Cumulative Impact Analysis 5.2

6. PLAN IMPLEMENATION 6.1
6.1 Introduction 6.1
6.2 Incorporation by Local Governments 6.1
6.3 Local Plan Implemention 6.1
iv

APPENDIX A CREST CHARTER

APPENDIX B OREGON GOAL EXCEPTIONS

APPENDIX C DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED INTO THE PLAN BY REFERENCE

APPENDIX D BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDIX E PLAN REVISION PARTICIPATION

1. INTRODUCTION.-

1.1. BACKGROUND

The Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan was originally
completed in 1979. The Plan was the culmination of 41 years of planning
2
by the Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce (CREST), local jurisdic-
tions, state and federal agencies, and concerned.citizens. Impetus for
developing the Plan came from growing conflicts between conservation,
use and development of estuarine areas. The Regional Plan was also in
response to state coastal zone management programs and federal funding
under the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. The need for better manage-
ment data, for long term protection of critical natural resource areas,
and for estuary development all contributed to the,planning program*.

The 1979 Regional Plan was adopted into local shoreline master
programs and comprehensive plans and was implemented through the local@
zoning and permit process. The plans have been fine-tuned through local
plan amendments to meet changing development and conservation needs.

Changes in development needs as well as state and federal regula-
tions and programs became significant enough that in 1987 a revision to
the Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan was necessary. In
addition, the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development .
required that the Plan be updated through their Periodic Review process.

This 1987 revision of the Regional,Plan reflects:

Changes in development trends;

Changes in local planning needs;

New or updated state and federal programs and regulations;

New information; and

Language changes to improve and streamline the Plan.

The revision was guided by an agency and citizen advisory committee.

This revised Plan' expresses decisions of the CREST Council on.
estuarine management issues. The Plan has no legal authority except as,
implemented by local governments in revised Local Comprehensive Plans
(Oregon) and amended local Shoreline Management Master Programs (Wash-...
ington). Also, the decisions in the Plan do not supersede or negate
other management and regulatory authorities.

1.2. CONTENT AND USE OF THE DOCUMENT

This Plan is intended,fQr,use by local jurisdictions in updating
th6i"r 'do. mp;rehen-;sive plan s-and shoreline master programs. The Plan also
provides citizens and 'regulatory agencies with regional planning infor-
mation about the estuary. This Plan should not be used in making local
permit decisions or citing local regulations. The local comprehensive
plans and shoreline master programs provide this function.

This plan is divided into six sections. Each section's contents
Are described below.

Section 1: INTRODUCTION

The introduction provides background on Plan development, explains
the use and contents of the Plan, describes the CREST organization,
itemizes issues and material addressed in the revision and outlines
outstanding planning issues.

Section 2: --MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

This section defines the different land and water use designations
used.in the Land and Water Use-.Plan. Designations range from Natural to
.Development .and can be converted into "shoreline environments" for
Washington shoreline management programs and "zones" for Oregon local
ordinances. The section also lists the development uses and activities
allowed in each designation.

Section 3: DEFINITIONS, POLICIES AND STANDARDS

Section 3.provides the rek@ilatory criteria against which develop-
me.fits,are,reviewed.' It@ includds.definitions that set regulatory limits
n uses and activities, develo@ment policies and standards, and informa-
tion on the application of Oregon Impact Assessment/Resource Capability
Determinations and the_Washingt@qn Environmental Checklist.

Section 4: LAND AND WATER USE PLAN

This section provides land and water use plans for 46 geographic
regions of the Columbia River estuary. These regions are called sub-
areas. The plans provide background material on aquatic and shoreland
physical and biological characteristics, human use and planning issues
in each subarea. Each plan es@ blishes and maps water use designations
for the subarea. Area-specific'policies about resources that need
.speci al protection or how development should proceed are also included
here.

1-2

Section 5: CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

Section 5 describes cumulative ddyelopment impacts that are -expect-
ed and that have occurred since major;a.evelopment began on.the estuary.

Section 6: PLAN IMPLF14ENTATION

The implementation section describ ds how local, state, and federal
agencies can use the Plan. The section,details local jurisdictional
adoption of the Plan, the local permit process, and Plan amendment
process. Federal consistency issues are also described.

The six Plan sections are followed by appendices, including:

Appendix A: CREST Charter

Appendix B: Goal Exceptions

Appendix B summarizes exceptions to Oregon Statewide Planning Goals
that affect the estuary area.

Appendix C: Documents Incorporated into the Plan by Reference.

Appendix C lists the documents incorporated into the Plan by
reference. These documents contain planning and regulatory information
that is considered part of this Plan.

Appendix D: Bibliography

The Bibliography cites all of the documents used in the revision of
this Plan.

Appendix E: Meeting Attendants and Plan Commentors

Appendix E lists the citizens and agency personnel that attende 'd
the CREST Plan Revision Advisory Committee meetings or provided comments
on the revised Plan.

Two elements of the Regional Management Plan are published under
separate covers. These are the Columbia River Estuary Dredged Material
Management Plan and the Mitigation and Restoration Plan for the Columbia
River Estuary.

1.3. CREST ORGANIZATION

The Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce was established in 1975
under the authority of ORS 190 (Oregon Intergovernmental Coordination
Act) and RCW 34.39 (Washington Interlocal Cooperation Act). A Charter
and Agreement was developed (Appendix A)'and local governments joined in
the effort. CREST members now include:

1-3

Washington:

Port of Ilwaco
Town of Ilwaco
Pacific County
Wahkiakum Port District #2

Oregon:

City of Astoria
Port of Astoria
Clatsop County
Town of Hammond
City of Warrenton

The CREST Council, made up of representatives from each local
government, is the policy and decision-making body for the organization.
The CREST staff is responsible to the Council for all CREST planning and
implementation functions. The staff consists of personnel with exper-
ience in land-use planning, estuarine and wetland ecology, oceanography,
estuarine development, and economics.

CREST's funding is derived primarily from federal monies provided
under Sections 306 and 309 of the Coastal Zone Management Act, and dues
from local member jurisdictions. Other federal, state, local, or
private organizations occasionally provide funding for special planning
or implementation projects.

CREST's primary role is to provide land and water use planning
assistance to local jurisdictions. This' planning work includes:

- Reviewing and providing recommendations for development permits;

- Drafting Plan amendments;

- Assisting developers in fulfilling permit requirements;

- Drafting plans to address specific local planning needs;

- Updating local planning documents to meet changing local needs and
state and federal requirements.

In addition to the central planning role, CREST also provides the
following services to member jurisdictions:

- Developing grant applications for port or community projects;

- Assisting members in applying for and obtaining local, state,and
federal permits for development projects.

- Maintaining a library with materials on land use, regulations, and
resources in the lower Columbia River.

- Providing a forum for discussion and resolution of regional issues

1-4

on the Columbia River Estuary.

CREST helps to facilitate orderly development in the Columbia River
Estuary while ensuring the protection and conservation of the estuary's
natural resources. CREST's goals are:

- To improve and diversify the economy of the area;

- To reconcile conflicting uses of estuarine resources;

- To protect and enhance natural resource values of the estuary;

- To improve estuarine resource management through intergovernmental
communication and coordination at local, state, and federal levels;

- To.increase public understanding of the natural value of the
estuary and its usefulness to people; and

- To increase knowledge of the biological, physical, and socio-
economic characteristics of the estuary.

1.4. ISSUES AND INFORMATION ADDRESSED IN THE PLAN REVISION

This revision to the Regional Management Plan focuses on needs a ,nd
information which have changed or arisen since the completion of the
original Plan in 1979. Items addressed in the revision include-changes
in development and planning trends and needs, new programs, regulations,
and information, and Plan streamlining 'and language improvements.
Issues and information addressed in the revision are listed below.

1.4.1. Changes in Development'Trends

Estuary development trends have changed since the original Plan was
completed in 1979. The following changes are addressed in the revised
Plan:

- Loss of rail service: The rail line west of Astoria was abandoned
in 1985. The revised Plan examined the affects of railroad aban-
donment on industrial sites.

- Youngs Bay gillnet fishery: Since 1979 a gillnet fishery has
developed in Youngs Bay.

- Mitigation bankt A mitigation bank was created near the airport in
1986.

- Toxic waste site: Toxic wastes were discovered at a site on the
south Astoria waterfront in 1984.

- Ownership changes and development at Tansy Point: Since the

1-5

completion of the Plan in 1979, ownership of the Tansy Point
industrial site has been consolidated under the City of Warrenton.
A wood products facility occupies much of the site.

Port development trends: Since 1979, the Port of Astoria has
experienced a shift from wet-log to dry-log loading, has torn down
their grain elevator, has undertaken other developments, and has
developed a new long range plan. The revised Plan reflects these
changes.

Tourism: There has been an increase in planning for and marketing
the area for tourism. The revised Plan incorporates tourist-
related plans that have been developed since 1979.

1.4.2. Changes in Local Planning Needs

Since the completion of the Plan in 1979, several planning issues
have arisen that required additions or changes to the Plan. These
issues, along with some items that were not addressed in the original
Plan, include:

- 1981 CREST Mediation Panel Agreement: The revised Plan incorpor-
ates the results of this Agreement.

- Water quality: The revised Plan provides updated water quality
policies.

- Aquaculture: Aquaculture policies have been updated to reflect new
state regulations.

- Gillnet drift protection: The updated Plan provides more complete
gillnet drift protection policies.

- Federal consistency: The Plan implementation section explains
federal consistency procedures based on refinement of state proce-
dures for reviewing consistency.

- Dredged Material Management Plan update: The 1986 update of the
Dredged Material Management Plan is incorporated into this Plan.

- Mitigation Plan update: The .1987 update of the Mitigation Plan is
incorporated into this Plan.

- Public Access: The revised Plan includes more information on
public access and f-levises public access policies based on Oregon
statutory changes.

- State Environmental Policy Act: The revised Plan presents environ-
mental checklist procedures in the Plan implementation section.

1-6

1.4.3. New or Updated State and Federal Programs and Regulations

The revised Plan addresses the following statutes, regulations and
programs that have been developed or updated since 1979.

- Oregon Periodic Review Requirements.

- Revisions to Oregon Statewide Planning Goals 16 and 17.

- Revisions to Washington Shoreline Management Act.

- Oregon Division of State Lands Mitigation Administrative Rule.

- U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Mitigation Rules.

- New Corps of Engineers Rules for regulating and identifying wet-
lands.

- New sediment testing requirements based on the Puget Sound Dredge
Disposal Analysis Program and Environmental Protection Agency
regulations.

- Changes in energy facility siting review.

1.4.4. New Information

The revised Plan addresses planning, socio-economic, and natural
resource information that has been developed since 1979. These are
listed below. Appendix D, Bibliography, contains complete citations.

- CREST Mediation Panel Agreement.

- Port of Astoria Marine Terminals Development Plan.

- Port of Ilwaco Comprehensive Marine Plan.

- Astoria Waterfront Revitalization Plan.

- Skamokawa Waterfront Plan.

- Lower Columbia River Assessment of Oregon Deep Draft Sites

- Oregon Port Assessment.

- Ports and Transportation Systems Study (Washington).

- Area D Disposal Studies.

- Aquaculture Siting Study.

Columbia River Estuary Data Development Program Reports (20 reports
and 2 atlases).

1-7

Bald Eagle Study.

Crab Environment Studies.

Significant shoreland and wetland habitats in the Clatsop Plains
and the Columbia Floodplain of Clatsop County.

1.4.5. Plan Language Improvement and Streamlining

Several additional improvements were made to the Plan during the
revision process. These include the following:

- The Plan is shorter.

- Repetition among Plan policies has been reduced.

- Ambiguous policy language has been clarified.

- Plan language and subsection format is more internally consistent.

- The Plan now specifies policy differences between Oregon and
Washington.

The subarea maps have been redrafted on a new, more accurate base
map.. The maps are presented in a more readable format than the
original plan.

1.5. OUTSTANDING PLANNING PROBLEMS, ISSUES AND NEEDS

Several planning problems, issues, and needs were not addressed by
this revision of the Regional Management Plan because they were beyond
the scope of the Plan revision. CREST will endeavor to address these
issues and needs. Important outstanding issues recognized during the
Plan revision process that could not be addressed fully by the Plan are
summarized below.

1.5.1. Wetland Regulation

State and federal wetland regulation has become increasingly
vigorous in the past five years. Although CREST and local wetland
policy is consistent with these regulations for estuarine wetlands,
inconsistencies for the regulation of nontidal wetlands remain. These
nontidal wetlands cover large portions of the estuary and tributary
river floodplains.

Regulatory inconsistencies in nontidal wetland areas make long-
range planning difficult and significantly reduce regulatory predict-
ability. Wetland developments can now receive local permit approval but

1-8

permit denial or violation allegations at the state and federal level.
Because existing long-range plans do not address these wetland areas, it
is difficult to implement local development regulations and to plan
developments.

A long-range management plan for the nontidal wetland areas is
needed. The plan would need to accurately inventory nontidal wetlands
and establish development and conservation policy consistent with
current state and federal regulations. The plan could be implemented
through the Corps of Engineers general permit program.

1.5.2. Mediation Panel Agreement

In 1981 CREST sponsored a series of mediated negotiation sessions
among local governments, developers, and resource agencies to establish
development limits at five water-dependent development sites. The
interagency agreement that resulted from the sessions is referred to as
the Mediation Panel Agreement.

Since 1981, there has been some disagreement on the application of
the Mediation Panel Agreement regulations. Some parties to the Agree-
ment contend that developments are limited only to those specifically
mentioned in the Agreement while other contend that the,Agreement sets
general outer bounds for development but does not restrict type of
water-dependent development. Some agencies have unofficially requested
renegotiation of the Agreement. This Plan revision uses the designa-
tions and at policies established in the Mediation Panel Agreement.

A set of rules for interpreting and applying the Mediation Agree-
ment needs to be established and agreed to by all parties of the Agree-
ment. Renegotiation will be pursued only if desired by all parties to
the Agreement.

1.5.3. East Astoria Port Development Site

The 1986 Lower Columbia River Assessment of Oregon Deep Dr'@ft Sites
identified a potential port development site in east Astoria adjacent to
the Alderbrook area. This site has not been considered in the past.

Development of the site would require about 170 acres of fill in a
Conservation Aquatic designated area. The development would be adjacent
to a quiet residential neighborhood. Local residents and the City of
Astoria have objected to designating the site. The Oregon Department of
Economic Development and Division of State Lands state that the site is
needed for the States overall port development strategy and want it
designated so in the Plan.

This revised Plan does not designate the port site and retains the
Conservation Aquatic designation in the area. This decision is based on
local objections to the designation, the need for an exception to

1-9

Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 16 to designate the site, natural values
in the aquatic area, the lack of citizen and agency participation i the
selection of the site and the lack of adequate.compensatory mitigation
sites for a fill of this magnitude. Redesignation of the area as a port
site will only be considered after full agency and citizen participation
and the redesignation has been justified through the goal exception
process.

1.5.4. Oil and Hazardous Waste Spill Planning

The Plan revision does not contain adequate policies or fully
address contingencies for oil and hazardous waste spills in the estuary.
The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality and Washington Department
of Ecology are the primary planning agencies for spills. An up-to-
date oil and hazardous waste plan needs to be developed and reflected in
the local comprehensive plans and shoreline master programs.

1.5.5. Outer Continental Shelf Development

Areas off the Oregon and Washington coasts are scheduled for oil
and mineral exploration and development leasing in the early 1990's.
Although the Regional Management Plan does not regulate offshore devel-
opment, it should address impacts to the estuary region resulting from
the impacts. The plan needs to provide for support facilities, con-
struction sites, and staging areas for offshore exploration and develop-
ment. In addition, socio-economic affects of the development need to be
addressed.

1.5.6. Dike Maintenance

Regulation of dike maintenance activities is a major issue in the
estuary. The Regional Management Plan allows for maintaining dikes with
trucked-in material and with material dredged from subtidal aquatic
areas. This is consistent with state and federal policy. About
one-third of the dikes in the estuary cannot be accessed by trucks or
barge-mounted dredging equipment. Unless some other alternative is
found, these dikes can only be maintained with material removed from
intertidal marshes and flats fronting the dikes.

Resolution of this issue requires a thorough alternatives analysis
for dike maintenance and, in Oregon jurisdictions,an exception to
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 16.

1.5.7. Marina Planning

The revised Regional Management Plan does not thoroughly address

1-10

marina expansion and development needs. Planning for these needs must
be based on a marina demand analysis. A marina analysis was completed
in 1978 when the estuary's marinas were filled to capacity. Demand
subsequently declined in the early 1980's but is now increasing. The
1978 study is too outdated to be of use for planning purposes. A new
analysis of marina demand is needed before the plan can fully address
current needs of the estuary's marinas.

1.5.8. Aquaculture

Aquaculture activities are increasing in the estuary and throughout
the Northwest. The revised Plan contains updated aquaculture policies.
However, because the aquaculture potential of the estuary has not been
studied, the Plan could not make provisions for aquaculture sites and
special needs.

5. 124@00' 55, 5V 45'
01-
20' + + + + +
0
N5

aco
Cbi"
k

J BAKER K.

Rocky I
JBAY
`9
F- JCRAYSBA
IV. Sa
sl I Bl.ff'
Pe,cock Sp" C'@Y' N "Voi,
Chinook
All-
H@
"i'go' f.
X.
Cliff P1.
0.- Hill

M.gw
+ hi,,nk N M....
15- lim C
M'G....
/<C
P1. Ell@c@ Taylor Sands
SO-

-7
-2
k-@_TRESTLL COLUMBIA RIVER
BAY
T-,- Pl.
4@ f4
Add-

Desclem J_tancls C
..THLAMET ;uflwn

BAY
T,n,y Pt I
ASTORIA _11P
S-1, Pt.'

YOUNGS

bogiv
+ +
-A . .... .

PACIFIC OCEAN
@p
p

%
At,

n. @.f,
_K_
46-05' + +
124-00' 5w 45, W

Columbia River Estuary Shoreline (limit o

Scale 1:160,000 Intertidal vegetat

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Kilometers

i-------- T_
o 1 2 3 4 5 6 Miles Shoals and flats

Map produced in 1983 by North.est Cartography, Inc.
for the Columbia River Estuary Data Development Program Lakes, rivers, ott

2. MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

2.1. INTRODUCTION

The Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan's Management
System consists of nine aquatic and shoreland designations, and a
corresponding list of permitted uses and activities for each designa-
tion. The nine designations are:

Natural Aquatic;
Conservation Aquatic;
Development Aquatic;
Rural Aquatic;
Development Shoreland;
Conservation Shoreland;
Natural Shoreland;
Rural Shorelands; and
Water-Dependent Development Shorelands.

These designations are analogous to the shoreline environments designa-
tions established under the Washington Shoreline Management Act, and
used by CREST's Washington members in their Shoreline Management Master
programs. They are also analogous to the Oregon estuary and shoreland
management units established under Statewide Planning Goals 16 and 17,
and used by CREST's Oregon jurisdictions in their comprehensive plans
and zoning ordinances.

The Conservation designation is also referred to as a Conservancy
Environment in Washington. The Development designation is known as
Urban in Wahkiakum County. None of the jurisdictions use All of these
designations. Table 2-1 describes the designations that are applicable
in each jurisdiction.

i TABLE 2-1

AQUATIC AND SHORELAND DESIGNATIONS

Aquatic Designations Shoreland Designations
Jurisdiction NA CA RA DA NS CS RS DS WDDS

Astoria x x x x x x x

Cathlamet x x

Hammond x x x x x

Ilwaco x x x x

Warrenton x x x x x x x

Clatsop County x x x x x x x

2-1

TABLE 2-1 cont.

AQUATIC AND SHORELAND DESIGNATIONS

Aquatic Designations Shoreland Designations
Jurisdiction NA CA RA DA NS CS RS DS WDDS

Pacific County X X X X X X X X

Wahkiakum County X X X X X X X X

The use and activity lists associated with each designation, and
the designation's purpose statement, are derived from Washington Shore-
line Management Act Rules (WAC 173-14 to 173-22) and from Oregon State-
wide Planning Goals 16 and 17.

Aquatic designations cover the entire estuary below the landward
limit of aquatic vegetation or, where aquatic vegetation is not present,
Mean Higher High Water. Shoreland designations cover land areas and
nontidal wetlands along the estuary shoreline. The landward extent of
shoreland designations is described in subarea plans in Section 4.

2.2. AQUATIC AND SHORELAND DESIGNATIONS

This section summarizes information on the types of uses and
activities that may be permitted in the different aquatic and shoreland
designations. This information is presented in the form of nine lists,
each corresponding to a different designation. The lists areexclusive:
uses and activities omitted from a list are not permitted -in that
designation. Notations on the lists indicate additional substantive and
procedural requirements associated with particular uses. These addi-
tional requirements are described in Subsection 3.4. Many of the terms
appearing on the use lists ha,@e specific regulatory definitions. These
terms are defined in Subsection 3.2. Uses and activities on the list
may only be approved if they comply with applicable Regional Policies
and Standards (subsection 3.3.) and applicable Subarea Policies (section
4.).

2.3. DES1GNATION/USE LISTS

2.3.1. Natural Aquatic

Natural Aquatic areas are designated to assure the protection of
significant fish and wildlife habitats; of continued biological produc-
tivity within the estuary; and of scientific, research, and educational
needs. These areas are managed to preserve natural resources in recog-
nition of dynamic, natural, geological, and evolutionary processes.

2-2

Natural Aquatic areas include all major tidal marshes, tideflats, and
seagrass and algae beds. The designation is intended to preserve those
aquatic natural resource systems existing relatively free of human
influence.

Resource Capability Determination and Impact Assessment Required.

1. Undeveloped low-intensity, water-dependent recreation.

2. Research and educational observation.

3. Navigation aids, such as beacons and buoys.

4. Protection of habitat, nutrient, fish, wildlife and aesthetic
resources.

5. Passive restoration measures.

6. Estuarine enhancement.

7. Maintenance and repair of structures existing as of 10/7/77 or
structures that are allowed in the Natural Aquatic desig-
nation.

8. Bridge crossings.

9. Vegetative shoreline stabilization.

10. Riprap for protection of: uses existing as of October 7, 1977;
unique natural resources; historical and archeological values;
public facilities;

11. Bridge crossing support structures and dredging necessary for
their installation or maintenance.

12. Tidegate installatio'n and maintenance in functional dikes,
including necessary dredging. *

13. Active restoration of fish habitat, wildlife habitat, or water
quality.

14. Aquaculture which does not involve dredge or fill or other
estuarine alteration other than incidental dredging for
harvest of benthic species or removable in-water structures
such as stakes or racks.

15. Communication facilities.

16. Pipelines, cables and utility crossings, including incidental
dredging necessary for their installation. *

17. Boat ramps for public use where no dredging or fill is needed.

2-3

18. Temporary alterations.

A use which requires dredging, fill, in-water structures, riprap,
log storage, water intake, flowlane disposal of dredged material, or
other activities which could affect the estuary's physical processes or
biological resources are subject to an Impact Assessment, pursuant to
Subsection 3.4.1.

2.3.2. Conservation Aquatic

Conservation Aquatic areas are designated for long-term uses of
renewable resources that do not require major alterations of the estu-
ary, except for the purpose of restoration. They are managed for the
protection and conservation of the resources found in these areas. The
Conservation Aquatic designation includes areas needed for the mainten-
ance and enhancement of biological productivity, recreational resources,
aesthetic features and aquaculture. The Conservation Aquatic designa-
tion includes areas that are smaller or of less biological importance
than Natural Aquatic areas. Areas that are partially altered and
adjacent to existing moderate intensity development which do not possess
the resource characteristics of other aquatic areas are also included in
this designation.

Resource Capability Determination and Impact Assessment Required.

1. Undeveloped low-intensity, water-dependent recreation.

2. Research and educational observation.

3. Navigation aids, such as beacons and buoys.

4. Estuarine enhancemept.

5. Protection of habitat, nutrient, fish, wildlife and aesthetic
resources.

6- Passive restoration measures.

7. Active restoration of fish habitat, wildlife habitat, or water
quality.

8. Communication Facilities.

9. Pipelines, cables and utility crossings, including incidental
dredging necessary for their installation.

10. Vegetative shoreline stabilization.

11. Bridge Crossings.

12. Aquaculture which does not involve dredge or fill or other
estuarine alternation other than incidental dredging for

2-4

harvest of benthic species or removable in-water structures
such as stakes or racks.

13. Boat ramps for public use where no dredging or fill is needed.

14. Beach nourishment at a designated site.

15. Maintenance and repair of structures existing as of 10/7/77 or
structures that are allowed in the Conservation Aquatic
designation.

16. Bridge crossing support structures and dredging necessary for
their installation or maintenance.

17. Structural shoreline stabilization for protection of uses
existing as October 7, 1977; unique natural resources; histor-
ical and archeological values; public facilities; uses allowed
in this designation; or uses allowed on adjacent shorelands.

18. Tidegate installation and maintenance in existing functional
dikes, including necessary dredging.

19. Active restoration for purposes other than protection of
habitat, nutrient, fish, wildlife and aesthetic resources.

20. Aquaculture requiring dredge or fill or other alteration of
the estuary.

21. High-intensity water-dependent recreation, including boat
ramps, marinas and individual docks, and new dredging for
these uses.

22. Minor navigational improvements.

23. Mining and mineral extraction.

24. Other water-dependent uses requiring occupation of water
surface area by means other than dredge or fill.

25. Temporary alterations.

26. Dredging to obtain material for dike maintenance pursuant to
the dike maintenance dredging standards in Subsection 3.3.4.

A use which requires dredging, fill, in-water structures, riprap,
log storage, water intake, flowlane disposal of dredged material, or
other activities which could affect the estuary's physical processes or
biological resources must be sub-Ject to an Impact Assessment, pursuant
to Subsection 3.4.1.

2.3.3 Rural Aquatic

2-5

Rural Aquatic areas are designated to protect areas of the estuary
for recreational and open-space uses. These areas serve as a buffer
between aquatit areas.in a Development designation, and aquatic areas in
Conservation of Natural designations.

1. Recreation

2. Navigation Aids

3. Docks and Moorages

4. Signs

5. Log Storage

6. Aquaculture

7. Scientific Research and Education

8. Vegetative Shoreline Stabilization

9. Structural Shoreline Stabilization (Riprap)

10. Repair And Maintenance of Existing Dikes

11. Dredging

12. Residential Use*

13. Commercial Use*

14. Industrial and Port Facilities*

15. Utilities*

16. Marinas*

17. Navigation Structures*

18. Forest Practices*

19. Log Dump/Log Sort Area*

20. Mining/Mineral Extraction*

21. Bulkheads*

22. New Dikes*

23. Fill*

24. Dredged Material Disposal*

25. Bankline or Stream Alteration*

2-6

*These uses may only be approve as a Conditional Use.

2.3.4 Development Aquatic

Development Aquatic areas are designated to provide for navigation
and other identified needs for public, commercial, and industrial
water-dependent uses. The objective of the Development Aquatic designa-
tion is to ensure optimum utilization of appropriate aquatic areas by
providing for intensive development. Such areas include deep-water
adjacent to or near the shoreline, navigation channels, subtidal areas
for in-water disposal of dredged material, areas of minimal biological
significance needed for uses requiring alteration of the estuary, and
areas that are not in Conservation or Natural designations.

Must be consistent with Development Aquatic purpose, and consistent
with adjacent Shorelands Designation purpose.

1. Navigation.

2. Water-dependent commercial, industrial and port uses, includ-
ing but not limited to the water-dependent portions of the
following uses:

a. Docks, moorages, piers or wharves;

b. Fuel storage or dispensing facilities;

C. Cargo loading or unloading facilities;

d. Vessel maintenance or repair facilities;

e. Seafood receiving, processing or storage;

f. Cargo marshalling, assembly and storage facilities;

9. Ice making and sales establishments;

h. Integrated manufacturing and shipping facility where a
significant portion of the operation is water-dependent;

i. Commercial aquaculture production facilities.

3. High intensity water-dependent recreation.

4. Maintenance and repair of existing structures.

5. Water transport channels where dredging may be necessary.

6. Flowlane disposal of dredged material.

7. Water storage areas where needed for products used in or
resulting from industry, commerce, and recreation.

2-7

8. Navigational structures.

9. Boat.ramps. *

10. Undeveloped low-intensity, water-dependent recreation.

11. Water-related uses, including but not limited to:

a. Administrative offices of water-dependent business or
agencies;

b. Marine hardware sales and repair;

C. Charter fishing offices;

d. Net storage.

12. Non-dependent, non-related uses not requiring dredge or fill.*

13. Research and educational observations.

14. Navigation aids, such as beacons and buoys.

15. Minor navigational improvements.

16. Protection of habitat, nutrient, fish, wildlife and aesthetic
resources.

17. Passive restoration.

18. Active restoration.

19. Bridge crossings.

20. Aquaculture.

21. Communication facilities.

22. Pipelines, cables and utility crossings, including incidental
dredging necessary for their installation. *

23. Installation of new tidegates inlexisting functional dikes.

24. Temporary alterations. *

25. Mining and mineral extraction.

26. Structural shoreline stabilization.

27. Bridge crossing support structures and dredging necessary for
their installation. *

A use which requires dredging, fill, in-water structures, riprap,
log storage, water intake, flowlane disposal of dredged material, or

2-8

other activities which could affect the estuary's physical processes.or
biological resources must be subject to an Impact Assessment, pursuant
to Subsec@ion 3.4.1.

2.3.5. Natural Shoreland

Natural Shoreland areas are designated to assure protection of
significant nontidal marshes, significant shoreland wildlife habitat,
and exceptional aesthetic resources. Natural Shorelands are managed for
low-intensity recreation, wildlife habitat management and other non-
consumptive uses.

1. Timber harvesting and propagation.

2. Grazing of livestock.

3. Low-intensity recreation.

4. Navigation aides, such as range markers.

5. Research and educational observation.

6. Vegetative shoreline stabilization.

7. Pipelines, cables, and utility crossings.

8. Mitigation and restoration, where consistent with the mainte-
nance of natural values.

9. Public access improvement projects as specified in public
access plans, where consistent with the maintenance of natural
values.

10. ReDair and maintenance of existing structures.

11. Structural shoreline stabilization for protection of: uses
existing as of 10/7/77; unique natural resources; historical
and archeological values, and public facilities; or uses
allowed in this designation.

2.3.6. Conservation Shoreland

Conservation Shoreland areas are designated for long-term uses of
renewable resources where shoreland resources lack the significance of
those included in the Natural Shorelands designation. Aquaculture,
agriculture, forestry, and recreation are the primary uses.

Must be consistent with the purpose of the Conservation Shorelands
designation.

1. Low-intensity recreation.

2-9

2. Navigation aides, such as range markers.

3. Utilities.

4. Agriculture.

5. Timber propagation and harvest.

6. Public access improvement projects as specified in public
access plans.

7. Communication facilities.

8. Repair and maintenance of existing structures.

9. Temporary alterations.

10. Structural shoreline stabilization for protection of: uses
existing as of 10/7/77; unique natural resources; historical
and archeological values; public facilities; uses allowed in
this designation; or uses allowed in adjacent shoreland
designations.

11. Dredged material disposal.

12. Aquaculture facilities. *

13. Beach nourishment at a designated site.

14. Mitigation and restoration.

15. Log storage and sorting yard.

16. Single-family dwelling.

17. Land transportation facilities.

18. Dikes and tidegates.

19. Excavation to create new water surface area, for purposes
other than mitigation.

20. Water-dependent recreation.

21. Marine research and education facilities.

22. Dock or moorage facilities.

2.3.7. Rural Shoreland

Rural Shoreland areas are designated to protect agricultural land
from urban expansion; to restrict development along undeveloped

2-1'0

shorelines; to function as a buffer between urban areas; and to maintain
open spaces and opportunities for recreational uses. Shorelands in the
Rural Shoreland designat'ion include agricultural and recreational areas,
low density residential areas and areas where public facilities are
generally not fully available.

J.
Unless proposed for areas built upon or committed to non-resource
uses, there uses may be approved only upon a finding that the use
satisfies a need which cannot be accommodated on uplands or in
urban and urbanizable areas or in rural residential areas (Clatsop
County only).

1. Farm uses.

2. Timber propagation and harvesting.

3. Water-dependent recreation.

4. Aquaculture.

5. Dredged material disposal.

6. Public access improvement projects, as specified in public
access plans.

7. Navigation aides, such as range markers.

8. Beach nourishment at a designated site.

9. Maintenance and repair of existing structures.

11. Vegetative shoreline stabilization.

12. Dikes and tidegates.

13. Land transportation facilities.

14. Low-intensity recreation.

15. Single-family residences, including mobile homes.

16. Water-dependent commercial uses.

17. Water-dependent industrial uses.

18. Other water-related uses. *

19. Non-dependent, non-related uses.

2-11

2.3.8. Development Shoreland

Development Shoreland areas are designated to provide for water-
related and water-dependent development along the estuary's shoreline.
Development Shoreland areas include urban or developed shorelands with
little or no natural resource value, and shorelands with existing
water-dependent or water-related uses.

1. Water-dependent recreation.

2. Water-dependent commercial uses.

3. Water-dependent industrial uses.

4. Shoreland aquaculture support facilities.

5. Navigation aides, such as range markers.

6. Port facilities.

7. Structural shoreline stabilization.

8. Repair and maintenance of existing structures.

9. Utilities.

10. Dikes and tidegates.

11. Marine research and education facility.

12. Excavation to create new water surface area, other than for
mitigation.

13. Mitigation and restgration.

14. Temporary uses.

15. Dredged material disposal.

16. Public access improvement projects, as specified in public
access plans.

17. Water-related uses.

18. Non-dependent, non-related uses.

19. Single and multi-family residences, including mobile homes.

20 Vegetative shoreline stabilization.

21. Storm water and treated wastewater outfall.

22. Communication facilities.

2-12

23. Off-street parking.

24. Land transportation facilities.

2.3.9. Wao-ar-Dependent Development Shoreland

Water-Dependent Development Shoreland areas have unique character-
istics that make them especially suited for water-dependent development.
These areas are managed for water-dependent recreational, commercial and
industrial uses.

May be approved only upon a demonstration that it will not preempt
water-dependent uses.

1. Water-dependent recreation.

2. Water-dependent commercial uses.

3. Water-dependent industrial and port uses.

4. Temporary uses involving an existing structure.

5. Shoreland aquaculture support facilities.

6. Navigation aides, such as range markers.

7. Port facilities.

8. Structural shoreline stabilization.

9. Repair and maintenance of existing structures.

10. Utilities. 4

11. Dikes and tidegates.

12. Marine research and education facility.

13. Excavation to create new water surface area, other than for
mitigation.

14. Mitigation and restoration.

15. Dredged material disposal.

16. Public access improvement projects, as specified in public
access plans.

17. Water-related uses.

18. Vegetative shoreline stabilization.

2-13

19. Storm water and treated wastewater outfall.

20. Communication facilities. *

21. Off-street parking, limited to on-site need.

22. Land transportation facilities.

2-14

3. DEFINITIONS, POLICIES, AND STANDARDS

3.1. INTRODUCTION

Regional Policies and Standards are included in this section, along
with environmental assessment procedures, and regulatory definitions of
key terms.

The Policies and Standards (subsection 3.3.) are regionally appli-
cable to uses and activities occurring in Columbia River Estuary aquatic
areas and shorelands. They establish both land use and environmental
protection regulations. The Policies establish broad goals and objec-
tives, while the Standards set more specific implementing measures. The
Policies and Standards are divided into twenty-one different subject
areas covering the full range of developments and resources on the
Columbia River Estuary. Additional area-specific policies are found in
the subarea plans, Section 4.

The Definitions (subsection 3.2.) establish specific regulatory
meanings for about 70 different terms and phrases used in this Plan.
Many of the definitions are derived from the Washington Shoreline
Management Act and its administrative rules, and from the Oregon State-
wide Planning Goals.

The Environmental Assessment material (subsection 3.4. ) establishes
separate procedures for evaluating the environmental impacts of projects
in Oregon and Washington jurisdictions. The Oregon jurisdiction 'Impact
Assessment and Resource Capability Determination is derived from State-
wide Tl-anning Goal 16. The Washington jurisdiction Environmental
Checklist is derived from the State Environmental Po ,licy Act (WAC
197-11).

3.2. DEFINITIONS

ABUTMENT: A substructure composed of stone, concrete, brick.or timber
supporting the end of a single span bridge or the ends of a multispan
superstructure and, in general, retaining or supporting the approach
embankment placed in contact therewith.

ACCRETION: The build-up of land along a beach or shore by the deposi-
tion of waterborne or airborne sand, sediment, or other material.

AGITATION DREDGING: Dredging by displacement of sediments out of a
shoaled area using currents generated by a ship's propeller or large
pump. Also referred to as propwash dredging and sandwave skimming,
depending on the gear and techniques used.

AQUACULTURE: The raising, feeding, planting and harvesting of fish,
shellfish, aquatic plants, or other aquatic organisms, including associ-
ated facilities necessary to engage in the use.

3-1

AQUATIC AREA: In the Columbia River Estuary, the tidal waters and
wetlands, and the land underlying these waters. The upper limit of
aquatic areas is the upper limit of aquatic vegetation or, where vegeta-
tion does not e.xist, Mean Higher High Water,

AVULSION: A tearing away or separation by the force of water. Land
which is separated from uplands or adjacent properties by the action of
a stream or river cutting through the land to form a new stream bed.

BANKLINE ALTERATION: Realignment of a stream bank or the entire stream,
either within or outside of its normal high water boundaries.

BEACH: Gently sloping areas of loose material (e.g., sand, gravel, and
cobbles) that extend landward from the low-water line to a point where
there is a definite change in the material type or landform, or to the
line of vegetation.

BEACH NOURISHKENT: Placement of sand material on actively eroding beach
si@es identified in the Dredged Material Management Plan to maintain the
historic beach profile. Beach nourishment does not include creation of
new land area or beaches and Must Drovide for the protection of estuar-
ine resources (including habitat, nutrient-,.fish, wildlife, and aesthet-
3-c,resources). Dredged materia-1 may be used for beach nourishment.

BYSEFICIARY: With respe*,,t to Mitigation, any living organism, including
human, that benefits frcm values and functions of wetlands and aquatic
areas.

BOAT HOUSE: A floating or pile-supported structure used for the protec-
tion and storage of a boat or boats.

BOAT RAMP: An improved sloped surface extending from a shoreland area
into an aquatic area suitable for removing a boat from the water and
launching a boat into the water from a trailer.

BRIDGE CROSSING: The portion of a bridge spanning a waterway not
including supporting structures or fill located in the waterway or
adjacent wetlands.

BRIDGE CROSSING SUPPORT STRUCTURES:. Piers, piling, abutments, and
similar structures necessary to support a bridge span but not including
fill for causeways or approaches.

BULKHEAD: A vertical wall of steel, timber or concrete used for erosion
protection or as a retaining wall.

COASTAL SHORELANDS: Those areas immediately adjacent to the ocean,
estuaries, associated wetlands, and coastal lakes. Coastal Shorelands
are limited in landward extent by the coastal shorelands boundary,
described in Oregon jurisdiction area plans.

DIKE: With regard to flood protection, a structure designed and built
to prevent inundation of a parcel of land by water.

3-2

With regard to dredged material disposal, a structure consisting of
sediments, rock, or other material designed to contain the dredged
material and allow for settling of solids in a specific area while it is
being deposited and after deposition has occurred.

DOCK: A pier or secured float or floats for boat tie-up or other water
use.

DREDGED MATERIAL: Sediments, gravels, and other solids removed from an
aquatic area.

DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL: The deposition of dredged materials in
aquatic or land areas. Methods include land disposal (deposition in
specific land areas or on the tops and landward sides of flood protec-
tion dikes) and in-water disposal (including beach nourishment, flow-
lane disposal, estuarine open water disposal, agitation dredging, and
ocean disposal).

DREDGING: The extraction or displacement of aquatic sediment or other
material for the purpose of deepening an area, obtaining fill material,
or mining and mineraI extraction.

DRIFT RIGHT: A specific area or section of river bottom that has been
cleared of snags and sunken debris and is shared and actively maintained
by a group of fishermen as their fishing grounds.

DUCK SHACK: A structure having no permanent wdte'r or sewage treatment
connection which is used to store recreational.equipment meant for
hunting waterfowl and not exceeding 500 square@feet on a float. or pier
not exceeding 750 square feet. Occupancy by a single individual of a
duck shack shall be strictly limited to 15 days of any consecutive
30-day period.

EFFLUENT: With regard to water quality, treated or untreated liquid
entering the estuary from a point source..

With regard to dredging, water, including dissolved and suspended
materials, which flows from a dredged material disposal site.

EMERGENCY: With respect to the Columbia River estuary, emergency
conditions are limited to: (a) Severe shoreline, bankline or dike
erosion during a storm event or a high tide that threatens property or
public safety; or (b) oil or hazardous waste spills subject to U. S.
Coast Guard Captain of the Port (COTP) authority; or (c) a 100 year (or
less frequent) flood event; or (d) flooding caused by a tsunami;*or
extreme sedimentation, such as that caused by the eruption of Mt. St.
Helens.

ESTUARINE ENRANCE24ENT: An action which results in a long-term improve-
ment of existing estuarine functional characteristics and processes that
is not the result of a creation or restoration action.

ESTUARINE OPEN-WATER DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL: All types of in-water
dredged material disposal within the estuary which do not fall into the

3- 3

classifications of flowlane disposal, beach nourishment, sump disposal,
agitation dredging and disposal to provide fill material for an approved
a!quatic area fill project.

F_SYUARY:- A'bodv of water semi-)ehclosed by land, connected with the open
ocean, and within which salt water is usually diluted by freshwater
derived from the land. The estuary includes: estuarine water; inter-
tidal areas; and submerged lands. For regulatory purposes, the Columbia
River Estuary extends to the western edge of Puget Island on the Oregon
side to the Wahkiakum-Cowlitz County line on the Washington side, and
to the head of tide for all tributaries.

FILL: The placement by man of sand, sediment, or other material, to
create new uplands or raise the elevation of land.

FLOATING RESIDENCE: A dwelling unit which floats on a water body and is
designed such that it does not come into contact with land except by
ramp. Floating residences may also be referred to as floating homes or
houseboats. A floating residence is not equivalent to a duck shack or
ot*her similar recreational structure designed for temporary use. It is
not equivalent to a boat house, designed for storage of boats.

FLOWLANE DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL: Deposition of dredged material in
,or adjacent to a natural or maintain@d navigation channel in an area
where the preVailing sedimene'"ransport will carry the material down-
stream.

INCIDENTAL USE: A uge that is in conjunction with, and smaller than the
main part of the operation.

INAIND: With respect to mitigation, any actions that duplicate the
full array of wetland and aquatic area characteristics that are lost or
impaired by a development action.

INTERTIDAL: tetween extreme low tide and the landward limit of aquatic
vegetation.

IN-WATER DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL: Deposition of dredged materials in
an aquatic area. Methods include beach nourishment, flowlane disposal,
estuarine open-water disposal, in-water sump disposal, agitation dredg-
ing and ocean disposal.

LAND DISPOSAL: Deposition of dredged material on uplands or shorelands,
including on the top and landward sides of flood control dikes.

MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR: Routine upkeep of an existing structure or
remedial restoration of a damages structure. Maintenance and repair may
involve changes in the structure's location, configuration, orientation,
or alignment if these changes are limited to the minimum amount necess-
ary to retain or restore its operation or function or to meet current
building or engineering standards.

MAINTENANCE DREDGING: Dredging of a channel, basin, or other facility
which has been dredged before and is currently in use or operation or

3-4

has been in use or operation sometime during the past five years,
provided that the dredging does not deepen the facility beyond its
previously authorized or approved depth plus customary over-dredging.

MARINA: A facility which provides moorage, launching, storage, supplies
and a variety of services for recreational, commercial, and fishing
vessels. They are differentiated from individual docks and moorages by
their larger scale, the provision of significant landside services or
the use of a solid breakwater (rock, bulkheading, etc.).

MARSHES, BOGS, SWAMPS: Lands transitional between terrestrial and
aquatic systems where saturation with water is the dominant factor
determining plant and animal communities and soil development. For the
purpose of this definition, these areas must have one or more of the
following attributes:

a) At least periodically, the land supports predominantly hydro-
phytes; and/or

b) The substrate is predominantly undrained hydric soil.

MINING AND MINERAL EXTRACTION: The removal for economic use of miner-
als, petroleum resources, sands, gravels or other naturally occurring
materials from shorelands or submerged lands.

MINOR NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENTS: Alterations necessary to provide water
access to existing or permitted uses including dredging for access
channels and for maintaining existing navigationbut excluding fill and
in-water navigational structures other than floating breakwaters or
similar permeable wave barriers.

MITIGATION: Any action that, to some degree,.softens the impact of
development on wetlands and aquatic areas. This may include all or any
one of the following actions: 1. avoiding the impact altogether by not
taking a certain action or parts of an action; 2. minimizing impacts by
limiting the degree or magnitude of an action and its implementation; 3.
rectifying the impact by repairing; rehabilitation; or restoring the
affected environment; 4. reducing or eliminatingIthe impact over time by
preservation and maintenance operations; and 5. compensating for the
impact by creation, restoration, or enhancement of wetlands and aquatic
areas to maintain their functional processes, such as natural biological
productivity, habitat, and species diversity, unique features and water
quality. Any mitigation action or combination of actions involves
monitoring with remedial follow up action if necessary.

MOORAGE: Piling or a dock or both used to secure a boat or barge.

NAVIGATION AIDES: Beacons, buoy8, range markers and other objects
.providing directional assistance.

NAVIGATIONAL STRUCTURES: Jetties, groins, pile dikes, breakwaters and
other in-water structures designed to change or moderate hydraulic
characteristics for the purpose of improving navigation.

3-5

M DREDGING- Dredging a channel, basin, or other facility that has not
been dredged before; deepening an existing dredged channel, basin, or
other facility beyond its previously authorized or approved depth; or
dredging a channel-, basin*, or-other facility that has not been in use or
operation in the past five years.

OCEAN FLOODING: The flooding of lowland areas by salt water owing to
tidal action, storm surge, or tsunamis (seismic sea waves). Land forms
subject to ocean flooding include beaches, marshes, coastal lowlands,
and lowlying interdune areas. Areas of ocean flooding are mapped by the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Ocean flooding includes
areas of velocity flooding and associated shallow marine flooding.

OFF-SITE: An area separated from the impact area by a significant
distance and that offers little or no opportunity for reestablishing
lost values and functions to original beneficiaries.

ON-SITE: An area adjacent to or near the impact area that offers a
reasonable opportunity for reestablishing-lost values and functions to
original beneficiaries.

OUT-OF-KIND: Arty action that replaces wetland or aquatic area charac-
teristics that have bee impaired or lost due to a development action
with a different set of characteristics that are judged to be of equal
or greater resource -value.

RECREAT ION: Any experience voluntarily engaged in largely during
leisure (discretionary time) from which the individual derives satisfac-
tion.

Coastal Recreation occurs in offshore ocean waters, estuaries, and
streams, along beaches and bluffs, and in adjacent'shorelands. It
includes a variety of activities, from swimming, scuba diving, boating,
fishing, hunting, and use of dune buggies,. shell collecting, painting,
wildlife observation, and sightseeing,,to coastal resorts-and water-
oriented restaurants.

Low-Intensity Recreation does not require developed facilities and
can be accommodated without change to the area or resource. For exam-
ple, boating, hunting, hiking, wildlife photography, and beach or shore
activities can be low-intensity recreation. Facilities included as
low-intensity recreation include picnic tables, trail signs, unpaved
trails and portable restroomsi

High-Intensity Recreation uses specially built facilities, or
occurs in such density or form that it requires or results in a modifi-
cation of the area or resource. Campgrounds, golf courses, public
beaches, and marinas are examples of high-intensity recreation.

RESTORATION: Revitalizing, returning, or replacing original attributes
and amenities, such as natural biological productivity, aesthetic and
cultural resources, which have been diminished or lost by past alter-
ations, activities, or catastrophic events. For the purpose of Oregon
Statewide Planning Goal 16, estuarine restoration means to revitalize or

3-6

reestablish functional characteristics and processes of the estuary
diminished or lost by past alterations, activities, or catastrophic
events. A restored area must be a shallow subtidal or an intertidal or
tidal marsh area after alteration work is performed, and may not have
been a functioning part of the estuarine system when alteration work
began.

Active Restoration involves the use of specific remedial actions,
such as removing fills, installing water treatment facilities, rebuild-
ing deteriorated urban waterfront areas, or returning diked areas to
tidal influence.

Passive Restoration is the use of natural processes, sequences, and
timing which occurs after the removal or reduction of adverse stresses
without other specific positive remedial action (Mitigation Plan).

RESTORATION AS MITIGATION: For the purposes of Goal 16 estuarine
restoration means to revitalize or reestablish functional characteris-
tics and processes of the estuary diminished or lost by past altera-
tions, activities, or catastrophic events. A restored area must.be *a
shallow subtidal or an intertidal or tidal marsh area after alteration
work is performed, and may not have been a functioning part of the
estuarine system when alteration work began.

RIPARIAN: Of, pertaining to, or situated on the edge of the bank of a
river or other body of water.

RIPRAP: A layer, facing, or protective mound of stones randomly placed
to prevent erosion, scour or sloughing of a structure or embankment;
also, the stone so used. In local usage, the similar use of other hard
material, such as concrete rubble, is also frequently included as
riprap.

SHORELAND AREAS: The lands and nontidal wetlands along the estuary
shore. Shoreland designations extend waterward to the upper limit of
aquatic vegetation or, where aquatic vegetation is absent, Mean Higher
High Water.

SHORELAM RESOURCES, SIGNIFICANT: Significant shoreland resources are
described in subarea plans, and are included in Oregon jurisdiction
Coastal Shorelands Boundaries. Significant shoreland resources include
significant nontidal wetlands, significant shoreland fish and wildlife
habitat, significant riparian vegetation, exceptional aesthetic resourc-
es and coastal headlands.

SHORELINE: The boundary line between a body of water and the land,
measured on tidal waters at the landward limit of aquatic vegetation or,
where aquatic vegetation is absent, Mean Higher High Water; and on
non-tidal waterways at the ordinary high water mark.

SHORELINE STABILIZATION: The protection from erosion and sloughing of
the banks of tidal and nontidal streams, rivers, lakes or estuaries by
vegetative or structural means.

3-7

Vegetative Shoreline Stabilization: Use of plants that anchor the
soil. to prevent shoreline erosion and sloughing.

Structural Shoreline Stabilization: Use of riprap, bulkheads,
seawalls or other non-vegetative material to prevent shoreline erosion.

SHORELINES (WASHINGTON): The Washington Shoreline Management Act
applies to all areas of the state, including reservoirs, and their
associated wetlands, together with the lands underlying them; except (i)
shorelines of state-wide significance; (ii) shorelines on segments of
streams upstream of a point where the mean annual flow is twenty cubic
feet per second or less and the wetlands associated with such upstream
segments; and (iii) shorelines on lakes less than twenty acres in size
and wetlands associated with such small lakes.

SUBTIDAL: Below the level of extreme low tide. In the Columbia River
Estuary this is generally 3 feet below Mean Lower Low Water.

SUMP DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL, IN-WATER: Deposition of dredged materi-
als in a temporary in-water holding area and subsequently rehandling the
m;-2terial to place it on a land disposal site.

TZRPORARY ESTUARINE A-1,TIERATION (Oregon Only): Dredging, filling, or
other estuarine alteration occurring over a specified short period of
time which is nzeded to facilitate an allowed use. Temporary altera-
tions may.not be for more than tbree years and the affected area must be
restored to its previcus condition. Temporary alterations include: (1)
alterations necessary for federally authorized navigation projects
(e.g., access to dredged material disposal sites by barge or pipeline
and stag4ng areas o r dredging for jett' e), (2) alterations to
y maintenanc
establish mitigation sites, alterations for bridge construction or
repair and for drilling or other exploratory operations, and (3) minor
structures (such as blinds) necessary for research and educational
observation.

TEMPORARY USE: A non-permanent structure, use or activity involving
minimal capital investment that does not result in the permanent altera-
tion of the site and is removed from the site within 3 years.

TIDAL MARSH: Tidal wetlands vegetated with emergent vascular plants
lying between extreme low tide and landward limit of aquatic vegetation.

TIDEGATE: A device placed in a dike or dam that allows the passage of
water through a culvert in a single direction.

TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES: Highways, streets, and roads, railroads,
bridges and associated structures which provide for land transportation
of motorized and/or nonmotorized vehicles (excluding logging roads).

WATER-DEPENDENT: A use or activity which can be carried out only on,
in, or adjacent to water areas because the use requires access to the
water body for water-borne transportation, recreation, energy produc-
tion, or source of water.

3-8

WATER-ORMTED: A use whose attraction to the public is enhanced by a
view of or access to coastal waters.

WATER-REUTED: Uses which are not directly dependent upon access to a
water body, but which provide goods or services that are directly
associated with water-dependent land or waterway use, and which, if not
located adjacent to water, would result in a public loss of quality in
the goods or services offered. Except as necessary for water-dependent
or water-related uses or facilities, residences, parking lots, spoil and
dump sites, roads and highways, restaurants, businesses, factories, and
trailer parks are not generally considered dependent on or related to
water location needs.

WETLAND CREATION: Alteration, by excavation or other means, of upland
areas to allow local hydrologic conditions to convert soils and vege-
tation to a hydric character.

WETLAND ENHANCEMENT: An action which results in a long term improvement
of existing wetland functional characteristics and processes that is not
the result of a creation or restoration action.

WETLANDS:

In Washington: Lands transitional between terrestrial and aquatic
systems where saturation with water is the dominant factor determining,
plant and animal communities and soil development. For the purpose of
this definition, these areas must have one or more of the following
attributes: 1. at least periodically, the land supports predominantly
hydrophytes and/or 2. the substrate is predominantly undrained hydric
soil.

In Oregon: Land areas where water is the dominant fa ctor deter-
mining the nature of soil development and the types of plant and animal
communities living at the soil surface. Wetland soils retain sufficient
moisture to support aquatic or semi-aquatic plant life. In marine and
estuarine areas, wetlands are bounded at the lower extreme by extreme
low water; in nontidal areas by a depth of 6 feet. The areas below
wetlands are submerged lands.

WETLANDS, SIGNIFICANT NONTIDAL: Nontidal wetlands described as signifi-
cant in Oregon subarea plan Coastal Shorelands boundary descriptions or
described as significant in Oregon jurisdictions Goal 5 elements.

3.3. POLICIES AND STANDARDS

This subsection establishes use and activity policies and standards
for developments in Columbia River Estuary aquatic areas and shorelands.
Some apply only to the estuary's waters and tidal wetlands: These are
indicated by the qualifying phrase "aquatic areas" or "aquatic designa-
tions." Policies and standards applicable only to estuary shorelands,
including associated non-tidal wetland areas, are so indicated by the
phrase "shoreland areas" or "shoreland designations."

3-9

3.3.1. Agriculture and Forestry

Policies and standards in this subsection are applicable to agri-
cultural and forestry'activities on Columbia River Estuary shorelands.
Activities outside of the coastal shorelands boundary (Oregon) or
outside of Shoreland Management Act jurisdiction (Washington) are not
covered by this subsection. Certain uses and activities associated with
agriculture and forestry, such as log storage, dike maintenance, and
shipping facilities for agricultural and forestry products, are covered
under different policies and standards.

Policies

1. Continued use of productive agricultural land is encouraged.
Conversion to non-agricultural uses, except in urban areas, is dis-
couraged.

2. Existing dikes and tide gates and drainage systems protecting
productive agricultural land shall be maintained consistent with dike
maintenance policies and standards, unless part of an approved restora-
tion or mitigation project.

3. Potential water quality degradation resulting from agricultural or
forest management practices shall be controlled by Soil Conservation
Service programs, programs under section 208 of the 1972 Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amenriments, and State forest practice rules (the
Oregon Forest Practices Act 'and its Administrative Rules, or the Wash-
ington Forest Practices Act and its Administrative Code).

4. Shoreland resources that are significant under Oregon Statewide
Planning Goal 17 that occur in forested areas outside of Urban Growth
Boundaries shall be protected by the Oregon Forest Practices Act and its
Administrative Rules. (Oregon only).

5. Only selective timber cutting may be permitted within 200 feet of
the Columbia River Estuary Shoreline (this does not apply to tributaries
of the Columbia River). No more than 30% of the merchantable trees may
be harvested in Any ten year period. Other timber harvesting methods
may be permitted in limited instances where topography, soil conditions
or silviculture practices necessary for regeneration render selective
logging ecologically detrimental. Clear cutting of timber which is
solely incidental to the preparation of land for other uses authorized
by this chapter may be permitted. (Washington only).

Standards

6. Tillage and drainage practices should minimize sedimentation and
control surface water runoff of animal wastes, fertilizers, and pesti-
cides. Agricultural chemicals shall be applied in a manner that mini-
mizes the amount lost to the aquatic environment.

7. Runoff from feed lots or other confinement lots for livestock shall
be controlled with diversion structures, settling ponds or other land
management practices.

3-10

8. Forest practices and forest road building will comply with rules
established under the Oregon Forest Practices Act, administered by the
Oregon Department of Forestry, or the Washington Forest Practices Act,
administered by the Washington Department of Natural Resources.

3.3.2. Deep-Water Navigation, Port and Industrial Development

The policies and standards in this subsection apply to port and
industrial development occurring in and over Columbia River Estuary
waters, and on adjacent shorelands. This section also applies to
navigation projects related to deep-draft maritime activities, such as
channel, anchorage and turning basin development or expansion..

Policies

1. Shorelands with adjacent deep-water access, adequate rail orroad
access, and sufficient backup land shall be reserved for water-.dependent
recreational, commercial, industrial, or port development.

2. Federally-designated channels, anchorages.and turning basins,
including necessary side slopes, shall be in Development Aquatic desig-
nations.

3. Development, improvement and expansion of existing port sites is
preferred prior to designation of new port sites.

4. Aides to navigation, including range markers, buoys, channel
markers and beacons, shall be protected from development impacts that
would render them ineffective. This policy does not preclude develop-
ment subject to U.S. Coast Guard approved re-orientation or relocation
of navigation aides.

5. Evaluation of proposals involving treated or untreated wastewater
discharge into the estuary will rely on the point source water pollution
control programs administered by the Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality and the Washington Department of Ecology-

Standards

6. Port or industrial development in or over estuarine aquatic areas
involving the activities which could adversely affect estuarine physical
or biological resources shall be subject to an Impact Assessment (Sub-
section 3.4.1.) (Oregon only).

7. Shoreland and aquatic area facilities for the storage or transmis-
sion of petroleum products must have on-site equipment for the contain-
ment of oil spills.

8. Deep-water navigation, port or industrial development requiring
aquatic area dredging or filling may be allowed only if all of the
following criteria are met:

3-11

(a) The proposed use is required for navigation or other water-
dependent use requiring an estuarine location, or if specifi-
cally allowed in the applicable aquatic designation; and

(b) A substantial public benefit is demonstrated; and

(d) Feasible alternative upland locations do not exist; and

(e) Potential adverse impacts are minimized.

9. Deep-water navigation, port or industrial development requiring new
piling or dolphin installation, construction of pile-supported struc-
tures, or other uses or activities which could alter the estuary may be
permitted only if all of the following criteria are met:

(a) A substantial public benefit is demonstrated; and

(b) The proposed use does not unreasonably interfere with public
trust rights; and

(d) Potential adverse impacts are minimized.

10. Off-street parking may only be located over an aquatic area if all
of the following conditions are met:

(a) Parking will be on an existing pile-supported structure; and

(b) Suitable shoreland areas are not available; and

(d) The aquatic area is in a Development designation.

3.3.3. Diking

The policies and standards in this subsection apply to the con-
struction, maintenance and repair of flood control dikes in Columbia
River Estuary shoreland and aquatic areas. These policies and standards
do not apply to dredged material containment dikes.

Policies

1. Deliberate dike breaching or removal may be permitted as part of a
restoration or mitigation project subject to the applicable Policies and
Standards in Subsection 3.3.12..

3-12

2. New dike alignment or configuration shall not cause an increase in
erosion or shoaling in adjacent areas, or an appreciable increase in
seasonal water levels behind dikes. Waterway channelization shall be
avoided.

3. New dikes shall be placed on shorelands rather than in aquatic
areas unless part of an approved fill project, as a temporary flood
protection measure, or (Oregon only) subject to an exception to the
Statewide Planning Goal 16.

4. The effects of limited intertidal dredging along fringing marshes
for the purposes of dike maintenance-are not well-known. A small pilot
project to determine these impacts should be undertaken.

Standards

5. Dike maintenance and repair may be allowed under any of the follow-
ing circumstances:

(a) Dikes which have been inadvertently breached may be repaired,
subject to state and federal permit requirements, if the
repair is commenced within 36 months of the breach, regardless
of whether the property has reverted to estuarine habitat.

(b) Existing serviceable dikes (including those that allow some
seasonal inundation) may be repaired.

(c) Dikes which have been inadvertently breached may be repaired,
subject to state and federal permit requirements, if the
property has not reverted to estuarine habitat (as determined
by U.S. Army Corps-of Engineers and either Oregon Division of
State Lands or the Washington Department of Ecology).

Dike repair projects that do not fit under (a), (b), or (c) above; that
is projects where the property has reverted and more than 36 months have-
elapsed; must be reviewed as new dikes.

6. Dike maintenance and repair are distinguished from new dike con-
struction. To qualify as maintenance and repair, changes in the
location, size, configuration, orientation and alignment of the
dike must be limited to the minimum amount necessary to retain or
restore its operation or function or to meet current engineering
standards. Filling aquatic areas for dike maintenance may be
allowed only if it can be clearly demonstrated that there are no
feasible engineering Alternatives which would avoid the use of
aquatic area fill.

7. The outside dike face shall be suitably protected from erosion
during construction and maintenance operations. Shoreline stabili-
zation standards shall be met.

8. New dikes in aquatic areas may be permitted either;

(a) As part of an approved fill project; or

3-13

(b) As a temporary flood protection measure needed to promote
public safety and welfare, subject to applicable U. S. Army
Corps of Engineers, and Oregon Division of State Lands rules;
or

9. Dredging of subtidal estuarine aquatic areas as a source of fill
material for dike maintenance may be allowed (in Oregon, pursuant to the
exception to Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 16) if all of the following
conditions are met:

(a) Alternative methods of accomplishing dike maintenance are
infeasible (i.e., dikes proposed for receiving dredged ma-
terial are remote from upland sources of fill material or
land-based heavy equipment access to the dike area is not
possible); and

(b) Dredging in all cases is limited to that necessary to maintain
the dikes. Dredging as a source of fill material for dike
maintenance does not include enlarging or changing the bottom
contour of natural aquatic areas for navigation or any other
aquatic area use; and

(c) Dredging will not disturb or excavate emergent vegetation,
intertidal flats, or other adjacent intertidal estuarine
resources; and

(d) Dredging as a source of fill material for dike maintenance
will, in all cases, take place in subtidal aquatic areas, and
shall be limited to the deepest subtidal aquatic area access-
ible to float-mounted dredging equipment. In narrow tributary
areas of the estuary, dredging shall be limited to the deepest
subtidal areas nearest the center line of the waterway. In
reaches of the estuary exceeding 200 feet in width, dredging
shall be limited to subtidal areas more than 80 feet from the
waterward toe of the dike. The intent of this standard is to
protect the dike structures from sloughing, maintain existing
berms and shoal water immediately adjacent to dikes, and limit
dredge excavations to subtidal areas below the level of
effective light penetration; and

(e) Dredging will not be confined to localized areas of river
bottom. All excavations as a source of fill material shall be
lineally dispersed along the entire dike maintenance area.
Dredging shall not alter the existing contour of the river
bottom such that deep trenches and pockets capable of stran-
ding or impeding estuarine lifeforms will be created; and

(f) Dredging operations shall be consistent with state and federal
permit conditions and the requirements of local governments to
ensure that project timing and dredging conditions protect
estuarine resources (e.g., fish runs, spawning activity,

3-14

benthic productivity, wildlife habitat, etc.).

3.3.4. Dredging and Dredged Material Disposal

Policies and standards in this subsection are applicable to all
estuarine dredging operations and to both estuarine shoreland and
aquatic dredged material disposal in the Columbia River Estuary.

Dredging and Dredged Material Disposal Policies

1. Dredging shall.be allowed only:

a. If required for navigation or other water-dependent uses that
require an estuarine location or if specifically allowed by
the applicable designation unit requirements; and,

b. If a need (i.e., a substantial public benefit) is demonstrated
and the use or alteration does not unreasonably interfere with
public trust rights; and,

C. If no feasible alternative upland locations exist; and,

d. If adverse impacts are minimized.

2. Dredging and dredged material disposal shall not disturb more than
the minimum area necessary for the project and shall be conducted and
timed so as to minimize impacts on wetlands and other estuarine resourc-
es. Loss or disruption of fish and wildlife habitat and damage to
essential properties of the estuarine resource shall be minimized by,
careful location, design, and construction of:

a. Facilities requiring dredging,

b. Sites designated to receive dredged material, and

C. Dredging operation staging areas and equipment marshalling
yards.

Dredged materials shall not be placed in intertidal or tidal marsh
habitats or in other areas that local, state, or federal regulatory
agencies determine to be unsuitable for dredged material disposal.
Exceptions to the requirement concerning disposal in an intertidal or
tidal marsh area include use of dredged material as a fill associated
with an approved fill project or placement of dredged materials in the
sandy intertidal area.of a designated beach nourishment site. Land
disposal shall enhance or be compatible with the final use of the site
area.

3. The effects of both initial and subsequent maintenance dredging, as
well as dredging equipment marshalling and staging, shall be considered
prior to approval of new projects or expansion of existing projects.

3-15

Projects shall not be approved unless disposal sites with adequate
capacity to meet initial excavation dredging and at least five (5) years
of expected maintenance dredging requirements are available.

4. Dredging subtidal areas to obtain fill material for dike mainten-
ance may be allowed subject to Dredging Standard 9.

Some dikes in the estuary are not accessible by barge-mounted
dredges or land-based equipment. Dredging intertidal areas to obtain
fill material may be the only option for maintaining these dikes. In
Oregon, approval of intertidal dredging will require an exception to
Statewide Planning Goal 16.

5. Where a dredged material disposal site is vegetated, disposal
should occur on the smallest land area consistent with sound disposal
methods (e.g., providing.for adequate dewatering of dredged sediments,
and avoiding degradation of receiving waters). Clearing of land should
occur in stages and only as needed. It may, however, be desirable to
clear and fill an entire site at one time, if the site will be used for
development immediately after dredged material disposal. Reuse of
existing disposal sites is preferred to the creation of new sites
provided that the dikes surrounding the site are adequate or can be made
adequate to contain the dredged materials.

Dredged Material Disposal Site Selection And Site Reservation
Policies

1. When identifying land dredged material,disposal sites, emphasis
shall be placed on sites where (not in .priority order):

a. The local designation is Development provided that the dispos-
al does not preclude future development at the site;

b. The potential for the site's final use will benefit from
deposition of dredged materials;

C. Material may be stockpiled for future use;

d. Dredged spoils containing organic, chemical, and/or other
potentially toxic or polluted materials will be properly
contained, presenting minimal health and environmental hazards
due to leaching or other redistribution of contaminated
materials;

e. Placement of dredged material will help restore degraded
habitat; or where

f. Wetlands would not be impacted.

9. (Washington Jurisdictions add: "The land is owned by the
state or, secondly, where the land is owned or leased by a
county, port, or other public entity.")

3-16

Important fish and wildlife habitat, or areas with scenic, recrea-
tional, archaeological, or historical values that would not benefit from
dredged material disposal and sites where the present intensity or type
of use is inconsistent. with dredged material disposal shall be avoided.
(Oregon jurisdictions add: "The use of agricultural or forest lands for
dredged material disposal shall occur only when the project sponsor can
demonstrate that the soils can be restored to agricultural or forest
productivity after disposal use is completed. In cases where this
demonstration cannot be made, an exception to the Oregon Statewide
Planning Goal 3 or 4 must be approved prior to the use of the site for
dredged material disposal. The use of shoreland water-dependent devel-
opment sites for dredged material disposal shall occur only when the
project sponsor can demonstrate that the dredged material placed on the
site will be compatible with current and future water-dependent develop-
ment. Dredged material disposal shall not occur in wetlands designated
as significant under Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 17.)

Engineering factors to be considered in site selection shall
include: size and capacity of the site; dredging method; composition of
the dredged materials; distance from dredging operation; control of
drainage from the site; elevation; and the costs of site acquisition,
preparation and reve-getation.

2. Estuarine in-water disposal sites shall be in Developmen t designat-
ed areas identified as low in benthic productivity, unless the disposal
is to provide fill material for an approved,fill project, and where
disposal at the site will. not have significant.adverse hydraulic ef-
fects.
,@stuarine in-water disposal sites shall only be designated and
used.when it is de-Tionstrated that no feasible land or ocean disposal
sites with less damaging environmental impacts can be identified and
biological and physical impacts are minimal. An in@-water disposal site
shall not be used if sufficient sediment type and benthic data are not
available to characterize the site.

3. Flowlane disposal sites shall only be allowedin Development
designated areas within or adjacent to a channel. The Development
designated area adjacent to the channel shall be defined by a line 600
feet from either side of the channel or the 20-foot bathymetric contour,
whichever is closer to the channel. Flowlane disposal within this area
shall only be allowed where:

a. Sediments can reasonably be expected to be transported down-
stream without excessive shoaling,

b. Interference with recreational and commercial fishing opera-
tions, including snag removal from gillnet drifts, will be
minimal or can be minimized by applying specific restrictions
on timing or disposal techniques,

C. Adverse hydraulic effects will be minimal,

d. Adverse effects on estuarine re sources will be minimal, and

e. The disposal site depth is between 20 and 65 feet below MLLW.

3-17

4. Beach nourishment sites shall only be designated on sandy beaches
currently experiencing active erosion. Dredged material disposal at
beach nourishment sites shall only be used to offset the erosion and not
to create new beach or land areas. Beach nourishment sites shall not be
designated in areas where placement or subsequent erosion of the dredged
materials would adversely impact tidal marshes or productive intertidal
or shallow subtidal areas. (Oregon Jurisdictions add: "Designation of
new beach nourishment sites shall require an exception to Statewide
Planning Goal 16.)

5. Dredged material disposal sites with adequate capacity to accom-
modate anticipated dredging needs for at least a five year period shall
be identified and designated. Additional sites may also be designated.
All dredged material disposal sites shall receive a Priority I or II
designation with respect to its suitability and importance for.meeting
five-year dredging needs.

A. Priority I Dredged Material Disposal Sites

Sites which are essential for meeting anticipated five-year dispos-
al needs shall receive a Priority 1 designation. Priority I shoreland
sites shall be protected from incompatible and preemptive uses to ensure
adequate sites will remain available to accommodate five-year disposal
needs. Incompatible and preemptive uses include:

- Uses requiring substantial structural or capital improvements
(e.g., construction of permanent buildings, water and sewer service
connections);

- Uses that require alteration of the topography of the site, thereby
affecting the drainage of the area or reducing the potential
useable volume of the dredged material disposal site (e.g., exten-
sive site grading or excavation, elevation by placement of fill
materials other than dredged spoils);

Uses that include changes made to the site that would prevent
expeditious use of the site for dredged material disposal. Such
uses would delay deposition of dredged material on the site beyond
the period of time commonly required to obtain the necessary
federal, state and local dredging and dredged material disposal
permits (approximately 90 days);

(Note: Exampl:es of non-preemptive or compatible uses of shoreland
dredged material disposal sites are: unimproved parking lots, equipment
storage yards, materials marshalling yards, log storage and sorting
yards, and undeveloped recreation areas, campgrounds or recreational
vehicle parking areas.)

Incompatible or preemptive uses shall not be allowed at shoreland
Priority I dredged material disposal sites unless the site is removed by
plan amendment upon demonstration that either:

1. The site has been fille d to capacity and is available for
other uses, or

3-18

2. The site is, in fact, not required to accommodate anticipated
five-year disposal needs, or

3.1 A new Priority I site has been designat@d to regla'ce the site
being removed.

B. Priority II Dredged Material Disposal Sites

Dredged material disposal sites which are not required for antici-
pated five-year disposal needs but which may be required to meet longer-
range needs shall be given a Priority II designation. The importance of
these sites, as compared with Priority I sites, does not justify efforts
to reserve.all or portions of each site from possible preemptive uses.

A 30-day freeze shall be placed on preemptive development requests
(as defined in "A", above), for the purpose of allowing affected govern-
ment agencies or private interests to negotiate for the use of the.
Property as a disposal site. Individual jurisdictions may choose to run
this freeze concurrently or in addition to the normal permit process.
If there is no expressed interest in use of the site for dredged mater-
ial disposal during the freeze period, the development request shall be
reviewed under normal procedures. -if the request is approved, the
e@ntire site or affected portions of the site shall be removed from the
,dredged material disposal plan by plan.amendment.

6,. in order to ensure the adequacy rJ identified dredged material
disposal site capacities for anticipated five-year disposal require-
ments, an analysis of thd dredge material disposal site inventory shall-
be COMDleted eVery five Years. Th,@@ analysis shall include:

a. A determination of the Priority I sites utilized for dredged
material disposal and the volume received by each site during
the preceding period, noting also the project source of the
dredged material and the interval separating the most recent
from the next anticipated dredging event.

b. A determination of the number and usable volume of Priority I
sites remaining in the inventory, and the relationship between
these sites and present or expected navigation-related dredg-
ing or water-dependent development projects in the following
five year period, and the number and useable volume of Prior-
ity II sites identified in the inventory.

C. An identification of the Priority II or other additional sites
to be added to the Priority 1 inventory.

d. An analysis of the adequacy of the dredged material site
inventory shall include notification of an communication of
up-dated inventory information to affected property owners and
local, state and federal governmental agencies. Of particular
importance is the addition, deletion, or change in priority of
dredged material disposal sites.

e. Each jurisdiction shallcooperate with other jurisdictions on

3-19

the Columbia River Estuary in monitoring of dredged material
site availability and in dredged material disposal plan
update.

Dredging Standards

1. Dredging in estuarine aquatic areas, subject to dredging and
dredged material disposal policies and standards, shall be allowed only:

a. If specifically allowed by the applicable designation and
required for one or more of following uses and activities:

1. Navigation or navigational access;

2. An approved water dependent use of aquatic areas or
adjacent shorelands that requires an estuarine location;

3. An approved.restoration project;

4. Mining or mineral extraction;

5. Excavation necessary for approved bridge crossing support
structures., or pipeline, cable, or utility crossing;

6. Obtaining fill material for dike maintenance (Oregon
jurisdictions add-: "where an exception to Oregon State-
wide Planning Goal 16 has been-approved");

7. Maintenance of existing tideg ates and tidegate drainage
channels;

8. Aquaculture facilities;

9. Temporary alterations;

10. Installation of tidegates in existing functional dikes;

11. Incidental dredging for harvest of benthic species or
removable in-water structures such as stakes or racks.

b. If a need (i.e., a substantial public benefit) is demonstrated
and the use or alteration does not unreasonably interfere with
public trust rights; and

C. If no feasible alternative upland locations exist; and

d. If adverse impacts are minimized.

2. When dredging is perm 'itted, the dredging shall be the minimum
necessary to accomplish the proposed use.

3. Undesirable erosion, sedimentation, increased flood hazard, and
other changes in circulation shall be avoided at the dredging and

3-20

disposal site and in adjacent areas.

4. The timing of dredging and dredged material disposal operations
shall be coordinated-with state and federal resource agencies, local
governments, and private interests to protect-estuarine aquatic and
shoreland resources, minimize interference with commercial and recrea-
tional fishing, including snag removal from gillnet drifts, and insure
proper flushing of sediment and other materials introduced into the
water by the project.

5. Bottom sediments in the dredging area shall be characterized by the
applicant in accordance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington Department of Ecology, and Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality standards. Information that may be required includes, but is
not@limited to, sediment grain size distribution, organic content, oil
and grease, selected heavy metals, pesticides and other organic com-
pounds, and benthic biological studies.

The types of sediment tests required will depend on dredgingand
disposal techniques, se diment grain size, available data on the sedi-
ments a;L the dredging site, and proximity to contaminant sources.
Generall y, projects invol-,&ing in-water disposal of fine sediments will
requ ire a higher level of sediment testing than projects involving
disposal of coarse sediments. Projects involving upland disposal may be
exampted from the te8tingrequirement, depending on the nature of the
sediments and the amount of existing sediment. data available.

In order to avoid tinreasonable burdens on the permit applicant,
consideration shall be given to the economic cost of performing the
sediment evaluation, the utility of the data to be provided, and the
,nature and magnitude of any potential environmental effect.

6. Adverse short-term effects of.dredging and aquatic area disposal
suchas increased turbidity, release of organic and inorganic materials
or toxic substances, depletion of dissolved oxygen, disruption of the
food chain, loss of benthic productivity, and disturbance of fish runs
and important localized biological communities shall be minimized.

7. The effects of both initial and subsequent maintenance dredging, as
well as dredging equipment marshalling and staging, shall be considered
prior to approval of new projects or expansion of existing projects.
Projects will not be approved unless disposal sites with adequate
capacity to meet initial excavation dredging and at least five years of
expected maintenance dredging requirements are available.

8. Dredging for maintenance of existing tidegate drainage channels and
drainage ways is limited to the amount necessary to maintain and restore
flow capacity essential for the function (the drainage service provided
by the tidegate) of tidegates and to allow drainage and protection of
agricultural and developed areas. Tidegate maintenance dredging does
not include enlarging or extending the dimensions of, or changing the
bottom elevations of, the affected tidegate drainage channel or drainage
way as it existed prior to the accumulation of sediments.

3-21

9. Dredging of subtidal estuarine areas as a source of fill material.
for dike maintenance requires an exception to Oregon Statewide Planning
Goal 16. This dredging activity may be allowed upon the applicant's
demonstration that:

a. Alternative methods of accomplishing dike maintenance are
infeasible (i.e., dikes proposed for receiving dredged mater-
ial are remote from upland sources of fill material and that
land-based heavy equipment access to the dike area is not
possible);

b. Dredging in all cases will be limited to that necessary to
maintain the dikes. Dredging as a source of fill material for
dike maintenance does not include enlarging or changing the
bottom contour of natural aquatic areas for navigation or any
other aquatic area use;

C. Dredging will not disturb or excavate emergent vegetation,
intertidal flats, or other adjacent intertidal estuarine
resources;

d. Dredging as a source of fill material for dike maintenance
will, in all cases, take place in subtidal aquatic areas, and
shall be limited to the deepest subtidal aquatic area access-
ible to float-mounted dredging equipment. In.narrow tributary
areas of the estuary, dredging shall be limited to the deepest
subtidal areas nearest the centerline of the waterway. In
reaches of the estuary exceeding 200 feet in width, dredging
shall be limited to subtidal areas greater than 80 feet in
distance from the waterward toe of the dikes. The intent of
this standard is to protect the the dike structures from
sloughing, maintain existing berms and shoal water immediately
adjacent to dikes, and limit dredge excavations to subtidal
areas below the level of effective light penetration.

e. Dredging will not be confined to localized areas of river
bottom. All excavations as a source of fill material shall be
lineally dispersed along the entire dike maintenance area.
Dredging shall not alter the existing contour of the river
bottom such that deep trenches and pockets capable of strand-
ing or impeding estuarine lifeforms will be created.

f. Dredging operations shall be consistent with state and federal
resource agency conditions, the requirements of local govern-
ments, and concerns of private interests, to ensure that
project timing and dredging conditions protect estuarine
resources (e.g., fish runs, spawning activity, benthic produc-
tivity, wildlife habitat, etc.)

10. Dredging for mining and mineral extraction, including sand extrac-
tion, shall only be allowed in areas deeper than 10 feet below MLLW
where the project sponsor demonstrates that mining and mineral extrac-
tion in aquatic areas is necessary because no feasible upland sites
exist and that the project will not significantly impact estuarine

3-22

resources. The estuary bottom at the project site shall be sloped so
that sediments from areas shallower-than 10,feet below MLLW and other
areas not included in the project do.rlot slough into the dredged area.
Dredging as part of an approved dredging project which also provides
fill for an approved fill project shall not besubject to this standard.

11. When proposing dredging for sand extraction, the project sponsor
shall first consider obtaining the material from a shoaled area within a
federally-authorized navigation channel that is currently shallower than
its authorized depth. Said dredging shall be coordinated with the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers. The dredging depth shall not exceed the
authorized channel depth plus any over-dredging that the Corps would
normally perform while maintaining the site.

12. New dredging in Conservation Aquatic designations may be permitted
only for: (Oregon only)

a. Aquaculture;

b. High intensity water-dependent recreation, including boat
ramps and marinas;

C. Minor navigational improvements;

d. Mineral extraction;

e@. Obtaining fill material for dike maintenance where a Goal 16
exception has been approved;

f. Active restoration;

g. Bridge crossing support structures;

h. Pipelines, cables, and utility crossings;

i. Maintenance of existing functional tidegates and associated
drainage channels;

j. Temporary alterations;

k. Installation of tidegates in existing functional dikes;

1. Incidental dredging for harvest of benthic species or remov-
able in-water structures such as stakes or racks.

Dredging for items a, b, c, d, f, or j shall be allowed only where said
dredging is consistent with the resource capabilities of the affected
designation.

13. New dredging in Natural Aquatic designations may be permitted only
for: (Oregon only)

a. Maintenance or installation of bridge crossing support struc-
tures;

3-23

b. Obtaining fill material for dike maintenance where a Goal 16
exception has been approved;

C. Maintenance of existing functional tidegates and associated
drainage channels;

d. Pipelines, cables, and utility crossings;

e. Temporary alterations;

f. Installation of tidegates in existing.functional dikes;

g. Incidental dredging for harvest of benthic species or remov-
able in-water structures such as stakes or racks.

Dredging for installation of bridge crossing support structures and for
items d, e, f, and g shall be allowed only where said dredging is
consistent with the resource capabilities of the affected designations.

Dredged Material Disposal Standards

1. Dredged material disposal shall occur only at designated sites or
at new sites which meet the requirements of the Dredged Material Dispos-
al Site Selection Policies.

2. Proposals for in-water disposal of dredged materials, including
flowlane disposal, beach nourishment, estuarine open-water disposal,
,ocean disposal, and agitation dredging, shall-

a. Demonstrate the need for the proposed action and that there
are no feasible alternative disposal sites or'methods,that
entail less damaging environmental impacts; and

b. Demonstrate that the dredged sediments meet state and federal
sediment testing requirements and water quality standards (see
Dredging Standard 5); and

C. Not-be permitted in the vicinity of a public water intake.

3. Proposals for in-water estuary disposal shall be coordinated with
commercial fishing interests, including, but not limited to: gillnet
drift captains at the dredging and disposal site, the Columbia River
Fisherman's Protective Union, Northwest Gillnetters Association, and the
State fishery agencies. In-water disposal actions shall avoid gillnet
drifts whenever feasible. When it is not feasible to avoid gillnet
drifts, impacts shall be minimized in coordination with fisheries
interests through:

a. Disposal timing,

b. Gear placement,

C. Choice of disposal area within the drift, and

3-24

d. Disposal techniques to avoid snag placement.

4. Flowlane disposal,-estuarine open water disposal and agitation
d-,.-edging shall be monitored to assure that estuarine sedimentation is
consistent with the resource capabilities and purpose of affected
natural and conservation designations. The monitoring program shall be
established prior to undertaking disposal. The program shall be de-
signed,to,both characterize baseline conditions prior to disposal and
monitor the effects of the disposal. The primary goals of the monitor-
ing are to determine if the disposal is resulting in measurable adverse
impacts and to establish methods to minimize impacts. Monitoring shall
include, at a minimum, physical measurements such as bathymetric changes
and may include bilological monitoring. Specific monitoring requirements
shall be based on, at a minimum, sediment grain size at the dredging and
disposal site, presence of contaminants, proximity to sensitive habitats
and knowledge of resources and physical characteristics of the disposal
site.

The monitoring requirement shall be discontinued when adequate
inforr.ation has been gathered to determine impacts and establish an
agreed-upon disposal volume and methodology. If the agreed-upon volume
and mzthodol.ogy is altered, the monitoring requirement may*be re-estab-
lis1hed. Monitoring may be waived on small projects where the impacts
would be undetectable.

5. Flowlane disposal sites shall be in Development Aquatic areas
identified as low in benthic productivity and use of these sites shall.
not have adverse.hydraulic effects. Use of disposal sites in the
estuary shall be allowed on!- when no feasible alternative land or ocean.
disposal sites with less damaging environmental impacts can be identi-
fied and the biological and physical impacts of flowlane disposal are
demonstrated to bd insignificant. The feasibility and desirability of
alternative sites shall take into account, at a minimum:

a. Operational constraints such as distance to the alternative
sites;

b. Sediment characteristics at the dredging site;

C. Timing of the operation;

d. Environmental Protection Agency constraints on the use of
designated ocean disposal sites;

e. The'desirability of reserving some upland sites for potential-
ly contaminated material only.

Long term use of a flowlane disposal site may only be allowed if
monitoring confirms that the impacts are not significant. Flowlane
disposal is contingent upon demonstration that:

f. Significant adverse effects due to changes in biological and
physical estuarine pro perties will not result;

3-25

g. Flowlane disposal sites shall be shown able to transport
sediment downstream without excessive shoaling, interference
with recreational and commercial fishing operations, including
the removal of snags from gillnet drifts, undesirable hydrau-
lic effects, or adverse effects on estuarine resources (fish
runs, spawning activity, benthic productivity, wildlife
habitat, etc.).

6. Ocean disposal shall be conduc ted such that:

a. The amount of material deposited at a.site is compatible with
benthic populations, other marine resources, and other uses of
the area;

b. Interference with sport and commercial fishing is minimized;

C. Disposal is strictly confined to the sites designated by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; and

d. The disposal site does not shoal excessively and create
dangerous.wave and swell conditions.

7. Beach nourishment shall only be conducted at sites identified in
the dredged material management plan. New sites may be added to the
Plan by amendment (Oregon jurisdictions add: "after an exception to
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 16 for the site has been approved").
Beach nourishment shall be conducted such that:

a. The beach is not widened beyond its historical profile. The
historical profile shall be defined as the widest beach
profile that existed prior to June 1986.

b. The material placed on the beach consists of sand of equal or
greater grain size than the sand existing on the beach.

C. Placement and subsequent erosion of the materials does not
adversely impact tidal marshes or productive intertidal and
shallow subtidal areas.

d. Efforts are made to maintain a stable beach profile.

e. Dredged material is graded at a uniform slope and contoured to
minimize juvenile fish stranding and hazards to beach users.

Use of beach nourishment sites shall be allowed only when no
feasible land or ocean sites with less damaging environmental impacts
can be identified.

The feasibility and desirability of alternative sites shall take.
into account, at a minimum:

f. Operational constraints such as distance to the alternative
sites; 10

3-26

9- Sediment characteristics at the dredging site;

h. Timing of the operation;

i. Environmental Protection Agency constraints on the use of
designated ocean disposal sites;-

j. The desirability of reserving some upland sites for potential-
ly contaminated material only.

8. Except as noted below, land disposal and site preparation shall be
conducted such that:

a. Surface runoff from disposal sites is controlled to protect
water quality and prevent sedimentation of adjacent water
bodies, wetlands, and drainage ways. Disposal runoff water
must enter the receiving waterway through a controlled outfall
at a location with adequate circulation and flushing charac-
teristics. Underground springs and aquifers must be identi-
fied and protected;

b. Dikes are constructed according to accepted engineering
standards and are adequate to support and contain the maximum
potential height and volume of dredged materials at the site,
and form a sufficiently large containment area to encourage
proper ponding and to prevent the return of dredged materials
into the waterway or estuary. Containment ponds and outfall
weirs,shall be designed to maintain adequate standing water at
all. times to further encourage settling of dredged' materials.
The dikes shall, be constructed within the boundaries of the
disDosal site and shall be constructed of material obtained
from within the site or other approved source.

Clean dredged material placed on land disposal sites located directly
adjacent to designated beach nourishment sites may be allowed to flow
directly into the waterway without conforming to "a" and "b", above,
provided that all policies and standards for in-water disposal and beach
nourishment are met and the dredged materials are not allowed to enter
.wetlands or the waterway in areas other than the designated beach
nourishment site.

9. Land disposal sites which are not intended for dredged material
disposal or development use within a two year period following disposal
shall be revegetated as soon as site and weather conditions allow,
unless habitat management plans agreed upon by resource management
agencies specify that open sand areas should remain at the site. The
project sponsor shall notify the local jurisdiction and state and
federal permitting and resource management agencies when disposal is
completed and shall coordinate revegetation with these agencies. The
notification shall be sent to at least thefollowing agencies: the local
jurisdiction, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Soil Conservation Service,
Division of State Lands (Oregon Projects), Oregon Department of Fish and
Wildlife (Oregon Projects), andMashington Departments of Wildlife and
Ecology (Washington Projects). Revegetation of a disposal site does not

3-27

preclude future use of the sites for dredged material disposal.

The disposal site design shall be reviewed to determine if wetlands
or other habitats will form on the site during the period between
disposal actions. The disposal permit may be conditioned to allow
future disposal actions to fill the created wetlands or habitats.

10. The final height and slope'after each use of a land dredged mater-
ial disposal site shall be such that:

a. The site does not enlarge itself by sloughing and erosion into
adjacent areas;

b. Loss of materials from the site during storms and freshets is
minimized; and

C. Interference with the view from nearby residences, scenic
points, and parks does not occur.

3.3.5. Estuarine Construction: Piling and Dolphin Installation,
Shoreline Stabilization and Navigational Structures

The policies and standards in this subsection apply to over@
the-water and in-water structures such as docks, bulkheads, moorages.,
boat ramps, boat houses, jetties, pile dikes, breakwaters and other
structures involving installation of piling or placement of riprap in
Columbia River Estuary aquatic areas. This section ddes not apply to
structures located entirely on shorelands or uplands, but does apply to
structures, such as boat ramps, that are in both aquatic and shoreland
designations.

Policies

1. Proper streamside vegetation management is the preferred method of
shoreline stabilization, followed by planting of new vegetation, instal-
lation of riprap and installation of a bulkhead.

2. Navigational structures, such as breakwaters, jetties, groins, and
pile dikes are major estuary alterations with long term biological and
physical effects. Proposals for new or enlarged navigational struc-
tures, or for removal of existing structures, must demonstrate that
expected benefits outweigh potential adverse impacts on estuarine
productivity.

3. New uses in aquatic areas and in shoreland areas especially suited
for water-dependent development that are not water-dependent, if permit-
ted, shall not preclude or pose any significant conflicts with existing,
proposed or probable future water-dependent uses on the site or in the
vicinity.

Standards

4. Where land use management practices and vegetative stabilization is

3-28

shown not to be feasible (In terms of cost, effectiveness or other
factors), structural means may be approved subject to applicable poli-
cies, @tandards arid designation use restrictions.

5. Where structural shoreline stabilization is shown to be necessary
because-of the infeasibility of vegetative means, the choice among
various structural means shall be made on a case by case basis. Factors
to be considered include, but are not limited to:

(a) Hydraulic features;

(b) Shoreland habitat;

(d) Aquatic habitat;

(e) Water quality;

(f) Engineering feasibility;

(g) Navigation;

:(h): Impacts on public shoreline access.

6. jetties, groins and breakwaters shall be constructed of clean,
erosion-resistant materials from upland sources. In-stream gravels
shall.not be used, unless part of an approved mining project. Material.
size shall be appropriate for predicted wave, tide and current condi-
tions.

7. Where a jetty, groin, breakwater or other in-water structure is
,.proposed for erosion or flood control, the applicant shall demonstrate
that non-structural solutions, such as land use management practices, or
other structural solutions, such as riprap, will not adequately address
the problem.

8. Piling or dolphin installation, structural shoreline stabilization,
and other structures not involving dredge or fill, but which could alter
the estuary may be allowed only if all of the following criteria are
met:

(a) A substantial public benefit is demonstrated; and

(b) The proposed use does not unreasonably interfere with public
trust rights; and

(d) Potential adverse impacts, as identified in the impact assess-
ment, are minimized.

9. Jetties, groins, breakwaters and piers requiring aquatic area fill
may be allowed only if all of the following criteria are met:

3-29

(a) The proposed use is required for navigation or other water-
dependent use requiring an estuarine location, or if specifi-
cally allowed in the applicable aquatic designation; and

(b) A substantial public benefit is demonstrated; and

(d) Feasible alternative upland locations do not exist; and

(e) Potential adverse impacts, as identified in the impact assess-
ment, are minimized.

10. Proposals for bulkheads may be approved only if it is demonstrated
that sloped riprap will not adequately fulfill the project's objectives.

11. Proposals for bulkheads or for riprap bankline slopes steeper than
1.5 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) must demonstrate that adequate shallow
areas will be available for juvenile fish shelter, or that the area is
not typically used for juvenile fish shelter.

12. Plant species utilized for vegetative stabilization shall be
selected on the basis of potential sediment containment and fish and
wildlife habitat values. Trees, shrubs and grasses native to the region
should be considered for vegetative stabilization; however, plant
species and vegetation stabilization techniques approved by the Soil
Conservation Service, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and other partic-
ipating federal and state resource agencies are also appropriate.
Stabilization of dike slopes must not include vegetation (particularly
trees) which jeopardize the dike.

13. Riprap bank protection must be appropr iately designed with respect
to slope, rock size, placement, underlying material and expected hydrau-
lic conditions. Project design by a licensed engineer shall meet this
requirement. The local government may also find that.riprap projects
designed by other individuals, such as experienced contractors, soil
conservation service personnel or others, meets this standard.

14. Shoreline stabilization measures shall not restrict existing public
access to public shorelines.

15. Shoreline stabilization shall not be used to increase land surface
area. Where an avulsion has occurred, fill may be used to restore the
previous bankline, so long as the corrective action is initiated within
one year of the date of the avulsion. Any other extension of the
bankline into aquatic areas shall be subject to the policies and stan-
dards for fill.

16. Structural shoreline stabilization measures shall be coordinated
with state and federal agencies to minimize adverse effects on aquatic
and shoreland resources and habitats.

17. As a shoreland stabilization and protective measure, bulkheads

3-30

shall be designed and constructed to minimize adverse physical effects
(i.e., erosion, shoaling, reflection of wave energy orinterferences
W4
ith sediment transport in adjacent shoreline areas) resulting from
their placement.

18. Emergency maintenance, for the purpose of making repairs or for the
purpose of preventing irreparable harm, injury or damage to persons,
property or shoreline stabilization facilities is permitted, not with-
standing the other requirements in these standards, but subject to those
regulations imposed by the Corps of Engineers and (in Oregon) the
Division of State Lands.

19. Revegetated shoreline areas shall be protected from excessive
livestock grazing or other activities that would prevent development of
effective stabilizing plant cover.

20. Docks and piers shall be built no larger than required for their
proposed use.

21. Community dock and pier facilities common to several uses and
interests are encouraged. The proliferation of individual single-pur-
pose docks and piers is discouraged.

22. The size and shape of a dock or pier shall be the minimum required
for the intended use.

23. Proposals fo r new docks and piers may be approved only after
consideration of alternatives such as mooring buoy, dryland storage, and
boat ramps.

3.3.6. Filling of Aquatic Areas and Non-tidal Wetlands

This subsection applies to the placement of fill material in the
,tidal wetlands and waters of the Columbia River Estuary. These policies
and standards also apply to fill in nontidal wetlands in shoreland
designations that are identified as "significant" nontidal wetlands in
Oregon jurisdiction coastal shorelands descriptions (See Section 4.), or
by Natural or Conservation designations in Washington jurisdictions.

Policies

1. New uses in aquatic areas and in shoreland areas especially suited
for water-dependent development that are not'water-dependent, if permit-
ted, shall not preclude or pose any significant conflicts with existing,
proposed or probable future water-dependent uses on the site or in the
vicinity.

2. Reduction of surface area or volume of aquatic areas and signifi-
cant non-tidal wetlands in shoreland areas shall be minimized in the
location and design of facilities requiring fill.

3. Construction on piling is preferred over construction on fill.

3-31

4. Mitigation may be required for fills (see subsection 3.3.12.).

Standards

5. Fill in estuarine aquatic areas may be permitted only if all of the
following criteria are met:

(a) If required for navigation or for other water-dependent uses
requiring an estuarine location, or if specifically allowed
under the applicable aquatic designation; and

(b) A substantial public benefit is demonstrated; and

(d) Feasible upland alternative locations do not exist; and

(e) Adverse impacts, as identified in the impact assessment, are
minimized.

6. A fill shall cover no more than the minimum necessary to accomplish
the proposed use.

7. Aquatic area fills using either dredged material or other easily
erodable material shall be surrounded by appropriately stabilized dikes.

8. Aquatic areas shall not be used for disposal of solid waste.

9. Projects involving fill may be approved only if the following
alternatives are examined and found to be infeasible:

(a) Construct some or all of the project on piling;

(b) Conduct some or all of the proposed activity on existing
upland.

3.3.7. Fish and Wildlife Habitat

This subsection applies to uses and activities with potential
adverse impacts on fish or wildlife habitat, both in Columbia River
estuarine aquatic areas and in estuarine shorelands.

Policies

1. Endangered or threatened species habitat shall be protected from
incompatible development.

2. Measures shall be taken protecting nesting, roosting, feeding and

3-32

resting areas used by either resident or migratory bird populations.

3. Major nontidal marshes, significant wildlife habitat, coastal
headlands, and exceptional aesthetic resources within the Estuary
Shorelands Boundary shall be protected. Uses in these areas shall be
consistent.with the protection of natural values, and may include
propagation and selective harvest of forest products, grazing, harvest-
ing, wild crops, and low intensity water-dependent recreation.

Standards

4. Projects affecting endangered, threatened or sensitive species
habitat, as identified by the US Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlifei Washington Department of Fisheries, or
Washington Department Wildlife, shall be designed to minimize potential
adverse impacts. This shall be accomplished by one or more of the
following:

(a) Soliciting and incorporating agency recommendations into local
permit reviews;

(b) Dedicating and setting aside undeveloped on-site areas for
habitat;

(d) Retaining keyhabitat features (for example; roosting trees,
riparian vegetation, feeding areas).

5. In-water construction activity in aquatic areas shall follow the
recommendations of state and federal fisheries agencies with respect to
project timing to avoid unnecessary impacts on migratory fish.

6. Uses and activities with the potential for adversely affecting fish
and wildlife habitat may be approved only if the following impact
mitigation actions are incorporated into the 'permit where feasible.
These impact mitigation actions are listed from highest to lowest
priority:

(a) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action
or parts of an action;

(b) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of an
action and its implementation;

(c) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, restoring
the affected environment (this may include removing wetland
fills, rehabilitation of a resource use and/or extraction site
when its economic life is terminated, etc.);

(d) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation
and maintenance operations.

3-33

7. Projects involving subtidal or intertidal aquatic area fill or
intertidal aquatic dredging with the potential for adversely effecting
aquatic habitat must provide compensatory mitigation, consistent with
the Mitigatifon and Restoration Plan for the Columbia River Estuary.

3.3.8. Fisheries and Aquaculture

The policies and standards in this subsection apply to all projects
that could conceivably affect fisheries (either commercial or rec-
reational) or aquaculture in the Columbia River Estuary. This sub-
section is also applicable to the development of aquaculture facilities
and to fisheries enhancement projects.

Policies

1. Traditional fishing areas shall be protected when dredging, fill-
ing, pile driving or when other potentially disruptive in-water activ-
ities occur.

2. Sufficient space for present and anticipated needs shall be re-
served for the following uses:

- Fishing vessel moorage;
- Seafood receiving and processing;
- Boat repair;
- Gear storage;
- Ice making;
- Cold storage;
- Other seafood industry support facilities.

3. Increased hatchery production and other fish enhancement efforts
shall be supported where feasible, and when consistent with other
applicable plan provisions. .

4. Aquaculture facility location, design and operation shall minimize
adverse impacts on estuarine and shoreland habitat, navigation channels,
water quality, and public access points.

5. Existing aquaculture and hatchery facilities and areas identified
as having significant aquaculture potential shall be protected from
conflicting uses.

6. Aquaculture and hatchery structures shall not interfere with
commercial or recreational navigation.

Standards

7. Water diversion structures or man made spawning channels shall be
designed and built to maintain minimum stream flows for aquatic life in
affected streams.

8. Water discharged from aquaculture or hatchery facilities shall

3-34

comply with state or federal discharge permit conditions.

9. Aquaculture facilities shall be located far enough from sanitary
sewer outfalls to avoid potential health hazards.

10. Aquaculture facilities shall be constructed to blend in with and
not detract from the aesthetic qualities of the area. In developed
areas, views from upland property shall be given consideration in
facility design.

11. Water discharge from an aquaculture facility shall meet all federal
and state water quality standards and any conditions attached to the
waste discharge permit.

12. Operation of a private salmon hatchery requires a permit from the
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife or the Washington Department of
Fisheries.

13. In-water construction activity in aquatic areas shall follow the
recommendations of state and federal fisheries agencies with respect to
project timing to avoid unnecessary impacts on migratory fish.

14. Commercial fish drifts shall be protected from conflicting in-water
activity, including dredging, in-water dredge material disposal, and
aquatic area mining and mineral extraction, by coordinating review of
such activity with fishery regulatory agencies, fishing organizations,
drift captains and drift right owners, and other interested parties.

15. Prior to approval of in-water activities with the potential for
affecting fisheries, the project sponsor shall notify local drift
captains, the Columbia River Fisherman's Protective Union and the
Northwest Gillnetters Association. The Washington Department of Fisher-
ies shall also be consulted to determine project timing and methods that
will minimize impacts on the fishery.

3.3.9. Land Transportation Systems

Policies and standards in this subsection are applicable to the
maintenance and construction of railroads, roads and bridges in Columbia
River estuary shoreland and aquatic areas. Public, as well as private
facilities are covered under this subsection. Forest roads, however,
are excluded.

Policies

1. New non-water-dependent uses in aquatic areas or in shoreland areas
especially suited for water-dependent development shall not preclude or
pose any significant conflicts with existing, proposed or probable
future water-dependent uses on the site or in the vicinity.

2. Land transportation systems shall be maintained and improved to
support existing urban areas, allow industrial site development and
support rural and recreational uses.

.3-35

3. New land transportation routes shall not be located in aquatic
area's or.in significant nontidal wetlands in shoreland areas except
where bridges are needed, and where no feasible alternative route
exists.

4. New land transportation routes shall be located so as not to reduce
or downgrade the potential for development of Development Shorelands or
Development Aquatic areas.

5. When feasible, new public roads in scenic areas shall provide rest
areas, viewpoints and facilities for safe bicycle and pedestrian travel.

6. Construction of new land transportation facilities and maintenance
of existing land transportation facilities shall be undertaken in a
manner that minimizes expected impacts on aquatic and shoreland estuar-
ine resources.

Standards

7. New or relocated land transportation routes shall be designed and
sited so as to:

(a) Enhance development shoreland areas when possible; and

(b) Direct urban expansion toward areas identified as being
suitable for development; and

(d) Preserve or improve public estuary access where existing or
potential access sites are identified; and

(e) Avoid.cutting off high-intensity waterfront use areas or
water-dependent development areas from water access.

8.. Maintenance and repair of roads and railroads and maintenance and
replacement of bridges shall be permitted regardless of the plan des-
ignation through which the road or railroad passes, provided:

(a) The same alignment is maintained; and

(b) The same width is maintained, except that necessary enlarge-
ments to meet current safety and engineering standards may be
permitted.

9. Fill-supported causeways or bridge approach fills across aquatic
areas or across significant nontidal wetlands in shoreland areas shall
not be permitted; bridge abutments may, however, be approved.

10. Removal of riparian vegetation along transportation right-of-ways
may be permitted in order to maintain clear vision.

3-36

3.3.10. Log Storage

This subsection establishes policies and standards for the estab-
lishment of new, and the expansion of existing, log storage and sorting
areas in Columbia River Estuary aquatic and shoreland areas.

Policies

1. New or expanded aquatic area log storage facilities shall be
designed and located so as to minimize potential adverse impacts on
aquatic habitat.

Standards

2. New aquatic log storage areas shall be located such that logs will
not go aground during tidal changes or during low flow periods.

3. Proposals for reestablishment of previously used aquatic log
storage areas must meet standards applied to new log storage areas,
unless such areas have been abandoned for fewer than 36 months.

4. New aquatic log storage areas shall not be located in areas which
would conflict with active gillnet fish drifts or with other commercial
or recreational fishing activities.

5. New aquatic log storage areas shall be located where water quality
degradation will be minimal and where good flushing conditions prevail.

6. Unpaved shoreland log yards underlaid by permeable soils shall have
at least four feet of separation betweeh the yard surface and the winter
water table.

7. Log storage and sorting facilities in water-dependent development
shorelands shall not preclude or conflict with existing or possible
future water-dependent uses at the site or in the vicinity, unless the
log storage or sorting facility is itself an essential part of a water-
dependent facility.

8. New or expanded log storage facilities are subject to an Impact
Assessment (Subsection 3.4.1.).

3.3.11. Mining and Mineral Extraction

Policies and standards in this subsection are applicable to the
extraction of sand, gravel, petroleum products and other minerals from
both submerged lands under aquatic areas and from shoreland areas in the
Columbia River Estuary. These policies and standards are also applica-
ble to outer continental shelf mineral development support facilities
built in the estuary.

Policies

3-37

1. Proposals for aquatic and shoreland area mining may be approved
subject to protection of adjacent property and fishery reso.urces from
potential adverse impacts, including sedimentation and siltation.

2. Mining operations in aquatic and shoreland areas shall use tech-
nology and practices which minimize potential damage to estuarine
resources.

3. Mineral extraction or gravel or sand dredging from the estuary may
be permitted only when these resources are not otherwise available at an
economically feasible upland location.

4. Aquatic area mining or mineral extraction projects may be approved
only for the least biologically sensitive areas.

5. Mining and mineral extraction activities shall not be approved in
areas of major marshes, significant fish and wildlife habitat, or excep-
tional aesthetic resources.

6. ..Wastewater.associated with mining shall be handled in a manner that
preserves water quality.

7. The surface mining regulations administered by the Washington
Department of Natural Resources and by the Oregon Department of Geology
and Mineral Industries shall be relied upon with respect to Surface
mining practices.

Standards

8. Aquatic area mining and mineral extraction shall only occur in
aquatic areas deeper than ten feet below MLLW, where estuarine resource
values are low, and when no feasible upland sources exist.

9. Proposed shoreland mining and mineral extraction activities with
potential impacts on estuary shoreland and aquatic areas_shall provide
the local government with a copy of a proposed or approved surface
mining plan.

10. Project sponsors proposing estuarine shoreland or aquatic area
mining or mineral extraction shall demonstrate that the activity is
sited, designed and operated to minimize adverse impacts on the follow-
ing:

(a) Significant fish and wildlife habitat; and

(b) Hydraulic characteristics; and

11. Petroleum extraction and drilling operations shall not be allowed
in aquatic areas. Petroleum may, however, be extracted from beneath
aquatic areas using equipment located on shorelands or uplands. Petrol-
eum exploration activities, with the exception of exploratory drilling,
may be permitted in estuarine aquatic areas and in estuarine shoreland

3-38

areas.

12. Unless part of an approved fill project, spoils and other material
removed from aquatic areas shall be subject to Dredged Material Disposal
Policies and Standards.

3.3.12. Mitigation and Restoration

Policies and standards in this section are applicable to estuarine
restoration and mitigation projects on Columbia River Estuary aquatic
areas and shorelands.

Policies

1. Any dredge or fill activities that are permitted in the Columbia
River Estuary intertidal or tidal areas or fill activites in shallow
subtidal areas shall be mitigated through project design and/or compen-
satory mitigation (creation, restoration or enhancement of another area)
to ensure that the integrity of the estuary ecosystem is maintained. In
Oregon, Comprehensive Plans shall designate and protect specific sites
for mitigation which generally correspond to the types and quantity of
intertidal area proposed for dredging or filling, or make findings
demonstrating that it is not possible to do so.

2. Mitigation for removal and fill in intertidal or tidal areas or
fill in shallow subtidal areas of the Columbia River Estuary planning
area shall be implemented, to the extent feasible, through the following
Mitigation actions:

Project Design Mitigation Actions

a) Avoiding the impact,altogether by not taking a certain action
or parts of an action;

b) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of
action and its implementation;

c) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restor-
ing the affected environment (this would include removing
wetland fills, rehabilitation of a resource use and/or extrac-
tion site when its economic life is terminated, etc.);

d) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation
and maintenance operations;

Compensatory Mitigation Actions

e) Creation, restoration, or enhancement of an estuarine area to
maintain the functional characteristics and processes of the
estuary, such as its natural biological productivity, habi-
tats, and species diversity, unique features and water qual-
ity.

3-39

Any combination of the above actions may be required to implement
mitigation requirements. The compensatory mitigation actions listed in
section (e) shall only be implemented after impact avoidance, reduction
and rectification techniques have been considered, and there are still
unavoidable impacts.

3. The full array of wetland and aquatic area benefits shall be
addressed when making mitigation site decisions and when designing
mitigation action requirements. The list includes but is not limited
to: flood storage and desynchronization, food chain support, passive
recreation, shoreline anchoring and water purification functions.

4. All mitigation actions shall be required to begin prior to or
concurrent with the associated development action.

5. Developments in low-value diked freshwater nontidal wetlands can be
mitigated by treating estuarine restoration or creation as in-kind
mitigation actions.

6. If out-of-kind mitigation is found to be the only option, the
applicant shall first seek restoration of historically and/or present-
day scarce habitat types.

7. All completed mitigation sites shall be adequately buffered from
development and other activities to minimize the potential adverse
impacts on the mitigation site.

8. No mitigation action shall endanger or obstruct adjacent proper-
ties. The potential for present or future endangerment or obstruction
shall be determined in advance of the mitigation action. Responsibility
shall be determined prior to permit approval.

9. CREST will cooperate with local jurisdictions in the Columbia River
Estuary area and state and federal resource agencies in the periodic
review of the region's mitigation plan. Reviews shall occur every 4-7
years. The review shall include reexamination of site availability,
degree of plan implementation, changed policies and legal requirements
and possible new projects that may require mitigation.

10. Estuarine alterations in Washington can be mitigated by actions in
Oregon and vice versa if:

Local and state authorities from both states and federal author-
ities with statutory responsibility for administering mitigation
requirements approve the mitigation site selected and the miti-
gation action proposed.

11. Mitigation can be considered a permitted or conditional use in any
zone, management unit, or environment adopted in a local comprehensive
plan or shoreline master plan except, in Oregon, on shorelands desig-
nated Water-Dependent Development, agricultural lands under Statewide
Planning Goal 3, or forest alnds under Statewide Planning Goal 4.

12. Full consideration shall be given to existing resources that are

3-40

significant under Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 17, or Resource Cate-
gory 1 and 2 habitats, when designing a mitigation project that may
potentially alter, impair or destroy all or any portion of these re-
sources. The minimum consideration will be to discount existing values
from the credit potential of the mitigation action proportional to the
value of the significant Goal 17 resource. A goal exception may be
required where damage to significant Goal 17 resources is a concern.
(Oregon only).

13. Any acquisition strategy for bringing designated mitigation sites
(pre or post mitigation action) into public ownership or into ownership
of a private nonprofit land trust is encouraged.

14. All mitigation sites designated on public lands shall remain in
public ownership.

15. An area in productive use and considered for mitigation purposes
shall be evaluated for its present use value and compared with its
potential value as a wetland before conversion of the site is accept-
able.

16. Adequate mitigation sites shall be designated and protected in the
Comprehensive Plan (in Oregon) and Shoreline Master Plans (in Washing-
ton) to satisfy anticipated mitigation credit and habitat needs in the
Columbia River Estuary.

17. Additional mitigation sites shall be designated by local jurisdic-
tions as the need arises. New designations shall be coordinated with
CREST, local governments, state and federal resource agencies. New
sites shall be subject to the same policies and standards as sites
presently designated.

18. Mitigation sites designated in Wahkiakum County shall be reserved
only for development project match-ups that directly benefit the economy
of Wahkiakum County.

19. A developer may create, restore or enhance more wetland area than
required for irunediate development impacts. Subject to federal, state
and local agency approval, this "excess mitigation" may be credited
against future development by-the developer. The reserve wetland area
shall not be considered a mitigation bank unless it is acquired and
managed by a federal or state land and resource management agency.

Mitigation Bank Policies

1. Any area where a mitigation action has taken place and mitigation
credits are available for future development and the site is owned and
managed by a federal or state land management agency, shall be desig-
nated as a mitigation bank. The federal or state agency shall be
responsible for administration of a mitigation bank area, throughout the
period it serves as a bank.

2. A memorandum of agreement among local, state and federal

3-41

authorities shall serve as the implementing instrument establishing the
mitigation bank and for continuing management of the bank. Such an
agreement is necessary to document the initial conditions of the bank's
formation, including the means by which the mitigation bank shall be
administered. The agreement shall also detail ownership of the site and
include an itemized presentation of project costs, a technical plan
outlining the habitat'mitigation action, and include the number of
mitigation credits available in the bank. A plan for monitoring the
mitigation site shall be provided, including the goals, costs, and
responsibility of the monitoring program. The agreement shall specify
the mechanisms by which mitigation requirements for future estuarine
development will be transferred to the bank, the type of activity
qualifying for use of the bank, and the means by which proportional
mitigation bank development costs will be assessed by development
sponsors.

3. Mitigation credits in mitigation banks shall be reserved for use by
small scale development projects (5 acres or less of impacted wetland
and/or aquatic area).

4. A variety of habitats shall be created whenever possible, such that
the opportunity of replacement for wetland resources lost to a variety
of development activities is possible. The mitigation bank shall be of
sufficient capacity to meet the requirements of a number of expected
development projects.

5. Mitigation banks, in Oregon, shall be created by written agreement
with the Director of Oregon Division of State Lands (DSL) and shall be
administered but not necessarily owned by DSL. Such agreements shall
provide the basis for creation and operation of the bank and shall
specifically provide for the following:

a) The exact location of the real property.

b) Proof of ownership or control, i.e., deed or title report.

c) The nature and extent of the mitigation action. This analysis
shall require information about the site salinity, elevation,
wave and current actions, substrate, and other physical and
biological characteristics.

d) How and when the mitigation action shall be performed.

e) A statement of informed opinion as to what habitat shall
result from the action and a statement as to the relative
value of each anticipated habitat type.

f) How the resulting changes shall be monitored and evaluated
[OAR 141-85-254 (12, 14)] and what contingencies are planned
if goals are not satisfied within a reasonable time period.

g) How the mitigation bank shall be protected, i.e., dedication,
conservation easement, deed transfer, etc.

3-42

h) How funding for necessary construction or alteration work and
potential remedial action shall be guaranteed, i.e., bonding.

i). The price that may be charged for credits from the bank.

6. Applicants for removal and fill permits requiring mitigation are
not obligated, or automatically entitled, to use an existing mitigation
bank to meet the mitigation needs of any project. Permit applicants
shall negotiate directly with the owner of the bank to secure the right
to use the bank.

Restoration Policies for Wetlands and Aquatic Areas

1. Restoration of tidal and nontidal wetlands in the Columbia River
Estuary area may be done either as a mitigation action or as an action
outside of the context of mitigation.

2. Potential restoration sites (areas suitable for restoration but not
matched with a development action) may be designated as mitigation sites
until they are identified for restoration outside of the context of
mitigation. At this time, they shall be designated as restoration
sites.

3. All restoration projects shall serve to revitalize, return, replace
or otherwise improve the wetland and aquatic ecosystems in the Columbia
River Estuary area. Examples include restoration of natural biological
productivity, fish and wildlife habitat, aesthetic or historic resources
that have been diminished or lost due to past alterations, activities,
or catastrophic events. In selecting projects, priority shall be given
to those projects which provide substantial public benefits and which
restore those wetland and aquatic habitat types, resources, or amenities
which are in shortest supply compared to past abundance.

4. The following framework for restoration implementation is recom-
mended for the Columbia River Estuary:

a) To develop and provide educational materials for landowners
explaining the benefits of natural area protection and various
options for restoring land to natural conditions and protect-
ing the restored land.

b) To establish an incentive system in the Columbia River Estuary
area whereby landowners can effectively utilize a variety of
options for restoration and protection of their land.

c) To identify landowners with economically marginal production
land (e.g., forest or crop production), that was historically
wetland, and to inform them of the incentive-oriented restor-
ation system being devised and encourage their participation.

d) To differentiate between areas that are mitigation site
candidates as opposed to restoration site candidates. Any
potential restoration that is not matched with a proposed

3-43

development can be a candidate.

5. The following techniques are suggested as potential methods to
establish a wetland restoration and protection incentive system:

a) Development of effective acquisition power through private
nonprofit land trusts and federal and state grants (acqui-
sition may be through sale, trade or land donations). Public
ownership is encouraged.

b) Protection through restrictions while landowners retain title
to the land, i.e., conservation easements, mutual covenants,
deed restrictions and leases.

c) Provide tax incentives for landowners that allow restoration
to take place on their land.

d) Deed restrictions, wildlife easements or fee acquisition on
Farmers Home Administration farm foreclosure inventory lands.

6. Restoration actions that flood farm properties, forest lands, sites
designated Water-Dependent Development and significant resources under
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 17 shall require full consideration to
trade-offs associated with each action.

7. After a restoration takes place the local jurisdiction shall amend
its plan and implement a zone change to reflect the aquatic natural
character of the created wetland and/or aquatic area.

8. Restoration of economically marginal and unused low-lying diked
areas to estuarine wetland shall be encouraged; active restorations to
provide potential for diverse habitat (e.g., mudflat and marsh) as well
as passive restorations are encouraged. Except through public condemna-
tion procedures, removal of dikes or excavation on private lands shall
not occur without consent of the landowner.

Restoration Standards for Wetlands and Aquatic Areas

1. In Oregon, an exception to Statewide Planning Goal 3 or 4 shall be
required to implement restoration actions on agricultural land or forest
land.

2. In Oregon, an exception shall be required to implement restoration
actions in areas designated for Water-Dependent Development and areas
where restoration may deleteriously affect resources that are signifi-
cant under Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 17.

Long Term Wetland and Aquatic Area Mitigation and Restoration
Policies

1. Federal and state resource agencies shall be requested to intensify
existing programs to identify Resource Categories of wetlands and

3-44

section 404 wetlands in the Columbia River Estuary area with the purpose
being to give greater certainty to developers regarding available
development sites and potential mitigation requirements. The net result
shall be greater certainty for developers and a more streamlined permit
process.

2. CREST shall make an effort to develop a program to identify and
assess the relative values of the nontidal wetlands in the.CRtST plan-
ning jurisdiction. This inventory effort shall provide baseline data
that can be used to give greater certainty to development interests
regarding site potential for development. It will serve to help allevi-
ate the problem of lengthy and costly after the fact permits and restor-
ation orders. It will also serve to give greater certainty to appro-
priate mitigation and dredge disposal site selection.

3. A method of quantifying enhancement credits for mitigation shall be
determined.

4. A mechanism through which a transfer of development rights can
occur shall be researched and, if feasible, installed into local plan-
ning ordinances.

5. A system shall be devised whereby wetland impacts that are allowed
under a regional or nationwide permit and that do not require a permit
procedure to be followed, shall be reported to the local government so
that an accurate record of cumulative wetland impacts can be maintained.

Restoration Policies for Resources Other Than Wetlands and Aquatic
Areas

1. Consideration shall be given to restoring water circulation in
historically shoaled areas. Circulation enhancements must outweigh any
potential damages to wetlands before they are implemented.

2. Old piling, navigational structures, and buildings that are a
hazard to navigation and contribute to excessive shoaling, or pose a
threat to life or property shall be removed. Prior to removal, the
costs and benefits associated with removal shall be evaluated. Factors
requiring consideration include:

� Potential erosion or sedimentation problems that may result
from removal;

� The structure's habitat value and probable longevity; and

� The structure's historic and scenic values.

3. Restoration of riparian vegetation around wetlands and waterways in
the Columbia River Estuary planning area is a high priority. Protection
of these areas shall be implemented using various strategies, i.e.,
zoning, acquisitions, easements, transfer of development rights (if
possible), etc.

3-45

4. Shoreland and wetland areas that have had the vegetation cover
removed by development activities shall be revegetated to the extent
practicable with wildlife value, aesthetics and erosion,control being
the primary objectives.

STANDARDS

1. Any dredge or fill activities that are permitted in the Columbia
River Estuary intertidal or tidal areas or fill activities in shallow
subtidal areas shall be mitigated through project design and/or compen-
satory mitigation (creation, restoration or enhancement of another area)
to ensure that the integrity of the estuary ecosystem is maintained. In
Oregon, Comprehensive Plans shall designate and protect specific sites
for mitigation which generally correspond to the types and quantity of
intertidal area proposed for dredging or filling, or make findings
demonstrating that it is not possible to do so.

2. Mitigation for removal and fill in the Columbia River Estuary
intertidal areas or fill in shallow subtidal areas shall be implemented,
to the extent feasible, through the following Mitigation actions:

Project Design Mitigation Actions

a) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking e certain action
or parts of an action;

b) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of
action and its implementation;

c) Rectifying the impact by repairing., rehabilitating, or restor-
ing the affected environment (this would include removing
wetland fills, rehabilitation of a resource use and/or extrac-
tion site when its economic life is terminated, etc.);

d) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation
and maintenance operations;

Compensatory Mitigation Actions

e.) Creation, restoration, or enhancement of an estuarine area to
maintain the functional characteristics and processes of the
estuary, such as its natural biological productivity, habi-
tats, and species diversity, unique features and water qual-
ity.

Any combination of the above actions may be required to implement
mitigation requirements. The compensatory mitigation actions listed in
(e) shall only be considered when, after consideration of impact avoid-
ance, reduction or rectification, there are still unavoidable impacts.

3. If any of the compensatory mitigation actions are required, the
local government shall request that the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
make a Resource Category determination for the site proposed for

3-46

development. The classification shall be listed on the permit applica-
tion and review notice. If the area subject to impact is in a Resource
Category I site, it shall be protected, if it is in a Resource Category
2 or lower (4 = lowest), the following sequence of mitigation options
shall be considered:

� In-Kind/On-Site

� In-Kind/Off-Site

� Out-of-Kind/On-Site

� Out-of-Kind/Off-Site

The following list summarizes the mitigation goal for each resource
category:

a) Resource Category 1:

Habitat to be impacted is of high value for evaluation species
and is unique and irreplaceable on a national basis or in the
Columbia River Estuary area.

Mitigation Goal: No loss of existing habitat value.

b) Resource Category 2:

Habitat to be impacted is of high value for evaluation species
and is relatively scarce or becoming scarce on a national
basis or in the Columbia River Estuary area.

Mitigation Goal: No net loss of in-kind habitat value.

c) Resource Category 3:

Habitat to be impacted is of high to medium value for evalua-
tion species and is relatively abundant on a national basis.

Mitigation Goal: No net loss of habitat value while minimiz-
ing loss of in-kind habitat value.

d) Resource Category 4:

Habitat to be impacted is of medium to low value for evalua-
tion species.
Mitigation Goal: Minimize loss of habitat value.

4. All initial mitigation site work shall be reviewed against predes-
ignated performance specifications, i.e., starting date, a negotiated
completion date, grade.specifications, area and elevation specifications
of dike removal, channel specifications, seeding or planting specifica-
tions, etc. Any specifications not addressed or satisfied shall be
cause to'require remedial follow-up measures to satisfy the performance
specification(s). Remedial work shall also be required for dredge or

3-47

fill impacts not specified in the permit. 40
5. All mitigation actions shall be required to begin prior to or
concurrent with the associated development action.

6. All mitigation permit requirements shall address specific mitiga-
tion goals, and to the extent practicable, measurable objectives (e.g.,
the amount of vegetative cover that will be established in a specific
area over a specified time period). These goals and objectives shall be
determined by the local government in coordination with state and
federal resource agencies. The purpose of the goals and objectives is
to provide a standard by which to measure the success of a particular
mitigation action. The permit shall not be approved until determination
has been made that the goal and objective statements are satisfactory.
"Satisfactory" means that post-mitigation monitoring can use the goal
and objective statements on the permits to judge the success of the pro-
jects.

7. Post-mitigation monitoring of project design and compensatory
mitigation sites shall be required over a 2-5 year time period, depend-
ing on the size and complexity of the mitigation project.

a. Local governments, in cooperation with state and federal
resource agencies, shall design and implement the monitoring.

b. Developer accountability requirements shall be based on
anticipated financial and environmental risk factors.

c. A bond, or any legal mechanism that serves as a bond, shall be
required to hold the developer accotintable to remedial follow-up
requirements.

d. Potential remedial follow-up actions shall be identified in a
well structured contingency plan. The contingency plan shall be
required as a condition of permit approval.

e. The developer shall not be responsible for project problems not
addressed in the contingency plan nor for any expenses over the
amount estimated in the contingency plan.

f. Any portion of monies held and not used for remedial work shall
be refunded to the developer.

g. A waiver of the 2-5 year monitoring requirement shall be granted
if, at any time during the 2-5 year period, the project is
judged successful.

h. If a mitigation project fails to satisfy the original goals and
objectives after the designated time period, and the developer
has met all the site design and contingency plan requirements,
then the developer is not responsible for remedial action.
However monitoring may still be required up to a predetermined
time period to help agencies determine workable strategies for 0
future mitigation efforts.

3-48

i. The contingency plan shall include statements of potential
courses of action, or corrective measures to be taken, in the
event of sub-optimal project performance (based on project goals
and objectives).

8. For nontidal wetlands in Oregon, once a compensatory mitigation
action is required, local governments shall determine habitat trade
requirements in coordination with appropriate state and federal agen-
cies. Mitigation requirements shall be made on a case by case basis
using determinations made by these agencies.

9. For estuarine and nontidal wetlands in Washington, once a compen sa-
tory mitigation action is required, local governments shall determine
baseline habitat carrying capacity in coordination with appropriate
state and federal agencies. Mitigation requirements shall be made on a
case by case basis using the determinations made by these agencies.

10. In Oregon, removal and fill actions exempt from estuarine mitiga-
tion requirements include:

a) Removal or fill of less than 50 cubic yards of material;

b) Filling for repair and maintenance of existing functional
dikes where there is negligible physical or biological damage
to tidal marsh or intertidal area;

c) Rip rap to allow protection of existing bank line with clean,
durable material provided that the need for riprap protection
is demonstrated and that this need cannot be met with natural
vegetation, and no appreciable increase in upland occurs;

d) Filling for repair and maintenance of existing roads where
there is negligible physical or biological damage to tidal
marsh or intertidal'areas;

e) Dredging or filling required as part of an estuarine resource
creation, restoration, or enhancement project agreed to by
local, state, and federal agencies; and

f) Maintenance dredging.

g) Any proposed alteration that would have negligible adverse
physical or biological impact on the estuarine resources.

11. Actions not considered as mitigation in Oregon or Washington
include:

a) Conversion of an existing wetland type to another wetland type
as mitigation for impacts on another wetland shall not be
allowed. Diked nontidal wetlands with low wildlife value can
be discounted and restored to tidal influence as mitigation
for impacts*in diked nontidal wetlands. Also, enhancement of
an existing wetland can be considered mitigation for impacts

3-49

in another wetland;

b) .'@ransfer of ownership of existing wetlands to public owner-'
ship.

c) Dedication of existing wetlands for natural uses;

d) Provision of funds for research; or

e) Monetary compensation for lost wetlands.

12. The following criteria shall be considered when selecting and
including potential mitigation sites in the Columbia River Estuary
Mitigation Plan (not in order of priority):

a) Proximity to potential development sites.

b) Opportunity to create or restore habitat conditions similar to
those at the impacted sites or historically and presently
scarce habitat types.

c) Character of potential sites (e.g., low habitat value and no
conflicting uses).

d) Potential for protection through zoning.

e) Amount of new dike requirements

13. Mitigation site designations not established in the Plan shall be
made using criteria itemized in Standard 14. In addition, sites select-
ed shall have enough area and/or credits to accommodate the mitigation
requirement as stipulated by:

a) In Oregon:

� The Oregon Division of State Lands relative value trade
formula (OAR 141-85-256) for Oregon's portion of the
Columbia River Estuary.

� The Habitat Evaluation Procedures, Adamas Model, or
professional judgment of federal and state wildlife
biologists for Oregon's nontidal freshwater wetlands.

b) In Washington:

0 For estuarine and nontidal wetlands, once a compensatory
mitigation action is required, local governments shall
determine baseline habitat carrying capacity in coordina-
tion with appropriate state and federal agencies.
Mitigation requirements shall be made on a case by case
basis using the determinations made by these agencies.

14. The following approach shall be used to protect sites selected for

3-50

compensatory mitigation actions:

a) All mitigation sites shall be designated in local Comprehen-
sive Plans in Oregon and Shoreline Master Programs in Washing-
ton.

b) All sites are classified under one of three priorities (based
on need) and one of four levels of protection (based on need
and landowner concerns):

15. For mitigation sites on Exclusive Farm Use land (in Oregon), far 'm
related structures valued at $ 5,000 or less shall be considered exempt
from permit requirements.

16. A Plan amendment shall be required to remove a Priority 1 mitiga-
tion site from the mitigation overlay. A Plan amendment shall require a
demonstration that there is no longer a need for the site or that a
suitable alternative mitigation site has been designated and protected.

17. A Priority 2 site shall be totally removed from the mitigation
overlay if the landowner proposes a development that would preclude its
use for mitigation and, 30 days after the permit application has been
circulated, a negotiated agreement to sell the land, or certain land-
ownership rights, for mitigation use has not been made. The negotiation
shall be between the landowner and any interested buyer. The site shall
not be removed from the overlay until the development is completed.

18. A Priority 2 site shall be partially removed from the mitigation
overlay if the landowner proposes.a development that would partially
preclude its use for mitigation and, 30 days after the permit applica-
tion has been circulated, a negotiated agreement to sell the land, or
certain landownership rights, for mitigation use has not been made. The
negotiation shall be between the landowner and any interested buyer.
The partial removal shall not take place until the development is
completed.

19. The local jurisdiction shall make the determination of whether a
development will preclude all or some of the potential use of the site
for mitigation purposes.

20. If the landowner is a public entity, and the proposed mitigation
site is in a protected zone and managed under protection oriented
directives, a protection requirement shall not be imposed on the site.

21. After a mitigation action takes place, the local jurisdiction shall
amend its plan and implement a zone change to reflect the aquatic
natural character of the created wetland and/or aquatic area.

22. Private landowners shall be compensated, by the developer, with
payment equal to fair market value for land used for mitigation actions
on their ownerships.

23. The developer implementing a mitigation action shall be responsible
for all costs associated with the mitigation project.

3-51

A. Priority Need Level Protection

1 High 1

Matched Landowner Uses that preclude use of the site
with Med- not concern- for mitigation purposes (e.g., sub-
iated De- ed about re- stantial topographic alterations or
velopment strictions alterations or structural improve-
ments) are not allowed without a plan
amendment.

B. Priority Need Level Protection

I High 2

Matched Landowner Substantial topographic alterations
with Med- concerned and structural improvements allowed
iated De- about prop- under a conditional use permit. Con-
velopment erty restic- ditions are (1) no deviation from
tions conditions allowed under existing
underlay zone (e.g., EFU) and (2) if
diked, demonstration that a predeter-
mined amount of dike frontage and
contiguous diked area be retained for
mitigation purposes. If upland, then
demonstration a predetermined amount
of contiguous area is available for
excavation to allow tidal influence
or capable of being inundated through
some water level control procedure.

C. Priority Need Level Protection

2 Medium 3

Matched A 30'day freeze on permit applica-
with non- tions to give public agencies time
mediated to review potential effects on miti-
develop- gation use and current need for mit-
ment igation use at the site.

D. Priority Need Level Protection

3 Low 4

Not No restrictions, listed for inventory
matched with purposes only.
a develop-
ment

3-52

3.3.13. Public Access to the Estuary and its Shoreline

Policies and standards in this subsection apply to all uses and
activities in Columbia River Estuary shoreland and aquatic areas which
directly or indirectly affect public access. "Public access" is used
broadly here to include direct physical access to estuary aquatic areas
(boat ramps,for example), aesthetic access (viewing opportunities, for
example), and other facilities that provide some degree of public access
to Columbia River Estuary shorelands and aquatic areas.

Policies

1. Existing public ownerships, rights-of-way, and similar public
easements in estuary shorelands which provide access to or along the
estuary shall be retained or replaced if sold, exchanged or transferred.
Rights-of-way may be vacated to permit redevelopment of shoreland areas
provided public access across the affected site is retained.

2. Public access in urban areas shall be preserved and enhanced
through waterfront restoration and public facilities construction, and
other actions consistent with local public access plans.

3. Public access in rural areas shall be preserved and enhanced
through development of trails, boat ramps and other actions consistent
with local public access plans.
4. Proposed major shoreline developments shall not', individually or
cumulatively, exclude the public from shoreline access to areas tradi-
tionally used for fishing, hunting or other shoreline activities.

5. Special consideration shall be given toward making the estuary
accessible for the physically handicapped or disabled.

Standards

6. Projects to improve public access shall be designed to assure that
adjacent privately owned shoreland is protected from public encroach-
ment.

7. Oregon jurisdictions will develop and implement programs for
increasing public access.

3.3.14. Recreation and Tourism

Policies and standards in this subsection are applicable to recre-
ational and tourist-oriented facilities in Columbia River estuary
shoreland and aquatic areas.

Policies

1. New non-water-dependent uses in aquatic areas or in shoreland areas
especially suited for water-dependent development shall not preclude or

3-53

pose any significant conflicts with existing, proposed or probable
future water-dependent uses on the site or in the vicinity.

2. Recreation uses in waterfront areas shall take maximum advantage of
their proximity to the water by providing water access points, water-
front viewing areas, and structures visually compatible with the water-
front.

Standards

3. Off-street parking may only be located over an aquatic area if all
of the following conditions are met:

(a) Parking will be on an existing pile-supported structure; and

(b) Suitable shoreland areas are not available; and

(d) The aquatic area is in a Development designation.

4. New or expanded recreation developments shall be designed to
minimize adverse effects on surface and ground water quality. Adverse
effects of storm run-off from parking lots shall be minimized.

5. New or expanded recreational developments shall be designed and
located so as not to unduly interfere with adjacent land uses.

3.3.15. Residential, Commercial and Industrial Development.

The policies and standards in this subsection are applicable to
construction or expansion of residential, commercial or industrial
facilities.in Columbia River Estuary shoreland and aquatic areas.
Within the context of this subsection, residential uses include single
and multi-family structures, mobile homes, and floating residences
(subject to an exception to Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 16 in Ore-
gon). Duck shacks, recreational vehicles, hotels, motels and bed-
-and-breakfast facilities are not considered residential structures for
purposes of this subsection. Commercial structures and uses include all
retail or wholesale storage, service or sales facilities and uses,
whether water-dependent, water-related, or non-dependent, non-related.
Industrial uses and activities include facilities for fabrication,
assembly, and processing, whether water-dependent, water-related or
non-dependent non-related.

Policies

1. New uses in aquatic areas and in shoreland areas especially suited
for water-dependent development that are not water-dependent, if permit-
ted, shall not preclude or pose any significant conflicts with existing,
proposed or probable future water-dependent uses on the site or in the

3-54

vicinity.

2. Where non-dependent, non-related residential, commercial or indus-
trial development exists on shorelands designated for water-dependent
development, transition of shorelands to water-dependent or water-
related uses is encouraged.

Standards

3. Sign placement shall not impair views of water areas. Signs shall
be constructed against existing buildings whenever feasible. Off-
premise outdoor advertising shall not be allowed in aquatic areas.

4. Off-street parking may only be located over an aquatic area if all
of the following conditions are met:

(a) Parking will be on an existing pile-supported structure, and

(b) Suitable shoreland areas are not available, and

(d) The aquatic area is in a Development designation.

5. Joint use of parking, moorage and other commercial support facility
is encouraged where feasible and where consistent with local ordinance
requirements.

6. Uses on floating structures shall be located in areas protected
from currents and wave action, and shall not rest on the bottom during
low tidal cycles or low-flow periods.

7. Aquatic areas or significant non-tidal wetlands in shoreland areas
may not be used to compute the lot area or density'for residential
development in shoreland areas.

8. Where groundwater is or may be used as a water supply, the ground-
water table shall not be significantly lowered by drainage facilities,
or be affected by salt water intrusion due to groundwater mining.

9. Fill in estuarine aquatic areas or in significant non-tidal wet-
lands in shoreland areas shall not be permitted for residential uses
(Oregon only).

10. Piling or dolphin installation, structural shoreline stabilization,
and other structures not involving dredge or fill, but which could alter
the estuary may be allowed only if all of the following criteria are
.met:

(a) A substantial public benefit is demonstrated; and

(b) The proposed use does not unreasonably interfere with public
trust rights; and

3-55

W Potential adverse impacts, as identified in the impact assess-
ment, are minimized.

3.3.16. Shallow-Draft Ports and Marinas

The policies and standards in this subsection apply to development
of new marinas and improvement of existing marinas in aquatic areas of
the Columbia River Estuary. Also covered are adjacent shoreland support
facilities that are in conjunction with or incidental to the marina.
Included under this subsection's coverage are both public and private
marinas for either recreational, charter or commercial shallow draft
vessels.

Policies

1. Proliferation of individual single-purpose docks and moorages is
discouraged. Public or commercial multi-vessel moorage is preferred.

2. Navigational access to the estuary and its tributaries shall be
maintained. Peripheral channels, streams and sloughs shall not be
closed to navigation. Necessary maintenance dredging for traditional
moorage areas shall be allowed, subject to the requirements of the
designation, state and federal permits, and local plan and ordinance
provisions.

Standards

3. New marinas may be approved only when existing marinas are inade-
quate with respect to location, support services or size; or cannot
expand to meet area moorage needs.

4. New marinas shall be located in or adjacent to areas of extensive
boat usage, and in areas capable of providing necessary support services
(including street access, upland parking, water, electricity and waste
disposal).

5. The feasibility of upland boat storage shall be evaluated con-
current with proposals for new or expanded marina facilities.

6. Marina development and expansion may require some filling and
dredging of presently undeveloped areas. Significant aquatic and
shorelands resources shall be protected from preventable adverse impacts
in the design, construction, and maintenance of marina facilities.

7. Marina development requiring filling or dredging in estuarine
aquatic areas may be permitted only if all of the following criteria are
met:
(a) If required for navigation or for other water-dependent uses
requiring an estuarine location, or if specifically allowed
under the applicable aquatic designation; and

3-56

(b) A substantial public benefit is demonstrated; and

(d) Feasible upland alternative sites do not exist; and

(e) Adverse impacts are minimized.

8. New, expanded or renovated marinas shall be designed to assure
adequate water circulation and flushing.

9. New or expanded marinas shall provide facilities for emptying
holding tanks so that these wastes are not placed in the river.

10. Covered moorages may be permitted in marinas subject to the follow-
ing requirements:

(a) Information is provided on existing water quality and habitat
conditions in the aquatic area proposed for the covered
moorage; and

(b) Data or, existing aquatic vegetation, and an analysis of the
proposed covered moorages' impact on aquatic vegetation are
provided; and

(d) No more than 20% of the marina's aquatic surface is occupied
by the covered moorages.

11. New or expanded marina fuel docks shall maintain on-site equipment
for the containment of spilled fuel.

12. Floating docks in marinas shall be located such that they do not
rest on the bottom during low tides.

13. New individual docks outside of marinas may only be built when it
is shown that existing marinas cannot reasonably accommodate the pro-
posed use.

14. The size and shape of docks and piers in marinas shall be limited
to that required for the intended use.

15. Alternatives to new docks and piers, such as mooring buoys, dry
land storage and launching ramps, shall be investigated and considered
beiore new docks are permitted in a marina.

3.3.17. Shoreland Hazard Areas

The policies and standards in this subsection apply to development

3-57

in Columbia River Estuary shoreland areas with identified hazards to
development. These hazards are identified in area and subarea plans
(Section 4.), and include areas susceptible to erosion, soil movement,
and flooding.

Policies

1. Development proposed for identified shoreland hazard areas is
generally discouraged. All new and replacement development in shoreland
hazard areas shall be protected from the hazard.

Standards

2. Proposed shoreland area development shall be evaluated prior to
construction to assure that new hazards are not created or existing
hazards are not worsened on adjacent property.

3.3.18. Significant Areas

The policies and standards in this subsection are intended to
protect certain shoreland and aquatic resources with estuary-wide
significance. Significant shoreland resources are identified as such in
area and subarea plans (Section 4.). Significant aquatic resources are
found in Natural Aquatic areas. This-subsection applies only to activi-
ties and uses that potentially affect significant shoreland or aquatic
resources. Other resources without estuary-wide significance are not
covered by this subsection.

Policies

1. Significant estuarine aquatic and shoreland resources shall be
protected from degradation or destruction by conflicting uses and
activities.

2. Major marshes, significant wildlife habitat, and exceptional
aesthetic resources shall be protected. Uses in these areas may include
selective harvesting of forest products consistent with the Oregon
Forest Practices Act, grazing, harvesting, wild crops, and low-intensity
water-dependent recreation.

Standards

3. Temporary removal of riparian vegetation may be permitted in
conjunction with a water-dependent use where direct access to the water
is required for construction or for a temporary use. Permanent removal
of riparian vegetation may be approved for a water-dependent project.
Riparian vegetation removed for these reasons must be replaced upon
project completion.

4. Permanent removal of riparian vegetation may be permitted along
transportation right-of-ways for purposes of maintaining clear vision
maintaining clear vision. Riparian vegetation that threatens the

3-58

stability of flood control dikes may be removed.

5. Except as provided for in Standards 3 and 4, riparian vegetation
shall not be removed.

6. Public access to significant scenic areas shall be provided in a
manner consistent with the preservation of the scenic area and other
significant resources.

7. Tidegated sloughs and drainage ditches identified as having signif-
icant aquatic habitat value, significant riparian vegetation, or other
significant shoreland resource value may be maintained with respect to
depth, but their bankline location and configuration may not be altered,
unless part of an approved fill or shoreline stabilization project.

8. A setback of 25 feet from significant riparian vegetation shall be
required for all new structures.

3.3.19. Water Quality Maintenance

The policies and standards in this subsection are intended to help
protect and enhance the quality of water in the Columbia River Estuary.
Impacts on water quality in aquatic areas and in tidegated sloughs in
shoreland areas are covered.

Policies

1. Non-point source water pollutants from forest lands, roads, agri-
cultural lands, streambank erosion and urban runoff shall be@controlled
by state Section 208 water quality programs, in Oregon, the Oregon
Forest Practices Act and its Administrative Rules or, in Washington, the
Washington Forest Practices Act and its Administrative Code, and Soil
Conservation Service programs@

2. New untreated waste discharges into tributary streams, enclosed
bays and sloughs shall not be permitted.

3. Petroleum spill containment and clean-up equipment should be
located in the estuary area. This equipment should be capable of
controlling a large spill in all areas of the estuary.

Standards

4. New and expanded marinas shall provide facilities for emptying
holding tanks so that these wastes are not placed in the river.

5. Thermal effluents shall be cooled before they are returned to the
estuary.

6. The potential adverse impacts on water quality of dredging, fill,
in-water dredged material disposal, in-water log storage, water intake
or withdrawal, and slip or marina development will be assessed during

3-59

permit review. Parameters to be addressed include:

- Turbidity
- Dissolved oxygen
- Biochemical oxygen demand
- Contaminated sediments
- Salinity
- Water temperature
- Flushing

7. New or expanded marine fuel docks must provide on-site equipment
for the containment of fuel spills.

8. New point-source waste water discharges into the Columbia River
will be controlled through the National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit program.

9. Estuarine Aquatic area pesticide application will be controlled by
the State Department of Agriculture and, in Oregon, the Department of
Environmental Quality and, in Washington, the Department of Ecology.

3.3.20. Water-Dependent Development Areas

Policies and standards in this subsection are applicable only to
those Columbia River Estuary Shorelands that are designated as Water-
Dependent Development Shorelands. The purpose of these policies and
standards is to assure that adequate sites are available for water-
dependent uses.

Policies

1. Shorelands especially suited for water-dependent uses shall be
protected for water-dependent,uses and for other uses as provided for in
the designation (Subsection 2.3.9.).

2. Shorelands especially suited for water-dependent recreational,
commercial and industrial uses shall be placed in a Water-dependent
Development Shorelands designation. Some factors which contribute to
this special suitability are:

(a) Deep water close to shore;

(b) Supporting land transport facilities suitable for ship and
barge facilities;

(d) Protected areas subject to scour which would require little
dredging for -use as marinas;

(e) Potential for recreational utilization of the estuary or
riparian areas.

3-60

3.3.21. Implementation

The policies in this section are intended to assure consistent
region-wide implementation of the policies arrtd standards in Section
3.3.1. through 3.3.20.

Policies

1. Prepermit application meetings and site visits shall be encouraged.

2. Initial site visit shall be structured such that key issues will ,be
addressed and consensus, to the degree possible,,is establishedon each
issue. This will require a structured format listing goals, obj ectives,
and specific activities.

3. The regional policies and standards in sections 3.3.1. through
3.3.20. are part of a regional plan for the Columbia River Estuary.
Amendments must be coordinated with the Columbia River Estuary Study
Taskforce (CREST).

4. CREST will provide planning assistance to member agencies upon
request to and approval by the CREST Council, review local comprehensive
plans and shoreline management master programs, and make recommendations
which will result in coordination and conformance with the Columbia
River Estuary Regional Management Plan.
5. CREST will provide technical information and assistance to' members
and other agencies for Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan
implementation.

6. CREST members will maintain the coordinated Regional Management
Plan by mutually adopting Plan amendments during scheduled Plan updates.

3.4. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

This section describes some of the additional substantive and
procedural requirements associated with several of the uses and activi-
ties in the permitted use lists (Subsection 2.3.).

3.4.1. Oregon Jurisdiction Impact Assessment

Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 16, dealing with estuarine resour-
ces, requires that actions which would potentially alter the estuarine
ecosystem must be preceded by an assessment of potential impacts. The
Impact Assessment need not be lengthy and complex, but it should enable
reviewers to gain a clear understanding of the impacts expected. The
following uses and activities, in addition to those so indicated on the
use lists, all require an Impact Assessment at the time a local permit
is reviewed:

3-61

Dredging;
Aquatic area fill;
In-water structures;
Riprap;
New in-water log storage areas;
Water intake pipes;
In-water dredged material disposal;
Beach nourishment;
Other uses or activities which could affect estuarine
physical or biological resources; and
Uses or activities that require a Resource Capability
Determination.

Information needed to complete the Impact Assessment may be ob-
tained from sources other than the permit application, such as a Federal
Environmental Impact Statement. An assessment of impacts of aquatic
area pesticide application shall be provided by the Oregon Department of
Agriculture and the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality.

A complete Impact Assessment includes the following information:

1. Aquatic life forms and habitat, including information on both the
extent of and impacts on: habitat type and use, species present (in-
cluding threatened or endangered species), seasonal abundance, sedi-
ments, and vegetation.

2. Shoreland life forms and habitat, including information on both the
extent of and impacts on: habitat type and use, species present, (in-
cluding threatened or endangered species), seasonal abundance, soil
types and characteristics, and vegetation present.

3. Water quality, including information on: sedimentation and turbid-
ity, dissolved oxygen, biochemical oxygen demand, contaminated sedi-
ments, salinity, water temperatures, and expected changes due to the
proposed use or activity.

4. Hydraulic characteristics, including information on: water circu-
lation, shoaling patterns, potential for erosion or accretion in adja-
cent areas, changes in flood levels, flushing capacity, and water flow
rates.

5. Air quality, including information on quantities of particulates
and expected airborne pollutants.

6. Public access to the estuary and shoreline, including info---Mation
on: proximity to publicly-owned shorelands and public street ends;
effect on public boat launches, marinas and docks; and impact on inven-
toried public access opportunities.

7. Navigation, including information on: distance from navigation
channels, turning basins and anchorages; proximity to range markers.

8. Demonstration that proposed structures or devices are properly
engineered.

3-62

9. Demonstration that the project's potential public benefits will
equal or exceed expected adverse impacts.

10. Demonstration that non-water dependent uses will not preempt
existing or future water-dependent utilization of the area.

12. Determination of methods for mitigation and accommodation of the
proposed development, based on items (1) through (10) above, in order to
avoid or minimize preventable adverse impacts.

Based on the information and analysis in (1) through (11) above,
one of the following four conclusions shall be reached:

- The proposed uses and activities do not represent a potential
degradation or reduction of estuarine resource.

- The proposed uses and activities represent a potential degra-
dation or reduction of estuarine resources. The impact
assessment identifies reasonable alterations or conditions
that will eliminate or minimize to an acceptable level expect-
ed adverse impacts.

The proposed uses and activities will result in unacceptable
losses. The proposed development represents irreversible
changes and actions and unacceptable degradation or reduction
of estuarine resource properties will result.

Available information is insufficient for predicting and
evaluating potential impacts. More information is needed
before the project can be approved.

3.4.2. Oregon Jurisdiction Resource Capability Determination

Some of the uses and activities listed in the use lists (Subsection
2.3.) may only be approved when consistent with the resource capabili-
ties of the area and the purposes of the designation. This section
describes procedures for making this determination. A completed re-
source capability determination'consists of three elements.

1. Identification of the affected area's designation, and its purpose.

2. Identification of the types and extent of.estuarine resources
present and expected adverse impacts. This information is included in
the impact assessment.

3. A determination of whether the use or activity is consistent with
the resource capabilities of the affected designation. A use or activi-
ty is consistent with the resource capabilities of the area when either
the impacts of the use on estuarine species, habitats, biological
productivity, and water quality are not significant or that the resourc-
es of the area are able to-assimilate the use and activity and their
effects and continue to function in a manner which either:

3-63

(a) InNatural Aquatic designations, protects significant wildlife
hahitks, natural biological productivity, and values for
scientific research and education; or

(b) In Conservation-Aquatic designations, conserves long-term
renewable resources, natural biological productivity, recrea-
tion and aesthetic values and aquaculture.

For temporary alterations, the resource capability determination
must also include:

4. Determination that the short-term damage to estuary and shoreland
resources is consistent with the resource capabilities of the area; and

5. Determination that the area and affected resources can be restored
to their original condition.

3.4.3. Washington Jurisdiction State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)
Checklist

Washingtonts State Environmental Policy Act (RCW 43.21C) requires
that certain types of projects may be approved only upon review of an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). EIS details, and the types of
projects they are applicable to, are too complex to describe here. They
are described. fully in the SEPA-administrative rules (WAC 197-11). The
elements of a completed EIS are listed below, in outline format:

(1) Natural Environment

(a) Earth

(i) Geology

(ii) Soils

(iii) Topography

(iv) Unique Physical Features

(v) Erosion/accretion

(b) Air

(i) Air Quality

(ii) Odor

(iii) Climate

(i) Surfacewater movement/quantity/quality

3-64

(ii) Runoff/absorption

(iii) Floods

(iv) Groundwater movement/quantity/quality

(v) Public water supplies

(d) Plants and Animals

(i) Habitat, numbers, diversity

(ii) Unique species

(iii) Migration routes

(e) Energy and Natural Resources

(i) Amount required/rate of use/efficiency

(ii) Source/availability

(iii) Conservation and renewable resources

(iv) Scenic resources

(2) Built Environment

(a) Environmental Health

(i) Noise

(ii) Risk of Explosion

(iii) Toxic or@hazardous materials

(b) Land and Shoreline Use

(i) Land use plans/estimated population

(ii) Housing

(iii) Light and glare

(iv) Aesthetics

(v) Recreation

(vi) Historic and cultural preservation

(vii) Agricultural crops

3-65

(i) Transportation systems

(ii) Vehicular traffic

(iii) Waterborne, rail, and air traffic

(iv) Parking

(v) Movement/circulation of people and goods

(vi) Traffic hazards

(d) Public services and utilities

(i) Fire

(ii) Police

(iii) Schools

(iv) Parks and other recreation facilities

(v) Maintenance

(vi) Communication

(vii) Water/storm waste

(viii) Sewer/solid waste

(ix) Other governmental services or utilities

3-66

4. LAND AND WATER USE PLAN

INTRODUCTION

4.1.1. The Estuary Planning Area

The Columbia River Estuary planning area includes aquatic areas and
shorelands from the 3-mile limit offshore to the eastern boundary of
Wahkiakum County in Washington and the eastern boundary of Clatsop
County in Oregon. All tributary streams to the head of tide and their
adjacent shorelands are included within the estuary planning area.
Although shorelands generally ext end to the landward limit of the
floodplain for planning purposes, jurisdictional boundaries of the
shorelands zones define a much smaller area. This Plan's informational
sections, such as descriptions of shoreland features and human uses,
apply to the entire floodplain area. Regulatory sections, such as
aquatic and shoreland designations and policies,,apply to.the narrower
jurisdictional shoreland area.

The estuary is divided into 46 planning subareas. Thesesubareas.
were drawn to represent distinct,planning units with common features and
needs. Land use patterns, phy@;ic al and biological characteristics, and
jurisdictional boundaries were used to determine subarea boundaries.

The subarea plans are divided into.several elements, each of which
addresses a different set pf factors affecting land use. The elements.
are designed to provide local'igovernment officials, planners,,and other
plan users with the background information needed to evaluate develop-
ment proposals. Those elements and their contents are described below.

4.1.2. General Description

This section contains a descript ion of subarea boundaries and
general characteristics. The boundaries are described using, where
possible, commonly known features.

4.1.3. Aquatic Features

This section describes predominant aquatic area characteristics.
The aquatic area is defined as all areas lying below the landward limit
of aquatic vegetation or, where there is no vegetation, Mean Higher High
Water. The following physical and biological characteristics are
discussed:

a. Changes to the aquatic habitats over the past century.

4-1

b. Currents, bathymetry.' salinity, @idal influences, flushing,
sedimentation, and flow;

C. Estuarine wetlands;

d. Benthic a.nd water-column invertebrates;

e. Fish; and

f. Wildlife.

4.1.4. Shoreland Features

This section contains information on shoreland physical and biolog-
ical features. Features discussed include:

a. Soils;

b. Topography;

C. Vegetation;

d. Nontidal wetland habitat; and

e. Wildlife.

For informational and planning purposes, the shoreland features section
describes all of the land area within the.floodplain. Much of this area
does not fall under the regulatory bouncla'ries of shorelands, as defined
by Washington and Oregon.

The regulatory shoreland area on the Washington side of the Colum-
bia River Estuary includes all land within;two hundrGd feet from the
ordinary high water mark, floodways and contiguous floodplain areas
landward two hundred feet from such floodways, and all marshes, bogs,
swamps, and river deltas associated with the estuary (see RCW 90.'030).

The regulatory estuary shorelands area on the Oregon side of the
Columbia River Estuary includes all lands within fifty feet landward of
the shoreline. Land with the following characteristics is also includ-
ed:

a. Lands subject to ocean flooding;

b. Areas of geologic instability;

C. Riparian resources;

d. Significant shoreland and wetland biological habitats;

e. Areas necessary for water-dependent and water-related uses;

4-2

f. Areas of exceptional aesthetic or scenic quality;

g. Coastal headla.nds; and

h. Dikes and their assaciated toe -drains.

4.1.5. Human Use

This section describes human land andwater uses in each subarea.
The following factors, where applicable,, are discussed:

a. Predominant economic activities and developed land uses;

b. Locational advantages to economic activities resulting from
the presence of natural resources or from physical site
characteristics;

C. Recreational uses, both active and passive;

d. Ma-or T,[email protected] non-poiat pollution sources;

e. Navigational structures and channels;

f. Transportatton facilities; and

g. Cumulative impacts on the. subarea of particular activities
(see Se-tion 5, 'Jdr region -wide cumulative impact information).

4.1.6. Issues

This section focuses on,the relationship between resources and uses
identified in the "previous three sections and existing and projected
land use patterns. Areas are identified where conflicts exist between
pressures for development and resource conservation. Limitations on
development potential resulting from physical site characteristics are
discussed with particular emphasis on changes that have taken place
since adoption of the 1979 Regional Management Plan.

4.1.7. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

Based on an evaluation of the aquatic and shoreland features
described in the previous sections, the Plan designates portions of the
various subareas according to their development potential, resource
sensitivity, and conservation needs. Aquatic and shoreland designations
are used with the policies and development standards to determine the
types and intensities of uses which would be permitted within the
subarea. Aquatic and shoreland designations are defined in Subsection

4-3

2.1. Shoreland designations apply to the regulatory shoreland area
only. This subsection defines the regulatory shoreland boundary of each
subarea.

4.1.8. Subarea Policies

This subsection includes policies that contain specific provisions
concerning a unique physical, land use, or economic characteristic of
the subarea. Policies applicable to the entire estuary are included in
Subsection 3.3.

4-4

4.2. MOUTH OF THE COLUMBIA RIVER

4r.2.1. General Description

This subarea includes the South Jetty, the offshore waters west to
the Columbia River Entrance Buoy and the estuary between the South Jetty
and a line connecting Jetty A and the North Jetty. It extends upstream
to about RM 3. It does not, however, include Clatsop Spit,
Jetty A, the ocean beaches or any land areas except the South Jetty.
The subarea extends seaward of the three mile limit (state and county
line) to the Columbia Entrance Buoy, encompassing productive areas
outside the mouth of the estuary and dredged material disposal sites.
The subarea includes parts of both Clatsop and Pacific Counties.

4.2.2. Aquatic Features

The Mouth of the Columbia River Subarea includes waters both inside
,the estuary and in the ocean. The river mouth has undergone large
phy sical changes resulting from construction of the entrance jetties.
Prior to jetty construction, the mouth of the river was at Cape Disap-
pointment in Washington and Point Adams in Oregon. Large, shifting sand
barsand shallow channels characterized the area. With the construction
of thejetties,,the mouth was moved about 3-1/2 miles seaward and
constricted from 6 to 2 miles wide. The constriction of the mouth has
resulted in a deeper entrance channel.

T'he mouth of the Columbia River is the most physically dynamic area
of the estuary. Tidal currents, freshwater flow, wind-drive:n- currents,
waves, and coastal currents all affect the waters of the subarea.
Currents and wave action combine to make navigation difficult..

Sediments in the subareq consist almost entirely fine sand inside
the mouth and in the adjacent offshore area. Some silt is found farther
offshore and south of the entrance. Outside the mouth, sediment is
transported by wind-driven currents and waves. The dominant direction
of sediment transport is north. From the bar inward tidal estuarine and
river flow effects become much more important. Upstream bottom.currents
bring sand into the estuary from the ocean during low flow periods. The
overall yearly balance and the effect of storms are not known.

Salinity levels in the estuary portions of the subarea vary from
zero to near ocean salinities depending on tidal cycle and river dis-
charge. During high river discharge the water column becomes stratified
with bottom salinity levels greatly exceeding those on the surface. The
area becomes entirely freshwater during very high river discharges and
strong ebb tides. During low river discharge, the water column becomes
highly stratified during reap tides and nearly unstratified during
spring tides.

Plant types in the subarea include phytoplankton and marine algae.
Phytoplankton productivity is high in offshore areas but is generally

4-5

low within the estuary portion of the subarea. Marine algae grow on the
jetties.

,Zooplankton productivity is very high in this area and seaward for
several miles. Benthic invertebrate production is high in offshore
marine waters but decreases toward the mouth. There is an extensive
commercial crab and shrimp fishery outside the mouth, while recreational
crab fishing is important inside the jetties. Th 'e main channel area is
an important nursery area for juvenile Dungeness crab.

Fish in the subarea include a mix of coastal marine, estuarine and
anadromous species. Common marine species include English sole, sand
sole, butter sole, starry flounder, northern anchovy, surf smelt,
whitebait smelt, and Pacific tomcod. Anadromous fish including longfin
smelt, American shad, eulachon, and the salmonids migrate through the
subarea.

Birds commonly occurring within the subarea include cormorants,
gulls, surf scooters, and western grebes.

The subarea is an important feeding area for California and north-
ern sea lions. Although the sea lion species can be found in the
subarea year round, they are most common in winter and spring. Harbor
seals also feed in the subarea.

4.2.3. Shoreland Features

The only shorelands in the subarea are on the South Jetty, which is
constructed of rock and rubble. The tip of the South Jetty is the
largest California and northern sea lion haulout site in the estuary.

4.2.4. Human Use

This subarea contains the downstream end of the authorized naviga-
tion channel (55 feet deep by 1/2 mile wide to RM 3). The channel is
stabilized by the entrance jetties and maintained primarily by hopper
dredge. The average amount dredged from this subarea is about 7 million
cubic yards per year. The offshore disposal sites (Areas A, B, E, and
F) are in the outer portions of this area. An in-water estuary site
(Area D in the Estuary Channels Subarea) was used for disposal from the
inner bar when, during rough bar conditions, disposal at sites outside
the mouth (disposal sites A, B, E, and F) was too hazardous. The Corps
of Engineers has adopted a change in practices to discontinue disposal
of entrance material in Area D. Recreational use of the waters by small
boats is high. The Buoy 10 sports fishery draws large numbers of
recreational anglers to this area each summer. Commercial fishing is
intensive throughout the year.

The cumulative impact of jetty construction and dredging on circu-
lation and securing in this subarea has been substantial, particularly

4-6

with respect to deep-draft navigation. The cumulative impact of the
jetties on sand transport along the ocean beaches is not well-
documented, but probably significant. The cumulative impact of bar
dredging on fish habitat, particularly Dungeness crabs, may be signifi-
cant, but recent studies on this are inconclusive.

4.2.5. Issues

The Corps of Engineers is currently studying the effects of dredg-
ing the bar on the juvenile Dungeness crab population. Study results
demonstrate that the hopper dredged removes large numbers of juvenile
crab from the bar. The effect of this removal on the regional crab
population has not been determined.

Peacock Spit has accreted north of the North Jetty (in the Cape
Disappointment Subarea) and is part of Fort Canby State Park. In recent
years the spit has experienced erosion and the Washington State Parks
Department desires maximum disposal of dredged material at Area E, since
this may feed the beach at Peacock Spit and retard erosion. The desir-
ability of extensive disposal at Area E needs to be evaluated, particu-
larly as it may affect the productive crab fishery in the area.

4.2.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

All aquatic areas are Conservation, except:

1. Dredged material disposal sites A, B, E, and F, which are designat-
ed Development.

2. The navigation channel, plus a flowlane disposal area on each side
(either 600 feet wide or to the 20-foot bathymetric contour,
whichever is narrowest), is designated Development.

Shorelands on the South Jetty are designated Development.

The South Jetty is entirely within the regulatory shorelands
boundary.

4.2.7. Subarea Policies

1. Adverse impacts on Dungeness crab habitat and on commercial or
recreational crabbing in the Mouth of the Columbia River subarea
caused by dredging or by in-water dredged material disposal shall
be minimized.

4-7

4.3. ESTUARY CHANNELS

4.3.1. General Description

This subarea includes the deep water portions of the estuary from
Jetty A (RM 3) to the upper end of Rice Island (RM 22.5). The subarea
is not restricted to the authorized navigation channel, but includes the
flowlanes of both the north and south channels. The boundary of the
subarea generally follows the 20-foot bathymetric contour; however, it
varies from this contour in the vicinity of cities and other subareas
containing deep channels. There are no intertidal wetland or shoreland
areas. Portions of Clatsop, Pacific and Wahkiakum Counties, and
Astoria, Hammond and Warrenton are within this subarea.

4.3.2. Aquatic Features

Human activities have caused some changes in the channels. Histor-
ically, the north channel carried a larger portion of the river flow
than the south. Navigation structures, including primarily pile dikes
and created islands, now direct a larger portion of the flow to the
south channel.

Tidal and river flow are the primary factors influencing currents
in the subarea. Most of the tidal exchange between the estuary and
ocean occurs through the north channel. In comparison, the south 0
channel receives less tidal flow but greater river flow. As a result,
flood currents are relatively stronger'in the north channel while ebb
currents are relatively stronger in the south channel.

Salinity levels vary widely both over time and among different
parts of the subarea. The eastern extent of the subarea represents the
normal upstream limit of salinity intrusion. Salinity levels increase
in the downstream direction. In most of the subarea salinity levels
vary from freshwater condition to 33 ppt. Generally, salinity levels in
bottom waters are greater than those on the surface. Saline water
intrudes farther upstream in the north channel than in the south.

Sediments in the subarea range primarily from coarse to medium
sand. Patches of very fine sand, silt, and clay appear periodically in
the portion of the channel between approximately RM 8 and 18. In
addition, the south channel contains fine sand during low river dis-
charge months in the area between RM 8 and 12. The area of finer
sediments results from settling of sediments associated with the
turbidity maximum zone. This zone is the area where upstream suspended
sediment transport converges with downstream sediment transport.

Sediment bedload transport is upstream on the channel bottoms from
about Hammond to Astoria during the low river discharge and winter
months and in the vicinity of Hammond only during high river discharge.
Upriver from these regions, bedload transport is downstream. The area

4-8

of bedload sediment transport convergence generally corresponds with the
turbidity maximum zone.

The only plant type in the subarea is phytoplankton. Phytoplankton
productivity is relatively high at the upstream end of the subarea and
decreases to relatively low levels toward the downstream end.

All of the estuary's major invertebrate groups, zooplankton,
benthic infaunai and epibenthic organisms, have been studied in the
subarea. The accumulation of particulate organic matter in the
turbidity maximum zone allows for very high zooplankton and epibenthic
organism population densities in the area between RM 8 and 18. The most
abundant planktonic organism in this region, Eurytemora affinis, has
been most considered by researchers to be the most important food
species for fish in the estuary. As a result of dynamic sediment
conditions benthic infauna populations are relatively sparse in the
channels. Dungeness crab use the western part of the subarea as a
nursery area.

Fish populations in the estuary tend to concentrate in the area
between RM 6 and 19, due to the abundant supply of invertebrate food
species. The subarea is an important nursery area for marine bottom
species such as English sole, starry flounder, and Pacific staghorn
sculpin. Pacific tomcod, snake prickleback, and northern anchovy are
seasonally abundant in the channels. White and green sturgeon popula-
tions concentrate in the deeper portions of the subarea, primarily in
the north channel near the Astoria-Megler Bridge and in the south
channel off Tongue Point. Pacific herring, shiner perch, and longfin
smelt possibly spawn in the subarea.

In addition to longfin smelt, other anadromous species including
American shad, eulachon, and the salmonids utilize the subarea as a
migration route and nursery area. Adult American shad migrate upriver
primarily in June and July while juveniles migrate downriver mainly in
November and December. Juvenile shad use the channels year round as a
nursery area. Eulacbon migrate upriver from December through April with
a peak run in February. All of the salmonid species abundant in the
estuary use the channels as a migration route. Subyearling chinook
migrate downriver primarily from March through August. Yearling chinook
and coho salmon and juvenile steelhead and cutthroat trout migrate
through the subarea primarily in spring.

Several bird species, particularly the fish-eaters, utilize the
subarea. Bird concentrations tend to be greater in the north channel
than the south channel. Cormorants use primarily the western portion of
the subarea while common mergansers and western grebes use the eastern
portion. Surf scoters are also abundant in the subarea. Bald eagles
associated with nesting sites near Tongue Point and along the northern
shore of the estuary feed in the subarea.

The channels are important feeding areas for harbor seals and
California sea lions. Harbor seals use the subarea year round while
California sea lions use the channels primarily in winter.

4-9

4.3.3. Human Use

Navigation, maintenance dredging, and dredged material disposal are
the predominant human activities in the ship channel. Waste disposal,
principally from fish processing, is a lesser use. There are also
gillnet drifts in and around the north and south channels. Recreational
fishing for salmon and sturgeon is important. Recreational and commer-
cial crabbing occur off Hammond and the Sand Islands. The cumulative
impacts of navigation channel maintenance on the southern arm of this
subarea have been significant with respect to both navigation and
circulation. The northern arm of the subarea has been affected by de-
creased river flow and some shoaling as a result of river training
structures.

4.3.4. Issues

In-water disposal of dredged material is an issue of concern.
Approximately 1.2 million cubic yards of dredged material are removed
from this reach each year. Approximately 630,000 cubic yards of materi-
al are placed in the Harrington Point Sump by hopper dredge each year,
and eventually moved by pipeline dredge to Rice Island (See the Estuary
Sands Subarea Plan). Approximately 650,000 cubic yards are deposited in
Area D annually.

Area D is located in the north channel of the Columbia River
Estuary approximately 4,200 feet south of the Chinook pile dike.
Disposal of dredged material at Area D is a major concern. The Corps of
Engineers places dredged material at Area D for several channel mainten-
ance projects in the lower estuary. A study by CREST (Benoii and Fox,
1986: *Dredged Material Disposal at Area D) made several recommenda-
tions, including a maximum limit of 3,250,000 yards of dredged material
over a 5-year time period.

4.3.5. Aquatic Designations

. All aquatic areas are Conservation except:

1. The main navigational channel, plus a flowlane disposal area on
each side of the channel (either 600 feet wide or to the 20 feet
below MLLW contour, whichever is narrower) is designated Develop-
ment.

2. Designated dredged material disposal sites are designated Develop-
ment.

41-10

4.3.6. Subarea Policies

1. The use of the Area D in-%ater dredged mgterial disposal site shall
be kept to an absolute minimum. In all cases, ocean disposal shall
be substituted for the use of this site whenever feasible. The use
of Area D shall be regula@ed by implementing cubic yardage limita-
tions for dredged material disposal. The Corps of Engineers should
continue to examine alternative disposal sites and methods that
would result in fewer adverse shoaling impacts. The use of Area D
should be discontinued when feasible alternatives are found.

2. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers shall continue to review naviga-
tion improvements and the impacts of disposal of dredged material
at Area D with the objective of minimizing undesirable sedimenta-
tion.

4-11

4.4. ESTUARY SANDS

4.4.1. General Description

this subarea includes the extensive mid-estua'ry sand flats between
approximately RM 6 and RM 24 and the adjacent slopes to as deep as 20
feet below MLLW. These include Desdemona and Taylor Sands, the Tongue
Point bar and other unnamed sands, the largest of which extends west and
north from Rice Island into Grays Bay. Rice Island, a dredged material
island, is also included. Rice Island and adjacent water areas are part
of the Lewis and Clark National Wildlife Refuge. This subarea includes
portions of Clatsop, Pacific and Wahkiakum Counties.

4.4.2. Aquatic Features

The western part of this subarea has accreted significantly since
the construction of the jetties at the mouth. The increase in tidal
currents resulting from constriction of the mouth by the jetties has
caused sediments forming the natural tidal delta to be transported both
into the estuary and out to sea. A portion of the sediment transported
into the estuary has accumulated in the estuary sands subarea.

Strong river and tidal currents and wind waves create the high.
energy environments of the Estuary Sands Subarea. The broad, shallow
channels between Desdemona,and Taylor Sands form the main corridor of
water transport between the north and south channels. Water flows
southeasterly from the north to the south channel during flood tides.and
northwesterly from the south to the north channels during ebb tides.

Salinity levels are similar to surface salinities found in the
adjacent north and south channels (see Estuary Channels Subarea Plan).

The subarea has a wide r'ange of sediment types. The tidal flat
sediments range from medium to fine sand while the surrounding slopes
contain coarse to medium sand. Scattered deposits of silt and clay
appear intermittently throughout the subarea.

Plant types in the subarea include phytoplankton and benthic algae.
Phytoplankton productivity is similar to that found in the adjacent
north and south channel (see Estuary Channels Subarea Plan). Benthic
algae productivity on the sands is"low due to the instability of the
sediments.

Invertebrate, fish and bird species present in the subarea are
similar to those found in the surrounding north and south channels (see
Estuary Channels Subarea Plan). The subarea is an important fish and
bird feeding area.

Taylor Sands and the surrounding waters are important feeding areas
for the Mill Creek bald eagle pair (see Tongue Point Subarea Plan ).
Feeding in this area is particularly intense during the nesting season.

4-12

A pile dolphin on Taylor Sands provides an important hunting perch for
the eagles.

The subarea contains the largest harbor seal haulout sites in the
estuary. Desdemona and Taylor Sands each contain two haulout sites.
The largest site, on Desdemona Sands, is used by about 50% of the
estuary's harbor seal population in winter and early spring, nearly 100%
of the population in late spring and summer, and 80 to 90% of the
population in fall.

4.4.3. Shoreland Features

The only shorelands in the subarea occur on Rice Island. Rice
Island is a large dredged material disposal island created to receive
material from the main navigation channel, and to direct river flow.
The island has some planted vegetation, primarily grasses, to stabilize
the sand. Canada geese nest on the island.

4.4.4. Human Use

Major uses and activities in this subarea include gillnet drifts
along the margins of the sands and in the minor channels between the
sand bars, recreational boating, and small boat and tug navigation
across the rivar. Dredging and dredged material disposal have occurred
on and around various sands. The sands were used for horse seining and
fish t-raps when such activities were practiced. The only area currently
being used for dredged material disposal is Rice Island, an Jntirely
man-made island created for the dual purposes of flow control and
dredaed material disposal. The cumulative impact of channel maintenance
(dredging and river training) on circulation and sediment transport has
been significant in this suba-rea. Shoaling has increased substantially
in this subarea as a result of jetty construction and other channel
maintenance activities.

4.4.5. Issues

Potential uses of the sand flats include dredged material disposal,
recreation, aquaculture, and restoration. The Corps of Engineers has
proposed creation of additional islands for dredged material disposal.
State and federal resource agencies have raised concerns regarding the
proposal and it may not be actively pursued. Island creation for
dredged material disposal would require amendment of local shoreline
master programs and comprehensive plans.

The Cor ps of Engineers and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
cooperate with regard to management of dredged material disposal is-

4-13

lands. The cooperative agreement provides for continued dredged materi-
al disposal on Rice Island, and establishes timing of disposal as well
as revegetation and habitat maintenance techniques.

4.4.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

Subtidal aquatic areas and the narrow tidal flat along the south
shore of Rice Island are Conservation. All other tidal flats are
Natural.

All shoreland areas are Conservation.

Rice Island is entirely within the regulatory shorelands area.

4.4.7. Subarea Policies

1. Proposals to enlarge existing dredged material disposal islands or
to create new ones will require an exception to Oregon Statewide
Planning Goal 16.

2. The use of heavy equipment on rice Island in association with
dredged material disposal activities is appropriate.

4-14

4.5. RIVER CHANNELS

4.5.1. General Description

This subarea includes the deep water portions (deeper than 20 feet
below MLLW) of the authorized navigation channel and adjacent slopes
between Harrington Point (RM 22.5) and the western end of Puget Island.
The authorized navigation channel is in this subarea, but side channels
are not included. There are no intertidal wetlands or shorelands. Some
water areas are part of the Lewis and Clark National Wildlife Refuge.
Parts of Wahkiakum and Clatsop Counties are included.

4.5.2. Aquatic Features

While tides and tidal currents are important in this reach, fresh
water flow increasingly dominates circulation patterns toward the
upriver end. Salinity intrusion varies, depending on freshwater flow
and the tides, but will normally not extend past Pillar Rock. Flood
tide currents may not be observable under high flow conditions, and the
100-year flood level rises sharply toward the upstream limit of the
subarea.

Sediments in the channel and slopes are largely medium to coarse
sand, with some gravel. Compacted finer sediments are found in some
scour holes. The transport of sand and gravel as bedload is almost
entirely downstream. Some sand will also move in suspension under
freshet conditions.

Phytoplankton comprise the only plant type found in the subarea.
The phytoplankton consist primarily of freshwater species carried into
the estuary from upriver. They exhibit relatively high productivity
levels in the subarea. As these freshwater species encounter saline
water downriver from the subarea many are killed. This accounts for the
lower phytoplankton productivity in downriver subareas (see Estuary
Channels Subarea Plan).

Zooplankton, benthic infauna, and epibenthic organism species
occurring in the subarea consist primarily of freshwater species.
Population densities are relatively low.

Fish species present in the subarea include freshwater fishes,
marine fishes tolerant of low salinities, and anadromous fishes. The
most abundant freshwater species include threespine stickleback, pea-
mouth, and prickly sculpin. Principal marine species in the subarea
include starry flounder, Pacific staghorn sculpin, Pacific tomcod, and
snake prickleback. White sturgeon concentrate in deep channel areas.
The primary anadromous species include American shad, eulachon, and the
salmonids (see Estuary Channels Subarea Plan).

Several species of water birds utilize the subarea. Double-crested
cormorants associated with nesting sites on range markers off of Miller

4-15

Sands are abundant. Waterfowl species, including mallard, surf scoter,
and common merganser, feed in the subarea.

Two marine mammal species, harbor seals and California sea lions
use the subarea. They are most common in winter when the seals and sea
lions feed on the eulachon run as it moves upriver.

4.5.3. Human Use

The main navigation channel passes through this area. Dredging is
required at five separate bars, with an average 900,000 cubic yards
removed annually by pipeline and 625,000 cubic yards by hopper dredge.
In-water disposal occurs at the Harrington Point Sump (for re-handling)
and at several flowlane disposal sites along the main navigation chan-
nel. Numerous pile dikes exist. Gillnet drifts exist along the edge of
and in the main navigation channel. Commercial sturgeon gillnetting,
sports fishing and pleasure boating also occur. The cumulative impact
of channel maintenance activities on water quality and circulation may
be substantial.

4.5.4. Issues

Major issues in this subarea are related to dredging, disposal and
navigational structures and their impact on fish habitat and commercial
fisheries. Replacement of pile dikes in this area is being studied by
the Corps of Engineers. Depending on the results of monitoring the
prototype rock groin at Cottonwood Island, the Corps may congider
replacing aging pile dikes in this subarea with rock groins.

Gillnet fishermen have expressed concern over in-water activities
which interfere with commercial fishing. Major areas of conflict
include:

Sinker logs from log rafts;

Debris uncovered by dredging; and

Dredged material disposal.

Potential conflicts may be alleviated through continued coordina
tion between gillnetters, log transport companies and the Corps of
engineers. Some gillnetters have suggested that they be reimbursed for
costs they incur while clearing drift areas. Such a requirement is
outside of this Plan's scope. Planning measures that can be implemented
to reduce the snag problem include:

- Requirements that conflicting activities avoid gillnet drifts
whenever possible; and

- Requirements that gillnet drift captains be consulted concerning
timing and location of in-water activity.

4-16

4.5.5. Aquatic Designations

The main navigation channel on each side of the channel (extending
either 600 feet or to the 20-foot bathymetric contour, whichever is
narrowest), are designated Development. All other areas are Conserva-
tion.

4.5.6. Subarea Policies

1. Prior to approval of in-water activities with the potential for
affecting fisheries, the project sponsor shall notify local drift
captains, the Columbia River Fisherman's Protective Union and the
Northwest Gillnetters Association. The Washington Department of
Fisheries shall also be consulted to determine project timing and
methods that will minimize impacts on the fishery.

2. In-water activities that may leave snags in gillnet drifts whenever
possible. If a drift cannot be avoided, the project sponsor shall
notify the drift captain.

4-17

4.6. SNAG ISLANDS

4.6.1. General Description

This subarea includes dredged material disposal islands (Miller
Sands and Jim Crow Sands), tidal marsh (around the Snag Island Jetty and
Miller Sands), the Woody Island Channel, exposed sand bars south and
west of Woody Island Channel, and various subsidiary channels. The
entire subarea is within the Lewis and Clark National Wildlife Refuge,
and within Clatsop County.

4.6.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic portion of this subarea consists of several small marsh
islands and sandflats separated by a network of shallow channels.
Historically the subarea has tended to shoal due to navigation struc-
tures and created islands which have channeled most of the river flow
through the main navigation channel. There are more tidal marshes and
flats in the subarea than occurred a century ago. Woody Island channel
which runs along the southern boundary of the subarea was once an.
important navigation channel. Parts of the channel are now too shallow
for safe navigation by all but the smallest boats.

Little is known about currents in the subarea. Woody Island
channel is the main corridor for water transport through the subarea.
The subarea is primarily freshwater. During very low river discharge
conditions, saline water extends into Woody Island channel.

Sediments in most of the subarea are sandy. Coarse sand occurs in
the deeper areas while fine sand occurs on the flats. Sediments in the
tidal marshes probably consist mainly of silt and clay.

N
Plant types in the subarea include phytoplankton, benthic algae,
and tidal marsh vegetation. Phytoplankton productivity is relatively
high. Benthic algal productivity on the predominantly sandy tidal flats
is very low. The marshes of the subarea include colonizing low marshes
dominated by bulrush (Scirpus validus) and higher elevation low marshes
dominated by Lyngby's sedge (Ciir`exLyLibyei), reed canary grass (Phalaris
arundinacea), and cattail (Typha angustifolia). The colonizing marshes
develop on the downstream side of the islands while the higher marshes
develop on the upstream sides.

Of the estuary's invertebrate types, only benthic infauna and
epibenthic organisms have been studied in the subarea. Benthic infauna
densities are high. Important fish prey species such as the amphipod
Corphium salmonis and the clam Corbicula manilensis are abundant.
Epibenthic organism densities are also high in the subarea.

Fish species present in the subarea are the same as those found in
the River Channels Subarea and the upstream end of the Estuary Channels

4-18

Subarea. The shallow tidal flats and marsh channel are important
feeding and nursery areas for juvenile salmonids.

Several.specie's of water birds utilize the subarea. Double-crested
cormorants nest on channel range markers west of Miller Sands. Western
and glaucous-winged gulls occupy a small nesting colony on the western
tip of the Miller Sands sandspit. Abundant waterfowl in the subarea
include western grebe, mallard, and common merganser.

Marine mammal use of the subarea concentrates around a haulout site
south of Miller Sands. Harbor seals occupy this haulout year-round with
peak use in spring and winter. The aquatic mammal species muskrat and
nutria utilize the marshes of the subarea.

4.6.3. Shoreland Features

Shoreland in the subarea include Miller Sands and Jim Crow Sands,
both dredged material disposal islands. Soils on the islands consist of
Columbia River sand. Both islands are relatively low and flat.

Vegetation has been planted on the islands to help stabilize the
sand. Miller Sands has some well-developed grasslands and shrub and
willow/cottonwood habitat on the main island. Only scattered grasslands
have become established on Jim Crow Sands.

Wildlife on the islands includes small mammals such as muskrat and
nutria and several bird species. Bald eagles hunt from the islands.
Canada geese nest on Miller and Jim Crow Sands. There is a small
nesting colony of Caspian terns on Miller Sands.

4.6.4. Human Use

Activities in this area include navigational improvements, dredged
material disposal, commercial and sports fishing, wildlife observation,
waterfowl hunting, and trapping. Active dredging material disposal
sites are located on Jim Crow Sands and Miller Sands. Gillnet drifts
are found in Woody Island Channel and along the margins of the naviga-
tional channel.

4.6.5. Issues

The establishment of duck shacks in the sloughs and along the
shores of the islands is a long-standing issue. These structures are
approved for temporary periods (i.e., the hunting season) and not for
use as permanent residences. However, in some cases, they have been
improved beyond their intended function.

4-19

A proposal involving a possible exchange of the State of Oregon's
ownership interests in some estuary islands, including Miller Sands and
Jim Crow Sands Islands, for federal property on the South Tongue Point
peninsula was investigated in 1987. As part of the proposal, the
federal government would consolidate ownership of islands in the Lewis
and Clark National Wildlife Refuge (except Mott Island). The State of
Oregon would expand its ownership on the old naval station site on the
North Tongue Point peninsula and acquire the South Tongue Point peninsu-
la, facilitating its plans for development of the Tongue Point area.
Clatsop County may also quitclaim its relatively minor ownership inter-
ests in the estuary islands to the federal government in exchange for
in-lieu-of-tax payments.

This area is relatively distant from all boat ramps. The hunting
and sport fishing use of this area is probably less than in some other
subareas. All areas except Miller Sands are open to hunting and trap-
ping. Future use of Miller Sands and and Jim Crow Sands is an issue of
concern. Public access to the wildlife refuge is discussed in the Upper
Marsh Islands Subarea Plan.

4.6.6. Aquatic Designations

All aquatic areas are designated Conservation except:

The wetlands above the 3 feet bathymetric contour surrounding the Snag
Island Jetty; the wetlands,north of Green Island; and the unnamed sands
southeast of the Woody Island Channel area are all designated Natural.

Shorelands, including Miller Sands and Jim Crow Sands, @re desig-
nated Conservation.

Jim Crow Sands and Miller Sands Islands are within the regulatory
shoreland boundary.

4.6.7. Subarea Policies

1. Measures that increase or enhance public access opportunities to
the Wildlife Refuge are encouraged.

2. The use of heavy equipment in association with dredged material
disposal on Miller Sands and Jim Crow Sands is appropriate.

4-20

4.7. CATHLAMET BAY

4.7.1. General Description

This subarea includes Lois, Mott, Green, Russian, Seal, McGregor
and unnamed marsh islands; sand and mud flats; and parts of South,
Prairie and other subsidiary channels. It extends from near Tongue
Point (RM 19) to RM 25. The entire subarea is in the Lewis and Clark
Wildlife Refuge, and within Clatsop County.

4.7.2. Aquatic Features
The aquatic features in this subarea include s@veral tidal marsh
islands separated by relatively deep, narrow channels. Historically,
this subarea has tended to shoal and develop more marsh habitat. The
marshes of Green Island have developed in the past.century. Also, the
unnamed marsh islands in the western part of the subarea increased in
size since the creation of Lois Island.

There is little information on currents in the subarea. The
subarea is primarily freshwater with some salinity intrusion in the
deeper water areas north of Lois and Mott Islands. Sediments in the
subarea are similar to sediments in the Snag Islands Subarea.

The plant types present in the subarea include phytoplankton,
benthic algae, and tidal marsh and swamp vegetation. Phytoplankton and
benthic algal productivity are similar to that in the Snag Islands
Subarea. The low marshes of Green Island and the unnamed island east of
Lois Island have developed a pattern of growth common in the Cathlamet
Bay islands. The lowest elevation marshes develop on the downstream
sides of the islands and the highest on the upstream sides. The down-
stream sites consist of bulrush ( 'Scipus validus) dominated colonizing
low marshes which grade into tidal flats, while the upstream sides
consist of higher elevation marshes dominated by Lyngby's sedge (Carex
lyngbyei). The marshes of Russian Island are slightly higher than those
on the other islands. They are dominated by Lyngby's sedge, horsetail
(Equisetum fluviatile), rush (Juncus oxvmeris), wappato (Sagittaria
lattifolia), water parsnip (Si suave), and creeping spikerush
(Eleocharis palustris). The marsh islands have an extensive network of
t al channels. These channels are important as feeding and shelter
areas for juvenile salmonids. Although they have not been studied
extensively in the Columbia, marshes and associated tidal channels have
been demonstrated to be the most important salmon rearing habitats in
other estuaries. Lois and Mott Islands are surrounded by tidal marshes
and swamps. The marshes are similar to others found in the subarea.
The swamps contain primarily shrub species.

Invertebrate and fish species in the subarea are similar to those
found in the Snag Island Subarea.

4-21

Bird species common in the subarea are similar to those in the Snag
Island Subarea. In addition, great blue heron and shorebirds utilize
the subarea. Bald eagles use the subarea intensively as a feeding area.
South channel and the unnamed island and associated flats east of Lois
Island are used most frequently. Eagles also feed on Green and Russian
Islands and the marshes and flats around Lois Island. Piling on the
northern side of south channel are important bald eagle perching sites.
A breeding pair of eagles known as the Twilight Creek pair as well as
many non-breeding eagles that occupy the area primarily in winter and
spring use the subarea.

Marine mammal use of the subarea primarily occurs on and adjacent
to a harbor seal haulout site on Green Island. Although a relatively
small number of harbor seals utilize the site., it is one of the few
haulouts in the estuary where harbor seals give birth to young. They
generally give birth in late spring and raise the pups through summer.
The group of harbor seals remaining in the Columbia River during this
period generally produce fewer than 10 pups per year.

Aquatic and terrestrial mammals utilize the marshes and swamps of
the subarea. Muskrat and nutria occupy the marsh islands. These
species, along with beaver and raccoon are found in the swamps surround-
ing Lois and Mott Islands.

4.7.3. Shoreland Features

Shorelands in the subarea are on Lois and Mott Islands. Both
islands were created from material dredged from the MARAD Ba,@iin and
Tongue Point pier area. Both Islands are wooded with willow and alder
along the fringes and grass-covered on the interiors. Wildlife values
are considered high. There is a bald eagle perch site on the eastern-
most point of Lois Island.

4.7.4.- Human Use

Human use of this area includes sports and commercial fishing, log
storage and transport, hunting, trapping, and wildlife observation.
None of these could be classified as intensive.

4.7.5. Issues

The tidal flats and marshes of Cathlamet Bay are a highly produc-
tive, integral part of the estuarine ecosystem. Their inclusion in the
Lewis and Clark National Wildlife Refuge provides needed protection for
fish and wildlife resources in the area.

4-22

Both Mott and Lois Islands are within the wildlife refuge and the
habitat value of the upland areas for birds and wildlife is high. The
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has indicated that they generally
oppose use of the area for dredged material disposal. Recreational
fishing and boating may conflict with port development in the Tongue
Point area. Public access to the islands in the Wildlife Refuge is
limited. USFWS does not provide any access facilities, and does not
manage the refuge for public access.

4.7.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

Aquatic areas are Conservation, except for tidal marsh and other
wetland areas on and adjacent to the islands which are designated
Natural.

Shoreland areas in this subarea are designated Natural.

The entire upland portions of Lois and Mott Islands are included in
the regulatory shoreland boundary.

4.7.7. Subarea Policies

1. Measures that increase or enhance public access opportunities to
the Wildlife Refuge are encouraged.

4-23

4.8. UPPER MARSH ISLANDS

4.8.1. General Description

This diverse group of marsh islands and interconnecting channels
extends between Minaker Island (RM 26) and Welch Island (RM 35). The
subarea includes Minaker, Karlson, Marsh, Brush, Horseshoe, Woody,
Tronson, Quinns, Goose, Grassy, Fitzpatrick and Welch Islands. 'Large
sections of these islands consist of forested and shrub swamps, with
tidal marsh in the lower areas. Sand and mudflats also occur. The
shorelands are current or former dredged material disposal sites on
Woody, Welch, and Fitzpatrick Islands. The entire area is in the Lewis
and Clark National Wildlife Refuge, and within Clatsop County.

4.8.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic portions of this subarea include several large
intertidal marsh and swamp islands separated by relatively deep, narrow
channels. Historically the area has changed little compared with other
areas of the estuary. Horseshoe and Grassy Island marshes have enlarged
slightly in the last century.

There is little information on currents in the subarea. Saline
water does not intrude into the subarea. Sediments consist primarily of
very fine sand, silt, and @lay. Prairie Channel contains some coarser
sandy sediments.

The plant types in the subarea include phytoplankton, benthic
algae, and tidal marsh and swamp vegetation. Phytoplankton and benthic
algal productivity levels are similar to those in the Snag Islands
Subarea. The islands of the subarea contain the largest tracts of
intertidal tidal marsh and swamp in the estuary.

Most of Minaker Island is low marsh, with high marsh and mixed
shrub vegetation in a few areas. Karlson Island is more complex. About
one-fourth of the island was diked, but the dikes have breached and the
area has returned to tidal marsh. The western end of the island is
undisturbed tidal marsh. The rest of the island is tidal swamp consist-
ing of willow and a species mixture of alder, Sitka spruce, western red
cedar and cottonwood. Brush and Horseshoe Islands are a mixture of low
marsh, high marsh, and swamp. Marsh and Woody Islands consist mostly of
tidal swamp with some marsh. There is some willow swamp on Quinns and
Tronson Islands and some marsh on Goose, Grassy and Quinns Islands.
Fitzpatrick Island is dominated by low marsh. Welch Island is covered
with high sedge marsh, and cottonwood and willow swamp. The marsh and
swamp islands have an extensive network of tidal channels. These
channels are important as feeding and shelter areas for juvenile
salmonids. Although they have not been studied extensively in the
Columbia, marshes and associated tidal channels have been demonstrated
to be the most important juvenile salmon rearing habitats in other
estuaries.

4-24

Invertebrate and fish species in the subarea are similar to those
in the Snag Island Subarea.

Several species of resident and migratory birds f eed and nest in
the subarea. Because of presence of several types of habitats, the
subarea has the greatest bird numbers and species diversity in the
estuary. Double-crested cormorant feed in the water areas in summer,
fall, and winter. Western grebe and several other species of migratory
waterfowl winter in the subarea. Common merganser and mallard, both
resident waterfowl, nest in the marshes of the subarea. Other resident
waterfowl species that nest in the subarea's marshes include green-
winged teal, wood duck, and blue-winged/cinnamon teal. Green-winged
teal and wood duck are most concentrated on Karlson Island. Shorebirds
feed in the tidal flats,, low marsh, and high marsh habitats. Great blue
heron feed in the subarea year round and occupy a larger nesting colony
in a tidal spruce swamp on Karlson Island. The marshes and swamps of
the subarea also contain a diverse array of land birds. The subarea
provides important bald eagle habitat. Karlson, Marsh, and Quinns
Islands have bald eagle nesting sites within the wooded tidal swamp
habitats. In addition to supporting two nesting pairs of eagles, the
subarea also provides feeding habitat for wintering and transitory
eagles.

The marshes and swamps of the subarea receive the greatest aquatic
and terrestrial mammal use in the estuary. Muskrat and nutria feed and
den primarily in the tidal marshes. Muskrat are particularly abundant
in the sedge-dominated low marshes. Beaver feed and den in the Sitka
spruce and willow swamps while raccoon utilize the shrub swamps of the
subarea. River otter feed in the tidal sloughs of the subarea's swamps.
Two species of deer, the black-tailed deer and the Columbian-white-
tailed deer, utilize the subarea. Black-tailed deer feed in the swamps
of the larger islands as well as on the mainland. Columbian white-
tailed deer, an endangered species, occur on Karlson and Welch Islands.

4.8.3. Shoreland Features

The shorelands in the subarea consist of dredged material disposal
sites on Welch, and Fitzpatrick Islands and an inactive dredged material
disposal site on Woody Island. These areas are primarily sandy with
little wildlife value. The Soil Conservation Service is revegetating
the eastern part of the Fitzpatrick Island disposal site. Welch Island
is being revegetated by the 'U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service in accordance with an agreement on its use 'for
dredged material disposal. Woody Island has been revegetating natural-
ly.

4-25

4.8.4. Human Use

Human uses in the area include dredged material disposal, log
storage and transport, small boat navigation, sports and commercial
fishing, hunting, trapping, and wildlife observation.

4.8.5. Issues

The main access point is at Aldrich Point, and the nearby islands
probably receive more use than islands more distant from the boat ramp.
Karlson Island is closed to all public use. Welch Island is subject to
seasonal access regulations. Otherwise, the islands are open to the
public, but access is difficult.

The use of duck shacks in the subarea's sloughs is an issue. They
are sometimes used as permanent dwellings. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service believes that this level of use is incompatible with the
refuge's goal of wildlife protection and management. The U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service does not provide any public access facilities for the
refuges, and does not manage the refuges for public access. Increased
public access, consistent with wildlife management needs, is desired
locally.

4.8.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The marsh and tideflat areas and the formerly diked areaon Karlson
Island are Natural. All other water areas are Conservation.

The shoreland areas on Woody, Welch, an Fitzpatrick Islands are
designated Conservation.

The dredged upland sites on Woody, Welch, and Fitzpatrick Islands
are entirely within the regulatory shorelands boundary.

4.8.7. Subarea Policies

1. Measures that increase or enhance public access opportunities to
the Wildlife Refuge are encouraged.

2. The use of heavy equipment in association with dredged material
disposal on Welch and Fitzpatrick Islands is appropriate.

4-26

0!5, 124' 55* 12314!v

101 oi 4

................
....... . ..- . .......

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

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

CC-E 8. 5
Area E

......... .

Area

Area A

Area F

NATURAL-AQUATIC OR SHORELAND

CONSERVATION -AQUATIC OR SHORELAND

RURAL-AQUATIC OR SHORELAND

DEVELOPMENT- SHORELAND

DEVELOPMENT -AQUATIC OR WATER DEP-
ENDENT DEVELOPMENT SHORELANDS
......... EXTREME LOW WATER AND WATER WETLAND lot
BOUNDARY (-3*MLLW)
.... SHORELINE
.................
LINE OF NON-AQUATIC VEGETATION (AQUATIC SHORE-
LAND BOUNDARY)
............. SHORELAND BOUNDARY WITH UPLAND
CC-E-8 5 DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITES

__j

4-2 Mouth of the Columbia River; 4-3 Estuary Channels; 4-4 Estuary Sands; 4-5 River Channels;
4-6 Snag Islands; 4-7 Cathlamet Bay; 4-8 Upper Marsh Island

4-27

4.9. TENASILLAHE ISLAND

4.9.1. General Description

This subarea extends from Multnomah Slough (RM 35), which separates
Welch and Tenasillahe Islands, to the pile dike (RM 38) at the upstream
end of Tenasillahe Island, to the south side of the Main Channel and to
the center of the Clifton Channel. Most of the perimeter of Tenasillahe
Island is forested wetland. The remainder inside the dike is pasture
land and wetland. The island is part of the Columbia White-tailed Deer
National Wildlife Refuge. The entire subarea is in Clatsop County.

4.9.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic portions of this subarea include waters adjacent to the
main navigation channel and in Clifton Channel and tidal marshes and
swamps which fringe Tenasillahe Island. Historically the subarea has
undergone large changes. Tenasillahe Island once consisted of a large
tidal marsh and swamp. It is now primarily diked pasture land and
nontidal wetland. A small island south of Tenasillahe Island has been
created from dredged material.

Physical characteristics in the waters surrounding the island areas
similar to those in the River Channels Subarea.

Phytoplankton, invertebrate, and fish productivity and species are
similar to those in the River Channels Subarea.

Tidal marsh and swamp fringe the island. The tidal swamp on the
south and east side of the island has been proposed for designation as a
Federal Research Natural Area because it represents some of the last
remaining habitat of tidally-influenced deciduous forest in the lower
Columbia River that has not been altered by diking and ditching activi-
ties.

Many of the water bird species found in the Snag Islands and
Cathlamet Bay Subareas utilize the waters and wetlands surrounding
Tenasillahe Island. A pair of bald eagles nest in the tidal swamp on
the southeast side of the island.

Aquatic and terrestrial mammal use of the marshes and swamps
surrounding the island is similar to mammal use in the Upper Marsh
Islands Subarea.

4.9.3. Shoreland Features

Shorelands include Tenasillahe Island and a small island to the
south. Tenasillahe Island is a diked, former tidal wetland. The small

4-29

island to the south consist of sandy sediments dredged from the main
navigation channel.

Vegetation on Tenasillahe Island includes pastures with a mix of
grasses and rush, and wooded areas consisting largely of alder, willow,
and cottonwood. There are several sloughs on the island which are
surrounded by large nontidal wetlands. Several of the wetlands are
classified as significant under Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 17.

Wildlife values on the island are high. The island serves as a
wintering area for mallards, Canada geese, whistling swans, and other
waterfowl species. Muskrat, nutria, and beaver are common. Tenasillahe
Island is managed for Columbia white-tailed deer, an endangered species,
by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The island's population of this
species is between 50 and 60 animals.

4.9.4. Human Use

Human use of the area includes log storage and transport, small
boat navigation, sports and commercial fishing, wildlife management and
observation and grazing on the island. There is a log storage area
along Clifton Channel and commercial fishing areas along both the
Clifton and Main Channel sides of Tenasillahe Island. There is re-
stricted public access to t@e island; however, a private duck hunting
club has access during certain periods of the year to an area near
Multnomah Slough.

The cumulative impact of diking has been significant in this area.
Diking at the turn of the century resulted in the conversion of
Tenasillahe Island from tidal marsh and swamp to pasture.

4.9.5. Issues

Log storage and public access are issues, as they are in the Upper
Marsh Islands Subarea. The establishment and expansion of beach nour-
ishment sites are also of concern.

4.9.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The waters of Multnomah Slough and other wetlands are Natural,
except along Clifton Channel, where log storage sites are Conservation,
and at the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service boat dock, which is Conserva-
tion. The waters of the Main and Clifton Channels are classified
Conservation.

4-30

The dike's and diked area of Tenasillahe Island is Conservation
Shoreland. Much of the island is classified as a significant non-tidal
wetland.

The entire diked portion of Tenasillahe Island and the small
dredged material disposal island are included in the regulatory
shorelands boundary.

4.9.7. Subarea Policies

1. Measures that increase or enhance public access opportunities to
the Wildlife Refuge are encouraged.

4-31

ch 35
Islan
-.*# 4. N
A * -0. %---
%

so..
so..

so.

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

C --*J3 3 6

A
C S

Ten ahe

U A

00
N A

Ice e@.
C S
C A

CC-.13-3 .3
C-S-3
m4k
Clifton
SCALE IN FEET A

2000 1000 0 2000

Subar4s Boundary-o-eamm .... swe-m-man ... w- ... a,,,
R:g.::to,y Shor:land Boundary (OR)
R Qu tory Shor time Boundary (WA)
Designation Boundaries %*
RS CS '0. C A

Designations
Shoreland Aquatic

HS Hstuf%4 NA
CS Conservation CA

0 r a d Q a d M a t a r I a 1 0 4 6 p 0 a a I a I I a
. . . x . . . . . . . . . .
mitigation site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . radwood
Goal 17 Significant Wetlands

Z4.9. Tenasillahe Island

4-32

4.10. FORT STEVENS STATE PARK

4.10.1. General Description

This subarea includes the northern portion of Fort Stevens State
Park. The northern boundary is the 3-foot bathymetric contour to the
west and the 20-foot bathymetric contour to the east. The Hammond Urban
Growth Boundary is the eastern subarea limit. On the south and west the
extent of estuarine wetlands and the South Jetty form the subarea
boundary. Trestle Bay, Swash Lake, Clatsop Spit and the Fort Stevens
State Park Historic area are included. The entire subarea lies within
Clatsop County.

4.10.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic portions of this subarea consist of waters shallower
than 20 feet below MLLW, the waters and wetlands of Swash Lake and
Trestle Bay, and a salt marsh on Clatsop Spit. The subarea has changed
substantially in the past century. All of the land west of Point Adams
has accreted since the construction of the South Jetty. Trestle Bay was
also formed by this accretion.

The physical and biological characteristics of the aquatic portion
of the subarea outside of Trestle Bay are similar to those of the
Estuary Channels and Mouth,of the Columbia River Subareas.

Little is known about the physical characteristics of Trestle Bay.
Circulation between the inner bay and main part of the estuai'y is
partially restricted by the jetty. Salinity levels in the bay are
similar to those in the surface waters of the adjacent channel area (see
Estuary Channels Subarea Plan). Sediments in the inner bay consist of
very fine sand, silt, and clay.

Plant types in Trestle Bay consist of phytoplankton, benthic algae,
eelgrass, and brackish tidal marsh and swamp vegetation. Phytoplankton
productivity has not been measured in the bay. Benthic microalgal
productivity on the tidal flats ranges from high levels in the more
protected inner portion of the bay to moderate levels in the outer bay.
Sparse patches of eelgrass probably grow on the bay's tidal flats.
Tidal marshes and swamps form a wide band along much of the bay's
shoreline. Bulrush (Scirpus americanus) dominates the colonizing
(lowest elevation) low marshes while Lyngby's sedge (Carex lyngbyei)
dominates higher elevation low marshes. Swash Lake, a marshy areas
connected with Trestle Bay, contains low marshes consisting of bulrush
(Scirpus validus), cattail (Typha angustifolia), and Lyngby's sedge.
Creeping bent grass (Agrostis alba), aster (Aster subspicatus), and
Pacific silverweed (Potentilla pacifica) dominate the subarea's high
marshes. The swamps consist of shrub and tree species. The salt marsh
on Clatsop Spit has a direct hydrologic connection with the ocean.
Vegetation in the marsh includes pickleweed and saltgrass.

4-33

Little information exists on the invertebrates of Trestle Bay.
Zooplankton and epibenthic organisms have not been studied and benthic
infauna have only been sampled at one site in the outer bay. The
principal taxa in the single infauna sample were marine worms (Neanthes
limnicola), oligochaetes, clams (Macoma balthica), and amphipods
(Eohaustorius esuarius).

Fish species found in Trestle Bay are similar to those found in the
adjacent channel area (see Estuary Channels Subarea Plan ).

Trestle Bay is a feeding, nesting, and wintering site for many
species of birds. Migratory waterfowl, particularly swans, canvasback,
scaups, surf scoter, ruddy duck, wigeon and bufflehead utilize the bay
during their spring and fall migrations and winter in the bay. The
largest nesting colony of double-crested cormorants in the estuary
exists on rows of pilings that formed the trestle adjacent to the bayts
rock jetty. Double-crested cormorants nest in spring, summer, and fall,
and feed in the bay year round. Shorebirds and great blue heron feed on
the tidal flats and in the low marshes of the bay.

Aquatic and terrestrial mammals utilize the marshes and swamps of
the bay; however, mammal use is low compared to upriver wetlands.
Several muskrat dens have been found along the tidal channels of the low
and high marshes. In addition, beaver colonies have been found in
nontidal areas adjacent to the bay. Nutria, raccoon, and deer also
utilize the subarea's marshes and swamps.

4.10.3. Shoreland Features

The shorelands of Clatsop Spit are rolling foredunes stabilized by
European beachgrass. Coastal strawberry, early hairgrass, scotch broom
and shore pine are also present. These species also characterize the
shoreland vegetation along Trestle Bay; other shrubs, some willow, and
alder are also present. Large tracts of nontidal wetland classified as
significant under Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 17 are present in the
subarea. These wetlands have formed in the deflation plans between the
dunes. The shorelands also consist of river beach, rock riprap (origi-
nal starting point of south jetty) and some shrub vegetation.

The subarea has significant bird and wildlife values, including a
large roosting site for sanderlings on Clatsop Spit. Snowy plovers
inhabitat the ocean.beach areas in this subarea. The area is important
for waterfowl, wading birds, shorebirds and raptors, as well as deer,
elk, nutria, mink, beaver, raccoon and opossum.

4.10.4. Human Use

The intensity of human use in the Fort Stevens subarea varies
widely. Most use centers around the park facilities and the three
parking lot areas on Clatsop Spit and around the Historic Area.

4-34

Sightseeing, clamming, bicycling, hiking, beachcombing, nature observa-
tion, and jetty and beach angling are common activities. Drift logs are
used for firewood. There is some illegal off-road use of the area by
off-road vehicles, even in the salt marsh adjacent to the observation
tower.

The cumulative impact of jetty construction on this area has been
substantial. The South Jetty has resulted in large shoreland areas
where there was open water prior to jetty construction.

4.10.5. Issues

Development potential of the area is restricted to-recreation and
historic preservation. The Clatsop Spit area is already developed as
far as it is intended to be.

Erosion problems along Clatsop Spit just south of the South Jetty,
use of the area by four-wheel drive vehicles, removal of beach logs, and
the possibility of ocean waves breaching the spit south of the jetty are
issues of concern.

4.10.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

Aquatic area designations for Trestle Bay and its wetlands, and for
the wetland-salt marsh area on Clatsop Spit are Natural. Other aquatic
areas are Conservation.

The shoreland areas of Clatsop Spit ate designated Natural and
Conservation. The three developed parking areas are considered to be
consistent with the Conservation designation. The South Jetty is
classified as Development from Point Adams to its outer end. The
shoreland area from Hammond northwest to Swash Lake is designated
Conservation.

The regulatory shoreland boundary includes the northern part of the
spit and all lands east and north of Jetty Road.to the eastern subarea
boundary. The shoreland includes:

1. Significant wetlands and riparian vegetation as described by Duncan
Thomas in Significant Shoreland and Wetland Habitats in the Clatsop
Plains and the Columbia Floodplain of Clatsop County, OR (1986).

2. Swash Lake mitigation site described in the.Columbia River Estuary
Mitigation and Restoration Plan.

4-35

4.10.7. Subarea Policies

1. Off-road vehicles should not be permitted on dune or wetland areas
in the park and shall not traverse the Natural wetland-salt marsh
on Clatsop Spit.

4-36

S
Ith . ... .
ol
. ........ . . ..
jet
NS
... . . . . ..

D 8

Subarea Boundary .....................................
A
Sho,,:,1.,Id ((OR)) C A
R y Sho )no Sound& WA)
TRESTLE
0 0 u n d aI a 4
RS 60' CS 50 t. Adams
BAY
Do elan stiono
Shoreland Aquatic

HIS N a I u r a I NA
CS Conservation CA
RS R u I a I . . . . . . . .....
CS
IDS D a v a I o p m a n IDA
-Dependent Development
WDS Water

City Limits

Urban Growth S.oundary (OR) 0C]C]C)0000[:]C)0C]00

0(4dgod Material Disposal Site

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
mitigation site M. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SCALE IN FEE7
000 1000 2000
Goal 17 Significant Wetlands !mean
clateop cou
Goal 17 Significant Riparian V*Qet*tIonr,,V--ff--V?` 0
A Warrant

4.10. Fort Stevens State Park

4.11. HAMMOND

4.11.1. General Description

This subarea includes aquatic area and shorelands within the Town
of Hammond and its urban growth boundary. The boundaries are the town
limits on the east, Fort Stevens Highway on the south, the urban growth
boundary on the west and the 20-foot bathymetric contour on the north.
The subarea is entirely within the Town of Hammond. A small portion of
the Town, between the 20-foot bathymetric controur and the navigation
channel, is in the Estuary Channels Subarea.

4.11.2. Aquatic Features

Aquatic areas include the Hammond Mooring Basin, the beach, and
aadjacent waters of the Columbia River out to the 20-foot bathymetric
contour. Aquatic physical and biological characteristics are similar to
those in the adjacent channel (see Estuary Channels Subarea Plan).

The Hammond Mooring Basin varies from about 20 feet below MLLW at
the entrance to an intertidal mudflat on the east side. The Basin's
currents are slow and sediments consist primarily of silt and clay.

I
There is little information about the biological characteristics of
the boat basin aquatic area. A 1978 benthic infauna study found densi-
ties of invertebrates to be relatively high.

4.11.3. Shoreland Features

The Hammond shorelands include relatively high areas of sandy soils
(Westport fine sand), some areas of sandy dredged material, and lower
wetland areas. Most of the shoreland area is developed. There is a
forested and wetland area in the western part of the subarea adjacent to
Fort Stevens State Park. The wetland is classified as significant under
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 17. Wildlife use in the forested and
wetland area is high.

4.11.4. Human Use

Residential, commercial, industria'1 and recreational uses coexist
along the Hammond waterfront. Along Pacific Drive there is a mix of
commercial and residential uses. Commercial uses include boat charter
offices, grocery stores, and gasoline service stations. Residential
uses predominate north of Pacific Drive, east of the boat basin. The
Hammond mooring basin and support facilities, encompassing an area
approximately twenty-seven acres in size, are located inside the town

4-38

limits an the west. The mooring basin is primarily used by recreational
fishing vessels. It is in heavy demand for both launching and mooring
during the salmon fishing season.

The shoreline west of the mooring basin is a popular viewpoint and
is readily accessible by car. The town's main commercial area is
located several blocks south of the mooring basin. The mooring basin
and adjacent shorelands are not yet fully utilized. Because of the view
and close access to the river, the recreational and aesthetic value of
these shorelands is high. A condominium development was constructed on
the waterfront near Point Adams in the early 1980's. Commercial develop-
ment since adoption of the original CREST plan in 1979 has been limited
to construction of a fire station, a boarding house, and several offic-
es.

The cumulative impact of bank protection efforts is significant in
this subarea. Nearly the entire subarea shoreline is riprapped, except
for the shoreline inside the mooring basin.

4.11.5. Issues

The major potential conflict in this area is between the very high
water-dependent development potential along the.riverfront and continued
residential and recreational uses of the area. The other major issue is
how to capitalize on the potential of the mooring basin to stimulate the
Town's economy. I

The development potential along the waterfront is the pr-incipal
reason for the designation of the area east of Point Adams Packing as
Water-Dependent Development. The designation prevents new residential
development in the area and provides for future industrial tax base
expansion.

The CREST marina study (1978) projected a demand for 800-900 new
moorages in the estuary area with a 6-7% increase in demand each year.
Demand decreased substantially in the early 1980's because of changes to
the recreational and commercial fishing seasons, and the "El Nino" event
of 1982-83. The Hammond boat basin receives very intensive use during
certain seasons of the year. Present plans include creation of a
waterfront park in the southeast corner of the mooring basin, increasing
mooring basin capacity, and improvements to parking and visitor facili-
ties. Its proximity to the river mouth fishing grounds, its location
adjacent to a large state park, and the extensive area of undeveloped
land around the basin make this a very high priority area for marina
expansion. However, expansion of the mooring basin would require
dredging 10-15 acres of intertidal mudflats. Dredging of the intertidal
flats would require estuarine mitigation. Since there are no sites in
the immediate area for restoration of equivalent habitat, the site at
Swash Lake (Fort Stevens Subarea) or sites in Youngs Bay should be
utilized. Use of the Swash Lake site for mitigation in connection with
expansion of the Hammond boat basin may be difficult. The Oregon Trans-
portation Department, which owns the site, has adopted a policy res-
tricting use of the site for mitigation to state highway projects.

4-39

Dredged material disposal sites are needed for the boat basin. The
1986 Columbia River Estuary Dredged Material Management Plan identifies
three sites for dredged material disposal within the Urban Growth
Boundary. The sites have an estimated total remaining capacity of
195,000 cubic yards. The mooring basin is also pursuing the option of
flowlane disposal. However, this option may involve substantial costs
and post-disposal monitoring. The dredged material disposal site with
the greatest remaining capacity (Ha-S-7.6) may contain nontidal wetlands
that fall within Federal Section 404 or Oregon State Fill-Removal
regulatory jurisdiction.

Erosion is a problem between the boat basin and the end of the
railroad right-of-way. The bankline along the abandoned railroad is
riprapped. Review of navigation charts published over the last 40 years
indicates that naturally-occurring deep water in this reach is moving
closer to shore. Boat docks extending into the river provide evidence;
much of the National Marine Fisheries Service and Bar Pilots docks were
lost in 1985-1986.

The National Marine Fisheries Service Research Station shorelands
adjacent to the beach, the beach itself east to Point Adams Packing and
the adjacent waters are important recreational areas. These values are
preserved by the Conservation designation.

4.11.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The aquatic area is designated Conservation except for:

1. The aquatic area between Point Adams Packing and the east Town
limits, which is designated Development between the shoreline and
the subarea boundary.

2. The Mooring Basin, which@is designated Development.

The shoreland area is designated Development, except for:

1. A Water-Dependent Development area between the east Town limits and
Fleet Street, from the shoreline back to the regulatory shoreland
boundary excluding a 100-foot deep strip north of Pacific Drive.

2. A Conservation area at the northern undeveloped part of the Nation-
al Marine Fisheries Service research station.

The regulatory shoreland boundary is the area north of Fort Stevens
Highway and.Pacific Drive. It includes the following features:

1. Dredged Material disposal sites Ha-S-7.6, Ha-S-8.0, and Ha-S-7.9,
identified in the 1986 Columbia River Estuary Dredged Material
Management Plan.

2. Mitigation site M2 identified in the Columbia River Estuary Mitiga-
tion and Restoration Plan.

4-40

3. A wetland classified as significant under Oregon Statewide Planning
Goal 17.

4.11.7. Subarea Policies

1. The shoreland area between the eastern town line and the western-
most property line of Point Adams Packing is designated Water-
Dependent Development to accommodate water-dependent uses as the
highest priority of use. In order to minimize the impacts on
existing residences and preserve the unique potential of the area,
the following policies apply:

a. Notwithstanding the fact that existing residences are a
nonconforming use, in the event of complete destruction by
fire or other disaster, the residences may be rebuilt, subject
to the nonconforming use requirements of the Hammond Zoning
Ordinance.

b. As feasible, new industrial development should be located so
as to efficiently utilize land area and minimize conflicts
with existing residences.

C. Fills in the aquatic portions of this subarea shall be allowed
only in conjunction with bulkheading, riprapping or quay con-
struction along the present shoreline, or in connection with
restoration of afi eroded shore. Filling shall not be allowed
for the purpose of creating new land area.

2. The Development area around the boat basin leased from the Corps of
Engineers (north of 3rd Street) shall be restricted to uses which
are dependent on or related to operation of the boat basin. The
Development area south of 3rd Street is also needed for water-
oriented uses, but zoning in this area may also allow for other
commercial uses such as motels, hotels, restaurants, etc., if they
can demonstrate they provide a needed service for users of the boat
basin. Existing residences may be maintained or rebuilt, as in
Policy 1, above.

3. Development of a waterfront park adjacent to the Hammond Boat Basin
shall minimize impacts to the marsh vegetation in the basin.

4. If a new boat ramp for the basin is proposed, consideration shall
first be given to the south west side where dredging would be
minimal, and where there is adequate parking for trailers and
vehicles.

5.- The provision of public access in all private development projects
bordering the Columbia River shall be encouraged. Existing public
access, including rights-of-way and public easements shall be
maintained or replaced.

4-41

Subarea Boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A d Boundary (OR))
'0' 6ho':I'&n Boundary
,u::,, y a or ( W A
R:O. ry h In*

Designation Boundaries
RS 60' CS 50

Designations
1;'hol.l..d Aquatic

NS Natural NA
CS Cone:,rvation CA
RS R *I
08 Development DA
WDS Water-Dependent Development

City Limits

Urban Growth B.Oundery (OR) 0C300000000[]0[J0

Dredged Material Disposal Sit.

m4tigation Site

....... .......
Goal 17 Significant Wetlands x
Pt. Adams
Goal 17 Significant Riparian V a 9 a t a t I o n

Ha-S-8.0

CA
Ha-S-7.6

M-2

Ha
DS

SCALE IN FEET

2000 1000 0 2000
.......... ........

4.11. Hammond

4-42

4.12. TANSY POINVALDER COVE

4.12.1. General Description

This subarea lies entirely within the City of Warrenton. It
includes aquatic areas in Alder Cove, Tansy Creek and the Columbia River
out to the pierhead line, and shorelands adjacent to the Columbia River
and south to Tansy Creek. The western boundary is the Warrenton city
limits. The southern boundary extends to include the boundary of the
Mediation Panel Agreement area, and designated dredged material disposal
site, Tansy Creek and the dike around Alder Cove.

4.12.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic features of this subarea include the Columbia River and
the Alder Cove wetlands. Alder Cove was once part of Youngs Bay but was
separated from the bay when the Skipanon Peninsulas were created. The
aquatic area north of Tansy Point drops off relatively quickly from the
shoreline to about 40 feet deep at the pierhead line. Alder Cove
consists primarily of intertidal areas with a shallow channel running
from the Alder Creek tidegate to the northeast side of the cove.

The currents along the Tansy Point shoreline are very swift because
much of the river's flow is@ channeled through the main navigation
channel. In addition, Tansy Point is on an outside bend of the river
where currents are typically strong. Depending on river flow-and tidal
conditions, salinity levels in the deep bottom waters along Tansy Point
range from 0 to 33 parts per thousand. The salinity in Alder Cove
probably mirrors that of the Tansy Point surface waters where the range
is from 0 to-30 parts per thousand.

River bottom material along Tansy Point is primarily coarse sand;
finer materials are kept suspended by strong currents, waves and ship
wakes. 'Sediments in Alder Cove range from fine sand near the mouth of
the cove to silts and clays in the cove's interior. Erosion is occur-
ring on the west spit of the Skipanon peninsula adjacent to this subarea
and just south of Tansy Point in Alder Cove. From Tansy Point west to
the Warrenton City Limits, two pile dikes and riprap help retard shore-
line erosion.

Tidal marshes along Alder Cove are similar to those in Youngs Bay
(see Youngs Bay Subarea Plan). Lower elevation marshes are dominated by
softstem bulrush (Scirpus validus) while higher elevation marshes are
dominated by Lyngby's sedge (Carex lyngbyei) and cattail (Typha
angustifolia). Benthic diatom productivity on the mudflats of Alder
Cove is very high.

Invertebrates studied in the subarea. include zooplankton and
benthic infauna. Zooplankton off the mouth of Alder Cove are very
abundant. The copepod Eurytemor@i affinis can exceed 100,000 animals per

4-43

square meter of water surface. Benthic infauna have been sampled on the
mudflats of Alder Cove. Infauna found at the site include amphipods
(Corophi salmonis) and worms (oligochaetes and polychaetes). The
total abundance of these organisms was found to be very high. Juvenile
Dungeness crab use the deep channel habitat as a nursery area.

Fish utilization of the Tansy Point subarea is similar to the
adjacent channel (see Estuary Channels Subarea Plan).

Several bird species, particularly the fish-eaters, utilize the
subarea. In the river area, bird utilization is similar to the adjacent
channel (see Estuary Channels Subarea Plan). The marshes and tidal
flats of Alder Cove provide habitat for migratory waterfowl, especially
swans, canvasback, scaups, and scoters. These birds are abundant in
winter and during their spring and fall migrations. The western grebe,
another migratory species, is very abundant in the subarea and uses
Youngs Bay and Alder Cove as a staging area before its spring migration.
Shorebirds utilize the tidal flat and low marsh habitats during all
seasons but are most abundant during their spring and fall migrations.
Great blue heron feed in the tidal flats and marshes.

Marine mammals utilize the channel off Tansy Point as a feeding
area. Harbor seals feed in the subarea year round and California sea
lions use the subarea primarily in spring.

Aquatic and terrestrial mammals utilize the marshes of Alder Cove;
however, mammal use is low compared with upriver wetlands. Muskrat and
nutria use the low and high@ marshes for feeding and denning. Beaver are
not common in the lower estuary because of the lack of swamp habitat;
however, beaver utilize the upland areas and adjacent high maTshes of
Alder Cove. Raccoon feed in the high marsh habitat of the-subarea.

4.12.3. Shoreland Features

The shorelands of this subarea include the primarily developed area
from the Hammond/Warrenton boundary to NW 13th Street-just south of
Tansy Point, and the undeveloped area from NW 13th to Tansy Creek. Also
included is the partially developed area south and west of Warrenton
-Drive. Along the Columbia River, shorelands are relatively high in
elevation and soils are Westport fine sand and fill. South and west of
Warrenton Drive and adjacent to Tansy Creek, the shorelands ate low and
poorly drained silty clay loams. The topsoil is underlain by a rela-
tively thick layer of sand (approximately 200-250 feet through most of
the subarea). The water table is at or near the surface. The shoreline
from Tansy Point west is riprapped to retard erosion.

Vegetation on the undeveloped area between NW 13th and Tansy Creek
includes Sitka spruce forested areas, some forested and shrub nontidal
wetlands, and some upland areas dominated by shrub species. As of the
date of this Plan, the precise boundaries of the nontidal wetlands have
not been determined. The area south and west of Warrenton Drive con-
sists of some forested areas and pastures comprised of upland grasses

4-44

and common rush (Juncus effusus). The undeveloped areas of the subarea
support some wildlife including small mammals, deer and many bird
species.

4.12.4. Human Use

Low density residential, recreational and industrial uses all occur
on the shoreland areas around Tansy Point. There are residences,
industrial activities and vacant land between Tansy Point and the
western city limits. An Industrial Park at Tansy Point contains a log
sorting, processing and chipping operation. A barge moorage facility
has been proposed for the Industrial Park. Two access roads have been
constructed from Warrenton Drive to the Industrial Park. Railroad
service to Tansy Point was abandoned in 1986.

A City Park (Eben Carruthers Memorial Park) has been developed
along the Columbia River waterfront on one of three parcels of land at
Tansy Point deeded to the City of Warrenton by Eben and Nancy
Carruthers. The Park is presently undeveloped, but off-street parking
and an interpretive display are planned.

The Alder Cove marshes receive some recreational and hunting use.
Warrenton sewage lagoon effluent drains into the cove. Otherwise, human
use of Alder dove is minimal. The Port of Astoria owns tidelands
outside the dike on the south and west sides. Cavenham Lumber Company
owns tidelands adjacent to 'the peninsula on the west bank of the
Skipanon River.

The cumulative impacts of previous developments have been substan-
tial in this subarea. Diking, riprap, and the separation of Alder Cove
from Youngs Bay have all significantly altered the subarea.

4.12.5. Issues

Alder Cove tidal marshes and flats are widely recognized as a
unique area. The Nature Conservancy has identified it as a potential
natural area, because of its value to fish and wildlife and its histor-
ical use as a recreational area. The existing and potential development
adjacent to the Cove, and the secondary sewage treatment effluent
discharged into the Cove degrade its natural values somewhat.

Tansy Point has several unique features whichmake it especially
suited for water-dependent development. The Lower Columbia River Ports
Region Study, prepared by the Oregon Department of Transportation in
1975, and the 1977 Port of Astoria Master Plan identify the Tansy Point
area as important to reserve for Dort development, as it is adjacent to
the main ship channel. However, the Lower Columbia River Assessment of
Oregon Deep Draft Sites (Ogden Beeman and Associates, 1986) did not
select Tansy Point as a preferred site. This study cited the lack of
rail service as a major disadvantage. However, this site remains

4-45

attractive for handling commodities not requiring rail service. Water
depths close to shore are 50 feet or more, and the area is naturally
scoured; however, the strong tidal currents which produce this scour
effect represent a possible disadvantage for moorage. According to
Columbia River Bar Pilots, this is not a serious problem for ships.
However, it can be serious for barges. Originally known as the Town of
Flavel, this area was once used for passenger steamship docking.
Because of the natural scour and deep water, initial and maintenance
dredging would be significantly less than at most other potential
deep-draft ship development sites, particularly if the moorage were not
directly adjacent to the shoreline.

The Tansy Point area also has potential for residential develop-
ment. There is already low-density housing west toward the City limits
and the park-like waterfront setting is aesthetically very desirable.

The City participated in the CREST Mediation Panel in order to
resolve conflicts over the planning designations and uses permitted at
Tansy Point. The consensus agreement reached during mediation by local
governments and state and federal agencies provided for large-scale
development of Tansy Point for a water-dependent use. The agreement
contained a list of findings regarding the special suitability of-Tansy
Point for water-dependent development. These findings assumed continued
rail service to the area; rail service has since been abandoned west of
Astoria. The site has other advantages, including a naturally scoured
deep-draft aquatic area adjacent to the shoreline, nearby highway
access, relative proximity to the Columbia River mouth, a large amount
of potential deep-water berthing frontage and significant amount of
backup land area. The Mediation Panel Agreement designated the aquatic
and shoreland areas adjacent to Tansy Point for water-dependent develop-
ment.

4.12.6. Aquatic and Shoreland@Designations

The following aquatic areas are designated Development:

I. The aquatic area bounded by the shoreline on the South, the pier-
head line to the North, the Hammond/Warrenton boundary line on the
West and Tansy Point at the Pacific Shrimp pier on the East.

2. The aquatic area on the East side of Tansy Point proposed for barge
moorage.

3. The flowlane disposal area south of the main channel (600 feet wide
or to the 20-foot bathymetric contour, whichever is narrower).

The following aquatic areas are designated Conservation:

1. The area at the southern end of Alder Cove where effluent from the
Astoria sewage ponds is discharged.

4-46

2. The mouth of Alder Cove from the 3-foot bathymetric contour north
to the flowlane disposal area..

A Natural designation is applied to the remaining aquatic area
within Alder Cove.

All shoreland areas are designated Water-Dependent Development,
except for a portion of dredged material disposal site Wa-S-9.4, which
is designated Development.

The regulatory shoreland boundary is 50 feet from the Columbia
River estuary shoreline, or'from the landward toe of dikes and associat-
ed toe drains, whichever is greatest, except where it extends further
inland to include the following features:

1. The industrial park area (containing the log sorting, processing,
and chipping operation and the barge dock) on Tansy Point, desig-
nated Water-Dependent Development by the 1981 Mediation Panel
Agreement.

2. The area zoned Water-Dependent Development bounded by Railroad
Drive on the West, Tansy Creek on the'south, the Columbia River on
the north and Alder Cove on the east.

3. Mitigation site M3 from the Columbia River Estuary Restoration and
Mitigation Plan.

4. Dredged material disposal site Wa-S-9.4 from the Columbia River
Estuary Dredged Material Management Plan (1986).

5. The significant wetland at Tansy Creek.

4.12.7. Subarea Policies

(Policies I through 7 are from the Mediation Panel Agreement for
Tansy Point.)

1. In the 3.5-acre parcel, a waterfront recreational park is consis-
tent with the Water-Dependent Development designation.

2. The 8-acre parcel can be developed for single-family residential
use only after a major portion of the 26-acre and 72-acre parcels
together are committed for a large acreage water-dependent use. It
is understood that a large acreage water-dependent use may not need
the entire 98 acres. Commitment includes the following: (1)
agreement with a user, (2) aggregation of ownership or development
rights, (3) relocation/improvement of highway (if needed), and (4)
land clearing and initial construction activities.

3. The 8-acre and 3.5-acre parcels may be developed at any time for
any water-dependent use, to include a waterfront recreational park.

4-47

4. The 26-acre and 72-acre parcels are to be developed together (98
acres) for a large water-dependent industrial use. However, the
City may prohibit storage and transshipment of bulk coal/ore on
these two parcels if Warrenton, Astoria, Clatsop County and the
Port agree (by virtue of a coordinated comprehensive estuary plan)
to allow bulk coal ore u 'ses at the east Skipanon or Tongue Point,
or other lower Columbia River sites. If, during a scheduled update
of the Columbia River Estuary Plan, it is determined that needs for
large-scale water-dependent uses have changed such that this large
parcel is no longer needed for large acreage water-dependent uses,
the City may, through a plan amendment, redesignate the area for
other water-dependent uses, and the 8-acre parcel for single-family
residential use.

5. Temporary uses, or other uses which do not preclude large water-
dependent use of the combined 26-acre and 72-acre parcels or any
portion thereof, may be allowed.

6. The City of Warrenton and the Town of Hammond may cooperatively
change the shape of the 26-acre and 72-acre parcels by adding lands
in Hammond and deleting lands in Warrenton so long as 2,000 feet of
continuous river frontage, and the overall size of 98 acres are
maintained or expanded.

7. The 10-acre and the 11-acre parcels north of N.W. 14th Street
extended to the shoreline on the north and the dike on the east are
designated Water-Dependent Development to provide for the continued
development of the existing types of small water-dependent uses.

8. Notwithstanding the fact that residences within the Water-Dependent
Development shorelands of this subarea are a non-conforming use,
reconstruction may be allowed in the event of destruction by fire
or other disaster in accordance with the non-conforming use regula-
tions of the Warrenton Zoning Ordinance.
1

9. The Aquatic Natural tideflats and marshes of Alder Cove shall be
protected from alterations (note: the tidal marsh approximately 7.8
acres in size on the East side of Alder Cove was designated Aquatic
Development by the 1981 Mediation Panel Agreement). Such protec-
tion, however, should not preclude intensive development of the
adjacent Water-Dependent Development or Development shorelands nor
necessary dike maintenance.

10. Large-scale fills are not appropriate in the Development Aquatic
portions of this subarea. Filling shall be allowed only for
bulkheading or quay construction along the present shoreline. No
substantial parcels of new land shall be created. The potential
for impacts or tidal and nontidal wetlands shall be evaluated
during development review. Prior to development approval, the
Corps of Engineers and Oregon Division of State Lands must be
consulted to determine if the site contains wetlands within their
respective regulatory jurisdictions.

4-48

SCALE IN FEET

2000 1000 0 2000

13.
N 10
DA %41

Ct
cc T

WDS
\@ '-@, D A
Wa-S-9.
3 C A
C%
ID 0 0 cc;:

ALDER COVE

G-barea Soundary .....................................
R:gu::Io"y ghor:,. and ound.,y (Oflt)@,
Gh r 4.0 S..nda,y ( W 0,

00-19nallOn Boundaries
R S 6 o'-@C 6 60.
i-h . I . -1. . dDesignations Aquatic

N S Natural NA
CS C 0 n 6 a r v a t I a nCA
RS R u r a I
Ds Development DA
WDS WaI*f-D4PGnd6nt Development

City Limits

Urban Growth B.Oundary (OR) OOOOOOC]C:]OOOOOC)

Dredged Material Disposal 6110

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

Goal 17 Signific an i We I Ian d
Mitigation Site .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Goal 17 Significant Riper[&. Vegetation

4.12. Tansy Point

4-49

4.13. NORTH WARRENTON

4.13.1. General Description

This subarea is entirely shorelands. It is bounded by Tansy Creek
on the north, the dike adjacent to Alder Cove on the northeast, N.E.
Skipanon Drive on the east and N. W. Warrenton Drive on the south and
west. It includes rural, residential and commercial areas in the City
of Warrenton.

4.13.2. Shoreland Features

Shorelands in this subarea include primarily low elevation undevel-
oped diked lands. Alder and Tansy Creeks run through the subarea and
empty into Alder Cove through a tidegate. The Warrenton sewage lagoons
are on the east side of the subarea.

Most of the shorelands, consist of either alder and gpruce forested
areas or pasture land comprised of upland grasses and common rush
(Juncus effusus). Some of these areas are nontidal wetland. As of the
date of this Plan, the precise boundaries of the nontidal wetlands have
not been determined. Alder and Tansy Creek are classified as signifi-
cant wetlands under Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 17.

The forested and pasture areas probably receive high wildlife use.
Bird use of the sewage lagoons is also high.

4.13.3. Human Use

Residential and rural uses predominate except immediately adjacent
to downtown Warrenton, where there is some commercial development. The
Warren House on Skipanon Drive is a State Historical Landmark. There is
a recreational vehicle park adjacent to Tansy Creek. Immediately
adjacent to this subarea on the east is the Cavenham Lumber Mill. There
is residential development along N. E. Skipanon Drive south of the
Cavenham Lumber Mill, as well as along Warrenton Drive. The City of
Warrenton's two sewage lagoons are located south of Alder Cove and west
of N. E. Skipanon Drive. A dike borders the sewage lagoons to the north
and east.

4.13.4. Issues

The subarea does not have navigational access to the Columbia River
or the Skipanon River. The parcel between the dike and the old railroad
right-of-way, to the north and west of the sewage lagoons, is owned by
the Cavenham Lumber Company and may be used for expansion of their

4-50

facilities. Other areas have considerable potential for residential
development, except perhaps the low-lying lands between Alder and Tansy
Creeks.

An issue in this subarea (and others adjacent to the Burlington
Northern Railroad right-of-way) is the change in potential development
patterns due to abandonment of the railroad (tracks were removed in@
1987). In addition, much of the undeveloped portion of this subarea
contains wetlands under the jurisdiction of state and federal regulatory
agencies.

4.13.5. Shoreland Designations

All of the shorelands in this subarea are designated Development,
except for Alder Creek and Tansy Creek which are designated Conser-
.vati.on.

The regulatory shoreland boundary is 50 feet from the Columbia
River Estuary shoreline or the landward side of dikes and associated toe
drains, whichever is greatest, except where it extends farther inland to
include the following features:

1. Dredged Material Disposal site Wa-S-10.1 from the Columbia River
Estuary Dredged Material Management Plan (1986).

2. Alder and Tansy-Creek,' significant Oregon Statewide Planning Goal
17 wetlands and surrounding riparian vegetation.

4.13.6. Subarea Policy

1. Widening and strengtheniAg.of the dike to enable its use by heavy
vehicles shall be allowed on the shoreland side of the dike, except
along the sewage lagoons. If fill is required on the Alder Cove
side of the dike, other than fill or riprap associated with normal
dike maintenance, an exception will be required to Oregon Statewide
Planning Goal 16's prohibition fill in aquatic areas for non-water-
dependent uses.

4-51

10 SCALE IN, FEET
2000 1000 0 2000

Tansy

ALDER COVE

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

wa- -10.1 0

Warr nton 6 bar*. Boundary . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
:go:: 10, y 6ho'1:: a o d Boundary ( OR)
R go forY S.,a IM4 Boundary (WA)
Boundarlea C E@; -@-
R S 6 0 '--Ic S 6

0 a 6 1 a n a I I a 0 a
Shorof-d AQ..t1C
OS Development DA
WOS Water-DePondent DevalaDment

Dredged Material 014pagal Silo
Lilligation r . . . . . . .

Goal 17 Significant We do
t I a n...... ......
R- Go at 1 -1 Significant Alt) Atian vocal at Ion

4.13. North Warrenton

4-52

4.14. MIDDLE SKIPANON RIVER

4.14.1. General Descript--on

This subarea includes shorelands on both sides of the Skipanon
River, diked lands east of the Skipanon and the aquatic areas between
the Harbor Drive Bridge and Highway 101. Although parts of downtown
Warrenton and a major shopping center are included, the subarea is
largely vacant land,residential or low density commercial and light
industrial. The entire subarea lies within the Warrenton City limits.

4.14.2. Aquatic Features

The estuarine aquatic portion of this subarea includes the Skipanon
River below the 8th Street dam. The river above the dam does not
receive free tidal flow from the estuary and is therefore considered a
.shoreland feature.

The average fresh water flow of the Skipanon River is only about 50
cfs. The circulation in the reach below the 8th Street dam is dominated
by tidal currents and flushing is poor (flushing time: 10 to 38 days).
Water quality in the Skipanon River below the dam ranges from poor to
moderate. During late summer low flow periods, severe depletion.of dis-
solved oxygen has bep-n observed. Water quality is degraded by industri-
al wastes, boat,traffic, fish wastes and non-point water pollution
sources.

Biological characteristics of the Skipanon are similar to those in
the lower parts of the rivet described in the Mouth of the Skipanon
Subarea Plan. Estuarine wetlands include two small forested and shrub
tidal swamp islands south of Harbor Drive, and some small tidal marshes
on the inside meanders of the river.

4.14.3. Shoreland Features

The shorelands consist primarily of low, poorly-drained silty clay
loams protected by dikes along both sides of the Skipanon River and
.along Youngs Bay and Alder Cove. The area west of the Skipanon River is
a developed residential and commercial area. Much of the shoreland east
of the Skipanon River consists of pasture or shrub and forested area.
There are houses along Harbor Drive and Marlin Avenue and a large
shopping center between Holbrook Slough and Highway 101. Rivers and
sloughs in the shorelands include the Skipanon River upstream from the
8th Street dam, Skipanon-Slough, and Holbrook Slough.

The sloughs, Skipanon River and large tracts of wetlands along the
river are classified as significant under Oregon Statewide Planning Goal

4-53

17. The wetlands along the Skipanon are primarily Sitka spruce swamps.
Other parts of the subarea may also contain nontidal wetlands. As of
the date of this Plan, the boundaries of these wetlands have not been
determined.

Wildlife values in this subarea are high in the sloughs and adja-
cent wetlands and low in the developed areas.

4.14.4. Human Use

Lands west of the Skipanon River are in residential and commercial
uses. The lands east of the river are largely vacant and without road
access or utilities. Residential, commercial, agricultural and light
industrial uses are scattered along Harbor Drive and Highway 101. Water
and sewer are available along the major roads. Timber value is low, but
there is some farmland. Zoning is Residential., Commercial and Light
Industrial. Land ownership is mostly private, much in large holdings..
with some public ownership. The area around the intersection of.Highway
101 and Harbor Drive is developing into a major regional commercial
district. An existing shopping center and two planned facilities are in
this area.

The cumulative impact of diking on this area has been substantial.
Nearly all of the area was intertidal swamp or marsh prior to dike
construction.

4.14.5. Issues

Development potential east of the Skipanon River is limited by the
flood hazard and poor soils. Any portion of the area that could be
filled with dredged or other r@aterial could be developed, however.

The Skipanon River South of the Harbor Drive Bridge has significant
potential for the development of marinas for recreational boats if
facilities can be designed to minimize further degradation of water
quality. A public boat ramp has been installed just upstream of -the
bridge on the east side of the River.

Construction of marina facilities above the Harbor Drive Bridge
would provide needed moorage for recreational boats and enable some of
the moorage facilities north of the bridge to convert from recreational
to larger commercial fishing vessel use. However, a constraint for
marina development are the marsh islands and fringing marshes in the
Skipanon River. Marina development may require major alteration of the
islands and fringing marshes, which is inconsistent with Oregon State-
wide Planning Goal 16 restrictions against major alterations in Conser-
vation Management Units. If a marina or other development proposed for
the Middle Skipanon would require major alteration of the islands or
fringing marshes, the City of Warrenton will, at that time, consider

4-54

taking ail 'e:,-1,ception to the Statewide Planning Goal. Another potential
constraint to marina development above the Harbor Drive Bridge is the
limite& vertical clearance (17 feet).

4.14.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The marsh islands and fringing marshes in the Skipanon River
between the Harbor Drive bridge and the 8th Street dam are designated
Conservation. The remaining aquatic areas from the Harbor Drive Bridge
to the 8th Street dam are designated Development.

All of the shorelands of this subarea are designated Development,
except the river from the 8th Street dam south to the end of the subarea
which is designated Conservation.

The regulatory shoreland boundary is 50 feet from the shoreline or
the landward side of dikes and associated toe drains, whichever is
greatest, except where it extends farther inland to include the follow-
in- features:

1. Dredged material disposal site Wa-S-10.5 from the Columbia River
Estuary Dredged Material Management Plan (1986).

2. The following wetlands classified as significant under Oregon
Statewide Planning Goal 17: Skipanon River above the 8th Street
dam and associated wetlands', Skipanon Slough, and Holbrook Slough.

3. Significant riparian vegetation around Skipanon River upstream of
the 8th Street dam and Skipanon Slough.

4.14.7. Subarea Polices

1. Development along the east shoreline of the Skipanon River between
Harbor Drive and 8th Street shall include a Tourist/Commercial
mixture of water-dependent, water-related and other uses.

2. The Aquatic Development designation of the Middle Skipanon is
provided to accommodate marina development and other water-
dependent and water-related uses as the highest priority of use.
Non-water-dependent uses are not appropriate in the aquatic por-
tions of this subarea.

3. The water quality impacts of development in the Middle Skipanon
will be evaluated prior to approval of projects, particularly in
the area between the 8th Street dam and the Harbor Drive Bridge.
Alterations which have a decidedly negative water quality impact or
result in a decrease in the flushing rate will not normally be
permitted.

4-55

4. If a marina or other major development proposed for the Middle
Skipanon would require major alteration of the islands or fringing
marshes, the City will consider taking an exception to Oregon
Statewide Planning Goal 16.

4-56

Subarea bounda.-i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
R: a v: : tot y She F ?:on d Couc d a, y (OR)
R gu torV Shore Ina n&undary (WA)
Designation Boundaries <@ED
RS 60' CS 50

Desionallons
I;ho,.I.nd Aquatic

NS Natural NA
CS Conservation CA
RS Rural
0S Development DA

0 r a d C a d M a t a r I a I D I a p * a a I r. I t
a . . . . . . . X K K K X K X K X o
Mitigation Site . . . . . . . . a K

Wetlands
Goal 17 Significant

Goal 17 Significant Riparian Vegetation

Warr nton

-0 Wa-S- 10.5

206 SCALE IN FEET
2000 1000 0 2000
'01 ......

4.14. Middle Skipanon River

4-57

4.15. MOUTH OF THE SKIPANON RIVER

4.15.1. General Description

This subarea contains the filled and diked shorelands north of
Harbor Drive and east of Skipanon Drive, the Skipanon River from the
Harbor Drive Bridge to its mouth, the East and West Skipanon Peninsulas,
and adjacent Columbia River waters out to the navigation channel. Parts
of downtown Warrenton are also included. The subarea lies within the
Warrenton City limits, with the exception of the aquatic area between
the pierhead line and the navigation channel.

4.15.2. Aquatic Features

Aquatic areas in the Mouth of the Skipanon Subarea include the
Skipanon River downstream of the Harbor Drive Bridge, the Warrenton Boat
Basin, wetlands along the northern portions of the west and east penin-
sulas, and a portion of the Columbia River extending from the Skipanon
mouth to main navigation channel. The Skipanon River originally drained
into Youngs Bay approximately 3,500 feet upstream of its present mouth.
The Skipanon Peninsulas were created by fill during the late 1920's -
1930's when the Skipanon channel was dredged. These large fills have
severed Alder Cove from Youngs Bay and caused the Skipanon River to
empty into the main channel of the Columbia River, rather than into.
Youngs Bay. The peninsulas'were previously tidal marshes and mudflats.

The Skipanon Channel has an authorized depth of 30 feet J)elow MLLW.
It is currently dredged to a depth of 14 to 20 feet below MLLW, but
shoals to as shallow as 9 feet. From the mouth of the river to the main
navigation channel, the water depth increases from 20 to 40 feet. The
Warrenton Boat Basin is 10 feet deep.

The 8th Street dam effectively divides the Skipanon River into two
bodies of water. Except during the winter months, fresh water flow in
the Skipanon River is low (average flow 50 cfs). Salinity intrusion
occurs in the river whenever salinity is present in the adjacent Colum-
bia River waters. Salinity ranges up to about 25 parts per thousand.
Despite the low fresh water flow, strong vertical differences in salini-
ty occur during the fall and bottom waters may become stagnant.

Near the mouth of the river, the sediments are largely clean sand.
The proportion of fine material, organic matter and wood debris increas-
es in the upriver direction. Sediments in the river has been found to
contain low concentrations of metals.

The tidal marshes in the subarea include a low elevation marsh on
the west side of the West Peninsula, and a large marsh extending east-
ward as much as 1,800 feet on the east side of the East Peninsula. The
dominant marsh plants are softstem bulrush (Scirpus validus) at lower
elevations, and Lyngby's sedge (Carex lyngbyei) at h7igher elevations.
The tidal marsh on the East Peninsula grades upward into a nontidal

4-58

wetland dominated by common rush (Juncus effusus). The production of
non-vascular benthic plants (diatoms and other algae) ranks among the
highest in the estuary on the tidal flats and low marshes on the east
side of the subarea.

Invertebrates.studied in the subarea include zooplankton, benthic
infauna and epibenthic organisms. Zooplankton off the mouth of the
Skipanon are very abundant. Densities of the copepod Eurytemora affinis
can exceed 100,000 animals per square meter of water surface. Benthic
infauna have been sampled in the Skipanon River adjacent to the
Warrenton Boat Basin and onthe mudflats east of the East Peninsula.
Infauna found at the Skipanon River site include amphipods (Corophium.
salmonis) and worms (oligochaetes). The total abundance of these
organisms was found to be much lower at this site than in adjacent areas
of Youngs Bay and Alder Cove. The mudflat site near the East Peninsula
had primarily amphipods (Corophium salmonis) in very large numbers (in
excess of 30,000 animals per square meter). The mudflats on the eastern
part of the subarea are among the richest in the estuary in terms of
epibenthic invertebrates. Sand shrimp are particularly abundant.

The Skipanon River has not been sampled for fish. Juvenile sal-
monids are released from a small hatchery on the river operated by
Warrenton High School. The area east of the East Peninsula is used by
many of the same fish species found in Youngs Bay (see Youngs Bay
Subarea Plan). Wildlife use of the subarea's waters and wetlands are
also similar to Youngs Bay (see Youngs Bay Subarea Plan).

4.15.3. Shoreland Features

The shorelands of this subarea include the primarily developed West
Peninsula and vicinity, the mooring basin, and the primarily undeveloped
East Peninsula. Soils are sandy or freshwater marsh soils.

Vegetation on the northern half of the East Peninsula consists of
upland grasses and Scotch Broom in the higher spots and nontidal wetland
dominated by common rush in the lower (eastern) part. The southern half
of the peninsula consists of some upland grasses and a great deal of
common rush. Between the East Peninsula and Highway 101 the shoreland
vegetation varies, consisting of upland grasses, common rush, blackber-
ries, and various shrubs.

The shorelands on the southern half of the East Peninsula have
several small sloughs which drain through a tidegate into the Skipanon
River. Holbrook Slough, a larger slough which drains through a tidegate
into Youngs Bay, is classified as a significant wetland under Oregon
Statewide Planning Goal 17.

Use of the subarea by terrestrial mammals is low because of the
lack of vegetative cover. Some deer can be found in the subarea.
Abundant land birds include swallows, marsh wren, and common yellow-
throat.

4-59

4.15.4. Human Use

The West Skipanon Peninsula has been heavily impacted by develop-
ment. It includes the area bounded by N. E. Skipanon Drive on the
southwest, the Burlington Northern right-of-way on the south, the bank
of the Skipanon River on the east, and Alder Cove on the northwest and
north. The West Peninsula contains a number of diverse and potentially
conflicting uses, many of which are dependent upon the Skipanon water-
way. Private moorages exists across from the boat basin on the shore
adjacent to the Port Warren Condominiums. Several residences are
located along N.E. Skipanon Drive in this area. A seafood processing
plant with its own loading dock and moorage is located adjacent to the
Port Warren Condominiums on the north. The shore is mostly riprapped
along this section of the West Peninsula. The Cavenham Lumber Mill,
occupying the greater part of the West Peninsula's land area, lies
further to the north. The lumber mill has its own barge loading facili-
ties and moorage on the waterway, and occupies approximately 125 acres.
The greater part of the Cavenham Lumber Mill site is used for log
storage and loading. The south portion contains the lumber processing,
warehouse, and office facilities. At the north tip of the West Peninsu-
la there is a low marsh and narrow upland area which is now undeveloped
but could eventually be filled. The area was designated Water-Dependent
Development by the 1991 Mediation Panel Agreement and could potentially
be developed as a log export facility. The upland area is included as a
lower priority dredged material disposal site in the 1986 Columbia River
Estuary Dredged Material Management Plan. The railroad tracks which ran
approximately parallel to Harbor Drive and along N.W. Main to the north
were abandoned in 1986.

The East Skipanon Peninsula includes that area bounded by the
Warrenton Boat Basin and Harbor Drive on the south, Highway 101 and the
fringe marshes on the east, the Skipanon waterway to the west, and the
Columbia River to the north. The East bank of the Skipanon is primarily
undeveloped, with the exception of the Boat Basin and associated facili-
ties on the south end of the Subarea. Much of the bank is diked. An
extensive low marsh borders the peninsula on the east. The boundary of
the wetland area under federal jurisdiction was staked out and surveyed
in 1985. There is a designated dredged material disposal site on the
East Skipanon Peninsula. This site may contain nontidal wetlands, which
may reduce fill capacity. The upland areas are primarily pasture.

4.15.5. Issues

This area contains both industrial sites of great value and signif-
icant natural resource values. Both peninsulas of the Skipanon River
are especially suitable for water-dependent industry. There are size-
able parcels of vacant land in both public and corporate ownership. The
adjacent Skipanon River has an authorized channel. The main navigation
channel of the Columbia River is immediately accessible. There is no
railroad access, however.

4-60

The adjacent aquatic areas here contain important natural resource
values. Both Alder Cove and Youngs Bay are believed to make significant
contributions to the fisheries resource, particularly salmon.

The East Peninsula of the Skipanon River has been intensively
studied for its development potential and the impacts of development on
natural resource values. In connection with a proposed oil rig fabrica-
tion facility on the peninsula, an environmental impact statement and a
mitigation study was completed in the late 1970s. A Mediation Panel
Agreement between federal and state agencies and local governments was
reached in 1981 that provided for designation of Aquatic and Shoreland
areas for both water-dependent development and conservation. The East
and West Peninsulas were included in that Agreement. The great majority
of the uplands on the East Peninsula were designated Water-Dependent
Development to accommodate one or several large projects which would
require access to the Skipanon River channel and/or the Columbia River
navigation channel. In the event that the fringe marsh on the east side
of the East Peninsula is proposed to be filled, a mitigation area west
of Holbrook Slough in the southeast part of the East Peninsula would be
created. Most of the East Skipanon Peninsula is designated as a dredged
material disposal site.

The East Peninsula of the Skipanon is considered suitable for a
bulk shipping facility or heavy water-dependent industrial uses.
Deep-water access may be obtained via the Skipanon River or through a
pile-supported accessway north of the peninsula. If deep-water access
is obtained via the Skipanon River, it may be necessary to create berth
space by excavating existiiig uplands on the east peninsula due to the
narrowness of the river and location of the navigation channel.

The West Peninsula of the Skipanon River is presently occupied by
Cavenham Forest Industries. This largest employer in the City of
Warrenton has continued to make substantial investments in its facili-
ties. Expansion plans for this development have been discussed. They
may involve the development of a 2-berth log and lumber shipping facili-
ty on the Skipanon River.

The 1981 Mediation Panel Agreement'designated twenty acres of
aquatic and shoreland area for Development to provide for a log/lumber
export facility. Of these 20 acres, about 7.8 acres are in the aquatic
area of Alder Cove. Mitigation for the aquatic fill would need to be
provided as part of project approval.

The West Peninsula of the Skipanon River also has significant
potential for deep-draft access directly on the Columbia River. Natural
40-foot water depths occur about 1,600 feet from the end of the peninsu-
la. There is ample space for maneuvering and docking large ships. The
proximity of this site to the ocean and the excellent condition of the
40-foot channel downstream means that the site is one of few locations
where, by judicious use of tides, vessels drawing in excess of 40 feet
could be accommodated. As such, the site could provide the required
mooring capability for economically shipping or receiving bulk cargoes

4-61

in vessel sizes significantly greater than those using other port sites
on the Columbia River or in Oregon.

Further development in this subarea raises questions of water
quality in the Skipanon River. Water quality in the Skipanon River is
marginal during summer months. Increased dredging, river traffic, storm
runoff and boat moorage coupled with decreased flushing caused by
enlarging the channel could result in significantly poorer water qual-
ity.

The surface area of the Skipanon River is quite limited. It is not
known how much small boat traffic could be increased without causing
congestion problems and interfering with industrial operations. Highway
traffic congestion is already a problem in downtown Warrenton. More
industrial development at the mouth of the Skipanon River may increase
traffic congestion there and on Highway 101. Increased small boat
moorage would also increase congestion and result in a need for addi-
tional parking spaces. The East and West Skipanon Peninsulas were not
chosen as preferred sites for future deep-draft development in the Lower
Columbia River Assessment of Oregon Deep Draft Sites (Ogden Beeman and
Associates, Inc., 1996). The study cited lack of rail service and
distance to the channel as disadvantages. However, these sites remain
attractive for handling commodities not requiring rail service.

4.15.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations
1

The following aquatic areas are designated Development:

1. The entire Skipanon waterway between the Harbor Drive-Bridge and
the main navigation channel.

2. Approximately 25 acres of tidal marsh on the east side of the East
Peninsula (development aTternative I of the Mediation Panel Agree-
ment).

3. Approximately 7.8 acres of tidal marsh and flats on the west side
of the West Peninsula.

4. The flowlane disposal area south of the main channel (600 feet wide
or to the 20-foot bathymetric contour, whichever is narrower).

The following aquatic areas as designated Conservation:

1. The subtidal area between the 3-foot bathymetric contour and the
main navigation channel east of the Skipanon Channel.

2. The aquatic area,between the shoreline and the main navigation
channel west of the Skipanon Channel.
0

4-62

The following aquaLc areas are designated Natural:

1. Remaining tidal marshes and flats east of the East Peninsula
(development alternative I of the Mediation Panel Agreement) or all
tidal marshes and flats east of the East Peninsula (development
alternative II of the Mediation Panel Agreement).

The following shoreland areas are designated Development:

1. The area adjacent to the mooring basin east to N.E. Iredale Avenue.

2. The area just north of Harbor Drive on the east side of the
Skipanon waterway.

3. An area on the south side of the West Peninsula.

4. The area east of Holbrook Slough.

All other shorelands are designated Water-Dependent Development.

The regulatory shoreland boundary is 50 feet from the Columbia
River estuary shoreline, or the landward toe of dikes plus associated
toe drains, whichever is greatest, except where it extends farther
inland to include the following features:

1. The East Skipanon Peninsula containing:

(a) The 172-acre area designated Water-Dependent Development by
the Mediation Panel Agreement.

(b) The area east of Holbrook Slough to Highway 101 described as
suitable for mitigation/restoration by the Columbia River
Estuary.Mitigation and Restoration Plan.
(c) Dredged material dis'posal site Wa-S-10.9 from the Columbia
River Estuary Dredged Material Management Plan.

2. The West Skipanon Peninsula, including:

(a) All upland adjacent to Alder Cove and east of N. E. Skipanon
Drive, with the exception of the area designated commercial by
the City of Warrenton Zoning Ordinance.

(b) Dredged material disposal site Wa-S-10.7 from the Columbia
River Estuary Dredged Material Management Plan.

3. The following wetland classified as significant under Oregon
Statewide Planning Goal 17: Holbrook Slough.

4-63

4.15.7. Subarea Policies

1. Development of shorelands and adjacent aquatic areas on the East
and West Peninsulas of the Skipanon River shall be carried out so
as to minimize adverse environmental impacts on productive tidal
marshes, mud-sand flats, wildlife, fisheries and other important
natural values of Youngs Bay and Alder Cove. Site planning shall
include provision for vegetative buffers and other means for
shielding the developed areas from adjacent marshes and flats.

2. Existing and new uses which are associated with wood processing and
handling shall be allowed in the Water-Dependent Development area
on the West Peninsula of the Skipanon River.

3. The Development designations for aquatic areas along both sides of
the Skipanon are provided to accommodate future water-dependent
uses. However, the designations do not create the presumption that
dredging, filling or other alterations will be permitted automati-
cally. Specific proposals for water-dependent development must be
justified in terms of available alternatives, public need and
economic benefits, minimize adverse impacts on water quality and
natural habitat and meet other regulatory requirements.

4-64

City Litnits

Uroan Crowth B.Oundary (OR) 00000000000000

Dredged Met* ( Iof Disposal Site
... . . . . . . . . . " . . . . .
mitigation site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Goal 17 Significant Welland
. . . ........... ..... .. .......
Tansy

.'C A
IN a -S- 10L7
ALDER COVE

N A

WDS

D A

w -S-10.9

+
50,
D

Warr nton

Subarea Boundary .....................................
R egu I a I of y 6 hat: Ion d B a und a c y (OR)),
:u,13. to
t :.yShor.dln,*, Boundary WA)
1 no an Bou a at CE@; [email protected],L
RS CS

9Fh_01.l..d Aquatic
NS Natural NA SCALE IN FEET
CS Coneet..110. CA
RS Rural 2000 1000 0 2000
DS Development DA .............. ....
W.S Walo,-Ilpendon, Clo,olopool

4.15. Mouth of the Skipanon River

4-65

4.16. YOUNGS BAY

4.16.1. General Description

Youngs Bay is one of the more biologically productive parts of the
estuary. This subarea extends from the old Highway 101 bridges over the
'Youngs River and the Lewis and Clark Rivers to the 20-foot bathymetric
contour adjacent to the navigation channel of the Columbia River. it
includes large fringing marshes, tideflats, open water, and restored
wetlands at the Airport Mitigation Bank. The subarea boundary follows
the shoreline, except adjacent to the Port of Astoria and the East
Peninsula of the Skipanon River. No shorelands are included. Youngs
Bay is in Warrenton, Astoria and Clatsop County.

4.16.2. Aquatic Features

Because of numerous development proposals, Youngs Bay is the most
intensively studied bay of the estuary. The area has been considerably
altered by human activity. The most important physical alterations have
been diking of tidal marshes and spruce swamps, the filling of shallow
areas, and the alteration of the hydraulics of the bay by channels.,
fills and causeways. Youngs Bay originally extended from Tansy Point to
Smith Point, but the peninsulas at the mouth of the Skipanon River have
completely separated Alder Cove from Youngs Bay, though the systems
remain similar in their biology. The strongest effects on the bay's
hydraulics have been exerted by the Skipanon peninsulas, the fills at
Smith Point (Port of Astoria piers) and bridge causeways. T11 new
Highway 101 causeway in particular has caused a marked reduction in
currents and wave action in the interior of Youngs Bay. There has been
extensive shoaling. Much of the diked Airport and Jeffers Gardens areas
were previously tidal marshesiand swamps connected with Youngs Bay.

Tides in Youngs Bay and tributary streams are of the standing wave
type. Thus, the tidal range increases somewhat from the port docks (8.0
feet) to the tidal reaches of the tributary streams (8.6 or 8.7 feet).
High water is nearly simultaneous throughout the system and occurs at
slack water. This type of tide is typical of shallow bays but atypical
of the Columbia River Estuary.

Three water masses contribute to the circulation in Youngs Bay:
Columbia River fresh water, tributary fresh water and marine water.
Fresh water flow in the Columbia River is greatest during the spring
freshet in June; winter freshets also occur. Youngs Bay tributary flow
is strongest in December and January, when local rainfall is at a
maximum. Intrusion of saline marine water is governed primarily by
Columbia River flow and secondarily by tributary flow. Salinities in
Youngs Bay rarely exceed 10 to 15 parts per thousand even in the fall.
Under these conditions, the vertical salinity differences are pronounced
and salinity may intrude upriver along the bottom as far as RM 10 in the
Youngs River and RM 6 in the Lewis and Clark River. During high flow

4-66

periods for either the Columbia River or Youngs Bay tributaries, salini-
ty is absent or nearly absent from Youngs Bay.

Current patterns in Youngs Bay are complex. Eddies and stagnant
areas prevail in the shallows. Stronger currents are found in the deep
areas. Currents are highly variable, depending on winds, tides, fresh-
water flow and salinity intrusion.

Water quality is generally good in Youngs Bay; no serious pollutant
sources are present and the flushing is excellent. Flushing times for
the bay itself have been estimated to vary from 1 to 2 days, depending
on tide and freshwater flow conditions. The flushin- time of the
tributaries below the head of tide is slower; 3.3 to 16 days for the
Lewis and Clark River and 2.3 to 7.8 days for the Youngs River. Water
quality in some smaller tributaries and sloughs such as the Little
Walluski River is less favorable because of the poor flushing.

Sediments in the subarea range from medium to fine sand in the
central bay to very fine sand, silt, and clay on the tidal flats.
Youngs Bay appears to experience alternating periods of sedimentation
and erosion, with variations occurring on time scales from storm events
and seasons to years and decades. Sedimentation predominates (average
rate throughout bay 1 cm/yr) and most strongly so in the shallow areas
(up to 6 cm/yr). These observations are confirmed by the historical
changes over the last century.

Aquatic plant types in the Youngs Bay subarea include phyto-
plankton, benthic algae, and tidal marsh and swamp vegetation. Phyto-
plankton productivity is very low compared with the remainder of the
estuary. Benthic. algal productivity on the tidal flats and in the low
marshes ranks among the 1-tighest in the estuary. Tidal flats along the
west shore of Youngs Bay are particularly productive. Tidal marshes and
swamps form a narrow fringe along most of the Bay's shoreline. Coloniz-
ing low marshes dominated by bulrush (Scirpus validus) account for about
50% of the low marsh area. The remaining low marsh are dominated by
Lyngbyls sedge (Carex lyngbyei) and are extremely productive. The high
marshes consist @_fa mixture of several species of herbaceous plants and
shrubs. Shrub species dominate the tidal swamps. A 33-acre diked area
on the west side of the Lewis and Clark River mouth has been restored to
tidal influence. This area is expected to develop low and high tidal
marsh.

Invertebrate types that have been studied in the subarea include
benthic infauna and epibenthic organisms. Benthic infauna densities
rank among the highest in the estuary. Fish prey species such as
amphipods (Corophi salmonis) and clams (Macoma balthica) are abundant
in the infauna community. The epibenthic organism community in the
subarea also ranks among the most abundant in the estuary. Key species
include small copepods such as Eurytemora affinis and larger animals.
such as sand shrimp.

Youngs Bay is a feeding area for many species of fresh and salt
water fish. The Bay is also a particularly important nursery area for
the juveniles of many species. The marine demersal-species English

4-67

sole, starry flounder, and Pacific staghorn sculpin utilize the bay as a
feeding and nursery area. The English sole found in the bay are primar-
ily subyearlings and are most abundant in the deeper habitats during the
fall months. Abundant freshwater species in the subarea include
threespine stickleback, peamouth, and prickly sculpin.

Pacific herring, shiner perch, and longfin smelt possibly spawn in
Youngs Bay. Pacific herring spawn in the estuary from April through
July. Yearling and older herring, however, are not abundant in the bay.
Subyearlings become abundant in the bay in summer. Youngs Bay is more
important as a nursery area than a spawning area for Pacific herring.
Shiner perch bear their young in the estuary in June and July. Yearling
and older perch become particularly concentrated in the bay during this
period. Subyearling perch utilize the bay as a nursery area in summer
and fall. Longfin smelt spawn in the estuary from November through
March. Smelt ranging in age from yearlings through adults utilize
Youngs Bay throughout the year and are abundant in fall. Larval longfin
smelt appear in the estuary in winter and spring and subyearlings
utilize the bay as a nursery area primarily in fall.

In addition to longfin smelt, several other anadromous species,
including American shad and the salmonids, utilize the bay as a migra-
tion route and nursery area. American shad spawn in tributaries to the
bay from June to August. Adult American shad migrate through the bay in
June and July and juveniles in November and December. Because these
spawning runs are relatively small, American shad are less abundant in
Youngs Bay than in the main stem of the estuary. All of the salmonid
species abundant in the estuary utilize Youngs Bay as a migration route
or nursery area. Subyearling Chinook salmon utilize the bay as a
nursery area year round and are abundant during their springjnigration.
These juvenile Chinook include populations which have migr"ated from
upriver as well as from natural spawning areas and hatcheries in the
tributaries of the bay. Yearling Chinook and coho and juvenile steel-
head and cutthroat trout migrate through the bay primarily in spring.
The yearling Chinook populations represent upriver stocks, while the
coho and steelhead populations originate both upriver and in natural
spawning areas and hatcheries in the bay's tributaries.

The Youngs Bay subarea provides habitat for several species of
resident and migratory birds. Double-crested cormorant feed in the
subarea year round while pelagic cormorant utilize the subarea primarily
in winter. The marshes, tidal flats of the subarea provide habitat for
migratory waterfowl, especially swans, canvasback, scaups, and scoters.
These birds are abundant in winter and during their spring and fall
migrations. The western grebe, another migratory species, is abundant
in the subarea and uses Youngs Bay as a staging area before its spring
migration. Mallard, a resident waterfowl species, utilize the subarea
year round. Western and glaucous-winged gulls feed in the subarea year
round. Shorebirds utilize the tidal flat and low marsh habitats during
all seasons but are most abundant during their spring and fall migra-
tions. Great blue heron feed in the tidal flats and marshes of the
subarea year round. They are particularly abundant in spring and summer
in association with their use during the nesting season of a rookery
near the mouth of the Youngs River.

4-68

Aquatic and terrestrial mammals utilize the marshes of the subarea;
however, mammal use is low compared with upriver wetlands. Muskrat and
nutria use the low and high marshes for feeding and denning. Raccoon
feed in the high marsh habitats of the subarea.

4.16.3. Human Use

The primary uses are boating, recreational fishing, commercial
fishing, log transport, and sailing.

The cumulative impacts of diking, shore protection, bridge con-
struction and other human activity in Youngs Bay has been significant.
Circulation, aquatic habitat and public access have all been affected.

4.16.4. Issues

Youngs Bay is surrounded by Warrenton and Astoria. Several land
use disputes have centered around proposed fills in Youngs Bay or uses
of nearby shorelands that might have polluted the bay. Prime industrial
sites on the shorelands adjacent to Youngs Bay include the East Penin-
sula of the Skipanon River and the Astoria Airport. These sites could
be made larger by filling productive shallow areas.

The use of :the bay and tributaries for fish propagation will
probably also increase. The Clatsop Economic Development Committee's
fisheries project on the north shore of the bay has been succ-ssful and
is expanding. The physical characteristics of Youngs Bay,.including
good water quality, adequate depth at certain sites, and access to
shoreland sites make it particularly suitable for aquaculture.

A major limitation on development of shorelands adjacent to Youngs
Bay to the west is the limited land transportation system. Navigational
access to the Youngs Bay shoreline is limited by fringing tidal marshes,
shallow water and the high shoaling rate. Commercial use of the bay in
the near future will probably be limited to log transport and fishing.
Recreational boating and fishing will probably increase. There is a
need for support facilities along the shore of Youngs Bay for recrea-
tional and commercial fishing vessels. The salmon gillnet fishery in
Youngs Bay has increased in size in recent years, with rising production
at the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife's Klaskanine Hatchery and
the two Clatsop Economic Development Committee hatcheries on the south
fork of the Klaskanine and on Tucker Creek. Youngs Bay gillnet fisher-
men participated in a system of voluntary assessments to pay for the
Clatsop Economic Development Committee hatchery projects. The net pen
project on the north shore of the bay is expected to substantially
increase salmon runs.

Severe contamination of both upland and tidal flat sediments at the
old Pacific Power and Light coal gasification plant on Youngs Bay was
discovered in 1984. There was evidence of contamination of aquatic

4-69

organisms (not including fish) as well as groundwater contamination.
The sampling identified carcinogenic polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs) and benzene as the contaminants of primary concern in the coal
tars. A remedial action program was developed in coordination with the
Environmental Protection Agency and the Oregon Department of Environmen-
tal Quality. The old PP&L Service Center building was demolished in
1985 and the rubble was disposed on-site, then covered with sand and
several feet of topsoil. Warning signs were placed around the contami-
nated area. A two-year groundwater monitoring program has been imple-
mented. The results have indicated mainly localized contamination of
groundwater.

The dike adjacent to the airport runway designated for an instru-
ment landing system, which once intruded into the clear zone of that
runway, was moved waterward in 1984-85. Spruce and other vegetation
from approximately one acre outside the present dike was also removed.
This activity was mitigated by moving a portion of the dike landward and
created new marsh area. An exception to the Oregon Statewide Planning
Goal 16 was approved for this action.

A mitigation bank has been developed at the airport site near the
mouth of the Lewis and Clark River. The site was created by building a
new dike landward of the existing dike and removing the existing dike to
expose a 35-acre area to tidal influence. The mitigation bank is
administered by the Oregon Division of State Lands. The agreement
reached on use of the bank stipulates that it may be used only for
projects between Tongue Point and the Skipanon River..

4.16.5. Aquatic Designations

The authorized navigation channels are designated Development. The
mud flats, tidal flats, and fringing marshes are designated Natural,
except for areas adjacent to the old PP&L facility, the site of a former
net storage building south of the new Youngs Bay Bridge, and the exist-
ing structure at the Columbia Boatworks, which are designated Conserva-
tion.

All other water areas are designated Conservation.

4.16.6. Subarea Policies

1. Proposed developments shall be evaluated for their impact on
existing aquaculture operations. Aquatic sites that are especially
suitable for aquaculture development shall be reserved for that use
wherever possible.

2. Development of the aquatic area adjacent to the old Pacific Power
and Light facility shall be evaluated for its impacts related to
contaminated sediments buried on-site. Potential exposure of coal
tar pollutants from disturbance of contaminated sediments shall be
avoided.

4-70

DA
N see.
ei ..... ...... CA
'UOQ
UDER COVE Sr@ifji Pt.

26
CA
4g
GS

C A

41
we 0 AN\,
Subarea Bounderywo-&-o-vow- ... a ... NA
R:.g.u,l:,Io,,y Sho;:Iand Boundaty,(OR
R
o y sho line Boundary WA)

Designation Boundaries
R 8

Doelonstlons
Shof*fand Aquatic Port of Astoria,
Airport :6
NS Natural NA
C 8 Conservation CA

Development DA

SCA
City Limits
Urban Oro-th B.oundary (OFI) 0000000000000 C3 DA 2000- 10.0
Mitigation Site a a.x xKaK .'r CA

4.16. Youngs Bay

4.17. AIRPORT AND VICINITY

4.17.1. General Description

This subarea consists of diked shorelands that are part of or
adjacent to the Port of Astoria Airport. The subarea is.bounded by the
shoreline on the north and east, Highway 101 to the northwest, and
alternate Highway 101 on the south. The subarea lies within the
.Warrenton city limits and Urban Growth Boundary, except for an area
between S.E. l1th and alternate Highway 101, which is outside the Urban
Growth Boundary. There are no estuarine aquatic areas in this subarea.

4.17.2. Shoreland Features

The entire subarea is protected by dikes. Prior to diking, the
area consisted primarily of tidal marsh and swamp. With the exception
of filled areas at the airport, the entire subarea is in the 100-year
floodplain. The soils are fill material, Coquille-Tidal Marsh (fresh)
Clatsop Association and Walluski-Knappa Association. Developed areas
include the airport and associated facilities, an industrial park,. and a
residential area on the west side of the subarea.

Vegetation in the higher areas includes alder, willow and Sitka
spruce with a dense understory of blackberry. Much of the area around
the airport and west to Highway 101 consists of grasses with locally
dense areas of common rush (Juncus effusus).

Wetlands in the subarea include Vera Slough and some maf'shes in the
lower areas. Vera Slough has been classified as significant under
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 17. The boundaries of other wetlands
have not been determined as of the date of this Plan.

Wildlife use of the undeveloped portion of the subarea is high.

4.17.3. Human Use

The major human uses are the airport, light industry, the Coast
Guard base, agriculture, and rural residences. Agricultural suitability
is poor to moderate. The major agricultural activity is grazing.

Transportation access is provided by new and old Highway 101.
Because of the dike access problem and shallow water, there is no
navigationally useful water access to the airport. Water and sewer
service are provided by the City of Warrenton. The primary recreational
use is hunting.

4-72

4.17.4. Issues

The Airport is a valuable economic asset to the area. The Oregon
Department of Transportation has recommended that regulatory measures be
taken to protect present and future air operations. These measures
should provide for airport-related uses and should prevent encroachment
by residential uses. Use of the existing access road for airport-related
uses has resulted in conflict with adjoining residences. Development of
another access road to serve airport uses is needed. The Port of Astoria
plans to develop a new access road to the industrial park. This road
would require bridge crossing(s) over at least one slough and may
involve wetland fill.

Much of the land adjacent to the runways is designated for dredged
material disposal. These designated sites are distant from current
dredging projects but may be useful for material trucked in. They were
included in the Columbia River Estuary Dredged Material Management Plan
(1986) as reserve (Priority 2) sites, to be used primarily for the Port
of Astoria's projects.

4.17.5. Shoreland Designations

The shoreland north of the railroad is designated Rural. East of
Vera Creek, the shoreland within the Warrenton city limits is designated
Development. Agricultural areas outside the Warrenton city limits are
designated Rural and a small forested area is Conservation. West of
Vera Creek to S.E. Pacific Avenue and Holbrook Slough is designated
Rural. All clear zones at the ends of the airport runways are designat-
ed Rural. The creeks and sloughs, are designated Conservation. The
remainder of the subarea west to Highway 101 is designated Development.

The regulatory shoreland boundary in this subarea is 50 feet from
the estuary shoreline, or from the landward toe of dikes and associated
toe drains, whichever is greatest, except where it extends further
inland to include the following features:

1. Vera Creek Slough extending 1,000 feet inland from the tidegate.

2. The following dredged material disposal sites from the Columbia
River Estuary Dredged Material Management Plan:

Wa-S-12.6. Wa-S-12.5, Wa-S-12.1. Wa-S-11.9, Wa-S-11.8, and
Wa-S-11.7.

4.17.6. Subarea Policies

1. A new access road to serve airport uses should be developed.
Filling of Holbrook and Vera Creek sloughs and damage to riparian
habitat shall be minimized. An exception to Oregon Statewide
Planning Goal 17 may be necessary.

4-72a

2. New airport uses shall be designed and sited to minimize conflict
with res@dences along the present access road. Potential circula-
tion conflicts shall be evaluated.

4-73

SCALE IN FEET

2000 1000 0 2000

Wa-S- I 1 .9
W a S - 12. 1

Subarea Boundary .....................................
R:01::Iol,y Sll.*,:,iand Boundary (OR)
R . u 10 y Sh r Ing Boundary (WA)

Designation Boundaries
Designations RS ca 60
6 h o r 6 1 a n d Aquatic

08 DOVGIOP-.nt DA
()(edged Material 01 sposal Site

Mitigation Site
Goal 17 Significant W.Itlands

4.17. Airport and Vicinity

4. 18. LEWIS AND CLARK RIVER

4.18.1. General Description

This subarea includes thee Lewis and Clark River and diked and flood-
plain areas on the Lewis and Clark River and tributary sloughs between the
Alternate Highway 101 bridge and the head of tide. The subarea is within
Clatsop County.

4.18.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic portion of the subarea consists of the Lewis and Clark River
and the marshes fringing the river shore. Diking has brought about large
changes in this subarea in the past century. Prior to diking activities, the
river was flanked by broad tidal swamps. Most of the present fringing
marshes along the river shore formed after the dikes were constructed.

The Lewis and Clark River has an annual average discharge of 255 cubic
feet per second (cfs). Monthly average discharges can exceed 600 cfs in
December and January, and are typically less than 100 cfs in summer and fall.
Two-thirds of the total annual river discharge occurs during the period of
December through March. Tidal flow reversals are evident as far upstream as
Lewis and Clark River Mile 6 during low discharge periods and River Mile.2
duri ng high discharge periods.

Salinity levels in the subarea depend on the salinity of Youngs Bay
water and the volume of Lewis and Clark River discharge. Youngs Bay is
freshwater during the spring and summer Columbia River, hence the Lewis and
Clark River is freshwater. By late summer, the mouth of the Lewis and Clark
River exhibits salinities of 1 to 2 ppt. In fall, salinities at the river
mouth average 2 to 8 ppt and saline water intrudes to Lewis and Clark River
Mile 6. In winter, the high runoff of the Lewis and Clark River prevents
saline water from entering the river.

Sediments have been quantitatively sampled at two sites in the river.
At Lewis and Clark River Mile 7.5, the sediments consist of medium and coarse
gravel. The lower river sediments consist mainly of fine sand and silt.

Of the river's plant types, only phytoplankton and tidal marsh and swamp
vegetation have been studied. Information on these plant types exists for
the lower river only (to about RM 2.5). Phytoplankton productivity in the
lower river ranks among the highest measured in the estuary. The lower river
marshes are similar to those in Youngs Bay (see Youngs Bay Subarea Plan).

I
Invertebrate and fish species using the river are similar to those in
Youngs Bay (see Youngs Bay Subarea Plan).

Several anadromous species are known to spawn in the river. American
-shad spawn in the upper portion of the river from June through August. Fall

4-75

Chinook spawn in August and September, coho from August through October, and
steelhead from November through March.

Wildlife use of the subarea is similar to that in Youngs Bay (see Youngs
Bay Subarea Plan).

4.18.3. Shoreland Features

Most shorelands in this reach are low, diked lands in the 100 year
floodplain. Soils are of the Coquille-Tidal Marsh (fresh) - Clatsop and
Walluski-Knappa Associations. The soils are fair to good for agricultural
use. Most of the land is or has been in agricultural production. There are
few houses in the subarea.

Several tidegated sloughs drain the shorelands. These are significant
wetlands under Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 17. In addition, emergent
wetlands east of the Fort Clatsop Memorial are classified as significant.

Wildlife use of the shorelands is high.

4.18.4. Human Use

Land uses include agriculture (largely grazing), rural housing, and the
log dump owned by Cavenham Forest Products. Highway access is provided,by
Alternate Highway 101 and county roads. Water is private or provided by the
Youngs River and Lewis and Clark Water District. There is no sewer system.
The scenic value of the river is high. The Fort Clatsop National Memorial
commemorates the winter headquarters of the Lewis and Clark Expedition. The
major human uses of the waters are fishing, log sorting, storage and trans-
port, and recreational boating. There are two active diking districts in the
subarea.

The cumulative impact of dike construction on circulation and aquatic
habitat has been substantial. Large areas in this subarea have been convert-
ed from marsh/swamp habitat into agricultural use.

4.18.5. Issues

There is limited development potential because of the flood hazard, poor
transportation network and distance from developed areas. Some housing
development may occur on adjacent upland areas.

Dredging of the Lewis and Clark River channel (10 feet deep and 150 feet
wide) was at one time authorized, but has since been deauthorized. However,
private dredging occurs in the river.

4-76

Maintenance of fresh water flow and water quality during summer minimum
flow periods is important for continuation and enhancement of fish runs.
There is potentially a'conflict between public water supply and the need to
maintain minimum stream flows.

This subarea includes hundreds of acres of farmland and many residences
which are dependent upon an extensive diking and drainage system for protec-
tion from flooding. The maintenance of this system is the responsibility of
local diking districts which have limited funds. In some instances the only
economically feasible material for dike maintenance are river bottom sedi-
ments outside the dike. An exception to Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 16
has been approved to allow subtidal dredging for dike maintenance.

Public access to the Lewis and Clark River is limited. Construction of
a small boat ramp would significantly improve this situation. Concerns have
been raised by local landowners about the potential negative impacts of
increased public access. Problems cited by riparian owners include trespass-
ing, damage to dikes, and erosion caused by boat wakes.

4.18.6. kquatic and Shoreland Designations

The river channel is designated Development from the Alternate Highway
101.bridge to the upstream end of the Cavenham log booming area. Adjacent to
the Development Shoreland (Miles Crossing Subarea) south of the bridge and
includingthe mouth of Jeffers Slough, the aquatic area from the shoreline
out to the channel is designated Development.

Shorelands at the Cavenham log dump are designated Water-Dependent Deve-
lopment. The Fort Clatsop National Memorial and a small forested ;horeland
area are designated Conservation. Remaining shoreland is designated Rural.

The regulatory.shoreland boundary in this subarea is 50 feet from the
shoreline, or from the inland toe of dikes and associated toe drains, which-
ever is greatest, except where it extends farther inland to include the
following features:

1. Significant riparian vegetation along the following tidegated sloughs:
Jeffers Slough, Barrett Slough, Green Slough, and other unnamed diked
sloughs, as shown on Columbia River Estuary Resource maps; and signifi-
cant riparian vegetation along the banks of the Lewis and Clark River to
the head of tide as shown on Columbia River Estuary Resource Maps.

2. Jeffers Slough, Barrett Slough, Green Slough and other unnamed diked-
sloughs providing significant wetland habitat as shown on Columbia River
Estuary Resource Maps..

3. A log-dump site designated Water-Dependent Development.

4. The following dredged material disposal sites listed in the 1986 Colum-
bia River Estuary Dredged Material Management Plan: CC-S-12.9,
CC-S-12.7.

4-77

5.. Mitigation and restoration sites de signated in the Columbia River
Estuary Restoration and Mitigation Plan.

4.18.7. Subarea Policies

1. Existing log storage areas should be inventoried to determine where logs
rest on the bottom at low water. Use of these areas should be minimized
and phased out as new sites adequate to meet industry needs are provid-
ed.

2. Boat ramps on the Lewis and Clark River shall be sited and designed to
minimize negative impacts on adjacent properties. Only relatively small
ramps offering access to smaller boats may be permitted.

4-78

Airport

R 8
60,
Pd A@T-

a"' CC-S- 2.9
*x

J Jae

RS 50,

x
x
x
a
KA.
k xf 9
x x x

CC-S- 2.7

CS
50'

WDS

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

R S50"

Subarea Boundary ............... none ... C 8
R:g,,::Io,r y Sho,,:,I.,,d Boundary (OR)) 5 0
R a u t0 y Sho In* Boundary (WA) 2 3
Designation Boundaries CE:) -@- -1 - - --I- . . a
RS 60' CS 60 9 a
R , so,
Designations 50.
1@horalsrid AQuatic

NS N a I u r a I NA
CS Conservation CA
RS Rural C A
06 Development OA
WDS Water-Depandent Development + CS
50,
City Limits

Urban Growth B.ountiary (OR) 000000C]C]000000

Dredged Material Disposal Sit*

Mitigation Site

Goal 17 Significant ends
X":
Well
...... ...
. ............ - - - - - -
Goal 17 Significant Riparian Vegetation

AS
5
SCALE IN FEET CS 50,

2000 1000 0 2000

Head of Tide

4.19. MILES CROSSING

4.19.1. General Description

This subarea extends between the intersection of Clover Lane with
Jeffers Slough at the southwest, around the peninsula separating the Lewis
and Clark River and the Youngs.River, and Miller Slough toward the southeast.
There are no estuarine aquatic areas in this subarea.

4.19.2. Shoreland Features

The subarea's shorelands, except for the causeway fill for the Old
Highway 101 bridge over the Youngs River, are diked. The area is entirely
within the 100 year floodplain, with the exception of the highway and some
lands-north and west of the highway. The subarea consisted of tidal marsh
and swamp before it was diked.

Soils are of the Coquille-Tidal Marsh (fresh) - Clatsop Association and
topography is flat. Because the land is low, the agricultural suitability is
fair to moderate, and there is no timber of commercial value. Much of the
subarea is developed with residential, commercial and light industrial uses.

There are several tidegated sloughs in the subarea. The larger sloughs
are classified as significant wetlands under Oregon Statewide Planning Goal
17. Wildlife values are high in the undeveloped areas and low in the devel-
oped areas.

4.19.3. Human Use

The major agricultural use is grazing. Other land uses include rural
and low density residential housing, commercial uses and light industry.
The only water-dependent uses are the AMCCO Shipyard on the Lewis and Clark
River, a small shipyard north of AMCCO, and boat construction at the mouth of
Cook Slough. Commercial and industrial uses are concentrated along Alternate
Highway 101. County roads provide access to nearby rural areas.

There is no sewer system, and septic tank suitability is poor. Sewering
the area would probably require connection to the Warrenton or Astoria sewer
systems.

Water and marsh areas adjacent to this subarea are used for hunting,
fishing, boating and trapping. Some shoreline views are scenic.

4-81

4.19.4. Issues'

Majonportions of this subarea were considered for inclusion in
Astoria's Urban Growth Boundary in the late 1970s. The City and some commer-
cial interests favored inclusion. A large majority of area residents who
voiced their opinion were opposed. A decision was made not to include the
area. Future inclusion may be possible (see subarea policy below). '

The area has development potential due to its proximity to Astoria and
the availability of flat land. This potential is constraine 'd, however, by
the lack of sewers, flood hazard, and poor soil suitability. Water-oriented
development is feasible only along the Lewis and Clark River.

This subarea includes hundreds of acres of agricultural land and many
residences which are dependent upon an extensive diking and drainage system
for protection from flooding. The maintenance of this system is normally the
responsibility of local diking districts which have limited funds. An
exception to Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 16 has been approved to allow
subtidal dredging for dike maintenance. The Corps of Engineers has icompleted
a plan to rehabilitate the dikes in this subarea. As of the date of this
Plan, no dike work has begun.

A boat construction facility adjacent to the tide box at the mouth of
Cook Slough is presently being used for construction of steel-hulled fishing
vessels. Extensive shoaling has substantially reduced water depths and
launching is extremely difficult. The dredging of a "pothole" in the area
would allow vessels to be launched in a safe manner and would permit the
vessels to be moored at this location while final outfitting' takes place.
Movement out to the main river channel could occur 'at high tide. Continued
shoaling of this area, however, could result in shallow water depths which
would not allow the movement of these vessels (drafts of approximately 9
feet) out to the river channel even on the highest tides. Under those
circumstances limited dredging for ingress and egress to the area would be
appropriate. An exception to Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 16 will be
required to permit this dredging.

4.19.5. Shoreland Designations

All shorelands in this subarea are designated Rural, except for the
existing industrial zone on the east bank of the Lewis and Clark River which
is designated Water-Dependent Development, and the existing industrial zone
between Alternate Highway 101 and Knowland Slough, which is designated
Development.

The regulatory shoreland boundary in this subarea is 50 feet from the
Youngs Bay shoreline, or from the landward toe of dikes and-associated toe
drains, whichever is greatest, except where is extends further inland to
include the following shoreland features:

1. Significant riparian vegetation along Knowland Slough, Jeffers Slough,
Cook Slough and other unnamed sloughs, as mapped on Columbia River

4-82

Estuary Resource Maps; and significant riparian vegetation along the
Youngs Bay shoreline, as shown as Columbia River Estuary Resource Maps.

2. Jeffers Slough, Cook Slough, Knowland Slough, and other unnamed tide-
gated sloughs providing significant Goal 17 wetland habitat as shown on
Columbia River Estuary Resource Maps.

3. The Astoria Marine Construction (AMCCO) boatworks, in a Water-Dependent
Development Shorelands designation; a small boat shop about 1,500 feet
downstream from the AMCCO facility, also in a Water-Dependent Develop-
ment Shorelands designation; a partially developed site at the mouth of
Cook Slough, also in a Water-Dependent Development Shorelands designa-
tion; and mitigation and restoration sites designated in the Mitigation
and Restoration Plan for the Columbia River Estuary.

4.19.6. Subarea Policies

11. The Ruraldesignation in the Miles Crossing area recognizes that there
are no plans to include this area in the Astoria Urban Growth Boundary
(UGB) at this time. However, there are commitments between the County
and City to recons'ider the UGB issue during future review and update of
plans. In the meantime, the nature and intensity of new uses should be
consistent with the Rural designation and availability of public serviC7
es.

4-83

Subarea Boundary- . . . on-w-w-a . . . *,a . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Regulatory Shoreland Boundary (OR)
Regulatory Shoiallne Boundary

Designation Boundaries (f@ N -A,
Ra 60, CS 60 D g
0 a a I a n a t 10 n 0
Shoreland Aquatic D S
RS A u r a 1 60, RS 0
so
08 DA V
Development a
WDS Water-Dopendent Development

Mitigation Site a x WDS

Goal It Significant Wetlands ..... .....

Goal 17 Significant Riparian Vegetation
R

R S 50 0

Port of Astoria
Airport

C.
Mc

T
@
.R S
6 0 D S

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

SCALE IN FEET

2000 1000 0 2000
... .......

4.19. Miles Crossing

4.20. YOUNGS RIVE9.

4.20.1. G@neral De.@cription,

This subarea includes the aquatic and shoreland areas of Youngs River
above the Old Highway 101 bridge upstream to the head of tide. On the west
side of the river, the shoreland north of Millers Slough is not included.
The boundary of this subarea-in Astoria is the pierhead line between the
bridge and the point where the Astoria city limits intersect the Youngs River
shoreline. The subarea is under Clatsop County's jurisdiction.

4.20.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic areas,in this subarea include the Youngs, Walluski, and
Klaskanine Rivers to the head of tide and adjacent tidal marshes and swamps.
Diking has brought about large changes in this subarea in the past century.
Broad tidal marshes and swamps flanked the shores of the rivers prior to
being converted to,agricultural land by diking and clearing. Most of 'the
narrow fringing marshes along the rivers' shores formed after the dikes were
built.

Youngs River has,an average annual discharge of 560 cubic feet per
second (cfs). Monthly average discharges can exceed 1,200 cfs in December,
and january, and typib.ally rarge around 100. cfs in summer and fall.
Two-thirds of the total annual rivdr discharge occurs during the period of
December through March. *Flow reversals are evident as far upstream as Youngs
RM 9.5 during average river discharge and RM 6 during high discharge.

The salinity levels in Youngs Bay and the discharge levels of Youngs
River determine the salinity of tlie river. During the Columbia River fresh-
et, both Youngs Bay and River are entirely freshwater. In fall, salt water
intrudes into Youngs Bay and the mouth of Youngs River exhibits salinities of
4 to 10 ppt with significant salinity stratification. Brackish water moves
up the river to RM 10. In winter, Youngs River becomes entirely freshwater.

The sediments of Youngs River grade from coarse-grained in upriver areas
to fine-grained in downriver areas. The sediments consist of cobbles and
boulders upriver from the Klaskanine River confluence. The river bed grades
from sand to silt between the Klaskanine River confluence and Daggett Point.
Fine suspended sediments tend to settle out in the portion of this stretch of
river between the Walluski River confluence and Daggett Point. The sediments
become coarser silt downriver from Daggett Point.

The plant types of the Youngs River Subarea include phytoplankton,
benthic algae, and tidal marsh and swamp vegetation. Phytoplankton produc-
tivity levels in the lower river rank among the highest measured in the
estuary. Benthic algal productivity on the lower river tidal flats is
moderate to high. There is no information on phytoplankton or benthic algal
is productivity upriver from RM 5. Data on marsh production and community
composition exist for the lower river only (to RM 8). The tidal low marshes

4-85

near the river mouth resemble the brackish marshes of Youngs Bay, while those
farther upriver resemble the freshwater marshes of Cathlamet Bay (see Youngs,
Bay and Cathlamet Bay Subarea Plan). The dikes surrounding Haven Island
breached in the early 1980's and the island is reverting to tidal marsh.

Invertebrate and fish utilization in the subarea is similar to Youngs
Bay (see Youngs Bay Subarea Plan).

Several anadromous species are known to spawn in the river. American
shad spawn in the upper portion of the Youngs and Walluski Rivers from June
through August. Fall Chinook spawn in the Klaskanine River in August and
September, coho in the Youngs and Klaskanine Rivers from August through
October, and winter run steelhead in the Youngs and Klaskanine Rivers from
November through March. In addition hatcheries on the Klaskanine River
releases fall Chinook, coho, and steelhead.

Bird and wildlife use of the subarea is similar to Youngs Bay (see
Youngs Bay Subarea Plan). A great blue heron nesting colony exists east of
the subarea on Brown's Creek. Heron from this colony feed in Youngs River
and Bay. Much of the subarea is within the home range of a nesting pair of
bald eagles. The pair nests east of Youngs River near Cooperage Slough.

4.20.3. Shoreland Features

Most shorelands in this reach are low diked lands in the 100 year
floodplain. Soils are of the Coquille-Tidal Marsh (fresh) - Clatsop,
Walluski-Knappa, and Nehalem Associations. These soils are fair to good for
agricultural use.. Most of the land is or has been in agricultural produc-
tion. There is some commercially valuable timber and adjacent uplands are
highly productive timberland. There is rural housing development along the
main roads passing through the subarea.

Several tidegated sloughs drain the shoreland of the subarea. Most of
the large sloughs are significant wetlands under Oregon Statewide Planning
Goal 17.

Bird use of the shorelands is high and mammal use is high in the unde-
veloped areas and adjacent to the rivers and wetlands.

4.20.4. Human Use

Major land uses are agriculture and rural housing. Highway access is
provided by Oregon Highway 202 and county roads. Water is provided by three
water districts; there is no sewer system, except at the old naval hospital.
The scenic value of the river is high. There is a County park at Youngs
River Falls and there are several undeveloped access points for angling.

The major human uses of the aquatic areas are fishing, log storage and
transport, and recreational boating. There is one active diking district and
one defunct diking district on the Youngs and Klaskanine Rivers. Most dikes

4-86

throughout the area have been maintained by barge-mounted dragline. An
exc eption to Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 16 has been approved to allow
subtidal dredging for dike maintenance. The Corps of Engineers has completed
a plan to rehabilitate the dike from the Miles Crossing subarea to Binder
Slough. As of the date of this plan, work has not begun.

The cumulative impact of diking in this subarea has been substantial.
Nearly all of the former marshes and swampland along the rivers have been
converted to agricultural use. Remaining intertidal areas are greatly
diminished relative to their pre-diking size.

4.20.5. Issues

There is limited development potential in this subarea because of the
flood hazard, poor transportation network and distance from developed areas.
Residential development may occur on adjacent upland areas. The old naval
hospital site is on high ground near the intersection of Youngs and Walluski
Rivers, has water and sewer systems, and could be developed. Increased
residential use in the Youngs River area is likely. Water-related issues
include the preservation of diked, freshwater wetlands, log storage in
wetland areas where logs may go aground at low water, and the dredging of
shallow productive areas for fill material to maintain dikes.

This subarea includes hundreds of acres of farmland and many residences
which are dependent upon an extensive diking and drainage system for protec-
tion from flooding. The maintenance of this system is the responsibility of
local diking districts which have limited funds. Insome instances the only
economically feasible material for dike maintenance are river bottom sedi-
ments outside the dike.

The Youngs River subarea contains significant natural values which
should be protected. Except for extensive diking, people have changed this
environment to a lesser extent than many other portions of the estuary.
There is a substantial local and state investment in fisheries enhancement.
The state and Clatsop Economic Development Committee operate fish hatcheries
on the Klaskanine River. Expansion of these fish-rearing efforts is planned.
The construction of a fish ladder at Youngs River Falls and the use of the
area for mitigation sites could result in development of the river as an
extremely valuable fisheries resource. Youngs River Falls has also been
considered as a potential hydroelectricity development site.

4.20.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The authorized navigation channel in Youngs River is designated Develop-
ment to Haven Island. The following aquatic areas are designated Natural:
Cooperage Slough, Grant Island, Haven Island, Fry Island, and the tidal flats
downstream of the Walluski River on both sides of the river including Daggett
Point. Remaining aquatic areas are designated Conservation.

4-87

Shorelands in this subarea used for agriculture and associated uses are
designated Rural. Areas along the upper tidal reaches of the Walluski,
Klaskanine, and Youngs River, and shorelands used primarily for timber
production are designated Conservation.

The regulatory shoreland boundary in this subarea is 50 feet from the
Youngs River shoreline, or from the landward toe of dikes and associated toe
drains, whichever is greater, except where it extends farther inland to
include the following shoreland features:

1. Significant riparian vegetation along both banks of the Youngs River,
the Walluski River, the Little Walluski River, Crosel Creek and the
Klaskanine River to the head of tide, as mapped on Columbia River
Estuary Resource Maps; and significant riparian vegetation along diked
sloughs as shown on Columbia River Estuary Resource Maps, including
Sales Slough, Binder Slough, Casey Slough, Tucker Creek Slough, Battle
Creek Slough and other unnamed sloughs.

2. An eagle's nest near Cooperage Slough and a 50-foot buffer around the
next tree.

3. Sales Slough, Binder Slough, Tucker Creek Slough, Battle Creek Slough,
Casey Slough and other unnamed sloughs providing significant Goal 17
wetland habitat as shown on Columbia River Estuary Resource Maps.

4. Mitigation and restoration sites as designated in the Mitigation and
Restoration Plan for the Columbia River Estuary.

4.20.7. Subarea Policies

1. Existing log storage areas should be inventoried to determine where logs
rest on the bottom at low water. Use of these areas should be minimized
and phased-out as new sites adequate to meet industry needs are provid-
ed.

2. To protect present investments and the future potential of the fisheries
resource of the Youngs River, new development in the area shall be
carried out so as to preserve water quality, biological productivity,
and other factors which contribute to fisheries production.

4-88

b
00

CA
RS 5

A C A

CS 50,

0
0
0

0
C

K N K %
-C% 60, x RS-. RS 50'
50,

A
M -

x
CS
4 x x
50'

D A x x

RS 50' RS 50'

A x x
Fr
K
a!34

--27 CS 50
A _9

414 tnd

202
C

CS so

.,R 0'

CS 50,

FIS Sol RS 0
Csr

6 u b a r a a 13 o u n d a r y...................................... . S
60
R:gu.l:lo,,y Sho,,:jand
A .u ,o y Sho Ine Bounder WA)

Designation Boundaries
RS 50' CS 60
Designations RS 0'
Shoreland Aquatic

NS N a t u r a I NA
Ce Conservation CA
RS Rural
DS Development OA
WDS Water-Dependent Development
CA
City Limits . . . . . . . . .
Urban Growth B.oundary (OR) 0000000000000[] CS
Dredged Material Disposal all. so'
Mitigation Site * XKNKXKNXK@XXXXKKXKXXXXXXXKKK..%.Xt 8 , ..
1530
Goal 17 Significant Wetlands
... ... . ......
SCALE IN FEET
Goal 17 Significant Riparian Vegetation 20 00 1000 0 2000
mm-mummmmw

4.21. SOUTH ASTORIA

4.21.1. General Description

This subarea covers the north shore of Youngs Bay between the new
Youngs Bay bridge and the junction of the Astoria city limits with the
shoreline. West of the old Youngs Bay bridge only the shorelands are a
part of the subarea. East of the old Youngs Bay bridge the shorelands
and the aquatic area out to the pierhead line are included.

Most of the subarea is within the city limits and the Urban Growth
Boundary of the City of Astoria. Some aquatic areas in the eastern
portion of the subarea are outside of the UGB under Clatsop County's
jurisdiction.

4.21.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic portion of this subarea includes the nearshore waters
along the south Astoria waterfront. Much of the shoreline is riprapped
and there are fringing marshes and tide flats along the shore. Aquatic
physical and biological features are discussed in the Youngs Bay Subarea
Plan.

4.21.3. Shoreland Features

The shorelands of this subarea are a narrow band of developed land
between the water and Marine Drive/Highway 202. Soils are fill material
and Coquille-Tidal Marsh (fresh) - Clatsop Association. Wildlife values
are minimal, because most of the surface is paved and the shoreline is
riprapped.

4.21.4. Human Use

Residential, commercial and industrial uses are found on these
shorelands. Water-oriented uses include the Astoria Yacht Club adjacent
to the old Youngs Bay bridge north footing, a shipyard, a launching,
mooring, boat maintenance and fueling facility at Tidepoint, and other
small docks and moorages. The Clatsop Economic Development Committee
maintains salmon rearing pens west of Tidepoint. The salmon are raised
to smolt size and released into the Youngs River. The former Bumblebee
shipyard (now Corderman., Oregon) has had limited activity.

4-91

4.21.5. Issues

Most suitable development sites in this subarea have already been
developed. Industrial sites include the former Bumblebee Shipyard, the
abandoned PP&L plant and the Fluhrer Brothers shingle mill. Some
dredging would be needed adjacent to the PP&L site to provide access to
the Youngs Bay Channel. Dredging at this site could probably not be
approved because of coal tar contamination in the sediments and the fear
that polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and benzene would be released into
Youngs Bay (see Youngs Bay Subarea Plan). Dredging would probably also
be necessary to provide water access to the old Bumblebee Shipyard
facility. Though there is deep water close to shore between the old
Youngs Bay bridge and the Tidepoint Dock, little backup land is avail-
able. Extensive fills in the Youngs River/Youngs Bay system would
conflict with the high natural values of the area. Concerns have been
expressed about interference with upland views as a result of develop-
ment along the bay.

4.21.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The aquatic area east of the old Youngs Bay bridge out to the
pierhead line is designated Development between the bridge and 11th
street, and Conservation east of 11th Street to the subarea boundary.

Shorelands in this subarea are designated Development with the
exception of the area bounded by the old Youngs Bay Bridge, Highway 202,
and 11th Street, which is designated Water-Dependent Development.

,The regulatory shoreland boundary is 50 feet from the Youngs Bay
and Youngs River shoreline in this subarea, except where it extends
farther inland to include the following shoreland features:

1. Shoreland bounded by the@Old Youngs Bay Bridge, Highway 202, and
11th Street necessary for water-dependent uses.

2. All other shorelands between the new Youngs Bay Bridge (U.S.
Highway 101) and the eastern Astoria City limits, waterward of
Highway 202, with the exception of the PP&L substation at the
southeast corner of llth Street and Highway 202.

4.21.7. Subarea Policies

1. Development of the shoreland occupied by the old Pacific Power and
Light facility shall be evaluated for its impacts related to
contaminated sediments buried on site. Potential exposure of coal
tar pollutants from disturbance of contaminated sediments shall be
avoided.

4-92

2. Potential conf licts between new development and existing uses on
the South Astoria Waterfront will be evaluated on a case-by-case
basis during permit review.

3. Proposed developments shall be evaluated for their impact on
existing aquaculture operations. Aquatic sites that are especially
suitable for aquaculture development shall be reserved for that use
whenever possible.

4-93

Subarea Boundary . . . . a. . . . . . . . .

R*cufalofy Shoreland Boundary
Regulatory Shoreline Boundary
Designation Boundaries C@E:D

Desicnationa
shoreland A

"S Natural
CS Conservation
RS Rural
DS Development
WDS Water-Dependent
Smith Pit. City Limits
Urban Growth 8.0undary (OR) 0

D S
so,

D 8

D 8 0.

202
DS DS 60,
D S@ S
CA D S
A
D
11 0@9
o_ D

4.21. South Astoria

4.22. PORT OF ASTORIA

4.22.1. General Description

This subarea includes shorelands and aquatic areas along the Astoria
waterfront between the Astoria-Megler Bridge and the Youngs Bay Bridge
causeway. The Port of Astoria piers, the federally-authorized turning basin,
the West End Mooring Basin, the Red Lion Inn complex and the Union Cannery
are included.

4.22.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic portions of this subarea include.shallow flats west of Pier
3, deep water off the Port piers, and waters between the piers and east of
Pier 1. Aquatic features on the shallow flats west of Pier 3 are similar to
those inYoungs Bay (see Youngs Bay Subarea Plan). Benthic infauna densities
are very high on these flats. The aquatic characteristics of the waters off
of the Port piers are'similar to those in the adjacent channel (see Estuary
Channels Subarea Plan).

Much of the aquatic habitat between the finger piers, within the moorin$
basin,'and east of the basin, is somewhat degraded because of Port and , :
mooring basin use and past cannery use. Sediments in these areas consist
primarily of - very f ine sand,, silt, and clay. Benthic inf auna have been
.sampled on, the ti-dal flat east of the&.-ooring basin. Infauna densities in
that area are@moderate.

4.22.3. Shoreland Features

The shorelands of the subarea are flat and consist largely of fill
material obtained from the Columbia River. The subarea is almost entirely
developed for port facilities. The only shoreland vegetation consists of
upland grasses, scotch broom, and other shrubs located on and adjacent to
Pier 3. The subarea has little wildlife value.

4.22.4. Human Use

The Port of Astoria, the West End Mooring Basin, and the Red Lion Inn
are the major facilities in this subarea. The Port of Astoria facilities
contain 3 piers, a port office building, warehouses, open dock and storage
areas, a barge slip, and a marina for small commercial and recreational
vessels. There are also several warehouses and a tank farm located on
Port-owned property. The railroad and Highway 101 are adjacent to this
subarea.

4-95

Pier 3 was used for assembly of oil well modules for use in outer-
continental shelf and nearshore waters in Alaska. The project demonstrated
the feasibility of assembling these modules in the estuary. Declining
petroleum prices resulted in the closure of the Pier 3 facility in 1986.

4.22.5. Issues

Additional Port lands might be obtained by filling one or both of the
pier slips or by filling west of Pier 3 or east of Pier 1. Extensive filling
has been strongly opposed by resource agencies. A permit for an 80-acre fill
west of Pier 3 was denied in 1976. Future Port of Astoria development plans
involve extending the face of Pier 1 to the east to accommodate larger cargo
vessels. Additional plans include bulkheading and other structural repairs
to the piers, and construction of new warehouse, office, and restaurant
buildings (Port of Astoria Marine Terminals Development Plan, 1985).

Cargoes at the Port of Astoria have consisted almost entirely of logs in
recent years. The Port has carried out a major rehabilitation of Pier 1 with
the establishment of a new berth presently used for the shoreside handling of
logs.

A Mediation Panel Agreement between state and local governments and
resource agencies on potential development of several*sites along the Lower
Columbia River in Oregon was reached in 1981. This agreement designated
aquatic and shoreland areas for development as well as resource protection.
The agreement's policies and designations for the Port of Astoria are includ-
ed in the applicable sections of this subarea plan.

It is important to note that the 1985 Port of Astoria development plan
does not include future filling between the finger piers, although the
Mediation Panel Agreement did address it. Instead, port plans now call for
expansion of the dock face at Pier 1 to the east. This would involve fill of
approximately 4 acres to the west of the existing mooring basin in the first
stage, fill of approximately 10 acres east of the mooring basin in the second
stage, and fill of the area in between now occupied by the West End Mooring
Basin in the final stage. This potential fill area was not included in the
Mediation Panel Agreement.

The tidal flats west of Pier 3 are a valuable natural resource. Benthic
animals are abundant and the area used by salmon migrating downstream and by
other fishes. This is discussed in the Youngs Bay Subarea Plan. These tidal
flats are also an attractive development site, being adjacent to both the
main ship channel and existing Port facilities.

4.22.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The following aquatic areas are designated Development:

1. The aquatic area between the eastern tip of the port piers and a point
220 feet west of the end of Pier 3 and lying South of the pierhead line.

4-96

This area includes 19.4 acres within the finger piers and 2.1 acres of
aquatic area lying 220 feet West of the Fast tip of Pier 3 and South of
the pierhead line (Mediation Panel Agreement).

2. A 10-acre subtidal area West of the 2.1 acre area described above
(Mediation Panel Agreement), to be developed using piling to the maximum
extent feasible.

3. The aquatic area between the east side of Pier 1 and the Columbia River
bridge, south of the pierhead line, including the mooring basin and the
Union Cannery.

4. The turning basin, and the area between the piers and the turning basin.

The following aquatic areas are designated Conservation:

1. The aquatic area between 3 feet below MLLW and the Navigation channel,
excluding the aquatic area designated Development by the Mediation Panel
Agreement, and excluding the designated turnin'g basin.

The following aquatic areas are designated Natural:-

1. The remainder of the aquatic area west of Pier 3.

All shorelands are designated Water-Dependent Development, except those
south of the railroad right-of-way in a DevelODMent designation.

The regulatory shoreland boundary in this subarea includes areas desig-
nated Water-Dependent Development shorelands and areas designation Develop-
ment shorelands.

4.22.7. Subarea Policies

i. Filling of slips 1 and 2 and the 2.1 acre site north of Pier 3 may occur
as required to meet specific development proposals.-

2. The 10-acre aquatic development parcel west of Pier 3 may be developed
as part of a specific proposal to fully utilize the filled area inclu-
sive of slip 2, the 2.1 acre fill, Pier 3, and the existing filled area
adjacent to Pier 3.

3. The 10-acre aquatic development area shall be developed using piling to
the maximum extent feasible.

4. Filling shall only be allowed for water-dependent uses. Specific
proposals for the extent of fill or pile in the area west of Pier 3 must
be justified at the time of permit application, specifically addressing
physical and biological effects on the area west of Pier 3.

4-97

Subarea Boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
R:Q,,Il:loly 8h.0, land Boundary (ORII)
R ,U tocy a , :, Ina Boundary (WAII
Designation Boundaries CiED --@-
RS 50,

Designation$
;h.T.I..d Aquatic 15
NS N a t u r 8 1 NA C-1
CS Conservation CA
RS Rural
CD
DS Development DA
WDS Water-Dependent Development

City Limits
Urban Growth B.oundsty (OR) 00000000000000 M-5

D A
a WDS
C A e.
CO

CA WDS a
\ N A
S nNet NP t.

SCALE I

2000 1000

4.22. Port of Astoria

4.1.3. DOWNTOWN ASTORIA WATERFRONT

4.23.1. General Description

This subarea includes shore lands and aquatic areas within the City of
Astoria between the Astoria-Megler Bridge and 29th Street. The waterward
boundary is the 20-foot bathymetric contour, or the pierhead line, whichever
is farther waterward. The upland boundary is Marine Drive.

4.23.2. Aquatic Features

With the exception of nearshore areas, the aquatic physical and biologi-
cal characteristics in this subarea are similar to those in the adjacent
channel (see Estuary Channels Subarea Plan). Near the 'shoreline sediments
become finer and benthic infauna densities higher than in the adjacent
channel. Subyearling fall Chinook salmon migrate along the shallow nearshore
areas.

4.23.@. Shoreland Features

Virtually all of the shorelands in this subarea are former aquatic areas
-filled with sandy dredged material. Tbere-is little vegetation and no
wildlife habitat. The shorelands are not in the floodplain.

4.23.4. Human Use

This is an industrial and commercial area with few residences. Many
uses are water-dependent or water-related, including fish unloading and
processing, boat and tug moorage,.bar and river pilot offices, the Astoria
Plywood Mill, petroleum off-loading, marine equipment suppliers, and the
Columbia River Maritime Museum. The Pier 11 complex of shops and a restau-
rant is focused on the water.

The Elmore Cannery and the Bonded Warehouse are both listed on the
National Register of Historic Places. These sites are protected through
provisions of the City of Astoria's Zoning Ordinance.

Rail, road and water access are available. All utilities are provided
by the City of Astoria. Several street ends are popular public water access
points. The view of the Columbia River and the waterfront from the higher
areas of Astoria is scenic.

4-99

4.23.5. Issues

The development potential of this area for maritime commerce is limited,
despite the adjacent shipping channel and deep water, because there is little
undeveloped backup land. An increasing number of stores, offices and light
industrial concerns that are not water-oriented have located in this subarea
in recent years.* Although there are some waterfront areas which presently
contain strictly water-dependent uses, there is a general desire by the City
to permit a mixture of uses. Tourist facilities, redevelopment of old
canneries and fish processing facilities are the most likely new water-
oriented uses. Other large-scale water-dependent and industrial uses
may conflict with tourist-oriented businesses because of public safety,
security, road and rail traffic, and aesthetic concerns.

Public access to the waterfront is presently available via numerous
publicly-owned street ends and some vacant waterfront lands. Development of
publicly-owned sites to provide good public access to the waterfront is a
high priority and will require a considerable investment.

The Astoria Waterfront Revitalization Plan calls for mixed-use tourist-
oriented development and increased public access. A public pier.may also be
developed adjacent to Pier 11 and public walkways may be built along the
waterfront.

4.23.6. Aquatic Designations

The aquatic area is designated Development out to the pierhead line.
The main navigation channel and a flowlane disposal strip on each side
(either 600 feet wide or extending,up to the 20-foot bathymetric contour,
whichever is narrowest) is designated Development. The area between the
pierhead line and the flowlane is in a Conservation designation.

The shoreland designations from west to east are: from the Astoria-
Megler Bridge to the western boundary of the Astoria Plywood Corporation is
Development (the eastern boundary of this Development area extends from the
shoreline at 22nd Street north to Commercial Street, thence east 1/2 block,
thence north between the Plywood Corp. offices and the McCracken Motor
Freight facilities to Marine Drive); and from the above described boundary
east to the subarea boundary is designated Water-Dependent Development
(including the Astoria Plywood Mill).

The regulatory shoreland boundary in this subarea is 50 feet from the
Columbia River shoreline, except where it extends further inland to include
the following shoreland features:

All shorelands are in Development and Water-Dependent Development
designations.

4-100

4.23.7.. Subparea Policies

1. Public access to this area of the Astoria waterfront is'strongly encour-
aged at street ends, at areas designated in the Astoria Waterfront
Revitalization Plan.

2. The historic character of the Elmore Cannery and the Bonded Warehouse
will be protected through application of the Historic District element
of the City of Astoria's Zoning Ordinance.

3. A walking/jogging path along the waterfront is needed. Use of the
Burlington Northern railroad right-of-way should be explored.

4-101

Subarea Boundary-a . . . . an . . . we

Regulatory Shot*land Boundary
Regulatory Shoreline Boundary

Designation Boundaries

Designations
Shoreland A

N S N a I u r a I
CS Conservation
R S R Lo r a I
U'I 15 08 Development
WDS Water-Dependent 0

000.610*

DA
-TY

SCALE
20'00 1000

4.23. Downtown Astoria Waterfront

4.24. UPPERTOWN/ALDERBROOK

4.24.1. Ger-dral Description

This subarea contains shorelands and aquatic areas in eastern Astoria.
The waterward boundary is the 20-foot bathymetric contour. The western
boundary is 29th Street. The upland boundary extends eastward from 29th
Street on Marine Drive/Leif Erickson Drive to 44th Street, north to the 100
year floodplain boundary, east to 53rd Street, north to Alder Street, then
east along Alder Street and continuing straight east to the city limits. The
eastern boundary follows the city limits.

4.24.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic portions of this subarea include open water and nearshore
habitats in the river and Alderbrook Cove. The aquatic characteristics of
the open water areas are similar to the adjacent channel (see Estuary Chan-
nels Subarea.Plan),@. In the nearshore habitats, sediments become finer and
benthic infauna Droduc-tivity higher. A 1980 study reported high densities of
amphipods in nearshoreareas of the subarea. Juvenile fall Chinoak salmon
migratiE@ in the shallow nearshore habitats. , Alderbrook Cove contains fine
sediments and probably has high ben.thic productivity. The Cove is partially
fringed by low elevation tidal marshes. Bird use on the marshes and adjacent
tidal flats ishigh.

4.24.3. Shoreland Features

The shorelands in this subarea include the waterfront from 29th Street
east and the Astoria sewer lagoons,. The shorelands are developed except for
sandy dredged material disposal sites, both east and west of Alderbrook Cove.
The area east of the Cove is vegetated with primarily scotch broom on the
uplands and with emergent wetland plants and shrubs in a wetland area on the
southeast corner of the site.

Wildlife values are minimal in the developed areas and moderate in the
undeveloped areas. The sewer lagoons receive high bird use.

4.24.4. Human Use

Considerable construction occurred in this subarea between the plywood
mill and the East End Mooring Basin in the 1970's. The new buildings include
city shops, light industries, and a grocery store. Water-dependent and
water-related uses include fish receiving and processing facilities, net
racks and the East End Mooring Basin. No new water-dependent or water-

4-103

related facilities have been constructed in the last decade. There is a
trailer court adjacent to the East End Mooring-Basin.' The East End Mooring
Basin and its small area of backup land remain largely undeveloped. Surge
pr.events use of the East End Mooring Basin by all but the largest vessels,
and even they are not secure during storms.

This subarea has city water, sewer, and road access to Highway 30. The
railroad runs along the shoreline.

Alderbrook is the only residential area of Astoria that has immediate
frontage on the water. It contains a number of nineteenth century houses and
has a quiet attractiveness not found elsewhere along the waterfront.

4.24.5. Issues

Shorelands in this subarea do not have direct access to deep water. The
ship channel is 2,000 to 4,000 feet from the shoreline, though several ship
anchorages are south of the channel. Shallow draft boat access is available
.throughout the area but low tides uncover substantial flats. Rock piles from
old ship ballast and rock ledges further limit access. Most boat traffic is
concentrated around the East End Mooring Basin, which is-presently under-
utilized.

The Corps of Engineers has investigated possible improvements to the
East End Mooring Basin breakwaters that would correct the surge problem now
experienced. Eliminating the surge would open the basin to a large number of
vessel@; and increase the need for dredging and for back-up land to support
basin operations. Va6ant shorelands should be reserved for support uses..

Most of the subarea shorelands are already developed and there are no
large vacant parcels. Between 35th and 41st Streets, however, is mostly
vacant land with the potential to support water-dependent and water-related
uses associated with the boat basin.

The Water-Dependent Development site immediately west of Alderbrook Cove
may be reconfigured to include land closer to the Mooring Basin, and exclude
land immediately adjacent to the Lagoon. An exception to Oregon Statewide
Planning Goal 17 may be necessary.

The 1986 Lower Columbia River Assessment of Oregon Deep Draft Sites
identified Alderbrook Cove, the small park east of the cove, the existing
water-dependent development site west,of the cove and adjacent aquatic area
extending approximately 1500 feet into the Columbia River as a potential port
development site. Development would involve filling the cove and adjacent
Columbia River area. The fill would cover approximately 170 acres.

There is a conflict over designation of this port development site in
the Plan. Local residents and the City of Astoria have stated that develop-
mentof the site as projected in the Deep Draft Sites assessment would
generate unacceptable negative impacts on the Alderbrook neighborhood. In
addition, the aquatic area of the site is designated Conservation. Adequate
mitigation sites have not been identified for this development. Redesigna-

4-104

tion of the area to Development would require an except to Oregon Statewide
Planning Go4l*- If.. The Oregon State N@parLment of Economic Development and
Division of. State Lavids 1,&ve stated that a port development site in addition
to those already daSignated is-needed in the Astoria area. The Deep Draft
Sites Assestment. states that Astoria is Oregon's only alternative to Portland
for a deep-draft port potentially served by barge and competitive rail.

Port development near the Alderbrook area is not consistent with maint-
enance of the aquatic area habitat, scenic, and recreational values. It is
also inconsistent with the Alderbrook neighborhood residential area. In
addition, designation of a deep-draft port site at the proposed location
requiresfull involvement of public agencies and citizens. This coordination
has hot yet occurred. For these reasons, this Plan has retained the Aquatic
Conservation designation.of Alderbrook Cove and adjacent Columbia River area
and has not designated a new port site.

4.24.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The aquatic arqa between .29th.and 41st Streets is designated Development
to the pierhead line '. e,@cept at the East End Mooring Basin where the designa-
tion corresponds to the-outer boundary of the pier. East of 41st Street, the
.aquatic area is designatad Conservation.

Shorelands are designated Development, except for the Water-Dependent
Development- site west, oi Alde.rbrook Cove between 35th and 41st Streets.

The regulatory sh6reland. boundary in this subarea is 50 feet from the.
Columbia River shoreline except where it extends further inland to include
the following shoreland resources:

1. Lands surrounding the Astoria sewage lagoons, in a Development Shoreland
designation;

2. Lands adjacent to Alderbrook Cove, in a Development Shorelands designa-
tion;

3. Lands adjacent to and east of the Astoria East End Mooring Basin, in a
Development Shoreland designation;

4. Lands between 29th and 35th Streets, north of Leif Erickson Drive/Marine
Drive, in a Development Shorelands designation;

5. Dredged material disposal site A-S-16.3 (from the Columbia River Estuary
Dredged Material Management Plan);

6. A mitigation site on the east side of Alderbrook Cove (from the Columbia
River Estuary Restoration and Mitigation Plan).

4-105

4.25. TONGUE POINT

4.25.1. General Description

This subarea covers both shorelands and aquatic areas between the
navigation channel on the north, the MARAD Basin on the east, the
Astoria Urban Growth Boundary on the south, Highway 30 on the west (from
the Astoria Urban Growth boundary on the south to Mill Creek), and the
Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way (from Mill Creek to the
Astoria sewage ponds). This subarea contains the former Tongue Point
Naval Station and finger piers, portions of the federal Job Corps
Center, and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Field Station. The area
is in the Astoria Urban Growth Boundary, under the jurisdiction of
Clatsop County.

4.25.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic areas include the access channel to Tongue Point from
the Columbia River, the area surrounding 8 large finger piers, the MARAD
Basin between Mott Island, Lois Island and South Tongue Point, the tidal
flats and marshes adjacent to the Corps of Engineers Field Office, and
water areas west and north of Tongue Point and the Coast Guard piers.

The aquatic area adjacent to Tongue Point has been.highly altered
by human activities. Prior to 1939, the area between the mouth of the
John Day River and Tongue Point was an area of shallow waters, tidal
flats,, and marshes. The railroad track marked the approximate shoreline
east of the neck of Tongue Point, except on the west side of the John
Day River mouth, where the railroad track cut off a shallow embayment.
The present Mott and Lois Islands were tidelands or waters up to 15 feet
deep. The material dredged from the entrance channel into Tongue Point
and the MARAD Basin was used to form virtually all of the low-lying,
flat lands of-the present Tongue Point and Corps of Engineers facili-
ties. Mott and Lois Islands in the adjacent subarea were also formed
with this material.

The aquatic area north and west of Tongue Point differs markedly
from the basin formed by the Point and Lois and Mott Islands. The
aquatic characteristics north and west of Tongue Point are discussed in
the Estuary Channels Subarea Plan.

The partially enclosed aquatic area east of Tongue Point is charac-
terized by slower currents, finer sediments, and lower salinity than the
main channel. The entrance channel into Tongue Point ranges from about
40 feet deep at the mouth to about 25 feet deep east of the finger
piers. The MARAD Basin is generally between 20 and 26 feet deep.
Depths between the finger piers are generally less than 15 feet. A band
of intertidal areas, including tidal flats, marshes, and swamps, sur-
rounds the south Tongue Point peninsula. This intertidal area varies
from 300 to 1,500 feet in width and averages about 500 feet in width.
Currents and flushing in these waters east of Tongue Point result

4-108

primarily from tidal flow. Columbia River flow through the south
channel is relatively small and the discharge of the John Day River is
inconsequential.

Sediments in the area east of Tongue Point consist primarily of
very fine sand, silt, and clay. Organic content is fairly high in some
areas, and the layer of navy grey paint in the MARAD Basin may cause the
sediments to be polluted according to EPA standards. Based on bathy-
metric surveys and core studies, the average sedimentation rate in the
MARAD Basin is 4-6 cm/yr (about 2 in/yr) at the present depth of 20-26
feet below MLLW.

Tidal marshes and.swamps in the subarea exist primarily around the
south Tongue Point peninsula. The tidal swamps form an approximately
250-foot wide band around the peninsula. They contain primarily shrub
species. The tidal marshes form a fringe waterward of the swamps. This
fringe extends 1,200 feet on the north side of the peninsula. Softstem
bulrush (Scirpus validus) dominates the lowest elevation marshes while
Lyngby's sedge (Carex lyngbyei), reed canary grass (Phalaris arundin-
.acea) and cattail_(j_y2:h_a angustifolia) dominate the higher elevation
marshes.

Of the estuary's invertebrates types, only benthic infauna have
been sampled in the area east of Tongue Point. Important fish prey
items such as amphipods (Corophi salmonis), insect larvae (chirono-
mids), and freshwater clams (Corbicula manilensis) dominate the infauna
community. Infauna biomass is high compared with sandy areas of the
estuary.

Fishes found to be abundant in the subarea include species tolerant
of freshwater conditions and anadromous species. Two marine demersal
species tolerant of freshwater, starry flounder and Pacific staghorn
sculpin, utilize the subarea. Subyearling starry flounder are particu-
larly abundant in summer. Another marine species, whitebait smelt, has
been found in the subarea in winter. The most abundant freshwater
species in the subarea are threespine stickleback and peamouth. White
-sturgeon are also abundant.

Two species that spawn in the estuary, longfin smelt and shiner
perch, utilize the subarea. Longfin smelt, an anadromous species,
spawns from November through March. Smelt ranging in age from yearlings
through adults are found in the subarea in winter. Larval longfin smelt
appear in the estuary in.winter and spring and subyearlings utilize the
subarea as a nurs ery area in fall. The subarea is probably important to
shiner perch only as a nursery area because only subyearling perch are
abundant. They use the subarea primarily in summer.

In.addition to longfin smelt, several other anadromous species,
including American shad and the salmonids, use the subarea as a migra-
tion route and nursery area. Adult American shad migrate upriver in
June and July. Most of the upstream migrants are destined for spawning
areas upriver from the estuary and do not pass through the subarea.
Some, however, migrate through the subarea and spawn in the John Day
River. Juvenile American shad migrate downriver primarily in November

4-109

and December. Juvenile shad, originating from upstream spawning areas
as well as from the John Day River, use the subarea as nursery area.
The subarea is a nursery area for juvenile salmon. Subyearling Chinook
salmon are abundant during their spring and summer migrations and remain
fairly abundant through fall and winter. Yearling coho are found in
greater abundance in the subarea than in other estuarine areas during
their spring migration. Yearling Chinook and juvenile steelhead and
cutthroat trout migrate through the subarea primarily in spring.

The subarea provides habitat for several species of resident and
migratory birds. Double-crested cormorant are found in the subarea in
winter while pelagic cormorant are found in spring, fall, and winter.'
Common merganser, a resident waterfowl species, utilize the subarea in
fall and winter. Western grebe, a migratory species, winters in the
subarea. The tidal flats and low marshes provide feeding areas for
great blue heron year round and for shorebirds primarily in spring.

Bald eagle use of the Tongue Point area was studied intensively in
1984 and 1985. The subarea is used by a resident pair of eagles,
referred to as the Mill Creek pair, and by transitory and wintering
eagles. The Mill Creek pair's nesting site is located about 2,500 feet
east of the subarea along Mill Creek. The nesting area is protected
under Astoria's Comprehensive Plan and by state and federal regulations.
Another eagle pair nesting several miles to the east use the extreme
eastern part of the Tongue Point Subarea. This pair is discussed in the
John Day-Eddy Point Subarea Plan.

The home range or territory of the Mill Creek pair-encompasses the
entire Tongue Point subarea and portions of the adjacent subareas. The
eagles' use of the subarea includes use of old growth conifer perch
trees at the tip of Tongue Point, just south of the mouth of Mill Creek,
and on the north and south tips of the south Tongue Point peninsula.
The primary foraging areas for the pair include the mudflat off the
mouth of Mill Creek and Taylor Sands (see Estuary Sands Subarea Plan).
The Mill Creek site is used more often in winter while the Taylor Sands
site is used more often during the nesting season. The pair also forage
in the aquatic area around the periphery of Tongue Point and off the
southern tip of the south Tongue.Point peninsula.

Wintering and transient eagles use the subarea from November
through August. Peak numbers occur in March. The perch trees and
foraging area off the mouth of Mill Creek are also used by these eagles.
This area is used much less frequently by these eagles than perching and
foraging areas east of Lois Island (see Cathlamet Bay Subarea Plan).

in and adjacent to the foraging area off the mouth of Mill Creek,
the Mill Creek pair exhibit a high tolerance of motor vehicles and
trains, moderate tolerance of walking humans, and a very low tolerance
of boats. The pair avoids the industrial area except when flying over
at high altitudes. High priority measures for protecting this pair
within the subarea include complete protection of all of their perching
trees along the tip of Tongue Point, south of the mouth of Mill Creek
and on the north and south tips of the Tongue Point peninsula and
protection of mudflats and marshes'off of the mouth of Mill Creek. In

4-110

addition, human activities in the vicinity of the foraging areas should
be minimized during morning hours.

Aquatic and terrestrial mammals utilize the marshes and swamps of
the subarea. Muskrat and nutria feed and den in the marshes and occa-
sionally utilize the swamps. Beaver and raccoon feed and den in the
swamps and deer feed in the swamps and adjacent upland.

4.25.3. Shoreland Features

From north to south, the shorelands of this subarea include the
steep, forested slopes of Tongue Point itself, the relatively flat
developed area occupied by the Coast Guard station and the former naval
base, the sloped area waterward of Highway 30 between Mill Creek and the
south Tongue Point peninsula, and the south Tongue Point peninsula.
Almost all of the flat lands of this subarea are the result of filling
former aquatic areas with dredged material.

The flat land on the north Tongue Point peninsula is mostly devel-
oped. The developed flat land forming the south Tongue Point peninsula
consists of a Corps of Engineers field station and access roads. The
remainder of this area consists of vegetated shorelands with some
nontidal wetland. The boundaries of the nontidal wetland were surveyed
by the Corps of Engineers in 1987* Tongue Point proper consists of a
steeply sloping hill. The point contains basalt rock. Vegetation on
Tongue Point consists of old growth coniferous forest. '

Wildlife in the subarea include deer and small mammals. As dis-
cussed under Aquatic Features, bald eagles utilize the subarea. Al-
though there are currently no active eagle nests in the subarea, a nest
tree on Tongue Point was occupied in the early 1970's. The trees at the
tip of Tongue Point are used for roosting.

4.25.4. Human Uses

North Tongue Point Peninsula:

The @eninsula is mostly undeveloped with the exception of a Coast
Guard installation on the southwest corner. Tongue Point has been
designated a habitat area for the bald eagle by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service. There is an access road circling the point between
the Job Corps Center on the southeast corner and the U.S. Coast Guard
installation on the southwest corner.

The Naval Station, Job Corps Center and Finger Pier Area:

The Federal Job Corps Center occupies the area immediately adjacent
to Tongue Point Road on the west and between Tongue Point Road and the

4-111

railroad tracks. East of the railroad tracks there is a large level
area which was used as a naval station at one time. The north portion
of this area is under Federal ownership, the south portion is owned by
the State of Oregon and administered by the Division of State Lands.
The finger pier area has been used for long-term storage of vessels.
The aquatic area between the finger piers is used for log storage as
well.

South Tongue Point Mediation Agreement Area:

Constructed out of dredge material, this area is enclosed by water
on three sides and by railroad tracks on the south. It is almost
undeveloped with the exception of a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers instal-
lation. The lower areas have a high water table and contain wetland
vegetation.

4.25.5. Issues

The Tongue Point subarea contains one of the most difficult con-
flicts between natural resource values and development potential in the
Columbia River Estuary. Thee subarea receives extensive use by bald
eagles. The aquatic area is productive for several fish species,
including shad, Chinook salmon, and starry flounder. The area around
south Tongue Point contains tidal marsh and wetland habitat.

There have been a number of proposals for water-dependent uses at
Tongue Point. A mediation agreement was reached by representatives from
state and federal resource agencies and local jurisdictions in 1981.
The Agreement designated use zones and development requirements for
Tongue Point. It provides for the potential development of water-
dependent uses in the finger pier area by designating the aquatic area
between the finger piers., for the access channel, and for a turning
basin. A determination of dredged material disposal sites for excava-
tion of the access channel and turning basin and mitigation sites for
filling of the aquatic area was not made. Major issues involved in
prop6sals for water-dependent uses at Tongue Point include the dredging
of access channels, disposal of the dredged material, the filling of
wetlands in and around Tongue Point, protection of intertidal habitat,
the impact of access road construction on residences, and protection of
bald eagle habitat.

The development potential of the area around the finger piers is
high. The shoreland immediately adjacent to the finger piers would
provide a backup area for water-dependent development. The area has
good access to Oregon Highway 30 and the Burlington Northern railroad
tracks. The 1981 Mediation Panel Agreement permits filling of the area
between the piers and construction of access channels from the naviga-
tion channel to the finger piers. The Agreement also provides for an
access channel on the east side of South Tongue Point, and construction
of a turning basin.

4-112

The 1986 Lower Columbia River Assessment of Oregon Deep Draft Sites
identified Tongue Point as a potential deep draft development site. The
document included two scenarios for development of Tongue Point. The
first scenario, identified as the East Astoria Development Plan, appears
consistent with the Mediation Panel Agreement. The second scenario,
identified as the Tongue Point Development Plan, involves larger aquatic
area fills than specified in the Mediation Panel Agreement. The total
Tongue Point Mediation Panel Agreement fills amount to 97 acres while
fills under the second scenario amount to 209 acres. The additional
fill would occur in areas designated Aquatic Natural. This Plan retains
the designations and development scenario specified in the 1981 Media-
tion Panel Agreement. Redesignation of Tongue Point to allow for the
development scenario in the Deep Draft Sites assessment would require
full coordination with all of the Mediation Panel participants and other
affected agencies.

There are some physical and natural resource constraints to devel-
opment at Tongue Point. There are steep slopes in much of the area and
evidence of landsliding at one site, a factor which may affect access
road construction. Extensive wetland areas exist south of the finger
piers. In addition, an earthquake fault, possibly no longer active,
crosses thearea in a northeast/southwest alignment just south of the
finger piers.

The federal General Services Administration has considered the
possibility of trading ownership of the Tongue Point south peninsula to
the State of Oregon in exchange for state ownerships on several estuary
islands. The General Services Administration would theh transfer its
interest in the estuary islands to the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
The Oregon Division of State Lands would assume ownership of the Tongue
Point south peninsula in addition to existing State ownership in the
finger pier area. In addition, Clatsop County would quitclaim its
interest in the estuary islands to the U.. S. Fish and Wildlife Services.
This transaction had not taken place as of 1987.

4.25.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designa Itions

The following aquatic areas are designated Development:

The aquatic area between the shoreline of the old naval station and
the waterward end of the finger piers.

2. A channel 500 feet in width from the main navigation channel to the
finger piers and out 700 feet from the end of the finger piers.

3. A turning basin 1,000 feet in radius lying immediately waterward of
the end of the southerly four finger piers.

4. The aquatic area within the Coast Guard base.

5. The wetland lying south of the Corps of Engineers causeway if South

4-113

Tongue Point is used for a water-dependent development. Otherwise
the designation is Natural.

6. Tidal wetlands above the fringing emergent marsh lying between the
Corps of Engineers dock and the southerly line of T8N, R9W, Section
12, if South Tongue Point is used for a water-dependent develop-
ment. Otherwise, the designation is Natural.

The following aquatic areas are designated Natural:

1. The subtidal and intertidal areas between the southern most finger
pier and the South Tongue Point Peninsula.

2. The wetlands lying south of the Corps of Engineers causeway if
South Tongue Point is used for non-water-dependent development.

The following aquatic areas are designated Conservation:

1. The aquatic area between the shoreline of the North Tongue Point
peninsula, the navigation channel to the north, and the access
channel to the east.

The following shoreland areas are designated Water-Dependent
Development:

1. The Coast Guard base.

2. The shorelands between Mill Creek and the Job Corps Center.

3. The South Tongue Point Peninsula can be committed to water-
dependent or non-water-dependent developments.

The following shoreland area is designated Development:

1. The Federal Job Corps Center.

The following shoreland area is designated Rural:

1. The potentially unstable slope area waterward of Oregon Highway 30
between Mill Creek and the entrance to South Tongue Point.

The following shoreland area is designated Conservation:

1. A buffer strip between the Job Corps Center and the Tongue Point
Peninsula.
0
The following shorelands are designated Natural:

4-114

1. The Tongue Point peninsula north of the Conservation buffer border-
ing the Job Corps Center; with the exception of the Coast Guard
Base.

The steeply sloping potentially unstable area waterward of Oregon
Highway 30 between Mill Creek ad the entrance to South Tongue Point is
designated Rural.

The regulatory shoreland boundary is 50 feet from the Columbia
River estuary shoreline except where it extends farther inland to
include the following features:

1. The Tongue Point peninsula, because of its significant shoreland
habitat.

2. Bald eagle roosting trees in the Mill Creek area and south of Mill
Creek to the South Tongue Point Peninsula (waterward of Highway
30).

3. The steeply sloping potentially unstable area waterward of Oregon
Highway 30 between Mill Creek and the entrance to the South Tongue
Point peninsula.

4. Water-Dependent Development sites at the South Tongue Point penin-
sula; a designated dredged material disposal site (As-S-18.7); the
upland area between the railroad right-of-way and the finger piers
north of Mill Creek (also containing a designated dredged material
disposal site: As-S-18.2). The Coast Guard base.

4.25.T. Subarea Policies

1. Tidal wetlands south of the Corps of Engineers causeway on the
South Tongue Point peninsula can only be developed for improved
vehicular or rail access. Otherwise, uses permitted shall conform
to the Natural Aquatic designation.

2. Development proposals for the area between the railroad right-
of-way and Oregon Highway 30 south of Mill Creek shall demonstrate
through such measures as a soils engineering analysis that surface
alteration will not result in slope failure.

3. The USFWS and the ODFW shall be contacted prior to any development
to assess the potential for impacts on bald eagle habitat.

4. The design and construction of new access roads to the finger pier
area shall take into account potential impacts on residences and
slope stability.

6. The areas designated Development by the Mediation Panel Agreement
can be developed for all uses permitted under that designation, but

4-115

compliance with the policies in the agreement shall be required.

Mediation Panel Agreement Subarea Policies - North Tongue Point

6. The maximum extent of fill in aquatic areas at North Tongue Point
shall be: from the present shoreline eastward to the end of the
existing piers; from the south side of the southernmost finger pier
to the northern line of state ownership (halfway between the 5th
and 6th finger piers from the south). Fill shall be allowed only
for water-dependent uses.

7. A navigation channel 500 feet wide and 40 feet deep (with over-
dredge for compatibility with main channel) is allowed to provide
access from the Columbia River to North Tongue Point. The width of
the access channel may be extended 200 feet (creating a 700-foot
wide channel) if necessary to allow movement around vessels docked
at North Tongue Point.

If the main Columbia River navigation channel is deepened, the
access channel into North Tongue Point may be deepened to the same
depth.

9. Construction and maintenance of a 1,500-foot wide, 25-foot deep
(MLLW) turning basin is allowed. The basin shall be designed to
protect productive intertidal and nearshore subtidal areas in the
Tongue Point area. The turning basin may.extend s6uthward into the
MARAD Basin but not south of the existing Corps of Engineers dock
at South Tongue Point.

10. The location and dimensions of the access channel and the turning
basin shall be determined through engineering studies as a part of
the permit application process.

11. Spur railroad trestle access to North Tongue Point from the main
line across adjacent wetland areas is allowed. This rail access
corridor may also contain piling-supported conveyor or vehicle
access facilities for movement of commodities or cargo between
South Tongue Point and North Tongue Point (pursuant to the excep-
tion to Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 16 adopted by Clatsop County
and Astoria).

12. Dredged material disposal sites needed for fill development of
North Tongue Point must be identified and agreed upon in pre-
application consultation with resource agencies or in the permit
process.

Mediation Panel Agreement Subarea Policies - South Tongue Point

13. If South Tongue Point is developed for water-dependent uses, the
following accessory activities are allowed:

4-116

A) One access corridor from South Tongue Point to North Tongue
Point is allowed in addition to the rail access provided in the North
Tongue Point agreement. This corridor shall be located adjacent to and
waterward of the Burlington Northern Railroad to allow movement of
commodities or cargo between the sites. The corridor may contain rail,
conveyor, road access, or a combination thereof. If a road is built
some fringing wetlands along the shoreland may be filled. Otherwise the
corridor must use pile supported structures (pursuant to the exception
to Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 16 adopted by Clatsop County and
Astoria).

B) A navigational access channel (not to exceed 500 feet in width
or 25 feet depth at Mean Lower Low Water) suitable for ocean-going
barges is allowed to the eastern side of South Tongue Point. Dredging
shall be allowed in this channel to maintain the approved depth not to
exceed -25 feet. The objective shall be to locate the channel below -20
feet MLLW and to minimize the amount of dredging required.

C) T-docks or other piling-supported structures are allowed to
facilitate movement of commodities from the shoreland to barges or boats
in this channel (pursuant to the exception to Oregon Statewide Planning
Goal 16 adopted by Clatsop County and Astoria). Such structures shall
be designed and located with an objective of protecting productive
intertidal and nearshore subtidal areas.

14. Spur railroad trestle access to South Tongue Point from the main
- line across adjacent wetland areas located southeasterly of the
site is allowed (pursuant to the exception to Oreg6n Statewide
Planning Goal 16 adopted by Clatsop County and Astoria).

15. Specific locations of spur lines, transportation corridors, roads,
pile-supported structures, and the channel described above shall be
determined during the permit process.

16. Filling in the Development Aquatic shrub wetland area lying adja-
cent to and southerly of the access causeway mu st meet the use-
needs-alternatives criteria of the Section 404 permit process.

4-117

SCALE IN FEET
2000 1000 0 2000
+

0 rff
000 30T oq/
"@@000000000E iI
0 Pit.
CA

. . . . ......
0
....; . . . . . . . . . . . .

11,24

Mott
DA Island

WDS

Subarea Boundary .....................................
R:gu I 10 '1 y 8hor :f. nd 6 o und .YY (( OR
A ,u :, a V Sh r Ine Bounds WA)

Designation Boundaries C A- -1
RS 60' CS Do

Designations
[email protected] Aquatic A s S 1 8 7

NS Na.turaf NA
CS Conservation CA as
RS Rural
0S Development DA
WDS
Water-Dependent Development

City Limits

Urban Growth B.oundary (OR) 0000000000C1000

Dredged Material Disposal Sit.
. . . . . . . . . . . K
Mitigation Site as . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Goal 17 Significant Wildlife

4.25. Tongue Point

4-118

4.26. JOHN DAY RIVER

4.26.1. General Description

This area includes the John Day River from its mouth to the head of
tide, and the adjacent shorelands. The subarea is under the jurisdiction of
Clatsop County.

4.26.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic portion of this subarea includes the John Day River and
adjacent tidal marshes. Diking activities have reduced the amount of tidal
wetlands in this subarea. Prior to diking most of the river's floodplain
consisted of tidal swamp.

Water depths are a relatively shallow 4 to 12 feet. While the river is
considered navigable for a distance of three miles. River flow from the
small drainage basin is low, particularly in the summer. There is minimal
sediment transport, and flushing is slow. There is little salt water intru-
sion. The aquatic ecosystem of the John Day River is thus freshwater in
nature.

Tidal swamps and marshes exist near the mouth of the river and near the
upstream end of tidal influence. These tidal wetlands have plant species
similar to those found in Cathlamet Bay wetlands (see Cathlamet Bay Subarea
Plan).

There is no information on invertebrate populations in the subarea and
little information on fish. During the fall, there are cutthroat trout, some
coho salmon, and maybe a small number of Chum salmon. During May and June,
there is a run of American Shad which spawn around the head of tide. Other
species which occur throughout the year are carp, largemouth bass, crappie,
yellow perch, catfish, and other rough fish.

Bird and mammal use of the river's waters and wetlands is probably
similar to Cathlamet Bay (see Cathlamet Bay Subarea Plan). Bald eagles feed
at the mouth of the river. The Aquatic Features sections in adjacent subarea
plans discuss these eagles (see Tongue Point and Cathlamet Bay Subarea
Plans).

4.26.3. Shoreland Features

The shorelands are predominantly diked tidelands used for low intensity
agriculture. There are also small forested shoreland areas. Shoreland soils
are the Coquille-Tidal Marsh (fresh)-Tolovana Association. These lowlands
have high flooding potential (most of the area is within the 100 year flood-
plain), relatively high ground water level, and moderate agricultural suit-

4-119

ability. The shorelands have moderate wildlife value. Deer and elk, along
with smaller wildlife, frequent the area and several bald eagle nests have
been located in adjacent upland areas.

There are several nontidal wetlands in the subarea that are as signifi-
cant under Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 17. The wetlands include emergent
marshes dominated by sedges (Carex sitchensis, Carex cusickii, and Carex
obnupta), Sitka spruce swamps, and shrub swamps.

4.26.4. Human Use

Existing land and water use includes agriculture, forestry, residential
use, and recreation. Low-lying shoreland areas are protected by dikes and
fourteen tidegates located along the river. Adjacent land uses are mostly
related to agriculture and forestry.

Ownership is mostly private with some county, state and corporate
owners. There is a public boat launching ramp on county land near the mouth
of the river. There are also numerous private docks along@the river. Access
to the area is by water from Cathlamet Bay and by road from Highway 30.

Relocation of the John Day River bridge was approved by Clatsop County.
A new bridge will be constructed slightly downstream of the existing one.
The project will involve fill of approximately 1.3 acres of tidal marsh on
the west side of the river. The embankment will be stabilized with riprap.
The project will require wetlands mitigation.

4.26.5. Issues

There is limited potential for new development on the John Day River and
its low-lying shorelands. The river itself is relatively narrow and shallow.
Increased river traffic would conflict with existing houseboat uses and
worsen the stream-bank erosion problem. The shorelands, being either low and
flood-prone or steep and unsuitable for intensive development, also offer
little potential for expanded use. Factors which could improve development
potential in the future would be the use of low areas for disposal of dredged
material and possible relocation of Highway 30. An exception to Oregon
Statewide Planning Goal 16 to permit continued houseboat use on the John Day
River was approved by Clatsop County in 1983. This exception does not permit
expansion of the outside boundaries of the aquatic area "committed to house-
boat use" at the time the exception was approved. The Oregon Department of
Land Conservation and Development's position on houseboats is that residen-
tial uses are not water-dependent and therefore cannot be permitted in
aquatic areas. Water quality and navigational access concerns related to
existing houseboats may become a more significant issue in the future.

The tidal marsh-mudflat areas just' inside the river mouth are very
shallow, are flooded on every tide, have significant fish and wildlife
values, are publicly owned, and have little potential for development. It is

4-120

in the public interest to protect these natural resource values. The low-
intensity recreational uses of the river, the fishery resources and wildlife
values should be protected while providing for limited development.

4.26.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The large tidal marsh and mudflat just inside the mouth of the John Day
River, to the west of the river channel, is designated Natural. The remain-
ing aquatic areas to the head of tide are designated Conservation.

Shorelands in this subarea are designated Rural in agricultural areas
and Conservation in forestry areas.

The regulatory shoreland boundary in this subarea is 50 feet from the
shoreline or the inland toe of dikes and associated toe drains, whichever is
greatest, except where it extends farther inland to include the following
shoreland features:

1. Significant nontidal wetlands as shown on Columbia River Estuary Re-
source Maps.

2. Significant riparian vegetation along the John Day River to the head of
tide, as shown on Columbia River Estuary Resource Maps.

The John Day River Boat Ramp, including parking lot; dredged material
disposal sites CC-S-8.6 and CC-S-18.8 (from the Columbia Rivi--r Estuary
Dredged Material Management Plan); and mitigation and restoration sites as
designated in the Mitigation and Restoration Plan for the Columbia River
Estuary.

4-.26.7. Subarea Policies

1. The tidal marsh and mudflats just inside the river mouth have signifi-
cant fish and wildlife values and are publicly owned. They shall be
protected.

2. New, replacement and relocated houseboats may be permitted in the John
Day houseboat exception area, subject to local, state, and federal lease
and permit requirements, and subject to the exception to Oregon State-
wide Planning Goal 16. Approval of new or re-oriented houseboats shall
be subject to the following policies:

a. Any new or re-oriented floating residence must have a DEQ approved
sewage disposal system.

b. New or re-oriented floating residences must show an upland parking
area off any public road right-of-way.

4-121

C. New or re-oriented floating residences must have an approved lease
from the Division of State Lands to occupy the water surface.

d. Alignment of new or re-oriented floating residences shall be such
that navigability on the river is hindered as little as possible.

e. Maximum building height of new floating residences shall be equiva-
lent to that in the adjacent upland zone.

f. A distance of 25 feet is required between any portion of the floats
of a new or re-oriented floating residence and any existing float-
ing residence.

g. Any new or re-oriented floating residence shall be sited so that
the longer dimension runs parallel with the shoreline.

4-122

Urban Growth B.oundary (OR) OC3000000000CIC30

Dredged Material Disposal Bit.

mitigation Site x a K K K N K K X K N X X

at Wetlands
Go:: ss:g:::,.::
RS 50' a at Riparian Veastation

WDS,
CS 50'
A
NA C C - S - 1 8 8

C C - 8 - 1 8

S
60'
R CS 50,
DS 60' CA RS 50
RS
RS 50,

P-
C S N A
q0

CS5
0 R8
60'
601

A
. ..........
6A,

S
.50,

Subarea Boundary .....................................
ll:,,ol o,y rho,,::and Boundary (OR)
A ,u1:4 ry Sh in* Boundary
Designation Boundaries SCALE IN FEET
RS 50' CS 60 2000 1000 0 2000
Designations
Aquatic

HS Natural NA
CS Conservation CA
RS Rural
DS Development DA
WDS Walor-Depandent Development

4.26. John Day River

4-123

4.27. JOHN DAY POINT EDDY POINT

4.27.1. General Description

This subarea extends from John Day Point to Eddy Point. Included are
the shorelands along this part of the Cathlamet Bay shoreline, adjacent tidal
marshes, the lower portions of-Twilight, Mary's, Bear, and Ferris Creeks, and
Svensen and Calendar Islands. Most of the mainland shorelands are forested
and rural. Svensen Island is diked and used primarily for pasture. Calendar
Island consists of tidal marshes and swamps. The subarea is under the
jurisdiction of Clatsop County.

4.27.2. Aquatic Features

Aquatic portions of this subarea include the nearshore areas from John
Day Point to Eddy Point, the waters surrounding Svensen Islands, and the
marshes and swamps of Calendar Island. The principal historic changes that
have occurred in the subarea have resulted from diking. All of the subarea's
diked agricultural land previously consisted of tidal marshes and swamps.

Physical and biological characteristics of the aquatic areas are similar
to those in adjacent subareas (see Cathlamet Bay and Upper Marsh Islands
Subarea Plans). Tidal marshes and swamps fringe much of the subarea's
shoreline. In addition, large marshes and swamps exist at the mouth of
Twilight Creek, adjacent to Mary's, Bear, and Ferris Creeks, and on Calendar
Island. The Mary's, Bear, and Ferris Creek wetlands were at one time diked
but have returned to tidal influence when the dikes breached many years ago.

Mary's, Bear and Ferris Creeks have small wild runs of cutthroat trout,
steelhead, and coho and chum salmon; coho from state hatcheries have been
placed in Bear Creek. The.creeks and adjacent waters and wetlands receive
extensive use by feeding.juvenile salmonids.

The subarea receives heavy use by bald eagles. The Mill Creek bald
eagle pair (see Tongue Point Subarea Plan), Twilight Creek pair, and winter-
ing and transient eagles feed off of John Day Point. The Twilight Creek
marsh and adjacent south channel are feeding areas for the Twilight Creek
bald eagle pair as well as wintering and transitory eagles. Calendar Island
and adjacent waters are used by a pair of eagles that nest on Karlson Island.

4.27.3. Shoreland Features

Soils from John Day Point to Settlers Point include the Tolovana and the
Walluski-Knappa associations. Flood potential is low and there is a season-
ally high water table. The soils have a very low suitability for agricul-
ture. Soil movement hazards are present to the west of Twilight Creek.
While the movement is not rapid, it is present almost every winter, intruding
on Highway 30. The soils in the remainder of the subarea are primarily of

4-124

the Coquille-Tidal Marsh (fresh)-Clatsop Association. Soil morphology is to
a large extent a result of flooding, a relatively high seasonal water table,
and a low slope. Agricultural suitability is moderate.

Shoreland vegetation is character'ized by shrub willow, alder, Sitka
spruce, and Douglas fir. Wildlife in the area includes blacktailed deer,
elk, and small mammals. Freshwater marshes classified as significant under
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 17 are located on Svensen Island and Twilight
Creek.

Bald eagle use of the shorelands is high. Several bald eagle nesting,
and roosting trees (outside of the estuary area) have been identified inland
from the subarea. The Twilight Creek nest is located about one-half mile
south of the subarea and a large communal roost known as the Mary's Creek
roost is located about one and one-half miles south of the subarea. The
eagles' main hunting perches in the subarea are located on John Day Point,
adjacent to the Twilight Creek marsh, and near Settler's Point.

4.27.4. Human Use

Existing uses in the area are agriculture, forestry, and scattered resi-
dential uses. The railroad runs along the shoreline. There are several
in-water log storage areas. There is a mixture of state and private owner-
ship. Physical access to the water is limited to private shoreline struc-
tures.

4.27.5. Issues

There is limited development potential in the subarea. Some expansion
of residential uses in the Burnside area near Settlers Point may occur in the
future.

The tidal marshes at the mouth of Twilight Creek (also known as Eskeline
Greek) have been intensively studied and are a valuable natural resource.
The marshes are primarily in private ownership and are managed for waterfowl
bunting by a local club. There are several small docks and walkways giving
access to tidal channels cut in the marshes. Low intensity recreation is the
dominant use of these marshes. Continued maintenance and possible improve-
ment of docks and duck shacks is expected. Demand for recreation facilities
requiring major alterations, however, is not expected.

A major issue in this subarea is whether or not the formerly diked
wetlands can be re-diked and placed into agricultural or other use. Accord-
ing to federal, state, and local policy, once areas have substantially
reverted to wetland vegetation, repairing dikes and tide boxes is considered
new diking. New diking of wetlands for agricultural use could not be permit-
ted without an exception to Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 16. Proposals for
restoring abandoned dikes on Mary's Creek and Ferris Creek have been made.

4-125

Dikes on the uorth side of Svensen Island have experienced problems with
erosion. A series of pile dikes to retard erosion have been placed near the
center of the island. These have not solved all of the erosion problems.
Material to maintain the dikes has been difficult to obtain.

4.27.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

All tidal marshes and swamps are designated Natural except for the
following which are designated Conservation: marshes around Svensen Island
and fringing marshes along the mainland shore south of Svensen Island. All
other aquatic areas are also designated Conservation.

Shoreland areas are designated Rural in agricultural and residential
areas and Conservation in forested areas.

The regulatory shoreland boundary in this subarea is 50 feet from the
estuary shoreline, or from the landward side of dikes or associated toe
drains, whichever is greatest, except where it extends further inland to
include the following resources:

Significant wetlands and riparian vegetation identified in Significant
shoreland and wetland habitats in the Clatsop Plains and the Columbia
Floodplain of Clatsop County, OR 1986.

4.27.7. Subarea Policies:

1. Identified bald eagle roosting trees shall be preserved.

4-126

Itws4an Fund

.-Ca I en

Lois Island
13 0
CA
CS 60,

CS 60, fler Pt.:
.......... 01 N RS 601
N

RG 60' C860,
CS 50, Vtnso-

03 Subarea 13oundsrys . . . . . . . . . . . . .

land Boundary
R : .0 uU 11 .0 r, y.0 r : I I n a 8 a g A d a r y
Designs lion Soundsfis a I -ED

Dredged Material Disposal Site Shoroland Dealonat Ion a A
x . . . . 4 x
Mitigation site . . . . . . . . . . x . . . . . . NS N a I u r 8 1
... ...... .. .
C S
$CALE Ik FEET Goal 17 Significant Wetlands
Conservation
...... ....
tooo 1000 0 000 R S Rural
17 SICnIfI ca At RIP srlan Yogetation OS Development

4.27. John Day Point to Eddy Point

4.28. BIG CREEK/LITTLE CREEK/FERTILE VALLEY

4.28.1. General Description

This subarea lies between Eddy Point and Knappa Dock and includes
adjacent waters of Knappa Slough, the spruce swamp and tideland soil
shorelands at the mouths of Big and Little Creeks, and the diked lands in
Fertile Valley. This subarea is under.the jurisdiction of Clatsop County.

4.28.2. Aquatic Features

Big and Little Creeks, a large tidal spruce swamp at the mouth of the
creeks, and Knappa Slough are all prominent aquatic features of this subarea.
There have been few changes to this subarea over the past century. Diking
Fertile Valley has converted it from a tidal wetland to pastureland and
nontidal wetland.

Physical and biological characteristics of the aquatic area are similar
to those in the adjacent subarea (see Upper Marsh Islands Subarea Plan).

The approximately 125 acre tidal spruce swamp at the mouth of the Big
and Little Creeks is undisturbed Sitka spruce forest, dominated by a large,
open-growth form of Sitka spruce and some red alder, vine maple, salmonberry,
skunk cabbage, sedges and waterparsley. A variety of other wetland plants
are also present.

A state salmon hatchery on Big Creek releases Chinook salmon, coho, and
steelhead. The stream occasionally has a run of lamprey and has a wild
population of cutthroat trout. Little Creek fish runs are primarily strays
from Big Creek.

4.28.3. Shoreland Features

The primary soil in this area is the Coquille-Tidal Marsh (fresh)-
Clatsop Association. Portions of Little Creek flow through a group of soils
known as the Nehalem Association. The upper part of Fertile Valley Creek
flows through Walluski-Knappa Association. Many of the soils' characteris-
tics are similar, but the primary difference is the agricultural suitability-
the Nehalem and Wallusk2--Knappa Associations are mostly Class II soils, while
the.Coquille-Tidal Marsh (fresh) Clatsop Association is Class III and IV.
The primary hazard in the area is the potential of flooding of the creeks,
which also occurs upstream of tidal areas.

Shoreland vegetation includes primarily pasture grasses mixed with
wetland plants such as common rush (Juncus effusus). There are also some
forested areas.

4-128

Fertile Valley Creek is diked with a tidegate near its mouth where it
joins Warren Slough. The area is a private wildlife reserve and receives
significant wildlife use. Ducks and geese are common and nesting areas have
been provided. No fishery information is available on Fertile Valley Creek,
but warm water fish are probably common.

4.28.4. Human Use

Agriculture on shorelands in the upper portion of the subarea is the
most intensive human use. There is forestry on adjacent shorelands and
recreational fishing in Big Creek is important farther upstream. Part of
Fertile Valley is a privately owned wildlife refuge.

4.28.5. Issues

The major issue in this subarea is the need for protection of the old
growth spruce swamp at the mouth of Big and Little Creeks versus private
property rights. The area has been inventoried by the Nature Conservancy
and, based on its natural values, recommended for protection. Most of the
spruce swamp is in a single corporate ownership (Boise Cascade), with a small
portion in private farm ownership near the upper tidal reaches between the
two streams. Both landowners object to a protective land use designation
which would prevent their use of the area for forestry. . .

The waters of Knappa Slough adjacent to Big and Little Creeks are
important holding areas for adult anadromous fish prior to,ascending the
streams to spawning grounds and the hatchery. This area should be protected
from conflicting uses. The Knappa Slough area has significant historical and
archaeological value. The shoreline of the slough was the site of an Indian
village. The present Knappa Dock is also the first landing site of the Lewis
and Clark expedition in Clatsop County.

The Knappa dock area, midway between public water access points on the
John Day River and at Aldrich Point, has been proposed as a possible public
boat launch site. Because of the inability of local roads to'handle in-
creased traffic and impacts on area residents and lifestyle, this has been
opposed by some local residents.

4.28.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The entire spruce swamp and portions of Big and Little Creeks running
through the swamp are designated Natural. The wetland area north of the
railroad at Eddy Point on the west is designated Conservation.

Shorelands from Eddy Point east to the spruce swamp and shorelands along
the western and eastern edges of the swamp in forestry use are designated
Conservation. Areas in agricultural use south and east of the spruce swamp

4-129

are Rural. The privately-owned wildlife refuge in Fertile Valley is desig-
nated Natural.

The regulatory shoreland boundary in this subarea is 50 feet from the
estuary shoreline, or the inland toe of dikes and associated toe drains,
whichever is greater, except where it extends farther inland to include the
following features:

1. Significant riparian vegetation along both sides of Big Creek to the
head of tide; and significant riparian vegetation along the Columbia
River shoreline near Eddy Point, as shown on Columbia River Estuary
Resource Maps.

2. A privately-owned wildlife refuge consisting of lands below the 100-year
flood level bounded by Knappa Road on the west, and by Ziak-Gnat Creek
Road on the east and south.

4.28.7. Subarea Policies

1. The Natural designation of the Big Creek spruce swamp recognizes the
unique natural fish and wildlife values of this area. However, such a
designation should not limit logging of adjacent shoreland and upland
areas in accordance with the Oregon Forest Practices Act, and should not
impede construction of a log sorting yard or similar support facilities
on the uplands adjacent to the swamp.

2. The Natural designation on the privately owned portion of wetland south
of Blind Slough expressly provides for construction of a single resi-
dence at some future time on a piece of higher ground near the railroad.
The residence would provide for a caretaker of the area, which is
intended as a wildlife preserve.

4-130

Karlson Island

CA_

NS
CS 50' RS 5 01

"Ics 50,

Q1 RS50

6uba rea Boundary- ....
Q)
R:,,,.Ul,:I,o,,y rhho,:,I&nd Boundary (OR)
R 0 y 8 or In* Boundary
61) Designation Boundaries

Designations
Aquatic

NS Natural NA
CS Conservation CA
RS Rural
DS Development OA
WDS Water-Dependent Development

City Limits

Urban Growth 8.0undary (OR) 00000000000000

Dredged Material Disposal Sit*

K K K K M
Mitlastion Site X X K X X

Goal 17 Significant Wetlands .......... . .............. ......

Goal 17 Significant Riparian Vegetation

SCALE IN FEET

2000 1000 0 2000

4.28. Big Creek/Little Creek/Fertile Valley

4-131

4.29. BROWNSMEAD/GNAT CREEK

4.29.1. General Description

The Brownsmead/Gnat Creek subarea includes all of the lands behind the
Brownsmead dikes, all sloughs and wetlands behind the dikes, Blind Slough and
adjacent wetlands, Gnat Creek, and Prairie Channel waters and wetlands
fronting the subarea. This subarea is in Clatsop County.

4.29.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic portions of this subarea include parts of Knappa Slough and
Prairie Channel, Warren Slough, Blind Slough, and Gnat Creek. Diking activi-
ties have brought about large changes to this subarea in the past century.
Prior to diking, the Brownsmead area consisted of tidal marsh and swamp.

Physical and biological characteristics of the aquatic area are similar
to those in the adjacent subarea (see Upper Marsh Islands Subarea Plan). The
freshwater wetland areas north and south of Blind Slough are some of the
largest undisturbed tidal spruce and shrub swamps along the shoreline of the
estuary. Natural resource values are high. The areas have not been exten-
sively studied but the vegetation and wildlife use is probably similar to the
Big Creek area. Sitka spruce, willow and alder make up the overstory with
low wetland vegetation as an understory. Knappa Slough has been inventoried
by the Nature Conservancy, and its tidelands, fringing marshes and riparian
vegetation are described as valuable fish and wildlife habitat.

The fisheries value of the Gnat Creek area is very high. The Gnat Creek
Fish Hatchery supports steelhead sport fishing in the creek. Most of the
fish raised at the hatchery are transported and released at the other streams
in Oregon. Gnat Creek also supports a good run of fall Chinook, and some
coho, cutthroat, and chum.

The Brownsmead/Gnat Creek aquatic areas are within the home range of
three nesting pairs of bald eagles: the Karlson Island, Marsh Island, and
Aldrich Point pairs. There is an osprey nest in the Gnat Creek tidal wet-
lands.

4.29.3. Shoreland Features

The shorelands consist of Class III and IV soil types of the Coquille-
Tidal Marsh (fresh)-Clatsop Association. There are large areas of peat and
organic soils. The lowlands are protected by dikes and five tidegates.

Shoreland vegetation consists mostly of upland grasses in large pasture-
lands of the subarea. Some of these areas have developed wetland vegetation

4-132

such as common rush (Juncus effusus). The diked sloughs within the shoreland
are lined with riparian vegetation such as willow and alder.

There is a population of warm water game fish such as bass, crappie, and
perch in Brownsmead Slough. Other sloughs also have populations of warm
water fishes.

Wildlife values in and around the sloughs are high. Waterfowl use these
sloughs as well as the surrounding pastures.

4.29.4. Human Use

Existing uses include farming and rural residences. Portions of Blind
Slough and Prairie Channel are used for log storage. Ownership is entirely
private except for small parcels in state and county ownership. Recreational
use of the aquatic area is high, including hunting and fishing.

There are several water access points. Private docks are located mainly
on Blind Slough. There is a public boat launching facility at Aldrich Point,
which receives extensive use, particularly in the summer.

4.29.5. Issues

The Brownsmead area, according to the U. S. Soil Conserv'ation Service,
has the best agricultural land in Clatsop County. Most of the area is used
as pasture land, but corn, peas, beans and other crops are also.grown. The
area is in the Exclusive Farm Use zone (EFU).

The public boat launching facility at Aldrich Point is a source of
conflict in the area. Local residents do not.want the facility expanded
because traffic generated by the facility already causes problems during peak
use periods. The County government operates the facility and has expressed
plans for improving the boat ramp.

The bulk of the wetlands north and south of Blind Slough are owned or
leased by Western Transportation Company, with the remainder in a small
private ownership. These undisturbed wetlands have high natural values and
need protection.

Blind Slough, Prairie Channel and Knappa Slough are among the more
important log storage areas in the estuary. Water quality is good, the water
is deep enough so that grounding at low water is not a problem, and there are
no gillnet fish drifts in the area.

Gnat Creek, with its wetlands, riparian vegetation and important fish-
ery, needs protection from major alterations. Some of the wetlands are
formerly diked areas, but no dike restoration has been suggested. Some
pressure exists for installation of private docks. The recreation value of
the stream for sport fishing is high.

4-133

4.29.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The following aquatic areas are designated Natural:

1. The wetlands north and south of the mouth of Blind Slough.

2. The wetlands adjacent to the eastward bend in Prairie Channel.

3. The tidal marshes and swamps associated with Gnat Creek.

All other aquatic areas are designated Conservation.

All shorelands are designated Rural.

The regulatory shoreland boundary in this subarea is 50 feet from the
estuary shoreline, or the inland toe of dikes and associated toe drains,
whichever-is greater, except where it extends farther inland to include the
following features:

1. Significant riparian vegetation along the tidegated portions of Blind
Slough, Saspall Slough, Grizzly Slough, and other tidegated sloughs in
the Brownsmead area; significant riparian vegetation along both sides of
Gnat Creek to the head of tide; and significant riparian vegetation
along a tidegated slough in Sections 4 and 9, T 8N R7W.

2. Significant wetlands of diked sloughs including Blind Slough, Grizzly
Slough, Saspall Slough and other unnamed sloughs as shown on Columbia
River Estuary Resource Maps.

3. A boat ramp on Blind Slough, a boat ramp on Gnat Creek, and the Aldrich
Point boat ramp.

4.29.7. Subarea Policies

1. Maintenance and possible expansion of log storage activities in Blind
Slough are provided for in this plan. This area is well protected from
winds and river currents, has relatively deep water and is one of the
most important log storage areas in the estuary. The Natural designa-
tion of the adjacent spruce swamps at the mouth of Blind Slough are
intended to provide for protection of the natural vegetation and wild-
life values, while not limiting adjacent log storage and transport
activities. Logging in the swamp area shall not be permitted.

4-134

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

S 50'

N
RS 50'

CS so

CS 50,
RS 50,
NA
N

%@Cs 60,

Subarea Boundary .....................................
R : ,, 0
tl 0. , y S 1, o
r:11.nd Boundaryy C(OR)))
R fy Sho In* Sound* , WA

De-lonfition Boundaries A- -1
R660' CS 60'

Do signal Ions
6 h o r a I a n d Aquatic

NS Natural NA
CS Conse-stion CA
RS Rural
. . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . .
mitigation Silo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Goal 17 significa
a IWetlands
.... NNW.,
Goal 17 Significant Ripaflan Vegetation
SCALE IN FEET
20.00 10100 . .0 2000

4.29. Brownsmead/Gnat Creek

4-135

4.30. CLIFTON CHANNEL

4.30.1. General Description

This subarea consists of a shoreland strip from Aldrich Point to Brad-
wood. The area also includes the Columbia River to the center of the Clifton
Channel. This subarea is in Clatsop County.

4.30.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic physical and biological characteristics of the deeper part
of Clifton Channel, are, for the most part, similar to the River Channels
Subarea. Because sediments are finer in the Clifton Channel than the Main
Channel, benthic organisms tend to be more concentrated.

The nearshore parts of the channel contain some narrow, fringing tidal
flats and swamps. Subyearling fall Chinook salmon migrate along the near-
shore tidal flat and shallow subtidal areas. Two nesting pairs of bald
eagles perch and feed in these nearshore areas. Their nests are located
within the subarea's shoreland. The tidal swamps of the subarea provide
habitat for small mammals and waterfowl.

4.30.3. Shoreland Features

Most of the shorelands in this subarea are steep, heavily forested and
subject to landslide hazards, particularly adjacent to Clifton Channel.
Vegetation on these shorelands and adjacent uplands is mostly Douglas fir and
hemlock. Small pockets of tideland soils occur along Clifton Channel,
vegetated with conifers, alder and willow. Wildlife using shore and uplands
include deer, elk, bear and smaller animals.' Two bald eagle nests are
located near Aldrich Point. The eagles using the nests are referred to as
the Aldrich Point Pair and Clifton Channel Pair. Their home ranges extend
over the adjacent islands.

4.30.4. Human Use

Forestry and some residential uses occur in this area. The old fishing
community of Clifton is still occupied by several families and is used as a
staging area for fishing the Clifton Channel gillnet fish drifts. Extensive
log storage sites are located across the channel adjacent to Tenasillahe
Island.

4-136

4.30.5. Issues

The fish drifts in this area are very productive, but are hampered by
snag material. Most of these obstructions are sinker logs from log rafts
stored across the channel. Occasional broken log bundles also cause serious
problems, resulting in lost fishing time and expensive snag removal ftom
drifts. This issue is dealt with in the Regional Policies (Subsection
3.3.10.), and local fishermen are working with lumber companies to alleviate
the problem.

4.30.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

All aquatic areas along Clifton Channel are designated Conservation.

Shoreland areas in forestry use or hazard areas are designated Conserva-
tion. The developed area at Clifton, southeast to Bradwood, is designated
Rural.

The regulatory shoreland boundary in this subarea is 50 feet from the
shoreline, except where it extends farther inland to include the following:

1. Bald eagle nest trees and a 500-foot buffer extending around the trees.

4-137

SCALE IN

2000 1000 0

.............
Aldrich Pt,
CA

CS
5 0
Tenasillahe kl@nd
CS
610, see

*a
0
CS
co 50' CA

Subarea, Boundary ..................................... Clifton
lend Boundary (OR) R 8 as,"
R:.Q.U::1'.0"Yy Sano;:11ne Boundary 60
Designation Boundaries NA
A S e!l

Designations
Shoreland Aquatic

H8 Natural NA
Ca Conservation CA
As Rural

noal 17 Significant Riparian Vegetation
__a

4.30. Clifton Channel

4.31. BRA:DWOOD

4.31.1. General Description

This area includes the industrial area at Bradwood, a stretch of steep
forested shoreline to the east, and portions of the Columbia River. This
subarea is in Clatsop County. The eastern boundary is the section line
between Sections 21 and 22 of T8N, R6W, which corresponds to the downstream
end of Puget Island.

4.31.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic portions of this subarea include portions of Clifton Chan-
nel, the main navigation channel, and tidal marshes and swamps near Bradwood.
The biological and physical characteristics of the aquatic area are similar
to those in adjacent subareas (see River Channels and Clifton Channel Subarea
Plans).

4.31.3. Shoreland Features

The soils in this subarea include the Hembre-Klickitat Association (30%
60% slope) in the Bradwood area, and the Astoria-Hembre-Klickitat Associa-
tion (37. - 30% slope). The industrial area at Bradwood has been filled with
sandy dredged material.

The vegetation on the Bradwood Cliffs is mostly Douglas fir and hemlock.
This serves as habitat for deer, elk, bear, small mammals and furbearers, and
birds.

4.31.4. Human Use

The Bradwood industrial site is not currently used. It is designated as
a dredged material disposal site. Bradwood is privately owned. The shore-
line area between Bradwood and Wauna is forested.

There are private access points to the river in this reach. River use
includes sport fishing, commercial fish drafts, and commercial ship and barge
traffic.

4.31.5. Issues

The Bradwood industrial site offers limited potential for small to
medium sized water-dependent industrial development. There is deep water
close to shore, some available vacant land, and railroad access. There-are

4-139

constraints to development, however, including poor highway access and the
proximity of the wildlife refuge. Large-scale development involving exten-
sive dredging or filling would not be appropriate.

4.31.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The embayment and a 200-f6ot wide channel out to the main ship channel
are designated Development. The remaining aquatic areas are designated
Conservation, except where the Development ship channel and its 600-foot wide
flowlane disposal area (either 600 feet wide or to the 20-foot bathymetric
contour, whichever is narrower) extend into the subarea.

The entire filled area at Bradwood is designated Water-Dependent Devel-
opment. All other shorelands are designated Conservation.

The regulatory shoreland boundary in this subarea is 50 feet from the
shoreline except where it extends farther inland to include the following
shoreland features:

1. Significant riparian vegetation around the Hunt's Greek tidal marsh, as
shown on Columbia River Estuary Resource Maps.

2. The Bradwood industrial site; dredged material disposal site CC-S-38.9,
from the Columbia River Estuary Dredged Material Management Plan; and a
mitigation site as designated in the Restoration and Mitigation Pl!in for
the Columbia River Estuary.

4.31.7. Subarea Policies

1. Large-scale development involving extensive dredging or filling at the
Bradwood site is not appropriate.

2. The exact location of the 200-foot wide access channel to the Bradwood
site is not designated in this Plan. The location of the channel shall
be determined at the time of permit application.

4-140

:so,

CC;-S-38.9

DA
CS 60, N

CS so, .... ..

Subarea Boundary .....................................
R:g0,1:,,*,y Shor:land Sounds 'Y NS 50'
R ,U cry Shor line Bounds ry (WA)

Designation Boundaries
R 6 6 0.'_"@c 850.

D a a I C n a I I o n a
Shoroland Aquatic

N S Natural N A
CS Conservation C A
R S Rural CS so, C \A:
06 Development DA
WDS Water-Dependent Developent

City Limits
Urban Growth B.oundary (OR) OC30000(:)0000000

Dredged Material Disposal Site
9 X K K X K K K X' I
Mitigation Site X K

Goal 17 Significant W.1t..d.

Goal 17 Significant Riparian Vegetation

SCALE IN FEET
2000 1000 0 2000

4.31. Bradwood

4-141

4.32. WAUNA/WESTPORT

4.32.1. General Description

This subarea includes the Wauna Mill, Driscoll Slough, Westport Slough,
the unincorporated community of Westport, and a private recreational home
development east of Westport Slough. The subarea extends between the
Clatsop/Columbia County line and the downstream end of Puget Island. It
extends waterward to the state boundary, and landward to Oregon Highway 30.

4.32.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic portions of this subarea include a portion of the main
channel of the Columbia, wetlands and sloughs south of the Wauna Mill, and
Westport Slough. This subarea has been altered appreciably during the past
century. Much of the present shoreland areas were created by filling or
diking tidal swamp.

Physical and biological characteristics of the aquatic area are similar
to the River Channels and Clifton Channel Subareas. Nearshore areas tend to
be very deep.

The tidal swamp south of.the Wauna Mill is vegetated with spruce,
willow, and blackberries. The swamp is one of the last remnants of the
climax floodplain community that once covered large areas in the region.
This area provides habitat for small mammals, deer, and waterfowl. A small
population of the endangered Columbia white-tailed deer also use the swamp.

There is little information about the biological and physical character-
istics of Westport Slough. The slough supports warm-water game fish.
Plympton Creek, which drains into the slough,:, has a run of fall Chinook and
some steelhead, coho, cutthroat, and chum.

4.32.3. Shoreland Features

The soils in this area are of the Sauvie-Peat Association. These soils
have a low slope, a high.flood potential, and a high seasonal water table.
They are moderately suitable for agricultural activities. Parts of the
property just east of Driscoll Slough and the northern portion of the penin-
sula have been filled. Shorelands at the Wauna Mill site are developed while
most of the other shorelands are undeveloped.

Shoreland vegetation includes shrubs, spruce, cottonwood, and grasses
for pasture. Wildlife present include deer (black-tailed and Columbian
white-tailed), elk, small mammals, and birds.

4-142

4.32.4. Human Use

The Wauna Mill site is heavily developed. There are vacant lands east
of Driscoll Slough, a ferry landing and access point on Westport Slough,
grazing on the diked land and the southern part of the peninsula, and resi-
dential use on the northetn portion of the peninsula. Ownership on the
mainland portions of this subarea is largely corporate. The unincorporated
community of Westport has urban-level services, including sewer, water and
fire protection.

4.32.5. Issues

This subarea contains both a high degree of development potential and
substantial wetland habitat. With excellent accessibility to the main
navigation channel of the Columbia River, the large vacant areas have poten-
tial for water-dependent industrial development.

Portions of this subarea are low-lying with considerable wetland habitat
value. This is especially true of the area between the railroad and the
highway. North of the railroad there are some areas of wetland and a strip
of mature riparian vegetation along the west bank of Westport Slough. The
area east and north of the community of Westport has been designated by the
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service as critical habitat for the endangered
Columbia White-tailed deer.

The planning process involved extensive discussion of the conflict
between the habitat values and economic development potential of the area.
Resource agencies have agreed that the area has unique development potential
but note that the good natural resoui@ce values can and should be protected,
consistent with development of the ar ea. Development interests have re-
sponded that within the very limited areas which are suitable for intensive
development, undue restrictions should be avoided.

The portion of Driscoll,Slough between the railroad and the river is a
water and wetland area which has received considerable attention. During the
original CREST planning process, resource agency representatives noted the
habitat values, the need to preserve water quality, and the fact that
riparian vegetation can be protected without unduly restricting development
of adjacent land. A Conservation designation would provide such protection
while allowing construction on pilings and minor,dredging and filling, which
may be necessary for development..

A site between Westport and Driscoll Sloughs has been identified as a
potential deep-draft site by a 1986 study for the Oregon Department of
Economic Development (Lower Columbia River Assessment of Oregon Deep-Draft
Sites, Ogden Beeman and Associates, 1986). A portion of the site has been
used for dredged material disposal and it is designated for this use in the
1986 Columbia River Estuary Dredged Material Management Plan. Potential
development of this site involves issues of riparian and wetland habitat
protection. The development outlined in the Deep Draft Sites Assessment
would involve filling 27 acres of wetlands at the site. These wetlands are

4-143

significant under Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 5. A 1982 wetlands study 0
(Significant Shoreland and Wetland Habitats in the Clatsop PlLns and the
Columbia Flo6dplain of Clatsop County, Oregon (Thomas, 1982) identified
wetlands at the site as one of the last remnants of climax floodplain tidal
swamp on the lower Columbia River Estuary. Resource agencies have requested
protection of this valuable habitat. This Plan recognizes the suitability of
this site as a small port facility. Development of the site should be
confined to the existing upland area. Any fill in the adjacent wetlands must
be justified through the plan amendment process.

Residential property owners across Westport Slough have requested that
protection be provided from noise and other impacts of development on the
adjacent property.

This subarea includes the Westport Bar shoal in the main ship channel.
Large quantities of sand are removed from this shoal each year to maintain
required depths. The availability of this fill material coincides with the
needs of developers to prepare their land for development. Substantial
amounts of material have already been deposited. Disagreement, however, has
arisen over continued filling that may impact wetland habitat and riparian
vegetation along Westport Slough.

The northern shoreland portion of the peninsula was designated Develop-
ment in the draft 1979 CREST Plan. However, Rural is a more appropriate
designation, given the lack of sewers in the area and the moderate housing
density. Portions of the shorelands and wetlands on the peninsula are
considered critical habitat for the Columbian white-tailed deer and are to
remain undeveloped as part of a zone-change agreement with the River Ranch
subdivision developers.

Shorelands east of Westport are diked. There are no immediate develop-
ment plans and the property will probably remain leased for grazing. Consid-
eration should be given to the area's use by the Columbian white-tailed deer
and also the proximity of the property to the.community of Westport.

4.32.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The following aquatic areas are designated Development:

I. The area fronting the Wauna Mill site, thedevelopment site southeast of
Wauna and Westport Slough, extended to the north subarea boundary;

2. Westport Slough;

3. The main navigation channel and the flowlane disposal area on each side
of the channel (600 fee4t wide or to the 20-foot bathymetric contour,
whichever is narrower).

The following aquatic areas are designated Natural:

1. Driscoll Slough;

4-144

2. The tidal wetland designated as significant under Oregon Statewide
Planning Goal 5.

All other aquatic areas are designated Conservation.

The shorelands area north of Westport Slough is designated Rural.
Shorelands south of the railroad track and east of Driscoll Slough are
designated Conservation. All other shorelands are designated Natural.

4.32.7. Subarea Policies

1. Development on lands adjacent to Driscoll Slough shall be carried out in
a way that will minimize alteration of existing wetlands and riparian
vegetation, degradation of water quality and stream sedimentation.
Filling or other removal of vegetation for construction of a bridge or
other transportation access across the slough shall be the minimum
necessary to accomplish the project.

2. Except where direct access to water is required for wharves, docks or
piers, riparian vegetation along Westport Slough shall be protected for
bank stabilization, wildlife habitat, water quality, and a visual and
noise buffer.

4-145

D A
Island

N A

D S
W na

0 M I
0

DS
d%
NA CC- 0 DA
DA
CA

NA NA CS CS RS z
0 0
NA U U,

A
Subarea Boundary ............................. a.......
R:go@:Io,y 8ho,:,l.r,d Bounder y Wes1port U C
A '. I y Shor Ina Boundary (WA) so
q
Designation Boundaries 6 CS
-A- -1
RS 50' CS 60

Designation a s.
1;h.rol..d Allu&tic

HS N a I u t a I NA 4-
a
CS C a n a a r v a t I a nCA RS
RS Rural
DS D a v a I o p . a n IDA
INDS Woter-Dependent Development

City Limits

Urban Growth 8@ouftdary (OR) 00000000000000

Dredged Material Disposal Sit*
M X X X X X K X X X I
Mitigation Site . . . . . . . . X X X X M X
SCALE IN FEE7
Goal 17 Significant Wetlandc
.......... .. .....
.... .....
2000 1000 0 2000
Goal 6 Significant Riparian Vegetation

4.32. Wauna/Westport

4-146

4.33. PUGET ISLAND

4.33.1. General Description

This area ii-,cludes Puget and Little Islands, Coffee Pot Island,
Ryan Island, and associated small islands and marshy areas adjacent to
the larger islands. The area also includes water out to the state line
and to the mid-line of the Cathlamet Channel. Puget and Little Islands
are former marsh areas which have been diked and drained for agricultur-
al use. The small adjacent islands are undiked, uninhabited, and are
used mostly for recreational hunting and fishing. This subarea is under
the jurisdiction of Wahkiakum County.

4.33.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic portions of th is subarea include parts of the main
Columbia River Channel and Cathlamet Channel, Bernie and Welcome
Sloughs, and the tidal wetlands of Ryan Island, White Island, and on the
Puget Island shore. Prior to diking Puget Island to create agricultural
land the island consisted almost entirely of tidal swamp.

Most of the Columbia River flow is concentrated south of Puget
Island through the main navigation channel. Tidal range and tidal
reversals decrease in this subarea compared with the lower estuary.
River stage becomes increasingly important in water level fluctuations.

The subarea contains a wide range of sediment types. The high-
energy areas such as Cathlamet Channel and the main navigation channel
contain sediments with mean grain sizes ranging from coarse to medium
sand. The tidal flats and slopes south of Puget Island contain primari-
ly medium to fine sand. Very,fine sand,,silt, and clay predominate in
the quiet areas such as near the tidal marshes and swamps east of Puget
Island.

Of the estuary's plant types, phytoplankton and tidal marsh and
swamp vegetation have been studied in the subarea. Phytoplankton
productivity levels rank among the highest measured in the estuary.
Most of the subarea's low marshes are dominated by reed canary grass
(Phalaris arundinacea), Lyngby's sedge (Carex lyngbyei), and cattail
(Typha angustifolia). The high marshes consist of a species-rich
community of plants. The swamps are dominated by several shrub and tree
species; black cottonwood is particularly abundant..

Of the estuary's invertebrate types, only benthic infauna have been
studied in the subarea. Infauna densities are high. Fish prey species
such as amphipods (Corophium salmonis) and freshwater clams (Corbicula
manilensis) are abundant.

4-147

The subarea's fish community has not been quantitatively sampled.
Fish utilization is presumably similar to that of the River Channels
Subarea.

Many species of resident and migratory birds feed and nest in the
subarea. Because the subarea contains many different types of habitats,
bird species diversity is very high. Double-crested cormorants utilize
open waters. Western grebe and other migratory waterfowl species winter
in the subarea. Common merganser, a resident waterfowl species, feeds
and nests in the subarea. Other waterfowl species that nest in the
subarea include mallard, green-winged teal, and wood duck. Shorebirds
feed in the tidal flats and low marshes. Great blue heron utilize
nesting colonies on Ryan Island (north of Puget Island) and Brown Island
(east of Puget Island).

Two marine mammals, harbor seals and California sea lions, feed in
the subarea. Their use is concentrated in Cathlamet Channel during the
winter eulachon run. Marine mammal use is generally low during other
seasons.

The marshes and swamps of the subarea receive aquatic and terres-
trial rammal use. Muskrat and nu--ria feed and den primarily in the
tidal marshes of the subarea. Beaver feed and den in the Sitka spruce
and willow swamps. River otter utilize the sloughs, small tributaries,
and adjacent swamps. Raccoon are abundant in the swamps and in the
diked floodplain of Puget Island. Two species of deer, the black-tailed
deer and the endangered Columbian white-tailed deer, utilize the sub-
area.

4.33.3. Shoreland Features

The soils in this subarea have been deposited by the river, and are
of the Ocosta silty clay loam,type. This soil is relatively imperme-
able, with a high water table. The vegetation in agricultural areas is
mostly grass and row crops, and in other areas is a mixture of willow,
alder, and cottonwood. There is-residential development along the
perimeter dike and roads.

The area provides habitat for the endangered Columbian white-tailed
deer, muskrat, nutria, opossums, and other mammals. Migratory birds are
common in the area, and many, including the whistling swan, winter here.

4.33.4. Human Use

The existing uses of Puget and Little Islands are agricultural in
the interior and rural residential along and waterward of the main ring
dike. Housing is particularly concentrated along Bernie, Welcome and
Jackson Sloughs, and the Sunny Sands area along the south side of Puget
Island. There are a number of small businesses located on the islands'

4-148

interiors, as well as small boat building and repair yards. Ownership
is primarily private, although there is a large section of state owner-
ship (Department of Natural Resources on Puget Island and Department of
Wildlife on White Island). There are public shoreline fishing areas on
the west and south sides of Puget Island. In-water log storage areas
are present on the north side of Little and Ryan Islands and the south
side of Puget Island. There are also a number of commercial fishing
areas in Cathlamet Channel, adjacent to the main navigation channel, and
in the area between Coffee Pot and Puget Islands. There are several
established gillnet drifts in the aquatic portions of this subarea.

4.33.5. Issues

Dairy farming is traditional on these islands, and other types of
agriculture also occur. Residential development is occurring, but its
expansion is hindered by lack of road access, utility constraints and
floodplain hazard. Sand from maintenance dredging of the main naviga-
tion channel could be used as fill to enhance development sites. If
dredging were to occur at the entrances of sloughs around the islands,
shoreline residential development would become more attractive to people
owning boats.

Some areas of conflict are the bulkhead permit problems in Bernie
and Welcome Sloughs, Diking District-Corps of Engineers policies on dike
maintenance, public access to public beaches on White Island, ownership
disputes between Department of Natural Resources and private owners over
tideland and former shoreland, dredged material disposal practices on
and adjacent,to Puget Island and in-water activities interfering with
gillnet drifts.

Most of the subarea and the small low islands provide fish and
wildlife habitat and recreational opportunities. The small islands,
with the-possible exception of Coffee Pot Island, are unsuitable for
development because of their low elevation and flood hazard.

Shoaling in Cathlamet Channel is a concern. Cathlamet Channel is
continually changing, with shoaling in some reaches and scour in others.
(There was more than 20 feet of scour in the upstream areas between 1957
and 1984.) This constant change is due to tidal reversals and diver-
gence of flows at both ends of the channel. Other changes in recent
years, such as the enlargement of the navigation channel, the Mount St.
Helens eruption, and upstream regulation which traps sediments and
reduces peak flows, also change the river hydraulics and impact the
channel. The upstream pile dikes were constructed in the late 1920's
and except for the recent growth and stabilization of the disposal area,
these are probably not a major cause of the recent shoaling.

Gillnet fishermen have expressed concern over in-water activities
which interfere with commercial fishing. Major areas of conflict
include:

4-149

Sinker logs from log rafts;

Debris uncovered by dredging; and

Dredged material disposal.

Potential conflicts may be alleviated through continued coordination
between gillnetters, log transport companies and the Corps of Engineers.
Some gillnetters have suggested that they be reimbursed for costs they
incur while clearing drift areas. Such a requirement is outside of this
Plan's scope. Planning measures that can be implemented to reduce the
snag problem include:

Requirements that conflicting activities avoid gillnet drifts
whenever possible; and

Requirements that gillnet drift captains be informed concerning
timing and location of in-water activity.

4.33.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

Aquatic portions of Ryan Island that are publicly owned are desig-
nated Natural. East of the Puget Island Bridge, a 50 foot Rural Aquatic
designation is applied along the perimeter of Little and P-aget Islands
ending at the downriver end'of White Island. Welcome S1 'ough and Bernie
Slough are designated Rural. The main Columbia River navigation channel
and the flowlane disposal area (600 feet wide on each side of the
channel or to the 20-foot bathymetric contour, whichever is narrower)
are designated Development. All remaining aquatic portions of this
subarea are designated Conservation.

The publicly owned shorelands of Ryan Island are designated Natu-
ral. The shorelands of Puget'and [email protected] are designated Rural.
All remaining shorelands of this subarea are designated Conservation.

. The regulatory shoreline boundary is 200 feet landward of the
ordinary high water line along the Columbia River, including both sides
of Bernie Slough and Welcome Slough.

The following dredged material disposal sites are listed in the
1986 Columbia River Estuary Dredged Material Management Plan:
Wk-S-38.4, Wk-S-38.7, Wk-S-38.8, Wk-S-40.8, Wk-S-41.2, Wk-S-41.8,
Wk-S-42.4, Wk-B-40.9, Wk-B-41.3, Wk-S-42.5, Wk-B-43.8, Wk-S-45.0,
Wk-B-43.8, Wk-B-45.0, Wk-S-46.3, Wk-B-46.3.

4.33.7. Subarea Policies

1. Prior to approval of in-water activities with the potential for
affecting fisheries, the project sponsor shall notify local drift

4-150

captains, the Columbia River Fisherman's Protective Union and the
Northwest Gillnetters Association. The Washington Department of
Fisheries shall also be consulted to determine project timing and
methods that will minimize impacts on the fishery.

2. In-water activities that may leave snags in gillnet drifts shall
avoid drifts whenever possible. If a drift cannot be avoided, the
project sponsor shall notify the drift captain.

4-151

V* Isf n s

+: 8. 4 sees..
Cathlamet
Wk- -3 CA
144

k-B-3

Bradwood,
RS 20(K@
RS 200, Z4,
RA

4.r/
40 T Purt
RS 200

Wk- -40

Subarea Boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . a ...........
R:Q"I o,y rho,:,(.,,d 6 . . .Italy (OR)) k B .9
.1:1 ( W A -S-41 .2
R a to ry Sh .r Ina Boundary RA k 1 .
Designation Boundaries EK@ -@- 30 Is n d
R S CS 60 -S-41.8

Designations
ih.,.i..d ikaualic 4
HS Natural N A C S
CS Conssr@atlon CA
R S Rural CA -B-4 .4
DS Development DA
WDS Walet-Depandent De@elopant W na lp Ir
City UtI,Ila .- - --.. - - .. . . ... . . .. . . . .. %

Urban Gro.th B.Oundary (OR)
00000000000000 0
Dredged Material Disposal Site @p
. . . . . . . . Ig % K K K X K 1 0
Mitigation Site . . . . . . . X s s s 0

........................ .......... .
" *'* . .............. ...
G
joal 17 Significant Wetlands
.......................
........................
. ......... .........

Goal 17 SignificaRt Riparian Vegetation SCALE IN FEEIr

4.33. Puget Island

4-153

4.34. EINSTERN WAHKIAKUM COUNTY

4.34.1. General Description

This area includes aquatic and shoreland areas between the eastern
boundary of Wahkiakum County and the Puget Island Bridge. The area has
generally steep topography; there are no tideland soils. The planning
boundary extends from 200 feet landward of the Mean Higher High Water
line, and waterward out into the Columbia River to the State line, or to
the center of Cathlamet Channel. This area is within Wahkiakum County's
jurisdiction, except for a small portion of the Town of Cathlamet east
of the Puget Island Bridge.

4.34.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic portions of this subarea include parts of Cathlamet
Channel and the Columbia River Main Channel. Water depths along the
shoreline are relatively deep and there is little wetland habitat.
Aquatic physical and biological characteristics,are similar to those in
the channel portions of the Puget Island Subarea.

4.34.3. Shoreland Features

This section of t1m_ Wahkiakum County shoreline is characterized by
a steep -topography of,rocky bluf'fs vegetated by forest. The uplands
provide habitat for deer and other upland game. The shoreland from the
Nassa Point area to the Puget Island bridge is mostly steep cliffs with
a moderately flat bench at the top. The soil along the shore is this
subarea is mostly a silt loam,derived from sandstone.

4.34.4. Human Use

Human use in much of this area is limited by the steep and often
unstable topography and poor shoreline access. The heaviest human
activity is concentrated at County Line Park, two small residential
areas near Cape Horn, and along State Highway 4, which in some places
follows the shoreline. Shoreline ownership is mostly private, with some
corporate ownership. County Line Park is a day-use facility for pic-
nicking, swimming, and fishing. There are commercial salmon and-smelt
fishing areas in the river through this area,- limited in-water log
storage at Nassa Point, and a rock pit with water access close to
Cathlamet.

4-155

4.34.5. Issues

Development potential in most of the area is limited by the steep
and unstable topography, utility constraints, and the occasional clo-
sures of State Highway 4 east to Longview. Industrial activity will
probably continue to be limited to minor timber harvest and the commer-
cial rock pit. In-water development will probably continue to be
associated with the maintenance of the main navigation channel and
limited log storage.

Some conflicts in this subarea are related to navigation. A former
dredge spoil site at Flandersville is thought to contribute to the
shoaling of Cathlamet Channel. For this reason, Wahkiakum. County will
no longer grant a permit for the continued use of this site for dredged
material disposal.

The Development Shoreland classifications for the Eagle Cliff-
County Line Park, Cape Horn-Flandersville and the Nassa Point to Puget
Island Bridge areas will provide for the increasing use of these areas
for more intense recreation or housing developments.

The shoreland from the Nassa Point area to the Puget Island Bridge
is mostly steep cliffs with a moderately flat bench on top. The area
within Cathlamet is currently used for housing. It is scenic and has
road access. The exception to this is the currently used commercial
rock pit with river and road access.

Gillnet fishermen have expressed concern over in-water activities
which interfere with commercial fishing. Major areas of conflict
include:

- Sinker logs from log rafts;'

- Debris uncovered by dredging; and

- Dredged material disposal.

- Requirements that conflicting activities avoid gillnet drifts
whenever possible; and

- Requirements that gillnet drift captains be consulted concerning
timing and location of in-water activity.

4-156

4.34.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The main navigation channel of the Columbia River, including a
flowlane disposal area on each side (either 600 feet wide or to the
20-foot bathymetric contour, whichever is narrowest), as well as the
Cathlamet Channel (300 feet wide) area designated Development. Remain-
ing aquatic areas are designated Conservation.

Shorelands are designated Conservation from Eagle Cliff to
Waterford, and from approximately one-half mile west of Cape Horn to
approximately one mile east of Nassa Point. Remaining shorelands are
designated Development. The boundary between the Development and
Conservation designations is the section line between Sections 17 and 20
of T8N R5W.

Only one dredged material disposal sites is listed in the 1986
Columbia River Estuary Dredged Material Management Plan for this subar-
ea: Wk-B-51.8.

The regulatory shoreline boundary in this subarea is 200 feet
landward of MHHW throughout the subarea.

4.34.7. Subarea Policies

1. Prior to approval of in-water activities with the potential for
affecting fisheries, the project sponsor shall notify local drift
captains, the Columbia River Fishermants Protective Union and the
Northwest Gillnetters Association. The Washington Department of
Fisheries shall also be consulted to determine project timing and
methods that will minimize impacts on the fishery.

2. In-water activities that may leave snags in gillnet drifts shall
avoid drifts whenever possible. Ifta drift cannot be avoided, the
project sponsor shall notify the drift captain.

4-157

Subarea Boundary- . . . . . . . . . . .ma .....................

Regulatory Shoreland Boundary (OR)
Regulatory Shoreline Boundary (WA)
C.1hi-tt Dealgoation Boundaries <-
-A-
RS 60' CS 60

t Designation*
Shoreland AqU4tIC

NS Natural NA
CS Conservation CA
RS Rural RA
DS Development DA
WOG Watof-Depandent Development
& >->1..C A' City Limits
0::,dgod Mal".
*flag Disposal sits,
Puget CIS 200' M go Ion S WK-B-51

Eagle Clif@f
isand

Cape orn

C A

45
-Lsvap

0 0
U
S c
0

4000
W.tp@ U 0
U Vit

4.34. Eastern Wahkiakum County

4.35. CATHLAMET AND WHITE-TAILED DEER REFUGE

4.35.1. General Description

This subarea lies between the Puget Island Bridge and the down-
stream end of Price Island. Water areas to the state line are also
included. Both Wahkiakum.County and the Town of Cathlamet have juris-
diction in this subarea.

4.35.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic portions of this subarea include parts of Cathlamet
Channel and the Columbia River Main Channel, Elochoman River and Slough,
ports of Brooks Slough and the tidal swamps of Hunting and Price Is-
lands. This subarea has undergone extensive changes in the past centu-
ry. The diked farmland and refuge land north of the Elochoman River was
previously a large tidal swamp.

The physical and biological characteristics of the subarea's
channel portions are similar to those in the Puget Island and River
Channels Subareas.

Price Island, Hunting Island, and the mouth of the Elochoman River
all have large tidal swamps. The vegetation consists primarily of
spruce, cottonwood, alder, and willow. Bird and wildlife values are
high in the swamps (see Puget Island Subarea Plan). Hunting Island
supports some Columbian white-tailed deer. Price Island, Hunting Island
and adjacent water areas.are used by bald eagles.

The Elochoman River and Beaver Creek, a tributary of the Elochoman,
both have salmon and trout runs. Natural spawning grounds for coho and
steelhead exist on the Elochoman River..@ In addition, a hatchery on the
Elochoman produces fall Chinook and coho salmon and a hatchery on Beaver
Creek produces steelhead and cutthroat trout.

4.35.3. Shoreland Features

Shorelands in this subarea proceed from steep rock bluffs at the
Puget Island Bridge, to low wet areas of diked tideland west of the
Elochoman River. Price Island contains some sandy dredged.spoil shore-
land areas. Vegetated areas consist primarily of pastureland and some
forested areas. Cathlamet and a log sort yard along Elochoman Slough
are developed. ,

Much of the mainland is part of the Columbian White-tailed Deer
Natural Wildli-fe Refuge and is former agricultural land. The area east
of Highway 4 and north of the Elochoman River, and north and east of

4-159

Brooks Slough is still in agricultural production. The diked areas
contain several large sloughs and some low wetland areas. Wildlife
values are high in much of this area. The main part of the Columbian
white-tailed deer population exists within the diked refuge area.

4.35.4. Human Use

The Cathlamet vicinity has the largest concentration of industry,
commerce, and housing in the County. The Cavenham. log sorting yard and
log storage areas are the largest in the County. Most of Hunting
Island, Price Island, and the agricultural land north of Cathlamet and
west of State Highway 4 are in the Columbian White-tailed Deer National
Wildlife Refuge.

Intensive human use occurs,throughout the Cathlamet-Elochoman
Slough area. Cathlamet is the county's main developed water access
point. The Elochoman Slough Marina offers waterborne visitors a safe
harbor and pleasant place to visit, and may help attract people to
Cathlamet. Most of the town is built on a hill and is not included in
the estuary plan.

The Cavenham. log sorting yard is the major water-related industry
in this part of the county. The current site and Elochoman Slough have
been used for this purpose for decades and the shoreland has been highly
modified as a result. The forested area north of the sorting yard is a
possible expansion area.

There is an area to the east of the sorting yard which is used for
machine and truck shops. The previously-forested wetland to the east of
the sorting yard complex is privately owned and is seasonally grazed by
cattle. The lands east of State Highway 4 and north of the Elochoman
River are privately owned farmlands as is a parcel outside the Refuge
boundary north and east of Brooks Slough@.

The lands west of State Highway 4 and north of the Elochoman River
are owned and managed by the U. S-. Fish and Wildlife Service as part of
the Columbian White-tailed Deer National Wildlife Refuge. This land
generally is kept in pasture. The Refuge also owns most of Hunting
Islands which are maintained in a natural state. Ownership on Price
Island is divided between the County, the Refuge, and the State of
Washington; the island is in a natural state except for a dredged
material disposal site.

The Elochoman Slough Marina and protecting breakwater are part of
an authorized project in Elochoman Slough which includes a 100-foot wide
by 10-foot deep channel for 1.5 miles above the sewage lagoon, and a
turning basin. The mooring basin is maintained at a 6-foot depth with a
50-foot wide entrance.

There are log storage and holding activities, and maintenance
dredging in Elochoman Slough in conjunction with the Cavenham sorting

4-160

yard. Water quality and benthic habitat in Elochoman Slough are affect-
ed by log storage and holding. Decomposing bark creates low oxygen
conditions near the bottom.

The Corps of Engineers authorized Cathlamet Channel is 300 feet
wide by 10 feet deep.

4.35.5. Issues

Development potential is high along the Cathlamet waterfront and up
the landward side of Elochoman Slough to the small slough at the north
end of the Cavenham. sorting yard. This area is served by maintained
navigation channels and existing roads.

Price Island has been identified as critical habitat for the
endangered Columbian white-tailed deer by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, and for that use should be managed in a near natural state.
The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service owns the downriver end of the
island; the County owns the upriver end; the State of Washington owns a
small parcel along Steamboat Slough. Wahkiakum. County amended its
Shoreline Master Program designation for the upstream portion of Price
Island to Conservancy in 1985 because of wetlands at the site and the
lack of water shoreland access. The entire island is now designated
Conservation.

'Gillnet fishermen have expressed concern over in-water activities
which interfere with commercial fishing. Major areas of conflict
include:

- Sinker logs from log rafts;'

- Debris uncovered by dredging; and

- Dredged material disposal.

- Requirements that conflicting activities avoid gillnet drifts
whenever possible; and

- Requirements that gillnet drift captains be consulted concerning
timing and location of in-water activity.

4-161

4.35.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The aquatic portions of the Hunting Islands are designated Natural,
except for the wetland along Elochoman Slough adjacent to the Cavenham
sorting yard, which is designated Rural. Nelson Creek is designated
Rural. The following aquatic areas are designated Development: the main
Columbia River Navigation channel (600 feet wide or extending to the
20-foot bathymetric contour, whichever is narrower); the navigation
channel in Cathlamet Channel (300 feet wide); a 200-foot wide aquatic
area along the shoreline in front of Cathlamet extending from the Puget
Island Bridge to the tip of Hunting Island; and the Eloc'homan Slough.-
from Cathlamet to the Elochoman River. The remaining aquatic areas are
designated Conservation.

Shorelands at the Wildlife Refuge are classified Conservation. The
agricultural lands in this subarea are designated Rural because of their
present and projected future farm use. The shorelands east of State
Highway 4 and north of the Elochoman River, and the shorelands north and
east of the Refuge between Brooks Slough and State Highway 4 are desig-
nated Rural. The shoreland from the Puget Island bridge north along
Elochoman Slough, between the slough and State Highway 4 and south of
the Elochoman River are designated Development. Price Island is desig-
nated Conservation. The remaining shorelands are designated Conserva-
tion.

Two dredged material disposal sites are listed in the 1986 Columbia
River Estuary Dredged Material Management Plan: Wk-S-38.1, Wk-S'-36.9.
Site 38.1 would be used in association with dredging of the Cathlamet
Boat Basin, and is in a Natural Shorelands designation. Amendment of
the local Shorelands Master Program designation for this site would be
required to permit disposal of dredged material. Site 36.9 is designat-
ed for dredging of Elochoman Slou'gh.@

A twenty-acre mitigation site located along State Highway 4 on the
north side of the Elochoman River, described in the 1987 Columbia River
Estuary Mitigation and Restoration Plan, is included in this subarea.

The regulatory shoreline boundary is 200 feet landward of MHHW
along the Columbia River, Elochoman Slough, Brooks Slough, Steamboat
Slough and the Elochoman River.

4.35.7. Subarea Policies

1. For those shorelands that are designated Development, proposed uses
and activities shall be designed to minimize or avoid degradation
of fish habitat.

2. Prior to approval of in-water activities with the potential for
affecting fisheries, the project sponsor shall notify local drift
captains, the Columbia River Fisherman's Protective Union and the
Northwest Gillnetters Association. The Washington Department of

4-162

Fisheries shall also be consulted to determine project timing and
methods that will minimize impacts on the fishery.

3. In-water activities that may leave snags in gillnet drifts shall
avoid drifts whenever possible. If a drift cannot be avoided, the
project sponsor shall notify the drift captain.

4. The mitigation site in this subarea can be used as mitigation only
for projects that provide direct economic benefits to Wahkiakum
County.

4-163

@rSksmokows DA Limit,
DS 200,
Dredoed Material Diepoeal Site

Mitigation Site
s 2 0
C 2 SCAL E IN FEET 00
0 1
Price CS 200 RS 00'
0

51and

*te Cs 00,
35

-'C A

.-15
s C
CA
DS
NA Rs
d RS 200'

r DA
N DA
R 8 2 0_0'

k S
H nting
CA N S

CA S 200'
lit

Isl n-s

NA
DS 200'
N s
Wk-S 8.1
Subarea Boundary .....................................

,an. Boundary (OR)
Yy 8sh"or:,ine Boundary (WA) '6thlamel
DeBlonstlon eoundarloo CED CA
Shorelan Designations RS CS 0 4"
d Aquatic

N s N a I u r a I HA
CS Conservation C A
R 8 R U r a I R A
D S Development DA

4.35. Cathlamet/Whitetail Deer Refuge

4-164

4.36. SKAMOKAWA TO THREE TREE POINT

4.36.1. General Description

This subarea lies between the northern boundary of the Columbian
White-tailed Deer National Wildlife Refuge and Three Tree Point. It
includes the unincorporated community of Skamokawa and some agricultural
lands along Skamokawa Creek and Dead Slough. The shorelands west of
Skamokawa are mostly inaccessible by road and unpopulated. This subarea
is under the jurisdiction of Wahkiakum. County.

4.36.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic portions of this subarea include part of the main
Columbia River Channel, Skamokawa Creek, and part of Brooks Slough.
Diking and filling activities over the past century have altered parts
of the subarea. The floodplain of Skamokawa Creek, now protected by
dikes, once contained large tidal swamps. Tidal swamps west of the
creek's mouth were also diked and filled during the past century.

The aquatic physical and biological characteristics of the portions
of the subarea adjacent to the main channel are similar to those in the
River Channels Subarea.

There is little information about the other aquatic portions of the
subarea. There is a tidal swamp south of Brooks Slough. Skamokawa
Creek produces fall Chinook. Much of this subarea is within the home
range of a bald eagle pair that nests near Clifton Channel and another
pair that nests near Jim Crow Point.

4.36.3. Shoreland Features

The shoreland in this subarea is low and bounded by steep topogra-
phy around Skamokawa. This western portion is very scenic. Low areas
have a high probability of flooding, and landslide topography occurs in
the area west of Skamokawa. The land behind Skamokawa and is mostly
diked tideland used for farming.

Vegetation includes pastureland grasses in the floodplain of
Skamokawa Creek and steep forested slopes along the western part of the
subarea.

Skamokawa Vista Park, has received large amounts of dredged materi-
al from the maintenance of the 40 foot navigation channel. The beach
commonly erodes and is used as a beach nourishment disposal site. The
banks of Skamokawa Creek at its entrance are former disposal sites.

4-165

The eastern portion of this subarea provides critical habitat for
the Columbian white-tailed deer. Bear, black-tailed deer, and other
upland species occur in addition to muskrat, nutria, and migratory
waterfowl.

4.36.4. Human Use

Human use is concentrated most heavily around the small community
of Skamokawa. Skamokawa is located at the confluence of Skamokawa Creek
and Brooks Slough.

There are a number of houses along the sloughs, along the north
side of State Highway 4, and on the tip of the peninsula formed by
Brooks and Steamboat Sloughs. There are a few small businesses and some
waterfront net drying racks at the junction of Brooks Slough and
Skamokawa Creek. On the west bank of Skamokawa Creek are a few houses
and a rock pit. Many of the houses along Brooks Slough and Skamokawa
Creek have floats or boat houses attached. Both water bodies allow
passage of very shallow draft vessels. Low bridges and shallow depths
limit passage of larger vessels. Land between Skamokawa Creek Bridge
and Dead Slough is in residential use.

Wahkiakum Port District #2 has developed Skamokawa Vista Park on
the west side of the mouth of Skainokawa Creek. The park receives
intensive use for swimming, fishing, picnicking, camping... and boating.
The Port is pursuing expansion to the west, primarily for increasing its
campsite capacity. A non-profit community organization known as Friends
of Skamokawa is working in association with the Port to develop public
and visitor-oriented improvements in Skamokawa. Planned improvements
include development of a walking1path and foot bridge along Skamokawa
Creek, acquisition and redevelopment of the historic Redmen Hall as a
multi-use facility, and development of a public waterfront area to be
named "Skamokawa Commons." The planned developments are described in
the Skamokawa Tourism Facilities Preliminary Feasibility Study.

Lands between the Park and Three Tree Point are in both private and
corporate ownership. This is a steep, scenic, and uninhabited area with
poor public access. Parts of it are in commercial timber production.
The tip of Three Tree Point is owned by the Federal Government.

The Corps of Engineers has three authorized projects in this
subarea. One is the Columbia River navigation channel. Another was
authorized in 1919 for a channel 6.5 feet deep, and 75 feet wide from
the mouth of Skamokawa Creek to Skamokawa. This project extends up
Skamokawa Creek approximately to the State Highway 4 bridge, and up
Brooks Slough approximately to the Brooks Slough Bridge. Until 1974,
the common method of maintaining this channel was by pipeline dredge
with disposal along both banks of the creek. The current and probable
future method of maintenance dredging is by propwash agitation. The
third project was authorized in 1930 but has never been carried out. It
provides for a channel 24 feet deep, 150 feet wide, and 2,640 feet long

4-166

in Steamboat Slough. A 250-foot square by 24-foot deep turning basin
was the upstream limit of the project at mile 0.5, Winters Wharf. As of
1987, the Corps of Engineers had no plans to carry out this dredging
project.

There are commercial gillnet drifts all along the Columbia River in
this subarea.

4.36.5. Issues

Visitors to Skamokawa Vista Park will need increased public servic-
es and lodging. There is currently some private housing in this area.
Skamokawa will probably experience slight growth. The rural area behind
Skamokawa is low and diked, and is poorly suited for more intense
development.

Skamokawa Creek and Brooks Slough near Skamokawa are classified
Development because there is extensive navigational use, and some
housing and smali businesses along these water bodies. State and
Federal resource agencies have expressed concern over this designation
for the mouths and lower reaches of salmon spawning streams.

The West Fork of Skamokawa Creek and Skamokawa Creek from Dead
Slough north are classified Conservation to help protect existing salmon
runs. With proper watershed practices and good water quality, these
streams have salmon production potential.

Gillnet fishermen have expressed concern over in-water activities
which interfere with commercial fishing. Major areas of conflict
include:

- Sinker logs from log rafts;

- Debris uncovered by dredging; and

- Dredged material disposal.

- Requirements that conflicting activities avoid gillnet drifts
whenever possible; and

- Requirements that gillnet drift captains be consulted concerning
timing and location of in-water activity.

4-167

4.36.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The following aquatic areas are designated Development:

1. The Main Navigation Channel plus a flowlane disposal area on both
sides (either 600 feet wide or to the 20-foot bathymetric contour,
whichever is narrower);

2. Skamokawa Creek downstream from Dead Slough; and

3. Brooks Slough.

The following aquatic areas are designated Rural:

1. Skamokawa Creek upstream from Dead Slough; and

2. The West Fork of Skamokawa Creek.

Remaining aquatic areas are designated.Conservation.

The following shorelands are designated Rural:

1. Shorelands above Dead Slough.

The following shorelands are designated Conservation:

1. Shorelands between Three Tree Point and the section line between
Section 7 of.T9N R6W; and Section 12 of T9N R7W.

2. Shorelands on Price Island.

Remaining shorelands are designated Development.

One Dredged Material Disposal site is listed in the 1986 Columbia
River Estuary Dredged Material Management Plan for this subarea:
Wk-B-33.4. The site is designated for material from Skamokawa Creek and
Skamokawa Bar, but it can be used for other projects.

A 1.5-acre mitigation site is designated in Skamokawa Vista Park in
the 1987 Columbia River Estuary Mitigation and Restoration Plan.

The regulatory shoreline boundary in this subarea is 200 feet from
the Columbia River shoreline, the Skamokawa Creek shoreline, the Brooks
Slough shoreline, the Steamboat Slough shoreline, and the West Fork of
Skamokawa Creek shoreline.

4-168

4.36.7. Subarea Policies

2. In-water activities that may leave snags in gillnet drifts shall
avoid drifts whenever possible. If a drift cannot be avoided, _the
project sponsor shall notify the drift captain.

3. The mitigation site in this subarea can be used as mitigation only
for projects that provide direct economic benefits to Wahkiakum
County.

4-169

Subarfa Boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
R:Quu::Io,ly 6ho,1::&Ad Boundary (OR)
R 9 ,o y Sho Ina Boundary
0 a n a I I o n8 o u n d a r I a 0C@@ _@- -1 - - .-@-
RS 60' Cs 60

0 a a I g n a I I o n a
S h 0 r a I a n d Aquatic

NS N a t u r a I NA
Cs C o n a a r v a t I o nCA
A S R u r a I R A
Ds 0 a v 0 10 p m a nD A
WDS Water-Dependent Development RS 20

City Limit,
RA

D r a d Q 0 4SAStotial DI-PO--I Site

Mir r
loation to .. . . . . a K X X x RS 200' RS

%
CS 200' DS 200' RA
z"A M 14
CA
0 DA'
Three.T P int,@@ ."oo
Wk-B-33.4
ad

%C
;C1i'2,.z;_'i'ck @is

SCALE IN FEET
2000 1000 0 2000

4.36. Skamokawa to Three Tree Point
';@Th,r,e,e\,Tree @Poin-*,*Po
0*

4.37. THREE TREE POINT TO HARRINGTON POINT

4.37.1. General Description

This subarea includes the Brookfield log handling facility, the
communities of Pillar Rock and Altoona, and aquatic and shoreland
between Three Tree Point and Harrington Point. Aquatic areas between
the shoreline and the State line are included. The subarea is under the
jurisdiction of Wahkiakum County.

4.37.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic portions of this subarea include the Columbia River out
to the 20-foot contour and small tidal marshes and swamps west of Three
Tree Point and adjacent to Jim Crow Creek.

The aquatic physical and biological characteristics are similar to
those in the adjacent channel (see Estuary Channels and River Channels
Subarea Plans). The nearshore areas are migration routes for
subyearling fall Chinook salmon. Two bald eagle pairs feed along the
shoreline and in the adjacent water areas.

4.37.3. Shoreland Features

The shoreline topography is generally steep and unsuitable for most
activities other than timber production and private residences. Tide-
land soils occur only in the Brookfield area around the mouth of Jim
Crow Creek. This area is largely in timber production.

Wildlife in this area is largely upland species such as deer, bear
and upland birds. Two bald eagle pairs nest in the subarea: one near
Jim Crow Point and one near Altoona.

4.37.4. Human Use

Much of this land has a steep scenic topography, is remote and
sparsely populated, and is used for commercial timber production. There
are old cannery buildings at Pillar Rock and Altoona now used by qommer-
cial fishermen for storage.

L.
Most of the area is used for waterborne commerce., timber production
or rural residences. This area is sparsely populated; most people live
at Pillar Rock, Altoona or between Pillar Rock and Elliott Point. Lands
adjacent to the planning area are mostly in timber production. Within
the planning area, ownership is mostly corporate and individual. The
shoreline from Three Tree Point to Brookfield, and Jim Crow Point to

4-171

Pillar Rock:is inaccessible by road. Brookfield is accessible via a
logging road. Public road access ends at Pillar Rock.

Few industrial sites in this subarea are actively used. There is a
log handling facility west of the mouth of Jim Crow Creek. There once
were major salmon canneries at Pillar Rock and Altoona, but they have
been closed for many years. The cannery sites now are used for boat
moorage, net drying racks, and equipment storage. Aquatic uses include
commercial gillnet fishing and sturgeon fishing.

4.37.5. Issues

The potential for development in this area is limited by poor
access, limited public facilities, and landslide topography. Brook-
field., with deep water access, road access, and backup land, has some
potential for industrial development. The fish-producing capacity of
Jim Crow Creek could be improved. Altoona has been discussed as a
possible port site because of its access to deep water, but the road
system connecting Altoona with markets to the north and east is poor. A
new road connecting Grays River with Pe Ell may be necessary before this
port development could occur. The tourist potential in this area is
untapped.

Gillnet fishermen have expressed concern over in-water activities
which interfere with commercial fishing. Major areas of. conflict
include:

- Sinker logs from log rafts;

- Debris uncovered by dredging; and

- Dredged material disposal.

- Requirements that conflicting activities avoid gillnet drifts
whenever possible; and

- Requirements that gillnet drift captains be consulted concerning
timing and location of in-water activity.

Although Wahkiakum County is generally adequately served by exist-
ing boat ramps, a potential boat ramp site exists near Altoona. The
impact of new boat ramps on adjacent property is a concern in this
subarea.

4-172

4.37.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The aquatic area adjacent to the Development shoreland around the
mouth of Jim Crow Creek is designated Development out to the 20 foot
contour. Remaining aquatic portions of this subarea are designated
Conservation.

The shoreland from east of Pillar Rock to Harrington Point is
designated Rural. The shoreland from the eastern boundary of the
abandoned rock pit upriver from Brookfield to the western boundary of
Brookfield is designated Development. The remaining shoreland in this
subarea is designated Conservation.

The regulatory shoreline boundary is 200 feet inland from MHHW
along the Columbia River shoreline and the Jim Crow Creek shoreline.

4.37.7. Subarea Policies

1. Prior to approval of in-water activities with the potential for
affecting fisheries, the project sponsor shall notify local drift
captains, the Columbia River Fisherman's Protective Union and the
Northwest Gillnetter,s Association. The Washington Department of
Fisheries shall also be consulted to determine project timing and
methods that will minimize impacts on the fishery.

2. In-water activities that may leave snagg in gillnet drifts shall
avoid drifts whenever possible. If a drift cannot be avoided, the
project sponsor shall notify the drift captain.

4-173

6ubat*a Boundary .....................................

A gu ,IF.he In* Boundary (WA)
Designation Boundaries CE) -k- -1 - -
RS 50* CS 60

Do signat Ions
$CA
Shoreland Aquatic 1000 loo

NS Natural NA
CS Conser,vation CA
AS R u r a I RA
DS 0 a v a I Q pa n IDA CS 200'
CS 200'

DS 2
DS 200'
CA RS 200', CS 200'
............. Jim Cro
DA
41 Pilla,@ Rock' PO int A CA

..........
J---@ A
.. ............................ ............................

Jim Crow Sands

4.37. Three Tree Point to Harrington Point

4.38. GRAYS BAY AND TRIBUTARIES

4.38.1. General Description

This subarea extends from the state line through Grays Bay and up
Grays and Deep Rivers and Eden Valley to the extent of tideland soil,
including the community of Deep River and part of the Campbell Creek
Valley. In the Grays River valley, the area goes to about halfway
between the communities of Rosburg and Grays River, and partially up the
Seal River valley north of State Highway 4. The low lying lands in Eden
Valley are also included to a point approximately one and one-half miles
upstream from the mouth of Crooked Creek. The entire subarea is under
the jurisdiction of Wahkiakum County.

4.38.2. Aquatic Features

Aquatic portions of this subarea include Grays Bay waters and
wetlands, Deep River, Grays River, and other tributaries. The primary
alterations to the subarea over the last century have resulted from
diking activities in the bay's tributaries. Large areas of tidal swamp
have been diked and converted to farmland along Deep and Grays Rivers,
and Eden Valley.

Because Grays Bay contains large tidal flats and many small chan-
nels, water circulation patterns are complex. Numerical models have
provided insight into the factors influencing circulation in Grays Bay.
Much of the tidal flow into and.out of the bay occurs through the
channel along Portuguese and Rocky Points. Wind conditions are impor-
tant factors determining the bay's circulation. Strong north winds
significantly lower the bay's water levels. In addition, tidally-
averaged currents which normally flow to, the north on the eastern end of
the bay change direction and flow to thelsouth under these conditions.
During strong south winds the bay's water level raises and the tidally-
averaged north flowing currents become stronger. Although some of the
factors influencing circulation within the bay have been studied, the
circulatory patterns and current velocities have not been fully charac-
terized.

The Grays Bay Subarea is predominantly a freshwater environment but
exhibits some saline water intrusion during low river discharge. During
low river discharge the flood tide salinity of the bay ranges from 0.5
to 5 ppt and the salinity of the deep channel near Portuguese Point can
exceed 15 ppt.

The sediments of the Grays Bay Subarea have mean grain sizes
ranging from coarse and medium sand in the channels on the west side of
the bay to very fine sand, silt, and clay over much of the remainder of
the subarea.

4-175

The plant types of the Grays Bay Subarea include phytoplankton, is
benthic algae, submergent vascular plants, and tidal marsh and swamp
vegetation. Phytoplankton productivity is low compared with adjacent
subarea. Benthic algal productivity is highest on the east shore tidal
flats of Grays Bay and lowest on the central Grays Bay shoals. The
overall productivity range of the subarea's benthic algae falls between
the high values measured in Youngs and Baker Bays and the low values of
the central estuary. Several freshwater submergent vascular plants
occur in the bay. Sparse growths of pondweeds (PotamogetoE richardsonii
and P. foliosus) appear on the tidal flats in spring and summer and
hornwort (Ceratophyllum demersum) and waterweed (Elodea canadensis) are
often abundant in small pools within the low marshes. In addition, the
benthic macroalga Enteromorpha intestinales var. maxima occurs in Grays
Bay. Grays Bay tidal marshes and swamps contain a wide variety of plant
species. Colonizing low marshes dominated by bulrush ( 'Scirpus validus)
account for about 60% of the low marsh area. These marshes grow along
the shoreline and form several small marsh islands. Shrub and tree
species dominate the swamps of the subarea. Many of the swamps grade
into similar upland vegetation types.

The invertebrate types studied in Grays Bay include benthic infauna
and epibenthic organisms. Important fish prey organisms such as
amphipods (Corophi salmonis) marine worms (Neanthes limnicola), clams
(Corbicula manilensis), and insect larvae (chironomids) dominate the
benthic infauna community. Although total infauna biomass falls below
levels measured in Youngs and Baker Bays, it exceeds biomass levels
found in many other parts of the estuary. The epibenthic zooplankton
community on the tidal flats of *the bay exists in low densities during
the high river discharge periods and very high densities during the low
river discharge period. Sand shrimp are abundant during the low river
discharge period.

Fish utilization of Grays Bay has not been well characterized. The
fish community has only been sampled with bottom trawls; therefore,
mid-water species and species'favoring intertidal habitats have not been
well represented in past studies. Most of the fish found in the bay are
either freshwater species or marine species tolerant of freshwater. Two
marine species, starry flounder and Pacific staghorn sculpin, utilize
the bay year round. Juvenile starry flounder are particularly abundant
in the bay. The freshwater species threespine stickleback, peamouth,
and prickly sculpin are also abundant in the bay. Longfin smelt, an
anadromous species Qhich spawns in the estuary from November through
March., may spawn in the Grays Bay subarea. Smelt ranging in age from
yearlings through adults are very abundant in the western portion of the
subarea in summer and fall. Larval longfin smelt appear in the estuary
in winter and spring and subyearlings utilize the subarea as a nursery
area in summer and fall.

In addition to longfin smelt, several other anadromous species,
including American shad, eulachon, and the salmonids, migrate through
the bay and use the bay as a nursery area. Adult American shad migrate
upriver in June and July. Most of the upstream migrants are destined
for spawning areas upriver from the estuary and do not pass through

4-176

Grays Bay. Some adult shad, however, migrate through the bay to spawn
in Grays and Deep Rivers. Juvenile American shad migrate downriver
primarily in November and December. Juvenile shad, originating from
upstream spawning areas as well as Grays and Deep Rivers use the bay as
a nursery area. Eulachon migrate upriver from December through April
with a peak run in February. Although the main run of eulachon destined
for upriver spawning areas does not utilize Grays Bay, a small run
migrates through the bay to spawn in Grays River. Several salmonid
species utilize the bay as a migration route or nursery area. Sub-
yearling Chinook salmon utilize the bay in spring and summer. These
juvenile Chinook include populations which have migrated from upriver-as
well as from natural spawning areas and a hatchery on Grays River.
Yea-j@ling Chinook and coho and juvenile steelhead migrate through the bay
primarily in spring. The yearling Chinook populations are from upriver
stocks, while the coho and steelhead populations originate both upriver
and in natural spawning areas in Grays River. Coho are also produced in
the hatchery on Grays River.

The Grays Bay Subarea provides habitat for several species of
migratory and resident birds. Two resident waterfowl, common merganser
and mallard, are particularly abundant in Grays Bay. The western grebe,
a migratory species, utilizes the bay in spring, fall, and winter. They
are very abundant when these birds gather in Grays Bay and adjacent
subareas prior to their spring migration. Other migratory species that
winter in the bay or use it as a migration resting point include swans,
canvasbacks, pintails, wigeons, and green-winged teals. Gulls utilize
the bay year round and shorebirds become concentrated on the tidal flats
and low marshes in winter. Three separate nesting pairs of eagles
utilize the bay. Two nests are on Rocky Point and one near Altoona. In
addition, the bay is used by wintering and transient eagles.

Marine mammal utilization of the subarea is low compared with other
regions of the estuary. Harbor seals have been observed feeding in the
bay in spring, fall, and winter.

Aquatic and terrestrial mammals utilize the extensive marshes and
swamps of the Grays Bay Subarea. Muskrat and nutria feed and den in
both the marshes and swamps. Muskrat concentrate in the bulrush low
marshes while nutria utilize mainly the low and high marshes. Beaver
and raccoon feed and den in the subarea's swamps. River otter primarily
utilize the swamps and have been sighted in Grays and Deep Rivers. Deer
periodically feed in the subarea's swamps.

4.38.3. Shoreland Features

The most prevalent soil type in this subarea is a silty clay loam,
which is a very deep, poorly drained soil with a very slow permeability
rate. All of the lands in this subarea are within the 100-year flood-
plain. Flooding occurs nearly every winter which is particularly
serious in the lower valleys. Heavy rains coinciding with storm tides
and high winds cause dike breaching, road washouts, and.flooding of
farms and buildings, presenting a considerable hazard to lowland resi-

4-177

dents. The flooding is thought to be worsened and made more frequent by
the shallow, debris filled channel of Grays River. At the mouth, a bar
develops which acts as a dam behind which flood waters deepen and
overtop the dikes.

Shoreland vegetation is largely agricultural, but there are forest-
ed areas. The agricultural lands are generally diked tidelands. The
shorelands provide wildlife habitat for migrating waterfowl, black-
tailed deer, elk, bear, and smaller furbearers such as muskrat and
nutria. Pigeon Bluff, on the east shore of Grays Bay, is very important
habitat for wild band-tailed pigeons because of mineral-rich water
there.

4.38.4. Human Use

This subarea is mostly agricultural (hay and dairying), with the
wetlands used for recreational hunting. Parts of Grays River and Grays
Bay are used for commercial and sport salmon fishing and some sturgeon
fishing. The adjacent uplands on the east and west side of Grays Bay
and up Deep River are mostly in timber production. Road access is from
State Highway 4. Public services are available At the unincorporated
communities of Grays River, Rosburg, and Deep River.

Industry is limited to small logging companies, custom sawmills,
and the large Weyerhaeuser sorting yard and associated log handling
equipment along Deep River. There is extensive in-water log storage in
Deep River. Log rafting and sorting areas, a truck repair yard, and log
haul road lie immediately adjacent to the community of Deep River. Both
the river and the community arehistorically associated with the timber
industry.

There is a Department of Wildlife boat ramp at the Rosburg Bridge
on Grays River. There are two' structures on the National Register of
Historic Places: The Grays River Covered Bridge, and the Deep River
Pioneer Lutheran Church.

4.38.5. Issues

Agricultural and low-lying forest areas will probably remain in
those uses, perhaps with some increasing residential use. Industrial
development will most likely be related to wood products in the Deep
River area. The Weyerhaeuser sorting yard may expand north and east;
small operations may expand farther downstream along Deep River; log
handling and storage operations may expand around the community of Deep
River.

Certain forest practices, such as the construction of logging
roads, clear-cutting, and clearing of riparian vegetation, result in
significant increases in sediment loads to streams, deterioration of
spawning habitat ("choking" of spawning gravels) and increases in

4-178

turbidity and water temperatures. The Washington Shoreline Management
Act specifies that local jurisdictions shall allow a maximum of thirty
percent of merchantable timber to be cut in any ten-year period for
those areas within 200 feet landward of the ordinary high water mark on
shorelands of statewide significance. Local governments have regulatory
discretion on timber harvesting methods within designated shorelands.
There is a need to ensure compliance with Shoreline Management Act and
Forest Practices Act standards as well as to tailor timbering practices
to topography, drainage patterns and fisheries habitat values.

The Washington Department of Natural Resources has leased large..
state-owned portions of Grays Bay for oil and gas exploration. There
are similar leases for the rest of the shoreline east to Puget Island,
and west to the mouth of the Columbia River.

For most of the shorelands in this subarea, the current (and
logical future) use is agriculture. The forested area on the west side
of the mouth of Grays River is very low and undiked and may be suitable
for agricultural use only after extensive modification.

Those areas along Deep River designated as Development include
existing industrial sites, areas where new facilities are currently
being constructed, areas for expansion of existing industrial facili-
ties, and a few homes. Wahkiakum County amended its Shoreline Master
Program designations in 1985 for portions of the shoreland and aquatic
areas in Deep River to Urban to facilitate water-dependent industrial
development of a site with good water and road access. 'The community of
Deep River and the adjoining log handling facility have a history of
intensive use. Some of the land west of the main line road is leased
for agriculture but represents a possible industrial expansion site.
The triangular piece of land across from the community of Deep River
also has the potential for industrial expansion.

The Deep River development site may contain nontidal wetlands under
Federal Section 404 jurisdiction. Wetlahd losses associated with
development of this site may require mitigation.

A significant aspect of the plan in this subarea is the recognition
of the natural resource value of the tideflats and tidal marshes in
Grays Bay and the protection provided.

Although Wahkiakum County is, in general, adequately served by
existing boat ramps, a potential new boat ramp site exists at the
community of Deep River. The impact of new boat ramps on existing
adjacent properties is a concern in this subarea.

4.38.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The following aquatic areas are designated Development: the
authorized Deep River channel between Rocky Point and Deep River; the
proposed channel for Grays River between the Rosburg Bridge and its

4-179

junction with the Deep River channel; the waters of Deep River between
the community and the triangular shoreland parcel across from the town;
and the water between the channel and the Development shoreland.

Hitchcock Creek and Crooked Creek are designated Conservation, as
is Campbell Creek downstream to its junction with Lassila Creek.

The subtidal portions of Grays Bay are designated Conservation,
except for the designated*Deep River Channel (Development), and shallow
intertidal areas (Natural). A 100-foot wide conservation band surrounds
most of the Bay between the shore and the Natural designation.

The following shoreland areas are classified Rural: the shorelands
of Hitchcock Creek; the shorelands of Eden Valley; the shorelands of
Grays River Valley except on the west bank at the mouth; the shorelands
on the west bank of Grays Bay and Deep River up to the log handling
facility on the downstream edge of Deep River; the shorelands from
Miller Point up the east bank of Deep River approximately 3/4 of a mile;
the shorelands between the Weyerhaeuser sorting yard and the State
Highway 4-Deep River Bridge to the community of Deep River, except as
otherwise noted; and the shorelands from the community of Deep River
along both forks of Deep River to the planning boundary, except as
otherwise noted.

The following shoreland areas are classified Development: the
community of Deep River and adjoining log handling facility, a triangu-
lar shoreland parcel across from the community of Deep River; the shore-
land north of the community of Deep River along the Crown Zellerbach
main line log road and west to the planning boundary; and the shoreland
along the east bank of Deep River from a point approximately 3/4 of a
mile from Millers Point upstream'to where the unnamed slough turns east
on the Weyerhaeuser property between the sorting yard and the State
Highway 4-Deep River Bridge.

Remaining shorelands are 'designated@Conservation.

A mitigation site on Deep River is identified in the 1987 Columbia
River Estuary Restoration and Mitigation Plan.

The following dredged material disposal sites are identified in the
1986 Columbia River Estuary Dredged Material Management Plan for this
subarea: Wk-S-20.7, Wk-S-21.1, Wk-S-22.9, Wk-S-22.4.

The regulatory shoreline boundary is 200 feet landward of MHHW
along Deep River, Grays River, Crooked Creek, Hitchcock Creek, Sisson
Creek and Seal Slough.

4.38.7. Subarea Policies

1. Notwithstanding the Natural and Conservation designations in Grays
Bay, the construction of a channel or channels for flood control

4-180

and navigational access in the bay shall be permitted as agreed to
by Wahkiakum County and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers.

2. The mitigation site in this subarea can be used as mitigation only
for projects that provide direct economic benefits to Wahkiakum
County.

4-181

W
Fo

ib
14
En

cr
r.-
rt

Co
W

M- 1% DS
200' RA

DS IRS
CA
S IRS 200'
W k - S - 2 1 1

DS
200' R S
200'
R S -*CS A
200' D S

CS200,
W k S 2 0. 7 S IRS 200'
RS200'% /..I
OCA 100' IRS
W k - S - 2 2.
Wlk-S@r-22-4

CS 200,
RS 200' CA
--CA 100 %
NA RS IRS
V G R A YS
C IRS 2*00'
100

CA
Rocky Pt. . 6;@ NA

z
z0 R S 2 0-T
:DU
0
U
BAY 403

Pigeon Bluff
a** CA
s

Harringt in Pt@ Altoona

...........

WASlilNGTON
REG@ON

6b a t 8 o u n d a r y .....................................
R:,,u::I,.oly 6110, Sound.,,Y (OR)
R ou ,y alto ::InaBounds Y (WA) )
Designation Boundaries C,@ -A- -1 -- - -
RS lics 60
j'h . , -.IdDesignation. Aquatic

NS Natural IN A
CS Conservation C A SCALE IN FEET
RS R u r a I RA
os Development DA
WDS Wator-Dapondent Development

Dredged Material I[-, . . . I Sit.

Mitigation Site it a a s x a a K

4.39. KNAPPTON/FRANKFORT

4.39.1. General Description

T
.his subarea includes shoreland and aquatic areas between the
Astoria-Megler Bridge and the Pacific-Wahkiakum County line. It extends
waterward to the 20-foot bathymetric contour. The subarea is under the
jurisdiction of Pacific County.

4.39.2. Aquatic Features

Aquatic portions of this subarea include open water habitat adja-
cent to the north channel and tidal flats and small fringing marshes in
the subarea's small embayments.

Aquatic physical and biological characteristics of the open water
areas are similar to those in the adjacent channel (see Estuary Channels
Subarea Plan).

The subarea's small embayments are fringed by narrow marshes and
broad tidal flats. Some of the marshes and flats have been separated
from the estuary by the highway. They are culverted to provide tidal
exchange. The vegetation in the subarea's marshes consists primarily of
bulrush (Scirpus validus) and Lyngby's sedge (Carex lyngbyei). The
tidal flats are rich in food prey organisms su-chas amphipods (Corophium
salmonis). The shallow nearshore areas are migration routes for juve-
nile salmonids, particularly subyearling-fall Chinook salmon. Four
nesting pairs of bald eagles feed in the subarea. Their nests are near
Rocky Point, Grays Point, Cliff Point, and Megler.

4.39.3. Shoreland Features

Soils in this subarea are generally silt loams, subject to slippage
and erosion due to steep slopes. There are limited Nuby.soils and
filled lands that are subject to flooding. Shorelands are mostly forest-
ed down to the shoreline. Elk, deer, bear, and bald eagles are rela-
tively common in this area.

4.39.4. Human Use

Existing land and water uses include rural residential, commercial
and sport fishing, pleasure boating, and forest management. Adjacent
upland land use is forest management with small rural areas. There is a
small undeveloped boat ramp near Knappton.

4-185

Shoreland ownership is mostly by timber companies with some private
and state holdings. Tidelands are in state ownership. State Highway
401 follows the shoreline between the Astoria-Megler Bridge and
Knappton. A highway rest area is about one-half mile east of the
bridge.

4.39.5. Issues

There is little development pressure at this time. In the future,
there could be increased demand for public access. As the recreational
fishing industry recovers from the shortened fishing seasons of the
early 1980's, the demand for new public boat ramps will probably in-
crease. Although public boat ramps provide economic benefits to nearby
communities, they sometimes also result in traffic and parking impacts
and shoreline erosion from boat use.

Two areas that have potential for recreational access are identi-
fied in this subarea. One is an outcropping on the west end of Hungry
Harbor. The other is the existing boat ramp at the old saw mill site at
Knappton.

A shoreline trail between Knappton and Frankfort would provide
low-intensity access to a long stretch of shoreline. Easements or
outright purchase of private property would be needed for this project.

4.39.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The aquatic portions of thi's subarea are designated as follows:

Natural

- Nearshore intertidal areas between Pacific/Wahkiakum. County line
and the section line between Sections 8 and 17, T9N R9W.

- Off-shore intertidal areas.

Conservation

- Nearshore intertidal areas between the Astoria/Megler Bridge and
the section line between Sections 8 and 17, T9N R9W.

- All other aquatic areas.

The shorelands are designated Conservation, except for a Rural
designation for the area of residential development at Knappton ( in
Section 17, T9N R9W), and a Natural designation for the state-owned
lands from Portuguese Point to Frankfort (not including the old quarry).

4-186

The regulatory shoreline boundary is 200 feet from the Columbia
River shoreline throughout this subarea.

4.39.7. Subarea Policies

1. This subarea has potential for expanded public recreational access.
The boat launching ramp at the old saw mill site at Knappton should
be improved and maintained with adequate parking for cars and
trailers.

2. The feasibility of developing a shoreline trail from Knappton to
the old town of Frankfort should be investigated. This would
provide low-intensity access to a long stretch of shoreline.

4-18?

collr(,

CS
CS 200' 200'

NA
Kn-ppion N S Or.tuguCs
2 00'

CA ...... .............
R'S 200' .................. rays Pt.
............... .....
..........................

prif pt.
00
co C
CS 200'

Subarea Boundary ...............

and Sun4I a'Y
R 0 a Y sh Ina Bounder
R 11 U. 11 0 11 Y S 11 0. 11

443 Soundarloa
@@t. Em" 5,

Shoreland AQ

NS Natural
CS Cons Bev& tIon
RS Rural
08 Development

4.39. Knappton/Frankfort

4.40. MCGOWAN

4.40.1. General Description

This subarea includes shoreland and aquatic areas between the
Astoria-Megler Bridge and Chinook Point. It extends waterward to the
20-foot bathymetric contour. Most of Fort Columbia State Park is
included. The subarea is under the jurisdiction of Pacific County.

4.40.2. Aquatic Features

Aquatic areas include shorefront beaches and water areas along.the
north channel of the Columbia River. The beach is composed of coarse,
sandy sediments with gravel and larger rock.

Aquatic physical and biological characteristics are similar to
those in the adjacent channel (see Estuary Channels Subarea Plan).
There are small fringes of marsh vegetation along the more protected
portions of the beach. Tw *o nesting pairs of bald eagles feed in the
subarea. Their nests are located near Megler and on Scarboro Hill.

4.40.3. Shoreland Features

Shorelands include a narrow fringe of steep forested land and some
flat land around McGowan. Soils in this subarea are generally silt
loams or silty clay loams. Shoreland hazards include possible slides in
steep areas and erosion of the river shoreline, which is riprapped to
retard erosion.

Wildlife values of the shorelands aie moderate. The highway
running along the shoreline creates a barrier between aquatic and upland
areas. Deer, elk, bear, bald eagle, hawks, waterfowl, small mammals and
other wildlife are relatively common in the area.

4.40.4. Human Use

Highway 101 is the dominant developed feature in this subarea.
Land and water uses include commercial and sport fishing, recreational-
boating, forest management, and shoreland recreation at Fort Columbia
State Park.

Tidelands are nearly all in private ownership, except for state
owned areas around Chinook Point. Shoreland ownership is private around
McGowan and corporate in the forested areas. The beach in this area
gets some recreational use at low tide for beachcombing and walking.

4-189

Fort Columbia State Park is a regionally-significant historical and
recreational resource. Improvement of its facilities, consistent with
maintaining the natural and scenic character, will enhance these values.

4.40.5. Issues

There is little development pressure or potential in this area.
Very little buildable land exists, except around McGowan. Development
constraints such as a high water table limit development there.

4.40.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

All aquatic portions of this subarea are designated Conservation,
except nearshore intertidal areas between Chinook Point and the section
line between Sections 22 and 23, T9N R8W, which are designated Natural.

The shoreland areas between McGowan and the Astoria-Megler Bridge
are designated Rural. The remaining shorelands west of McGowan to
Chinook Point are designated Conservation.

The regulatory shoreline boundary is 200 feet form the Columbia
River shoreline throughout this subarea.

4-190

Subarea Boundary ................
11:gu:,,o,,y Sho, 0 . nd a, y (( 0
R gu a, o y Sho :!InaBounds y W

Designation Boundaries
Scarboro Hill Desionationa
Ch.,.I..d Aqu

HS
CS con a v C
AS R u r a I R
DS Development D

C 8
Chinoo
CS 200'

McGowan

RS 200'

@PACIFIC COUNTY
S C A L E IN FEET
2000 1000 0 2000 LAT@Sop @C
OUNTY

4.40. McGowan

4.41. CHINOOK

4.41.1. General Description

This subarea includes the unincorporated community of Chinook and
adjacent aquatic areas of Baker Bay. A special district, the Port of
Chinook, is included. The subarea is under the jurisdiction of Pacific
County.

4.41.2. Aquatic Features

Aquatic portions of this subarea include nearshore wetlands, the
Chinook Boat Basin and part of Chinook Channel. Aquatic areas are
extremely shallow except for the navigation channel and basin.

Aquatic physical and biological characteristics are similar to
those described in the Baker Bay Subarea Plan.

4.41.3. Shoreland Features

Soils in this subarea include the Westport and Yaquina associa-
tions, and filled land with low slope. The filled area-is east of the
boat basin and much of it is a stockpile site for dredged material
disposal. Most of the shorelands are developed for residential and
commercial uses.

Wildlife value of the shorelands is moderate inland from Chinook.
Deer beaver, and other small mammals inhabit the area.

4.41.4. Human Use

The unincorporated community of Chinook and the Port of Chinook
include residential, commercial, and industrial uses. Boat moorage,
navigation, and dredged material disposal are associated with port
operations. Tideland ownership is a mixture of private and state.
Shoreland ownership is mostly private and the Port of Chinook. The Port
of Chinook moorage facility is the third largest in the estuary, with a
capacity of 323 vessels. The Port of Chinook also has a boat ramp.

4.41.5. Issues

The Port of Chinook has significant potential for expansion. The
The 200 mile Exclusive Economic Zone has stimulated additional demand
for moorage of larger commercial fishing vessels. However, the "El

4-192

Nino" event and shortened fishing seasons in the early 1980's depressed
the commercial and recreational fishing industries. The Port of Chi-nook
is beginning to recover from this depressed period.

Severe shoaling problems throughout Baker Bay (see Baker Bay
Subarea Plan) are threatening the navigation channel into the Port of
Chinook. Dredging to maintain the channel has become increasingly
expensive and more frequently necessary. Adequate disposal area for
-dredged material is a growing problem. The viability of the third
largest mooring basin in the estuary is threatened.

Although the nature and extent of the navigational access problems
in Baker Bay have received careful attention during the CREST planning
process, the scientific research and engineering studies necessary to
solve these problems are beyond the scope of this plan. Accordingly,
this plan provides for the future resolution of these problems without
determining the exact measures which may be necessary. Possible solu-
tions to the navigation channel problems being considered include
channel realignment and alteration of the bay's circulation to increase
scouring in the channel.

The planning process included discussion of the appropriate areas
for Port expansion. Expansion areas are allowed for both to the west
and east of the basin.

The conversion of Chinook Park to overnight use has resulted in
heavy use by tourists and complaints from local residents that they can
no longer enjoy the park. There.is a need for day-use facilities at the
park.

4.41.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The existing navigation channel is designated Development. In the
event that a realignment of the channel is agreed to, the new channel is
also designated Development by this plan. The present facilities and
future expansion plans of the Port of Chinook are accommodated by a
Development designation for the aquatic area between Olsen Street and
Cherry Street, extending 500 feet out from the shoreline.

The remaining aquatic portions of the subarea are designated
Natural where there are intertidal wetlands, and Conservation for
subtidal aquatic areas.

Shorelands east of Chinook Park are designated Conservation. West
of Chinook Park the shorelands.are designated Development. Shorelands
between Olsen and Cherry Streets waterward of Water Street are designat-
ed Water-Dependent Development.

One dredged material disposal sites is listed and described in the
1986 Columbia River Estuary Dredged Material Management Plan for this
subarea: Pa-S-8.8. This site is used in connection with dredging in
the Chinook boat basin and the Chinook Channel.

4-193

The regulatory shoreline boundary is the 100-year floodplain,
except between Chinook Point and the section line between Sections 16
and 21, T9N RSW, where it is 200 feet from the shoreline of the Columbia
River.

4.41.7. Subarea Policies

1. Expansion of the Port of Chinook and its entrance channel should be
done in such a way as to minimize damage to aquatic productivity,
maintain water quality,and flushing, and avoid aggravating the
shoaling problems of the bay.

2. The Development Aquatic area east of the present Port facilities
should be designated and utilized as a dredged material disposal
site.

3. Day-use-only facilities should be developed at Chinook Park so that
both tourists and residents may enjoy the park. This may require
some reduction in the size of existing camping facilities.

4. This plan recognizes and provides remedies for the navigational
access problems in Baker Bay. The local governmental bodies,
relevant agencies and interested parties shall continue to pursue
the resolution of those problems. Approved channel realignments
and/or improvements shall be pe@-_mitted notwithstanding the designa-
tions of this plan.

4-194

r, d I Y1,11"
Ragu@:tory Shot
,:,land Boundary (OR)
R.Qu tofy Sho $no Boundary (WA,)@

Designation Boundaries
RS CS

Designations

NS Natural NA
CS conservation CA
RS Rural RA
08 Development DA
WDS Water-DependOnt Development
NA
City Limits

Dredged Material Disposal site

a DA
DS
$CA Chinook
P a - S 8. 8

CA@-@

D S
200'

a
2oo, Scarboro Hill
NA

Chinook Pt.

0, SCALE IN FEET

2000 1000 0 2000
.. ...... . .. . .....

4.41. Chinook

4-195

4.42. CH INOOK RIVER

4.42.1. General Description

This subarea covers most of the drainage basin of the Chinook River
and includes the tideland soils, fringing marshes along Baker Bay, and
the waters and wetlands of the river. The subarea is under the juris-
diction of Pacific County:.

4.42.2. Aquatic Features

Aquatic portions of this subarea include fringing tidal marshes and
swamps along the shoreline and open water areas at the mouth of the
Chinook River. This subarea has undergone substantial changes in the
past century. The Chinook River floodplain was once a large tidal marsh
and swamp partially separated from the bay by sand dunes. The Chinook
River floodplain was dikdd and converted to agricultural land in the
early 1900's. The fringing marshes of the subarea formed after jetty
construction eliminated ocean wave action against the Bay's shoreline.

Aquatic physical and biological characteristics are similar to
those described in the Baker Bay Subarea Plan. Bird and wildlife
habitat is extensive in the tidal marsh and swamp area south of the
Chinook River mouth. The subarea is a feeding area for a pair of bald
eagles which nests on Scarboro Hill and for wintering an'd transitory
eagles.

4.42.3. Shoreland Features

Soils along Highway 101 are generally loamy fine sand. In the
floodplain area silty clay loams are found. These are good' agricultural
soils. High erosion and flood potentials exist. The shorelands are
mostly cleared of timber for agricultural use with limited forest
acreage. Nontidal wetlands include the Chinook River, several associat-
ed sloughs, and some low wet areas of pasture. Wildlife values are high
in much of the subarea.

4.42.4. Human Use

Existing uses include agriculture, rural housing, recreation, and
an industrial site at the mouth of the Chinook River. The facilities on
this industrial site, which are connected with proposed mining of black
sands, are presently unused. This area receives recreational usage by
hunters and those who enjoy watching wildlife.

4-196

4.42.5. Issues

There is presently little pressure for additional development in
this area. The potential does exist, however, for industrial and
residential development. Mineral leases exist below mean high tide on
both public and private tidelands. The existing industrial area,
although not currently used, may not be compatible with adjacent trailer
parks and rural housing.

The peninsula at the mouth of the Chinook River between Highway 101
and Baker Bay has potential as a possible park or waterfront access
point. This location would offer both visual and physical access to
Baker Bay and the large wetland area directly adjacent.

Siltation of the Chinook River has reduced historical runs of
anadromous fish that use this river. A 1963 study by the Soil Conserva-
tion Service recommended dredging the river to improve drainage. Such
dredging would also enhance fisheries in the river, particularly for
salmon returning to the Sea Resources Hatchery.

4.42.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The state-owned wetlands and the remaining aquatic areas of the
Chinook River are designated Conservation. The fringing marshes along
Baker Bay to the 3-foot bathymetric contour are designated Natural.
Aquatic areas deeper than 3 feet below MLLW are designafed Conservation.

Privately-owned nontidal freshwater wetlands east of Chinook are
designated Rtiral. The privately-owned areas of tideland soils used for
agriculture to the east of Highway 101 are designated Rural. The
state-owned land east of Highway 101 is designated Conservation. West
of Highway 101, the shorelands are Rural, except for. the existing
industrial site which is designated Development.

There are two dredged material disposal sites listed in the 1986
Columbia River Estuary Dredged Material Management Plan for this sub-
area: Pa-S-8.1 and Pa-S-8.9. Site No. 8.1 is a low priority site
designated for a.future large project such as realignment of the Chinook
Channel.

The regulatory shoreline boundary along the Chinook River is the
100-year floodplain.

4-197

RS
RS

DS RS

N
ok

RS
200'

Cs
8X 9
P a

SCALE IN FEET
2000 1000 0 2000

6.b.foe Boundary .....................................
R090;:,101y Shor:11.rid Boundary (OR) Chinook
Re '. 0 ,y shor Ine Bound& y (WA) )
O.algnat(oft Boundaries -A-1-i
RS60'__@Cs 60

i'_h.,.l.nd Aquatic

Hs Natural NA
Cs C o n a 0 r v a I I o nCA
RS Rural RA
Ds 0 a v a 10 p . a n tDA
WDS Water-Dependent Development

City Limits

D,edoed Materiel Dfopo.al Site

4.42. Chinook River

4-198

4.43. BAKER BAY

4.43.1.. General Description

This subarea includes the aquatic areas of Baker Bay and the Sand
Islands. It is bounded by the west side of the Ilwaco navigation channel and
by the shoreline to the north and east. On the east it is bounded by Chinook
Point, and by the 30 foot depth contour to the south. The Sand Islands are
the only shorelands in this subarea. The Town of Ilwaco and the Port of
Ilwaco are not included in this subarea. The subarea is under the jurisdi ,c-
tion of Clatsop and Pacific Counties.

4.32.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic portion of this subareaincludes the waters and wetlands of
Baker Bay out to the North Channel. Prior to construction of the south jetty
in the 1890's, Baker Bay was an open water environment, very exposed to winds
and waves. Sheltered anchorage and deep w aterIwere provided at and behind
Cape Disappointment; most of the bay was'navigable. The mouth of the Colum-
bia River, including Baker Bay, was an extremely dynamic environment.
Channels and sand bars continually changed in size, shape, and position.
Between-1839 and 1848, Sand Island was located mid-river approximately 4.3
miles south of Cape Disappointment. B y 1870, the island had naturally
shifted 1.55 miles to the north to a position 2.75 miles south of Cape
Disappointment..

The natural northerly movement of Sand Island continued until 1885 when
South Jetty construction began. While the jetty was being built, Sand Island
moved into Baker Bay and enlarged. By 1910, the island stabilized in approx-
imately its present location due to changes in current flow patterns result-
ing from the new jetty. The movement and stalbilization of Sand Island in
Baker Bay has been the largest recorded shoal'ing event in the bay.

Shoaling continued to occur rapidly in the bay through the 1930's.
Factors contributing to this shoaling included the shelter from strong
currents and waves brought on by Sand Island's presence in the bay, the
effects of numerous pilings in the bay, and, possibly, the effects of diking
the Chinook and Wallacut River tidelands and the increased sediment load in
the Columbia River due to upriver logging and agricultural activities.

Sand Island breached and formed two islands in 1940. A great deal of
sediment eroded from the gap between the islands during the occurrence of the
breach. In addition, the newly opened gap resulted in scouring and deepening
of the shallow flats immediately north of the islands.

The complex water exchange patterns of Baker Bay's three entrances
determine the bay's circulation. A mathematical model of the bay provides
the only information available on circulation. Much of the water exchange
between the bay and the main channel of the estuary occurs through the
entrance between East and West Sand Islands. The Ilwaco and Chinook Channel

4-199

entrances exhibit maximum ebb flows about 2 hours before high water and
maximum flood flows about 2 hours after high water. The situation is re-
versed in the entrance between East and West Sand Islands, with maximum ebb
flows about 2 hours after high water and maximum flood flows 2 hours before
high water. The currents in the interior of the bay are much weaker than the
currents in the bay's entrances.

Winds have a significant impact on the bay's water levels, currents, and
waves. During the prevailing north and northwest winds of summer, water
levels drop and the circulation patterns in the bay change. For example, an
average north-flowing current in the east portion of the bay reverses and ,
flows south. During the prevailing south winds of winter, water levels rise
in the bay and the average north-flowing current of the east portion of the
bay continues to flow to the north and increases in strength. The windward
shores in the bay receive strong wave action.

Two tributaries flow into the bay but have little affect on the bay's
circulation. The discharge of the Chinook River averages 55 cubic feet per
second while the discharge of the Wallacut River averages 25 cubic feet per
second.

The salinity of Baker Bay ranges from less than 0.5 to greater than 30
parts per thousand (ppt) depending on the tidal stage and the discharge of
the Columbia River. During low river discharge the salinity levels in the
east half of the bay range over the tidal cycle from 0.5 to 30 ppt while the
salinity levels in the western half of the bay range from 5 to 30 ppt.
Salinity levels during high river discharge range over the tidal cycle form
less than 0.5 to 30 ppt.

The sediments of the Baker Bay Subarea are primarily poorly-sorted with
mean grain sizes ranging from fine sand to coarse silt. Very fine sand,
silt, and clay comprise the tidal flats of the inner bay. These tidal flats
tend to have coarser sediments near the shoreline than offshore. Many of the
outer bay's protected tidal flats contain sediments with mean grain sizes in
the very fine sand, silt, and clay@classes during high river discharge
periods and in the medium to fine sand classes during low river discharge
periods. Exposed tidal flats of the outer bay, such as the flat near Chinook
Point, consist of sediments with mean 'grain sizes ranging from medium to fine
sand year round. Sediments with mean grain sizes in the coarse sand class
exist in the subarea on the northeast shore of West Sand Island, the southern
shores of East and West Sand Islands, and in the channel between the islands.

The plant types of the Baker Bay aquatic area include phytoplankton,
benthic algae, eelgrass, and brackish tidal marsh and swamp vegetation.
Phytoplankton productivity has not been measured in the bay. Benthic algal
productivity levels on the tidal flats and low marshes of the subarea rank
among the highest in the estuary. Productivity rates are highest on the more
protected tidal flats on the west side of the bay and lowest on the exposed
tidal flats adjacent to the islands. The tidal flats of the inner bay and
north shoreline exhibit intermediate production levels. Sparse patches of
eelgrass grow on many of the tidal flats of the bay, with highest densities
on the flats adjacent to Ilwaco Channel. The.tidal marshes and swamps of the
subarea form a narrow band around much of the shoreline. Bulrush (Scirpus
americanus) dominates the colonizing (lowest elevation) low marshes while

4-200

Lyngby's sedge (Carex lyngbyei) dominates higher elevation low marshes. The
high marshes con-tain primarily creeping bent grass (Agrostis alba), aster
(Aster subspicatuO, and marsh potentilla (Potentilla palustris). The swamps
contain mainly willow, Sitka spruce, and alder.

Invertebrate types studied in the Baker Bay subarea include benthic
infauna and epibenthic organisms. The benthic infauna consist of a very
productive community dominated by clams, polychaetes, and oligochaetes. The
epibenthic zooplankton community exhibits high densities on the tidal flats
and slopes during spring, summer, and fall. The channels are important
nursery areas for Dungeness crab.

Fish community sampling in Baker Bay has been concentrated on the tidal
flats north of East and West Sand Islands and in Ilwaco Channel. Little is
known about the fish utilization of the inner bay. The dominant fish species
found in the bay include English sole, starry flounder, Pacific staghorn
sculpin, Pacific herring, shiner perch, longfin smelt, and juvenile
salmonids. Other abundant species include prickly sculpin, Pacific tomcod,
snake prickleback, peamouth, and threespine stickleback.

Pacific herring, shiner perch, and longfin smelt spawn in the estuary
and possibly within the Baker Bay subarea. Pacific herring spawn in the
estuary from April through July. Although yearling and older herring have
not been found to be abundant in the bay, herring spawning habitat (eelgrass
beds) does exist in the inner bay. Larval Pacific herring appear in the
estuary in spring and summer and subyearlings utilize Baker Bay as a nursery
area during the same seasons. Shiner perch bear their young.in the estuary
in June and July and perch ranging in age from yearlings through adults are
very abundant in the bay in spring, summer, and fall. Subyearling shiner
perch utilize the bay as a nursery area in summer and fall. Longfin smelt
spawn in the estuary from November through March and smelt ranging in age
from yearl-ings through adults occur in the subarea year round. They are
partic ularly abundant in summer. Larval longfin smelt appear in the estuary
in winter and spring and subyearlings utilize the bay as a nursery area in
summer and fall.

Several salmonid species migrate through the bay and use it as a nursery
area. Subyearling Chinook salmon, originating from upriver populations and
from a hatchery ori the Chinook River migrate through the bay from March
through August. They utilize the bay as a nursery area primarily in spring
and summer but are also present in fall and winter. Yearling Chinook salmon
migrate along the mouth of the bay primarily in spring. Yearling coho
salmon, originating from upriver populations and from a hatchery on the
Chinook River, migrate through the bay primarily in spring. The hatchery on
the Chinook River also produces chum salmon.

Several bird species utilize the Baker Bay Subarea. Surf scoter, a
migratory waterfowl species, winters in the bay. Other migratory waterfowl,
particularly pintail, wigeon, rudy duck, and merganser, also winter in the
bay. Mallard, a resident waterfowl species, feed in the bay and nest in
marshes on West Sand Island. Shorebirds and great blue heron feed in the
tidal flat and low marsh habitats. Shorebirds utilize the tidal flats and
marshes of the entire bay while great blue heron concentrate in the western
portion of the bay. Western and glaucous-winged gulls nest in a large colony

4-201

on East Sand Island in spring, summer, and fall. There is also a large
Caspian tern nesting colony on East Sand Island. The bay is an important
bald eagle feeding area. Two nesting pairs of eagles use the bay. Their
nests are located above Cape Disappointment and Scarboro Hill. The bay is
also used by numerous wintering and transitory eagles.

The harbor seal is the most abundant marine mammal species in Baker Bay.
Seals occupy a haulout site on a sand flat west of Chinook Point and feed
throughout the bay. The numbers of seals utilizing the bay is relatively
low, with fewer than 25 animals found on the haulout at any one time.

Aquatic and terrestrial mammal use of the Baker Bay Subarea is relative-
ly low. The narrow, fringing low marshes do not provide suitable habitat 'for
supporting large populations of mammals. A few muskrat utilize the low
marshes for feeding and some denning activity occurs near the Chinook River.
Most mammal activity is concentrated in the high marsh and swamp near the
Chinook River. These habitats receive use by raccoon, river otter, and deer.

4.43.3. Shoreland Features

East and West Sand Islands comprise the subarea's shorelands. The
islands have sandy sediments and are vegetated primarily by dune grasses and
Scotch broom. There are several open sand areas, primarily at actively used
dredged.- material disposal sites. The southern part of West Sand Island has
some of the last remaining examples of a native dune grass cQmmunities on the
Oregon and Washington coast.

Wildlife values on the islands are high. East Sand Island contains gull
and Caspian tern nesting colonies.

4.43.4. Human Use

The Corps of Engineers uses both East and West Sand Islands for dredged
material disposal. The U.S. Fish and *Wildlife Service and the Corps have an
agreement that specifies procedures for revegetation of the islands. The
Corps of Engineers revegetates the dredged material with a mixture of clover
and perennial grasses and disposes dredged material on a rotating basis to
allow maximum habitat establishment.

Alterations are extensive in Baker Bay. Several thousand pilings from
the old fish traps remain. The Chinook Jetty and pile dikes along the
southern shore of the islands were bui-lt to direct river flow toward the main
navigation channel and prevent erosion of the islands. The southern shore of
East Sand Island is riprapped. The remains of the pier and the rail-road bed
used to unload the material remain on East Sand Island.

Tidelands are owned by the States of Oregon and Washington. East and
West Sand Islands are owned by the federal government. Many of the Washing- 0
ton tidelands have had mineral, oil, and gas rights leased. There are also
leases pending for black sands mining.

4-202

There are three authorized navigation channels in Baker Bay. The
Chinook Channel extends 1.3 miles between the Columbia River and the Chinook
,Basin. It is authorized at 10 feet deep and 150 feet wide. Shoaling prob-
lems in the Chinook Channel are severe; the worst shoal encroaches from
Chinook Point to the east, opposite East Sand Island. The Ilwaco navigation
channel follows a circuitous course between Jetty A to the Port of Ilwaco.
The southernmost half mile of the authorized channel is 16 feet deep and 200
feet wide; the remaining 2.7 miles are 16 feet deep and 15 0 feet wide. The
channel has a moderate shoaling: problem, with the worst shoals at the outer
end and at the final turn into Ilwaco. The Baker Bay East Channel, from East
Sand Island to Ilwaco, is not presently maintained.

4.43.5. Issues

Use conflicts in this subarea include the impacts on aquatic and terres-
trial habitat of dredging, dredged material disposal, and possible future
black sands mining. The eastern portion of the East Sand Island is a nesting
area for Caspian terns. This area has also been used as a disposal site for
maintenance dredging of the Chinook Channel; it is now nearly filled to
capacity. The northwest corner of West Sand Island has been used for dispos-
al and other parts of the island are designated for disposal.

Dredged material disposal by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers at Area D
has been a subject of continuing controversy. A report by the Columbia River
Estuary Study Taskforce (Fox and Benoit: Dredged Material Disposal at Area
P, 1986) found that although a portion of the material disposed at Area D may
enter Baker Bay, that sediment is probably responsible for only a minor
amount of total shoaling in the bay. A more recent study of sediment erosion
and accretion in Baker Bay by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (U. S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Portland Districti: Bathyme ric Differencing in Baker
Bay) found that sediments in Baker Bay had generally accreted until about
1957, when erosion began to exceed accretion., It should be noted, however,
that maintenance dredging is included in the total erosion calculations. Use
of Area D, which is located approximately three-quarters of a mile south of
the Chinook pile dike, has been decreasing. Average annual disposal has
decreased from 1,320,000 cubic yards in the 1971 through 1977 period to
742,000 cubic yards in the 1978 through 1984 period. In 1986, the latest
year for which figures are available, approximately 491,994 cubic yards were
disposed. The majority of sediments disposed at Area D are coarse and settle
quickly. They are transported primarily as bedload. There is evidence that
this sediment moves primarily upstream along the north channel. Principal
sources for the material currently disposed at Area D are the Ilwaco and
Chinook navigation channel, Flavel Shoals, Desdemona Shoals, and the Skipanon
Waterway.

The mineral rights to most of Baker Bay have been leased for black sands
mining. This mining would have unknown impacts on the bay;s hydrology and
biological productivity.

4-203

4.43.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The intertidal areas of Baker Bay are designated Natural. The subtidal
aquatic areas are designated Conservation, except for the two maintained
navigation channels which are designated Development.

The shorelands of the Sand Islands are designated Conservation.

Three dredged material disposal sites are listed in the 1986 Columbia
River Estuary Dredg@',d Material Management Plan: CC-S-3.1 (on West Sand
Island), CC-B-5.8, CC-S-6.8 (on East Sand Island).

A mitigation site in this subarea is described in the 1987 Columbia
River Estuary Mitigation and Restoration Plan.

Both East and West Sand Islands are within the regulatory shoreland
boundary of Clatsop County.

4.43.7. Subarea Policies

1. The local governmental bodies, relevant agencies and interested parties
shall continue to pursue the resolution of the navigational access
problems in Baker Bay.

2. Channel realignments or other improvements must be justified in terms of
hydraulics, sand transport and impacts on maintenance dredging.

3. Areas of future channel realignment shall be designated Development for
the purpose of establishing a new navigation channel.

4. The marshes north of the Sand Islands should be protected.

5. The use of heavy equipment fof activities associated with dredged
material disposal on the Sand Islands is appropriate.

4-204

Subarea Boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Regulatory Sh'or: d Boundary
Regulatory Shor ilanne Boundary
Ilwaco Designation Boundaries CjEA

D a a I ii n a t I o n a

N a t u f a I
CS C o n a a r v a t I o n
NA RS R u r a I
BAKER DS 'Opme
w O:Ve1opennn,
D, Wet r-

City Limits
r:,dgd.-.1sr1a1 Disposal Sit*
n site
g a K K X it 1

CS BAY

-3.1
0
@.n

Sand Island CA NA
@,@D A
Ov

C NA
E. Sand Island C - S - 68

2 .. ..o _0
CA

4.43. Baker Bay

4.44. WALLACUT RIVER

4.44.1. General Description

This subarea covers the drainage basin of the Wallacut River
between the Ilwaco and Chinook River Subareas. It includes tideland
soils around the Wallacut.River, aquatic areas of the river, and the
fringing marsh adjacent to these shorelands along Baker Bay. This
subarea is under the jurisdiction of Pacific County and the Town of
Ilwaco.

4.44.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic portion of the subarea includes fringing tidal marshes
and flats along the shoreline and open water areas at the Wallacut River
mouth. This subarea has undergone substantial changes in the past
century. The Wallacut River floodplain was once a large tidal marsh and
swamp partially separated from the bay by sand dunes. The Wallacut
River,was diked and converted to farmland in the early 1900's. The
fringing marshes of the subarea formed after jetty construction elimi-
nated ocean wave action against the bay's shoreline.

Aquatic physical and biological characteristics are similar to
those described in the Baker Bay Subarea Plan.

4.44.3. Shoreland Features

Most shorelands in this subarea consist of tideland soils (silty
clay loams) with a low slope,,and dune sands. The area of high slope to
the west of the river is made up of Lyte@h soils. The shorelands are
mostly cleared of timber for agricultural use with limited acreage left
in forest. Nontidal wetlands include the Wallacut River and associated
sloughs, and some low wet pasture areas. Wildlife values are high in
much of the subarea. Deer and elk, along with smaller animals, frequent
the area.

4.44.4. Human Use

Existing uses include agriculture, suburban and rural housing and
trailer parks. The primary residential area is the Vandalia subdivi-
sion, north and west of the airfield. The tideland soils are used
extensively for agriculture. Remnants of dikes remain along the
Wallacut River, but are no longer maintained.

Ownership is private and corporate. Existing zoning is for agri-
culture, general development, and residences. Mineral leases exist
below mean high tide (MHT) in the tidelands.

4-206,

4.44.5. Issues

This subarea has significant development potential. Areas immedi-
ately east of Ilwaco have a moderate to steep slope; development should
be designed to avoid erosion and slides.

The Wallacut River has silted in and historical fish runs have been
virtually eliminated. The stream could support chum salmon and possibly
other species if restored-to former conditions.

4.44.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The Wallacut River is designated Conservation between the mouth and
the Highway 101 bridge. The remaining aquatic areas are designated
Natural.

The shoreland area between Yellow Bluff in Ilwaco and the beginning
of the tideland soils is designated Development, as is the area encom-
passing the Vandalia subdivision. The remaining shorelands are Rural.

The regulatory shoreline boundary is the 100-year floodplain
boundary along both the Wallacut River and the Baker Bay shoreline.

4-207

6 u b a f * a 8 o u n d a f y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ala- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11 : go::, o , y 8 h o , Bound aryy ((OR))
R ,u , . y Sho , : i In a Bound& f WA)

Designation Bounder(*$ -Jr -1 - -
RS 60' CIS 60

Designations
Aquatic

NS N a t u f a I NA
cs C 0 A 8 6 r @ a t 10 A CA
RS R u r a I RA
DS Developent 1) A
WDS Waist -Dependent Development

IRS
101 RS S
0), DS
0
00
DS
D S

DS R S
200' RS 200'
Boker, Bay

SCALE IN FEET
2000 1000 0 2000

4.44. Wallacut River

4.45. ILWACO

4.45.1. General.Description

This subarea includes a portion of the Town of Ilwaco, including
the Port of Ilwaco. The town exercises jurisdiction over the area.

4.45.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic portion of this subarea includes the mooring basin,
channel, and nearby waters and wetlands. Water depths are extremely
shallow except in the boat basin and authorized channel. Aquatic
physical and biological characteristics are similar to those described
in the Baker Bay Subarea Plan.

4.45.3. Shoreland Features

The shorelands are heavily developed within the port area with
moorage and service facilities, boat repair and storage, commercial
activities and offices. A town park is located at the base of Yellow
Bluff. There is little bird and wildlife value due to the developed
nature of the area. Adjacent areas have moderate habitat value for
small animals. Soils in the,port area consist entirely of fill materi-
al.

4.45.4. Human Use

Existing land and water uses are dominated by the Port of Ilwaco.
Activities include moorage (1,000 berths), commercial and industrial
operations, offices, and boating., To the west of the Port there are
canneries and a boat yard.

Tideland ownership is mixed, including the Port of Ilwaco, State of
Washington, and private individuals. Shorelands are owned either by the
Port or are privately owned.

4.45.5. Issues

The Port of Ilwaco has potential for expansion. The CREST Marina
Study (1978) found unfilled demand for both recreational and commercial
fishing vessel moorage. The 200 mile Exclusive Economic Zone has
stimulated additional demand for moorages for larger commercial fishing
vessels. The Port of Ilwaco is well-situated, close to the mouth of the
river, to accommodate this demand.

4-209

The existing channel into the Port of Ilwaco has been deepened to
16 feet by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Channel realignment was
examined in the early 1980's, but dropped after the channel was deep-
ened.

4.45.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The navigational access channel is designated Development. The
aquatic area fronting the Port of Ilwaco between the Port's property
lines out to the outer harbor line is designated Development. Tidal
marshes on the east side of this subarea are Natural.

The shoreland area is designated Development.

There is one dredged material disposal site listed in the 1986
Columbia River Estuary Dredged Material Management Plan: Pa-S-3.2. The
site is located at the Port of Ilwaco on fill land. The site is used as
a stockpile for basin and entrance channel maintenance material.

The regulatory shoreline boundary in this subarea is 200 feet
landward of the shoreline.

4.45.7. Subarea Policies

1. Port of Ilwaco and its entrance channel expansion should be done so
as to minimize damage to the aquatic productivity, maintain water
quality and flushing, and avoid aggravating the shoaling problem of
the Bay. Before any further aquatic areas are filled, existing
land areas should be fully utilized and economically feasible
upland alternatives exhausted. Dry boat moorage should be consid-
ered as an alternative to basin expansion.

2. Unless a suitable upland disposal site can be found, the port
should consider maintaining-a stockpile site so that material from
the mooring basin and inner channel can be rehandled.

3. The Development Aquatic designations which are provided to accommo-
date potential future expansion of the Port do not automatically
create the presumption that dredging, filling or other alternatives
will automatically result. Specific proposals for Port expansion
must be justified in terms of available alternatives, water quality
impacts and economic benefits, and must meet other requirements of
the permit process.

4. This plan recognizes navigational access problems in Baker Bay.
Local governmental bodies, relevant agencies and interested parties
shall continue to pursue the resolution of those problems. Approv-
ed channel realignments and/or improvements shall be permitted
notwithstanding the designations of this plan. 0

4-210

Sub&:** Boundary .....................................
ho;:jend Boundary (OR)
'A, U 1 .0 ; YY Sr, h oIne Boundary (WA)
Deeignallon Bouridefloa C@ -A-
R S 6 0'-@C S, 60.

0saiOnatlans
[email protected] Aquatic

Ns Natural NA
CS Conservation CA
RS Rural RA
08 Development DA
WOS Water-Oopendent Development

City Limits
D:adged Material Dispomal Site
M tigat Ion site x z a a a aa K K K it K ax x K a x a at K x xKxxuxx4xX

DS2

11waco

-S-3.2
DS 2061-4.),

DA 0
*a '-@W A

SCALE IN FEET
160
2000 1000 0 2000

4.45. Ilwaco

4-211

4.46. FORT CANBY NORTH

4.46.1. General Description

This subarea includes the shorelands between the northern boundary
of the State Park boat launch ramp and the Ilwaco ciLy limits. The
in-water boundary is the western edge of the entrance channel. The
subarea is under the jurisdiction of Pacific County. It includes parts
of Fort Canby State Park and the U.S. Coast Guard Station.

4.46.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic portions of this subarea include the waters and wet-
lands along the west shore of Baker Bay. Extensive sedge and bulrush
marshes have developed in the smaller embayments. Water depths-are
shallow between the marshes and the channel. The aquatic physical and
biological characteristics are similar to those in the Baker Bay Subarea
Plan.

4.46.3. Shoreland Features

Shorelands include forested areas inland to the limit of Shoreline
Management jurisdiction. Bird and wildlife values are high and include
deer and smaller furbearers. Soils in this area irf-clude the Yaquina and
Zenker associations, and slopes are moderate to steep. Some old forest
exists along the shoreline, predominantly Sitka spruce. There is a bald
eagle nest on the hills between Fort Canby and Ilwaco.

4.46.4. Human Uses

Existing land and water uses include boating, fishing, and housing.
Adjacent uses include forest management, recreation, Coast Guard resi-
dences and operations, and the developed area in Ilwaco. Tidelands are
owned by the Washington Department of Natural Resources or Washington
State Parks. Shorelands are owned by the state and federal governments.

4.46.5. Issues

No major planning issues affecting this subarea were identified
during the original Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan
development or during the 1987 Plan update.

4-212

4.46.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

Intertidal aquatic areas, including marshes and tidal flats, are
designated Natural. Subtidal aquatic areas up to the edge of the
channels side slopes are designated Conservation.

The shoreland designations in this area are Natural in the undevel-
oped portion of the State Park north of the boat launch ramp, and Rural
north to the city limits of Ilwaco.

4.46.7. Subarea Policies

1. The existing loop trail should be extended along the shoreline to
the Town of Ilwaco.

4-213

J J..I

llwaco
N

RS
00
SCALE IN FEET 2200'
2000 1000 0 2000 a 0

NXss o 0
se 0

400 NS se
2001'

Z= cc
c/.) (Z:)
Fo Canby
0

Subarea Boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
R:cu (OR)
u@:'o'fy S'oc:land Bound fyy
A 0 to Y Shor ,In* Bound,&,

Designation Boundaries
RS 60' CS 50

Designation 0
[email protected] Aquatic

NS Natural NA
CS Cons er@s tion CA
RS R u f a I RA
06 06,41opment DA
WDS W.t-000-darwt Oe,.iopmeot

4.46. Fort Canby North

4-214

4.47. CAPE DISAPPOINTMENT

4.47.1. General Description

This subarea extends from the tip of the North Jetty, east to the
western side of the Baker Bay entrance channel. The shoreland area, all
of which is in Fort Canby.State Park or the Coast Guard Base, includes
200 feet of Benson Beach north of the Jetty, all of Cape Disappointment,
the accreted lands to the east of Jetty A, and the shorelands of Baker
Bay north to the northern boundary of the State Park boat launch.
Aquatic areas include portions of Baker Bay west of the navigation
channel between Jetty A and the northern boundary of the subarea; the
waters between Jetty A and the North Jetty in the main Columbia River;
minor sloughs and wetlands behind the North Jetty. This subarea is
under the jurisdiction of Pacific County.

4.47.2. Aquatic Features

The aquatic portions of th e subarea include the nearshore waters
east of Cape Disappointment and the waters between Jetty A and the North
Jetty. Cape Disappointment was the northern side of the Columbia River
mouth prior.to jetty construction. The river mouth has moved seaward
and sediment has accreted north of the jetty since its construction.

Aquatic physical and biological characteristics along the east side
of Cape Disappointment are similar to those described in the Baker Bay
Subarea Plan.. Characteristics o'f the remaining aquatic areas are
similar to those described in the Mouth of the Columbia River Subarea
Plan.

Additional notable biological features of the subarea include the
extensive use of Jetty A tideflats by shorebirds and seabird nesting on
Cape Disappointment. There is a nesting colony of pelagic cormorants on
the cliffs. They feed in the adj 'acent waters. Gulls and pigeon
guillemots have also been observed nesting on the cliffs.

4.47.3. Shoreland Features

Shorelands include beach areas, the rocky promontories of Cape
Disappointment, and accreted land east of Jetty A. Wildlife value is
high in the state park area for deer and smaller furbearing animals.
Gulls, pelagic cormorants and other marine birds predominate on the
cliffs. Soil types include dune-sand (north of North Jetty and east of
Jetty A) and silt and clay loams (on Cape Disappointment). Uplands are
steep and rocky.
0

4-215

4.47.4. Human Use

This subarea is entirely in public ownership. The State of Wash-
ington owns the state park and the federal government owns Cape Disap-
pointment. Existing land and water uses include fishing, boating, State
Park recreational activities, and a Coast Guard Station which includes
both operations and housing.

4.47.5. Issues

The Coast Guard has indicated that it may expand its dock facility.
This project may involve limited filling and placement of piling. Other
potential developments would depend on future plans in the State Park.
Provision has been made for expansion of parking facilities at the North
Jetty.

4.47.6. Aquatic and Shoreland Designations

The rocky intertidal aquatic areas of Cape Disappointment are
designated Natural. The Coast Guard pier and waters between the shore
and channel and within 50 feet on either side of the Coast Guard pier
are designated Development to provide for maintenance and improvement of
the present facilities. All other aquatic areas are des.ignated Conser-
vation.

The North Jetty, Jetty A, the developed shoreland parts of the
Coast Guard base, the Cape Disappointment lighthouse, the Lewis and
Mark Interpretive.Center, and the State Park concession stands are
designated Development. The outermost State Park parking lot is desig-
nated Conservation and should not be expanded. The second parking lot
is designated Development with an expanded area to accommodate future
demand. Additional Conservation designated areas include the low-lying
shoreland areas east of the headland and Jetty A, the lands north of the
North Jetty, the other low-lying undeveloped parts of Fort Canby State
Park, and the 50-foot buffer strips surrounding Development areas.
Other state and federally owned shorelands at Cape Disappointment,
including the rocky bluffs on the south and east, and the old growth
forested areas are designated Natural.

There is one dredged material disposal site listed for this subarea
in the 1986 Columbia River Estuary Dredged Material Management Plan:
Pa-S-3.0. The site could be used to deposit material from maintenance
dredging of the Ilwaco Channel.

The 1987 Columbia River Estuary Mitigation and Restoration Plan
identifies a mitigation site in the subarea.

4-216

S.ba,as Boundary .....................................

A o y Sho In* Sound& WA) Zt
Designation Boundaries C-ED -@- -1 --1
A S 6 0'-lic S'0. IS-)
CA
Designations
Shoreland Aquatic
DS
NS N a t u r a I NA 200A
CS C o A a a f v a I I o nCA
AS Aural RA $4
DS Development DA F t CAbv
WOS Walet-Depandent Development 0

City Limits CA

Dredged material oi.,...i Site
. . . . . . . . . . .
Mitigation Silo x

200'
SCALE IN FEET DS CS
2000 1000 0 2000 + +
0 +

CA
CS

0
DS "so#
...................................................................................................

4.47. Cape Disappointment

5. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

5.1. INTRODUCTION

This section addresses the potential combined effects of certain
activities on the estuary. The primary reason for addressing cumulative
impacts is that they can not be adequately considered during most permit
reviews, yet under certain conditions can become significant planning
issues.

A second reason for considering cumulative impacts in this plan is
that Oregon and Washington local jurisdictions are required by state
statutes to address them. Comprehensive Plan Requirement 5 of Oregon
Statewide Planning Goal 16 states that local jurisdictions must
"Consider and describe in the plan the potential cumulative impacts of
the alterations and development activities envisioned." Washington
local governments are required by the Washington Shoreline Management
Act to evaluate the potential cumulative impacts of certain types of
developments plus other future and past similar developments (WAC
173-14-140(4)). The Washington Environmental Policy Act also requires
consideration of cumulative impacts (WAC 197-11-060(4) and WAC
197-11-792(2c)).

5.2. SCOPE

Discussion of cumulative impacts in this Plan is limited to six
major topic areas. Cumulative impacts on Public Access, Water Quality,
Fisheries, Maritime Commerce, Recreation/Tourism, and Circulation are
identified and discussed. In many cases cumulative impacts are both
positive and negative. Navigation channel maintenance dredging, for
example, generates beneficial impacts with respect to maritime commerce,
and some harmful impacts with respect to fisheries habitat. Public
Access, as another example, iis affected in a positive way by boat ramp
construction, and negatively by riprap shoreline protection. Cumulative
impacts that are significant only in certain estuary subareas are
described in the 'subarea plans in Section 4.

Cumulative impacts on the six estuarine categories of estuarine
resources identified above are generated by a number of activities. The
following are considered in this section:

1. Dredging - New and Maintenance

2. Dredged Material Disposal - Aquatic and Shoreland

3. Filling

4. Riprap

5. Boat Ramps - New and.Expanded

6. Marinas New and Expanded

5-1

7. Moorages - Individual

8. Aquaculture and Fish Hatcheries

9. Port Development

10. River Training.

Some activities with important cumulative impacts on the estuary are not
regulated by this plan, and are not considered in this section. Chief
among these are:

Forestry

Upstream Activities

Activities in the Ocean Outside of the Estuary Planning Area

Fisheries Harvest Allocations

Local Point-source and Non-point Source Discharge

River Discharge Decisions

Navigation.

5.3. CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSIS

5.3.1. Public Access

Activities generating cumulative impacts on public access can both
enhance and reduce opportunities for public access to the waters and
shorelines of the Columbia River Estuary. Public access is treated
broadly here to include both physical and visual access.

The cumulative impact of maintenance dredging projects on public
access is limited and to some extent beneficial. Main navigation
channel maintenance dredging generates no identifiable cumulative
impacts on public access opportunities. Boat ramp and marina access
channel dredging has the cumulative effect of maintaining or improving
small boat access. The cumulative impacts of new dredging on public
access are similar to those of maintenance dredging.

Use of designated shoreland and aquatic dredged material disposal
sites will have little measurable cumulative impact on public access in
the Columbia River Estuary. Beach nourishment will have positive
cumulative effects on public access, but only to the extent that en-
hanced beaches are used by the public.

Filling Columbia River Estuary aquatic areas along the shoreline
will have a generally negative impact on public access. Only limited

5-2

areas along the shoreline are designated for fills, so cumulative
impacts on public access should not be great.

Riprap bank@protection can, under certain circumstances, have
significant negative cumulative impact on public access, especially
physical shoreline access. Riprap can also have beneficial impacts on
public access by protecting marinas and boat ramps..

Boat ramps and marinas have a strongly beneficial cumulative impact
on public access for the boating public. Private individual moorages an
the other hand can have negative cumulative impacts with respect to
public access if allowed to overcrowd particular waterways. Continuous
development of individual moorages along a reach of the Columbia River
Estuary or a tributary can block public shoreline access and inhibit
small boat navigation, having a strongly negative cumulative impact.

Aquaculture and hatchery development may, under certain circum-
stances, generate adverse cumulative impacts on public access. If large
near-shore water a'reas are leased and used for net pens, for example,
public access could be substantially reduced. Pond aquaculture facili-
ties on shorelands, on the other hand, would be expected to have a
little or no adverse. cumulative impact.

Port development is often not fully compatible with public access;
however, the cumulative*impact of port development on public access is
expected to be minor. Port development is limited to only a few sites
in the estuary. Full development of all existing designated Development
and Water Dependent Development shorelands would not significantly
reduce public access opportunities in the Columbia River Estuary.

River training activities, including pile dikes and dredged materi-
al disposal islands, have had little or no cumulative impact on public
access.

5.3.2. Water Quality

A number of parameters are considered under water quality: turbid-
ity, dissolved oxygen, biochemical oxygen demand, organic contaminants,
metals, and other undesirable compounds. Both long-term and short-term
water quality impacts are considered.

New and maintenance dredging projects can have cumulative short-
term impacts, especially with respect to turbidity. Rarely, however,
are more than a small number of dredging projects occurring at one time.
Longer-term cumulative impacts are less significant. Aquatic and
shoreland dredged material disposal can generate significant cumulative
impacts on Columbia River Estuary water quality. Pollutants associated
with fine sediments can be resuspended as a result of aquatic dredged
material disposal. Land disp 'osal can also generate water quality
impacts by way of contaminated runoff. Rarely, however, are more than a
small number of disposal projects occurring at one time. Because
impacts associated with dredging and dredged material disposal tend to

5-3

be short-lived, the potential for generating significant cumulative
impacts on water quality is limited.

Filling of aquatic areas is expected to generate only minor,
short-lived impacts if conducted with clean material behind protective
berms. Fills constructed without these protective measures do have the
potential for generating water quality problems associated with leach-
ates from contaminated fill material. Large waterfront areas in some
parts of the estuary consist entirely of fill material: in these areas
the potential for cumulative water quality impacts may be high.

Riprap constructed from clean non-erodable stone generates few
potential water quality impacts. Inasmuch as it may displace riparian
vegetation, riprap may result in higher-turbidity runoff entering the
river. The cumulative impact of riprap on water quality may be consid-
erable to the extent that riparian vegetation is lost.

Boat ramps and individual moorages are expected to have no signifi-
cant cumulative impact on water quality. Enclosed marinas, however, can
generate local water quality impacts. To the extent that marinas are
located near each other, or are concentrated in poorly flushed tributar-
ies, cumulative impacts may be considerable.

Aquaculture and fish hatcheries are potentially detrimental for
water quality if uneaten fish food and fish wastes accumulate and
decompose on the site rather than dispersing. Significant cumulative
impacts would be expected only to the extent that several operationsare
clustered together, or they occur in a small or poorly flushed waterway,
or if a single operation is very large relative to the waterway's
flushing volume.

Port development has occurred in the estuary without any signifi-
cant cumulative water quality impacts. Increased port activity increa-
ses the likelihood of water quality degrading actions such as oil or
chemical spills. I

River training activities may affect water quality by changing
flushing patterns. The cumulative impact of river training on flushing
has been to decrease flushing away from the main navigation channel, and
increase flushing near the channel. Because little is known about the
relationship between flushing and water quality at specific locations on
the Columbia River Estuary, the cumulative impact of river training on
water quality is difficult to evaluate.

5.3.3. Fisheries

Discussion of cumulative impacts on fisheries includes impacts on
commercial, recreational, and uneconomic non-game species. Impacts on
their habitats are also included.

Dredging can have measurable impacts on fish by disrupting feeding
and shelter areas as well as migration routes. Project scheduling can
reduce some of these impacts. Long-term impacts which might generate

5-4

significant cumulative impacts are not well understood. Crab entrain-
ment resulting from bar maintenance dredging may have significant
impacts on the population of juvenile crabs at the bar, but its impacts
on the overall estuary and off-shore crab populations are unknown.

Dredged material disposal can affect fish by affecting water
quality. This is discussed in subsection 5.3.2..

Filling can affect fish and their habitats by disrupting migration
routes, and by eliminating benthic communities that are a component of
their habitat. Lost habitat will presumably be.replaced by way of
compensatory mitigation measures. Potential fill sites in the Columbia
River Estuary are not so numerous as to generate significant cumulative
impacts, as long as mitigation measures are applied.

Riprap may affect fish habitat by disrupting shallow water benthic
communities and by eliminating near-shore shallow water areas. The
benthic communities are a component of fish habitat. Near-shore shallow
areas may be important as resting, shelter and migration routes for
downstream juvenile anadromous fish. Large reaches of shoreline Are
r1prapped, so the potential for cumulative impacts may be high. Howev-
er, to the extent that riprap, projects tend to be placed on eroded or
erodable shorelines, these impacts may be reduced somewhat.

Boat ramps, marinas, and moorages are all essential components of
the commercial and recreational fisheries support system in the Columbia
River Estuary. To the extent that commercial and game harvests are
subject to regulation, these facilities will not generate significant
negative impacts on fish populations. Vater quality impacts associated
with small boat moorage may generate relatively minor, localized cumula-
tive impacts on fish.

Aquaculture and fish hatchery facilities have the potential for
generating both positive and negative cumulative impacts on fisheries.
Positive impacts can result fi@om fisheries enhancement programs associ-
.ated with hatcheries and with aquaculture release programs. Negative
impacts can be generated from confinement aquaculture and hatchery
operations that develop fish diseases which in turn infect wild stocks.
Significant harmful cumulative impacts would be expected when operations
are concentrated in small or poorly-flushed waterways.

Port development's expected impacts on fisheries are more associat-
ed with dredging and filling than with port activity by itself. Some
potential impacts are described in subsection 5.3.2. Fish populations,
distribution, and diversity may be related to port activity, but signif-
icant cumulative impacts have not been identified.

River training affects fish habitat by altering migration routes.
Upstream migrant anadromous fish follow the strong ebb currents associ-
ated with the main navigation channel. Significant cumulative impacts
on fisheries may be associated with river training.

5-5

5.3.4. Maritime Commerce

Cumulative impacts on maritime commerce are considered in this
subsection. Included are deep-draft moorage, navigation and associated
activities.

Dredging has had beneficial cumulative impacts on maritime com-
merce. A large share of all dredging in the estuary is carried out to
accommodate maritime commerce. The cumulative impacts of channel
maintenance dredging on navigation are significant. Reduced dredging at
any of the numerous shoals or at the bar would significantly impede
deep-draft commerce in the Columbia River Estuary.

Land disposal of dredged material has had no measurable cumulative
impact on maritime commerce. Aquatic disposal can affect navigation to
the extent that some of this material may settle in the channel and
contributes to shoaling. This impact is cumulatively small, especially
when frequent and thorough maintenance dredging of the channels is
considered.

Filling of the Columbia River Estuary has few significant impacts
on navigation and maritime commerce. Shoreline fills are evaluated for
impacts on navigation. The bulkhead and pierhead lines established on
the river are intended to avoid fill and pier-related impacts on navi-
gation. The cumulative impacts of fill on maritime commerce are negli-
gible.

Riprap has few significant impacts on navigation, except those
beneficial ones associated with protecting shorelines from ship wakes.
The cumulative effect of long protected shorelines is that they allow
deep-draft navigation close to shore without causing shoreline erosion.

Boat ramps and marinas have no significant cumulative impact on
maritime commerce. Deep-draft moorage opportunities in the Columbia
River Estuary have a direct beneficial impact on maritime commerce.

Aquaculture and fish hatcheries are expected to have no measurable
impacts on navigation and maritime commerce.

Port development has direct, positive impact on maritime commerce
in the Columbia River Estuary. The cumulative impact of port develop-
ment in the Columbia River Estuary is related to the stimulation of
maritime commerce.

River training efforts generate direct positive cumulative impacts
on navigation by keeping navigation channels relatively free of obstruc-
tions, and lowering maintenance costs.

5.3.5. Recreation/Tourism

Discussion of cumulative impacts on recreation and tourism includes
estuary-oriented recreation undertaken by both local residents and by
visitors from outside the region. Many impacts may be largely aesthetic

5-6

in nature.

Dredging results in changes that are for the most part invisible,
unless intertidal areas are dredged. Dredging for small boat access and
maintenance dredging of small boat facilities is beneficial with respect
to some segments of the recreation and tourism sector.

Dredged material disposal at upland sites generates both positive
and negative impacts. Beach nourishment may have beneficial impacts on
recreation and tourism, but only to the extent that nourished beaches
are accessible. Other types of upland disposal may yield negative
impacts with respect to aesthetic features, depending on location.
Aquatic dredged material disposal could have impacts on recreation and
tourism with respect to water quality and recreational fisheries
discussed in subsections 5.3.2. and 5.3.3. Dredged material disposal's
cumulative impacts are not expected to be significant with respect to
recreation and tourism.

Filling Columbia River Estuary aquatic areas may negatively impact
recreation and tourism if the fill is used for facilities that do not
support these activities. Because filling in the Columbia River Estuary
is limited to a few sites, cumulative impacts are expected to be minor.

Riprap may have cumulative impacts on recreation or tourism.
Extensive riprap protection of otherwise undeveloped shorelines will
yield undesirable aesthetic impacts, and impede public access. On the
other hand, riprap may be needed to protect important recreational and
visitor-oriented facilities (such as marinas). Large stretches of
shoreline in the estuary are riprapped, and cumulative impacts may be
significant.

Boat ramps, marinas, and moorages have a generally positive impact
on recreation and tourism, though there may also be a negative aesthetic
component. The net cumulative impact is probably positive, however,
because the estuary is large ielative to the extent of existing recrea-
tional boat facilities.

Aquaculture and fisheries generate both beneficial and harmful
impacts on recreation and tourism. Benefits are realized to the extent
that hatcheries produce game fish, and inasmuch as the hatcheries and
aquaculture facilities have a visitor-oriented component. Negative
impacts are mainly aesthetic, and related to water quality. Cumulative'
negative impacts are expected only when facilities become concentrated
in small waterways, or when very large facilities are developed.

Port development may generate both positive and negative impacts
with respect to tourism and recreation. The passage of deep-draft
vessels up and down the Columbia River Estuary, together with associated
tug, barge and wharf activities, are significant elements of the Colum-
bia River Estuary's attractiveness for visitors. Port development may
also, however, generate negative impacts on recreational fishing and
public access (see subsections 5.3.3. and 5.3.1.). Net cumulative
impacts are believed to be positive, and probably substantial.

5-7

River training probably has little cumulative impact on recreation
and tourism outside of minor aesthetic detractions such as pile dikes.

5.3.6. Circulation

Discussion of cumulative impacts on circulation includes erosion,
accretion, flooding, salinity intrusion, and related phenomena.

Dredging projects have had significant cumulative impacts on
circulation, particularly larger projects like the main navigation
channel. New projects will generate larger impacts than maintenance
projects, other parameters being comparable. The cumulative impact of
smaller dredging projects is probably minor unless several small pro-
jects are concentrated in an area.

Dredged material 'disposal in the water should have relatively minor
cumulative impacts on circulation. Land disposal practices should have
no measurable cumulative impact on circulation.

Filling has had a substantial impact on circulation. Shoreline
fills alter near-shore currents and can create eddies and other current
aberrations. Diking on tributaries can reduce the tidal prism, substan-
tially lowering flushing and thus increasing shoaling rates. Small
shoreline fills are not expected to have significant cumulative impacts
on circulation unless concentrated along a single reach of shoreline.

Riprap is intended to reduce shoreline erosion, so its net cumula-
tive impact on this component of circulation is probably significant and
positive. Depending'on slope and rubble size, riprap projects can, in
some instances, generate unintended impacts on adjacent unprotected
shorelines. There is no evidence, however, of a significantly negative
cumulative effect of riprap along shorelines with respect to this aspect
of circulation.

Boat ramps and marinas are so small and widely spaced that cumula-
tive circulation impacts are not expected. Individual moorages can,
when concentrated along a shoreline., have undesirable negative impacts
on currents. Their cumulative impact is potentially significant, but
there are no data verifying this.

Aquaculture and fish hatcheries have little impact on circulation.
They are generally designed to take advantage of flushing waters, rather
than interfere with them. Cumulative impacts, if there are any, are not
expected to be significant.

Port development's impact on circulation is probably restricted to
associated dredging and filling. Where the main navigation channel is
close to shore, erosion may result from shipwakes. Navigation and
maritime commerce are not expected to generate, by themselves, signifi-
cant cumulative circulation impacts.

River training efforts are directly related to circulatory changes
in the Columbia River Estuary. They have generated intentionally
significant cumulative impacts.

5-8

6.1. INTRODUCTION 6 PLAN IMPLEMENTATION

This section describes some aspects of Columbia River Estuary
Regional Management Plan implementation. Implementation is a critical
step in the planning process between policy formulation and evaluation
of results. The county and municipal governments that choose to adopt
the Regional Management Plan rely on a range of tools and techniques to
implement the plan's goals and objectives.

The Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan is, when
adopted by local governments along the Estuary, a component of the
Coastal Zone Management Plan for the Columbia River Estuary. The
federal Coastal Zone.Management Act authorizes states to engage in
comprehensive planning activities in the coastal zone. Oregon and
Washington have, in turn, required that local governments prepare plans
for coastal areas and resources. The Washington Shoreline Management
Act and the Oregon Statewide Planning Goals establish standards for
these local plans. The Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan
meets these standards. It fulfills the plan development obligation with
respect to the estuary for participating local governments.

6.2. INCORPORATION BY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

The Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan is implemented
by the local governments that adopt it. It is developed specifically
for the eight estuary area local governments: Astoria, Cathlamet,
Hammond, Ilwaco, Warrenton, Clatsop County, Pacific County and Wahkiakum
County. The Regional Management Plan is implemented by Washington
jurisdictions through their Shoreline Management Master Plans. Oregon
jurisdictions implement the Regional Management Plan by incorporating it
into local comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances.

Jurisdictions will not need to adopt the entire Columbia River
Estuary Regional Management Plan in order to implement it. Tables 6-1
through 6-8 summarize the sections needed for each jurisdiction's plan.

6.3. LOCAL PLAN IMPLEMENTATION

6.3.1. Oregon Jurisdictions

Astoria, Hammond, Warrenton and Clatsop County implement their
Comprehensive Plans, including adopted portions of the Regional Manage-
ment Plan, through implementing zoning ordinances. Regulated uses and
activities must meet the plan policies, zoning ordinance standards, and
zoning map designations. Oregon jurisdictions utilize a generally
hierarchical system of permits. The permit system includes conditional
use permits, review use permits, and permits issued "over-the-counter."
The Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan Aquatic and Shore-

6-1

land Designations are adopted as zones on the local jurisdiction's
zoning map.

6.3.2. Washington Jurisdictions

Cathlamet, Ilwaco, Pacific County and Wahkiakum County implement
the Shoreline Management Master programs by reviewing projects under
substantial development permits and variance permits. Uses and activi-
ties must meet the Master Program policies, standards and environment
requirements. The Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan
Aquatic and Shoreland designations are adopted as environment designa-
tions in the local Shoreline Management Master Program.

6.3.3. Federal Consistency

Section 307 of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)
requires that applicants for federal permits in the Coastal Zone submit
to the state information and data showing that the proposal is consis-
tent with the state's approved coastal zone management program. Local
Shoreline Management Master Programs in Washington and local Comprehen-
sive Plans and Zoning Ordinances in Oregon constitute significant parts
of each state's approved program.

There are two ways consistency may be demonstrated. Most permit
applicants will demonstrate consistency with Oregon's or Washington's
Coastal Zone Management program by applying for and receiving approval
of the necessary local permit. A federal permit can then be issues
because it will be consistent with the local element of the state
Coastal Zone Management Program. Consistency determinations are handled
differently, however, when the proposed use or activity occurs on
federally-owned land and wheA the project applicant would be a federal
agency.

Federal agencies do not obtain local permits for their projects.
Instead, they demonstrate to the Washington Department of Ecology or to
the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development that the
proposed federal action will be consistent, 'to the maximum extent
practicable, with the state's approved Coastal Zone Management program.
This is done by way of correspondence between the federal agency and
either the Washington Department of Ecology or the Oregon Department of
Land Conservation and Development, rather than through*the local permit
process.

Local government input into this process can be in two different
forms. The local jurisdiction is frequently asked by the federal agency
for information needed for the consistency demonstration. In this case,
the local government responds by pointing out the policies, standards,
and other criteria from their Shoreline Management Master Program or
local Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Ordinance that are germane to the
project. Alternatively, or in addition to this, the local government

6-2

may comment to the Washington Department of Ecology or Oregon Depart-
ment of Land Conservation and Development on a pending consistency
determination.

6.4. COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY REGIONAL MANAGEMENT PLAN REVIEW AND
AMENDMENT

The Regional Plan has not been subject to frequent amendment.
There are a number of circumstances under which the Plan may be amended:

1. The CREST Council may initiate and adopt a Plan amendment in
response to a request from a member, new information on the estuar-
ine ecosystem, or a change in the circumstances that support a Plan
component.

2. CREST members will, from time to time, amend their local comprehen-
sive glans, zoning ordinances and shoreline master plans in ways
that affect the regional plan. It may be appropriate to incorpor-
ate such changes into the Columbia River Estuary Regional Manage-
ment Plan.

3. The States of Oregon and Washington will periodically require local
jurisdictions to update their shoreline management plans and their
comprehensive plans. The Columbia River Estuary Regional Manage-
ment Plan should also be updated during these required local
updates in order to maintain regionalism.

4. Changes in Oregon, Washington, and federal regulations affecting
estuarine development may require that the Columbia River Estuary
Regional Management Plan be amended.

6-3

TABLE 6-1
ASTORIA

2.3.1. Natural Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.2 Conservation Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.4. Development Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.5. Natural Shorelands Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.6. Conservation Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.8. Development Shorelands Aquatic Designation and
Use List
2.3.9. Water-Dependent Development Shorelands Designation
and Use List

3.2. Definitions
3.3. Policies & Standards
3.3.2. Deep Water Navigation, Port and Industrial Develop-
ment
3.3.4. Dredging and Dredged Material Disposal
3.3.5. Estuarine Construction
3.3.6. Filling of Aquatic Areas and Non-Tidal Wetlands
3.3.7. Fish and Wildlife Habitat
3.3.8. Fisheries and Aquaculture
3.3.9. Land Transportation Systems
3.3.10. Log Storage
3.3.11. Mining and Mineral Extraction
3.3.12. Mitigation and Restoration
3.3.13. Public Access
3.3.14. Recreation and Tourism
3.3.15. Residential, Commercial, Industrial Development
3.3.16. Shallow Draft Ports and Marinas
3.3.17. Shoreland Hazard Areas
3.3.18. Significant Areas
3.3.19. Water Quality Maintenance
3.3.20. Water-Dependent Development Areas
3.3.21. Implementation

3.4.1. Oregon Jurisdiction Environmental Assessment Require-
& ments (Impact Assessment and Resource Capability
3.4.2. Determination).

4.21. South Astoria
4.22. Port of Astoria
4.23. Downtown Astoria Waterfront
4.24. Uppertown/Alderbrook
4.25. Tongue Point

5. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

5.1. Introduction
5.2. Scope
5.3. Cumulative Impact Analysis

6-4

6. CREST PLAN IMPLEMENTATION

6.1. Introduction
6.2. Incorporation by Local Governments
6.3. Local Plan Implementation
6.4. Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan Review and
Amendment

6-5

TABLE 6-3
HAMMOND

2.3.2. Conservation Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.4. Development Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.6. Consarvation Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.8. Development Shorelands Aquatic Designation and
Use List
2.3.9. Water-Dependent Development Shorelands Designation
and Use List

3.4.1. Oregon Jurisdiction Environmental Assessment Require-
& ments (Impact Assessment and Resource Capability
3.4.2. Determination).

4.3. Estuary Channels
4.11. Hammond

5. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

5.1. Introduction
5.2. Scope
5.3. Cumulative Impact Analysis

6. CREST PLAN IMPLEMENTATION

6.1. Introduction
6.2. Incorporation by Local Governments
6.3. Local Plan Implementation
6.4. Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan Review and
Amendment

6-6

TABLE 6-4
ILWACO

2.3.1. Natural Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.2. Conservation Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.4. Development Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.8. Development Shorelands Aquatic Designation and
Use List

3.2. Definitic-ns
3.3. Policies & Standards
3.3.1. Agriculture and Forestry
3.3.2. Deep Water Navigation, Port and Industrial Develop-
ment
3.3.3. Diking
3.3.4. Dredging and Dredged Material Disposal
3.3.5. Estuarine Construction
3.3.6. Filling of Aquatic Areas and Non-Tidal Wetlands
3.3.7. Fish and Wildlife Habitat
3.3.8. Fisheries and Aquaculture
3.3.9. Land Transportation Systems
3.3.10. Log Storage
3.3.11. Mining and Mineral Extraction
3.3.12. Mitigation and Restoration
3.3.13. Public Access
3.3.14. Recreation and Tourism
3.3.15. Residential, Commercial, Industrial Development
3.3.16. Shallow Draft Ports and Marinas
3.3.17. Shoreland Hazard Areas
3.3.18. Significant Areas
3.3.19. Water Quality Maintenance
3.3.20. Water-,Dependent Development Areas
3.3.21. Implementation

3.4.3. Washingto,n Jurisdiction Requirements (State
Environmental Policy Act)

4.43. Baker Bay
4.4-4. Wallacut River
4.45. Ilwaco
4.46. Fort Canby North

5. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

5.1. Introduction
5.2. Scope
5.3. Cumulative Impact Analysis

6. CREST PLAN IMPLEMENTATION

6.1. Introduction
6.2. Incorporation by Local Governments
6.3. Local Plan Implementation
6.4. Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan Review and
Amendment

6-7

TABLE 6-5
WARRENTON

2.3.1. Natural Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.2. Conservation Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.4. Development Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.6. Conservation Shorelands Designation and Use List
2.3.7. Rural Shorelands Designation and Use List
2.3.8. Development Shorelands Aquatic Designation and
Use List
2.3.9. Water-Dependent Development Shorelands Aquatic
Designation and Use List

3.2. Definitions
3.3. Policies & Standards
3.3.1. Agriculture and Forestry
3.3.2. Deep Water Navigation, Port and Industrial Develop-
ment
3.3.3. Diking
3.3.4. Dredging and Dredged Material Disposal
3.3.5. Estuarine Construction
3.3.6. Filling of Aquatic Areas and Non-Tidal Wetlands
3.3.7. Fish and Wildlife Habitat
3.3.8. Fisheries and Aquaculture
3.3.9. Land Transportation Systems
3.3.10. Log Storage
3.3.11. Mining and Mineral Extraction
3.3.12. Mitigation and Restoration
3.3.13. Public Access
3.3.14. Recreation and Tourism
3.3.15. Residential, Commercial, Industrial Devel7opment
3.3.16. Shallow Draft Ports and Marinas
3.3.17. Shoreland Hazard Areas
3.3.18. Significant Areas
3.3.19. Water Qua@ity Maintenance
3.3.20. Water-Dependent Development Areas
3.3.21. Implementation

3.4.1. Oregon Jurisdiction Environmental Assessment Require-
& ments (Impact Assessment and Resource Capability
3.4.2. Determination).

4.3. Estuary Channels
4.12. Tansy Point
4.13. North Warrenton
4.14. Middle Skipanon River
4.15. Mouth of the Skipanon River
4.16. Youngs Bay
4.17. Airport and Vicinity

5. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

5.1. Introduction
5.2. Scope
5.3. Cumulative Impact Analysis

6-8

6. CREST PLAN IMPLEMENTATION

6.1. Introduction
6.2. Incorporation by Local Governments
6.3. Local Plan Implementation
6.4. Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan Review and
Amendment

6-9

TABLE 6-6
CLATSOP COUNTY

2.3.1. Natural AquaticDesignation and Use List
2.3.2. Conservation Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.4. Development Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.5. Natural Shoreland Designation and Use List
2.3.6. Conservation Shorelands Designation and Use List
2.3.7. Rural Shorelands Designation and Use List
2.3.9. Water-Dependent Development Shorelands Aquatic
Designation and Use List

3.2. Definitions.
3.3.1. Agriculture and Forestry Policies and Standards
3.3.2. Deep Water Navigation, Port and Industrial Develop-
ment Policies and Standards
3.3.3. Diking Policies and Standards
3.3.4. Dredging and Dredged Material Disposal Policies and
Standards
3.3.5. Estuarine Construction Policies and Standards
3.3.6. Filling of Aquatic Areas and Non-Tidal Wetlands
Policies and Standards
3.3.7. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Policies and Standards
3.3.8.' Fisheries and Aquaculture Policies and Standards
3.3.9. Land Transportation Systems Policies and Standards
3.3.10. Log Storage Policies and Standards
3.3.11. Mining and Mineral Extraction Policies and Standards
3.3.12. Mitigation and Restoration Policies and Standards
3.3.13. Public Access Policies and Standards
3.3.14. Recreation and Tourism Policies and Standards
3.3.15. Residential, Commercial, Industrial Development
Policies and Standards
3.3.16. Shallow Draft Ports and Marinas Policies and Stan-
dards
3.3.17. Shorelan4 Hazard Areas Policies and Standards
3.3.18. Significant Areas Policies and Standards
3.3.19. Water Quality Maintenance Policies and Standards
3.3.20. Water-Dependent Development Areas Po.licies and
Standards
3.3.21. Implementation Policies and Standards

3.4.1. Oregon Jurisdiction Environmental Assessment Re-
& quirements (Impact Assessment and Resource Capabil-
3.4.2. ity Determination).

4.2. Mouth of the Columbia River Subarea Plan
4.3. Estuary Channels Subarea Plan
4.4. Estuary Sands Subarea Plan
4.5. River Channels Subarea Plan
4.6. Snag Islands Subarea Plan
4.7. Cathlamet Bay Subarea Plan
4.8. Upper Marsh Islands Subarea Plan
4.9. Tenasillahe Island Subarea Plan
4.10. Fort Stevens State Park Subarea Plan

6-10

4.18. Lewis and Clark River Subarea Plan
4.19. Miles Crossing Subarea Plan
4.20. Youngs River Subarea Plan
4.21. South Astoria Subarea Plan
4.25. Tongue Point Subarea Plan
4.26. John Day River Subarea Plan
4.27. John Day Point to Eddy Point Subarea Plan
4.28. Big Creek/Little Creek/Fertile Valley Subarea Plan
4.29. Brownsmead/Gnat Creek Subarea Plan
4.30. Clifton Channel Subarea Plan
4.31. Bradwood Subarea Plan
4.32. Wauna/Westport. Subarea Plan
4.43. Baker Bay Subarea Plan

5. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

5.1. Introduction
5.2. Scope
5.3. Cumulative Impact Analysis

6. CREST PLAN IMPLEMENTATION

6.1. Introduction
6.2. Incorporation by Local Governments
6.3. Local Plan Implementation
6.4. Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan Review and
Amendment

6-11

TABLE 6-7
PACIFIC COUNTY

2.3.1. Natural Aquatic Designation and 'Use List
2.3.2. Conservation Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.4. Development Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.5. Natural Shoreland Designation and Use List
2.3.6. Conservation Shorelands Designation and Use List
2.3.7. Rural Shorelands Designation and Use List
2.3.8. Development Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.9. Water-Dependent Development Shorelands Aquatic
Designation and Use List

3.2. Definitions
3.3.1. Agriculture and Forestry Policies and Standards
3.3.2. Deep Water Navigation, Port and Industrial Develop-
ment Policies and Standards
3.3.3. Diking Policies and Standards
3.3.4. Dredging and Dredged Material Disposal Policies and
Standards
3.3.5. Estuarine Construction Policies and Standards
3.3.6. Filling of Aquatic Areas and Non-Tidal Wetlands
Policies and Standards
3.3.7. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Policies and Standards
3.3.8. Fisheries and Aquaculture Policies and Standards
3.3.9. Land Transportation Systems Policies and Standards
3.31.10. Log Storage Policies and Standards
3.3.11. Mining and Mineral Extraction Policies and Standards
3.3.12. Mitigation and Restoration Policies and Standards
3.3.13. Public Access Policies and Standards
3.3.14. Recreation and Tourism Policies and Standards
3.3.15. Residential, Commercial, Industrial Development
Policies and Standards
3.3.16. Shallow Draft Ports and Marinas Policies and Stan-
dards i
3.3.17. Shoreland Hazard Areas Policies and Standards
3.3.18. Significant Areas Policies and Standards
3.3.19. Water Quality Maintenance Policies and Standards
3.3.20. Water-Dependent Development Areas Policies and
Standards
3.3.21. Implementation Policies and Standards

3.4.3. Washington Jurisdiction Regulations (State Environ-
mental Policy Act Checklist)

4.2. Mouth of the Columbia River Subarea Plan
4.3. Estuary Channels Subarea Plan
4.4. Estuary Sands Subarea Plan
4.5. River Channels Subarea Plan
4.39. Knappton/Frankfort
4.40. McGowan
4.41. Chinook
4.42. Chinook River
4.43. Baker Bay

6-12

4.44. Wallacut River
4.45. Ilwaco
4.46. Fort Canby North
4.47. Cape Disappointment

5. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

5.1. Introduction
5.2. Scope
5.3. Cumulative Impact Analysis

6. CREST PLAN IMPLEMENTATION

6.1. Introduction
6.2. Incorporation by Local Governments
6.3. Local Plan Implementation
6.4. Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan Review and
Amendment

6-13

TABLE 6-8
WAHKIAKUM COUNTY

2.3.1. Natural Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.2. Conservation Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.3. Rural Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.4. Development Aquatic Designation and Use List
2.3.5. @Natural Shoreland Designation and Use List
2.3.6. Conservation Shorelands Designation and Use List
2.3.7. Rural Shorelands Designation and Use List
2.3.8. Development Aquatic Designation and Use List

3.2. Definitions
3.3.1. Agriculture and Forestry Policies and Standards
3.3.2. Deep Water Navigation, Port and Industrial Develop-
ment Policies and Standards
3.3.3. Diking Policies and Standards
3.3.4. Dredging and Dredged Material Disposal Policies and
Standards
3.3.5. Estuarine Construction Policies and Standards
3.3.6. Filling of Aquatic Areas and Non-Tidal Wetlands
Policies and Standards
3.3.7. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Policies and Standards
3.3.8. Fisheries and Aquaculture Policies and Standards
3.3.9. Land Transportation Systems Policies and Standards
3.3.10. Log Storage Policies and Standards
3.3.11. Mining and Mineral Extraction Policies and Standards
3.3.12. Mitigation and Restoration Policies and Standards
3.3.13. Public Access Policies and Standards
3.3.14. Recreation and Tourism Policies and Standards
3.3.15. Residential, Commercial, Industrial Development
Policies and Standards
3.3.16. Shallow Draft Ports and Marinas Policies and Stan-
dards
3.3.17. Shoreland Hazard Areas Policies and Standards
3.3.18. Significan't Areas Policies and Standards
3.3.19. Water Quality Maintenance Policies and Standards
3.3.20. Water-Dependent Development Areas Policies and
Standards
3.3.21. Implementation Policies and Standards

3.4.3. Washington Jurisdiction Regulations (State Environ-
mental Policy Act Checklist)

4.3. Estuary Channels Subarea Plan
4.4. Estuary Sands Subarea Plan
4.5. River Channels Subarea Plan
4.33. Puget Island
4.34. Eastern Wahkiakum County
4.35. Cathlamet/Whitetail Deer Refuge
4.36. Skamokawa to Three Tree Point
4.37. Three Tree Point to Harrington Point
4.38. Grays Bay and Tributaries

6-14

5. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

5.1. Introduction
5.2. Scope
5.3. Cumulative Impact Analysis

6. CREST PLAN IMPLEMENTATION

6.1. Introduction
6.2. Incorporation by Local Governments
6.3. Local Plan Implementation
6.4. Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan Review and
Amendment

6-15

APPENDIX A

CREST CHARTER

I
0

CHARTER AND AGREEMENT

COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY STUDY TASKFORCE (CREST)

This Charter and Agreement is made pursuant to Oregon Revised Statutes,
Chapter 190 and the Revised Code of Washington, Chapter 39.34, and
entered into this 23rd day of Aug., 1984, by and between the member
agencies that adopted the attach-ed resolution.

1. DEFINITIONS

1.1 Council: The group of persons (Delegates or Alternates)
appointed by the -member jurisdictions vested with the
responsibility of the management of the affairs of CREST and
the formation of policy.

1.2 Estuarv Area: The estuary area is defined as the water and
submerged lands of the Columbia River estuary and its
tributary streams, the associated tidelands, wetlands,
shorelands within Pacific and Wahkiakum Counties in Washington
and within Clatsop County in Oregon.

2. ESTABLISHMENT

The Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce, hereinafter referred to
as CREST, is hereby continued by agreement among its member
jurisdictions.

3. OBJECTIVE

CREST, a regional estuarine management organization, is to provide
local jurisdictions and' other -groups, agencies, and individuals
with assistance in estuarine management, planning and plan
implementation.

4. PURPOSE

The purposes of CREST are:

4.1 Forum: To provide a forum for elected officials of member
Jurisdictions to present substantive issues of local concern
and to jointly identify issues which are regional in s-cope; to
recommend and review governmental activities related to the
development and management of the natural, economic, and human
resources of the Columbia River estuary area; and to improve
communication and cooperation between member jurisdictions.

4.2 Technical Support: To provide technical support to member
jurisdictions and, with the approval of the Council, to other
groups, agencies, and 'individuals in the planning and review
of development uses and activites proposed for location in the
Columbia River estuary.

A-1

4.3 Plan Implementation: To assist member jurisdictions in
effectively implementing and revising the estuarine and
shoreland elements of local comprehensive plans developed from
the Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan; and to
reduce conflicts, uncertainties, and delays in local, state,
and federal permit processes.

5. POWERS

CREST has the following authority:

5.1 Public Agreements: To enter into agreements with the United
States of America, State of Oregon, State of Washington or any
subdivision or agency of either, or any municipal corporation
for the purpose of obtaining financial aid or other
participation in attaining the objectives and purposes of
CREST.

5.2 Private Agreements: To enter into contractual relationships
with private agencies or firms.

5.3 Budget Adoption: To adopt a budget indicating the anticipated
@@-c
receipts and expenditures of CREST.

5.4 Bvlaw AdoDtion: To make, adopt, and amend bylaws consistent
with this Charter and Agreement.

6. STAFF

The Council shall appoint an Executive Director who shall
administer the business of; CREST. He shall employ such staff as
the Council shall authorize.

7. DURATION AND TERMINATION,

7.1 Dissolution: This Charter and Agreement shall continue and
remain in full force and CREST shall not be dissolved unless
by a majority vote of the member jurisdictions provided,
however, that any such dissolution shall not become effective
until such time as any contracts to which CREST is a party
have been fully performed or are no longer in effect. In the
event of such dissolution, all assests on hand shall be
distributed to the member agencies in proportion, to their
contributions for the acquisition of such assets.

8. AMENDMENTS

This Charter and Agreement may be amended by a majority affirmative
vote. Written notice of proposed amendments, must be submitted to
each member at least 10 days prior to consideration.

A-2

4.3 Plan Implementation: To' assist member jurisdictions in
effectively implementing and revising the estuarine and
shoreland elements of local comprehensive plans developed from
the Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan; and to
reduce conflicts, uncertainties, and delays in local, state,
and federal permit processes.

5. POWERS

CREST has thelfollowing authority:

5.2 Private Agreements: To enter into contractual relationships
with private agencies or firms.

5.3 Budget Adoption: To adopt a budget indicating the anticipated
receipts and expenditures of CREST.

5.4 Bylaw Adoption: To make, adopt, and amend bylaws consistent
with this Charter and Agreement.

6. STAFF

The Council shall appoint an Executive Director who shall
administer the business of CREST. He shall employ such staf f as
the Council shall authorize.

7. DURATION AND TERMINATION

7.1 Dissolution: This Charter and Agreement shall continue and
remain in full force and CREST shall not be dissolved unless
by a majority vote of the member jurisdictions provided,
however, that any such dissolution shall not become effective
until such time as any contracts to which CREST is a party
have been fully performed or are no longer in effect. In the
event of such dissolution, all assests on hand shall be
distributed to the member agencies in proportion to their
contributions for the acquisition of,such assets.

8. AMENDMENTS

This Charter and Agreement may be amended by a majority affirmative
vote of the council. Written notice of proposed amendments, must
be submitted to each member at least 10 days prior to
consideration.

A-3

APPENDIX B

OREGON GOAL EXCEPTIONS

0 1.

Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 2 establishes a procedure local
governments may use to take an exception. An exception is a decision to
exclude certain land or water areas from one or more of the requirements
of a particular statewide goal. Oregon Administrative Rule 660-04-000
through -035 establishes procedures and standards for an exception. The
rule also establishes two different kinds of exceptions. All of the
exceptions in this appendix are "Reasons" exceptions.

This appendix does not include the actual texts of the exceptions
rule, or of any of the 18 exceptions summarized below. The following
information is included:

Short description of the exception;
Area covered by the exception;
Goal requirement that the exception applies to;
Date of adoption; and
Adopting jurisdictions.

B-1

1. Pile-supported Access in an Natural Aquatic area between North and
South Tongue Point.

Mediation Panel Agreement area at Tongue Point.

Goal 16 Natural Management Unit requirements.

Astoria Ordinance 81-15, 81-16; November 15, 1981

City of Astoria; Clatsop County

2. Shoreline access structure connecting North and South Tongue Point

Mediation Panel Agreement area at Tongue Point.

Goal 16 Natural Management Unit requirements.

Astoria Ordinance 81-15, 81-16; November 25, 1981

City of Astoria; Clatsop County

3. Railroad access to South Tongue Point across a Natural Aquatic
area.

Mediation Panel Agreement area at Tongue Point.

Goal 16 Natural Management Unit requirements.

Astoria Ordinance 81-15, 81-16; November 25, 1981

City of Astoria; Clatsop County

4. Five to six acres of Development Aquatic designation at South
Tongue Point

Mediation Panel Agreement area at Tongue Point.

Goal 16 Natural Management Unit requirements.

Astoria Ordinance 81-15, 81-16; November 25, 1981

City of Astoria; Clatsop County

5. Construction of docks in a Natural Aquatic area at South Tongue
Point.

Mediation Panel Agreement area at Tongue Point.

Goal 16 Natural Management Unit requirements.

B-2

Astoria Ordinance 81-15, 81-16; November 25, 1981

City of Astoria; Clatsop County

6. Approximately 7.8 acre Development Aquatic designation in Alder
Cove

Mediation Panel Agreement site at the West Skipanon River Peninsu-
la.

Goal 16 Natural Management Unit requirements.

August 5, 1981.

City of Warrenton

7. Zone change from Aquatic Natural to Aquatic Conservation for about
acres.

Mediation Panel Agreement area on the east Skipanon River peninsu-
la.

Goal 16 Natural Management Unit requirements.

August 5, 1981.

City of Warrenton

8. Aquatic Development designation for 25 acres of marsh.

Mediation Panel Agreement area on the east Skipanon River
peninsula.

Goal 16 Natural Management Unit requirements.

August 5, 1981.

City of Warrenton.

9. Allows infilling of houseboats in an area committed to houseboat
use, subject to sanitation, placement and lease requirements.

John Day River

Goal 16 Conservation Management Unit requirements.

September 30, 1983.

Clatsop County

B-3

10. Zone change from Forest-38 to Marine Industrial

Bradwood

Goal 4 requirements for designating forest lands.

August 15, 1984

Clatsop County

11. Allows fill at a certain site on the Lewis and Clark River for dike
maintenance

Diking District 5, near the Astoria Marine Construction Corp
boatyard.

Goal 16 Natural Management Unit requirements.

July 6, 1983

Clatsop County

12. Realignment of the Port of Astoria Dike.

Port of Astoria Airport, northeast side.

Goal 16 Natural Management Unit requirements.

June 9, 1982.

City of Warrenton

13. Allows dredging to obtain dike maintenance material

Subtidal areas where road access is not available.

Goal 16 Dredging requirements.

Clatsop County

14. Allows dredging to keep tidegates open. This exception is no
longer needed: 1984 amendments to statewide planning Goal 16 allow
this activity.

In front of tidegates throughout Clatsop County.

Goal 16 Dredging requirements.

B-4

Clatsop County

15. Allows dredging in a small area for a barge moorage.

.Lansy Point

Goal 16 Conservation Management Unit requirements.

March 25, 1987.

City of Warrenton

16. Allows beach nourishment at certain sites.

Sand Island, other sites.

Goal 16 Natural Management Unit requirements.

December 31, 1987

Clatsop County

B-5

APPENDIX C

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED INTO THE PLAN
BY REFERENCE

t
t

The following documents are incorporated in the Columbia River
Estuary Regional Management Plan by reference:

Architects Atelier/Northwest. 1977. Waterfront people places system.
Astoria, OR: City of Astoria.

Barnes, M. In Progress. Economic evaluation of the Columbia River
Estuary. Astoria, OR: CREST.

Bierly and Associates. 1981. Port of Ilwaco comprehensive marina plan.
Ilwaco, WA: Port of Ilwaco.

CREST. 1982. Columbia River Estuary resource base maps. Astoria, OR:
CREST.

CREST. 1981. Mediation panel agreement. Astoria, OR: CREST.

Fox, D.S. 1986. Columbia River Estuary dredged material management
plan. Astoria, OR: CREST.

Fox, D.S. 1987. Dredging and dredged material disposal policy evalua-
tion. Astoria, OR: CREST.

Marshall, J. 1987. Columbia River Estuary mitigation and restoration
plan. Astoria, OR: CREST.

Perron, R. 1987. Skamokawa tourism facilities feasibility study.
Cathlamet, WA: Lower Columbia Economic Development Council..

Port of Astoria. 1985. Port of Astoria marine terminals development
plan. Astoria,OR: Port of Astoria.

Thomas, D.W.; Bell, S.J. 1983. changes, in Columbia River Estuary
habitat types over the past century" Astoria, OR: Columbia River
Estuary Data Development Program.

Thomas, D.W. 1982. Significant'shoreland and wetland habitats in the
Clatsop Plains and the Columbia floodplain of Clatsop County,
Oregon. Astoria, OR: CREST.

Waterfront Review Committee. 1986. Astoria waterfront revitalization
plan. Astoria, OR: City of Astoria.

C-1

APPENDIX D

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bierly & Associates. 1981. Port of Ilwaco Comprehensive Marina Plan
1981. Ilwaco, WA: Port of Ilwaco.

Bottom, D.; Jones, K.K; Herring, M.L. 1984. Fishes of the Columbia
River Estuary. Astoria, OR: Columbia River Estuary Data Develop-
ment Program.

Columbia River Estuary Data Development Program. 1984. Base map of the
Columbia River Estuary (scales 1:50,000 and 1:12,000). Astoria, OR.

Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce. 1979. Columbia River Estuary
inventory. Astoria, OR.

CREST. 1982. Columbia River Estuary resource base maps. Astoria, OR:
CREST.

CREST. 1981. Mediation panel agreement. Astoria, OR: CREST.

Dawley, E.M.; Ledgerwood, R.D.; Blahm, T.H.; Jensen, A.L. 1982.
Migrational characteristics and survival of juvenile salmonids
entering the Columbia River Estuary in 1981. Seattle, WA: NMFS.

Dawley, E.M.; Sims, C.W.; Ledgerwood, R.D; Miller, D.R.; Thrower, F.P.
1979. A study to define the migrational characteristics of chinook
and coho salmon and steelhead trout in the Columbia River Estuary,
1978 Annual Report. Seattle, WA: NMFS.

Dunn, J.; Hockman, G.; Howerton, J.; Tabor, J. 1984. Key mammals of
the Columbia River Estuary. Astoria, OR: Columbia River Estuary
Data Development Program.

Durkin, J.T. 1977. Migration and timing of juvenile salmon. Paper
presented at the American Institute of Research Fisheries Biolo-
gists, Ilwaco, WA.

Durkin, J.T. 1982. Migrational characteristics of coho salmon
(Oncorhynchus kisutch) smots in the, Columbia River and its estuary.
Kennedy, V.S.,.ed. Estuarine Comparisons. New York: Academic
Press. pp. 365-376.

EDAW, Inc.; CH 2MHill. 1986. Aquaculture Siting Study. Olympia,
Washington: Washington Department of Ecology.

Ebel, W.J.; Durkin, J.T.; Blahm, T.; McCabe, G.; Coley, T.; McConnell,
R.; Emmett, R.; Muir, W. 1981. Columbia River Estuary Data
Development Program report: Salmonid and non-salmonid fish, 1981.
Vancouver., WA: Pacific northwest River Basins Commission.

Fisher, D.A.; Meslow, E.C.; Coykendall, J.R.; Herb, G.; Martinsen, F.;
O'Neil, K. 1976. Columbian white-tailed deer recovery plan. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service

Fox, D.S.; Bell,S; Nehlsen, W; Damron, J. 1984. The Columbia River
Estuary: atlas of physical and biological characteristics.
Astoria,

D-1

OR: Columbia River Estuary Data Development Program.

Fox, D.S. 1986. Columbia River Estuary Dredged Material Management
Plan. Astoria, Oregon: Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce.

Fox, D.S.; Benoit, P. 1986. Dredged Material Disposal at
Area D. Astoria, Oregon: Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce.

Fox, D.S. 1987. Dredgin: and dredged material disposal policy evalua-
9
tion. Astoria, OR: CREST.

Fraser, M.B. 1978. Columbia River Estuary Marina Study.
Astoria, Oregon. Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce

Frey, B-E.; Small, L.F.; Lara-Lara, R. 1984. Water column primary
production in the Columbia River Estuary. Astoria, OR: Columbia
River Estuary Data Development Program.

Gabrielson, I.W.; Jewett, S.G. 1970. Birds of the Pacific Northwest.
New York: Dover Publications, Inc.

Garret, M. 1985. Draft maps of Columbia River Estuary bald eagle nests
and territories.

Hamilton, P. 1984. Hydrodynamic Modeling of the Columbia River Estu-
ary. Astoria, OR: Columbia River Estuary Data Development Program.

Hazel,, C.R.; Ives, J.H.; Miller, K.J.; Edwards, D.K.; Tinling, J.S.;
Dorsy, G.L.; Green, M.; Crawford, J.A. 1984. Avifauna of the
Columbia River estuary. Astoria, OR: Columbia River Estuary Data
Development Program.

Higley, D.L.; Holton, R.L. 1978. A grab-sample study of the benthic
invertebrates of the Columbia RiverEstuary. Corvallis, OR: Oregon
State University.

Holton, R.L.; Higley, D.L.; I"rezezinski, M.A.; Jones, K.K.; Wilson, S.L.
1984. Benthic infauna of the Columbia River estuary. Astoria, OR:
Columbia River Estuary Data Development Program.

Jay, D.A. 1983. Interim report: circulatory process in the Columbia
River Estuary. Astoria, OR: Columbia River Estuary Data Develop-
ment Program.

Jeffries, S.J.; Trqacy, K.D.; Geiger, A.C. 1984. Marine mammals of the
Columbia River Estuary. Astoria, OR: Columbia River Estuary Data
Development Program.

Jones, K.K.; Bottom, D.L. 1994. Zooplankton and larval fishes of the
Columbia River estuary. Astoria, OR: Columbia River estuary Data
Development Program.

Kujala, N. 1976. Biological characteristics of fish life and plankton.
Draft report. Astoria, OR: Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce.

D-2

Land Conservation and Development Commission. 1985. Oregon's statewide
planning goals. Salem, OR: Department of Land Conservation and
Development.

Macdonald, K.B.; Winfield, T.P. 1984. Tidal marsh plant production in
Columbia River Estuary. Astoria, OR: Columbia River Estuary Data
Development Program.

Marshall, J. 1987. Columbia River Estuary mitigation and restoration
plan. Astoria, ORt CREST.

McIntire, C.D.; Amspoker, M.C. 1984. Benthic primary production in the
Columbia River Estuary. Astoria, OR: Columbia River Estuary Data
Development Program.

Morgan, M. In progress. Clatsop County, Hammond, Warrenton, and
Astoria public access plans. Cannon Beach, OR: Clatsop-Tillamook
Intergovernmental Conference.

Nature Conservancy. 1984. June 25, 1984, letter to the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers concerning coastal dune ecosystems on West Sand
Island.

Odgen Beeman and Associates, Inc.; Benkendorf Associates; Enviro
Science, Inc. 1986. Lower Columbia River assessment of Oregon
deep draft sites. Portland, OR: Department of Economic Develop-
ment.

Oregon Department of Transportation. 1975. Lower Columbia River ports
region study. Salem, OR.

Oregon Department of Transportation. 1983. Statewide Comprehensive
Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP). Salem, Oregon.

Oregon Division of State Lands. 1984. Estuarine mitigation, the Oregon
process. Salem, OR.

Oregon State Parks and Recreation Branch, Department of Transportation.
1976. Fort Stevens State Park Master Plan. Salem, Oregon.

Oregon State University. 1974. Physical characteristics of the Youngs
Bay estuarine environs. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University
Ocean Engineering Programs.

Pacific Power and Light Company, Economic Development Department. 1985.
Clatsop County Economic Development Assessment. Portland, Oregon:
Pacific Power and Light.

Pacific Power and Light Company, Economic Development Department. 1986.
Target Industry Study - Northern Oregon Coast. Portland, Oregon:
Pacific Power and Light.

Perron, R. 1987. Skamokawa tourism facilities feasibility study.

D-3

Cathlamet, WA: Lower Columbia Economic Development Council.

Phillips Carter and Co., Inc.; Gordon Fay Associates, Inc.; Oregon
Department of Transportation. 1986. Oregon coastal ports study.
Portland, OR: Department of Economic Development.

Port of Astoria. 1985. Port of Astoria marine terminals development
plan. Astoria,OR: Port of Astoria.

Roberson, J.A.; Copp, H.D.; Naik, B. 1980. Mathematical modeling of
circulation in Baker Bay, Washington/Oregon. Pullman, WA: Washing-
ton State University, Department of Civil and Environmental Engine-
ering.

Schlicker, Herbert G., et al. 1972. Environmental Geology of the
Coastal Region of Tillamook and Clatsop Counties, Oregon. Port-
land, Oregon: State of Oregon, Department of Geology and Mineral
Industries.

Science Applications International Corporation. 1986. Recommended
Interim Guidelines for the Management of Salmon Net-Pen Culture in
Puget Sound, Final Report. Olympia, Washington: Washington Depart-
ment of Ecology.

Simenstad, C.; Jay, D.; McIntire, C.D.; Nehlsen, W.; Sherwood, C.;
Small, L. 1984. The dynamics of the Columbia River estuarine
ecosystem, 2 vols. Astoria, OR: Columbia River Estuary Data
Development Program.

Sims, C.W. 1979. Migrational characteristics of'juvenile fall chinook
salmon, Oncorhynchus tshawytscha, in the Columbia River Estuary.
Seattle, WA: NMFS.

Sutherland, G.B. 1979. Oil spill protection plan for the natural
resources of the lower Columbia an&Willamette Rivers. Port-
land,OR: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality.

Tabor, J.E. 1976. Inventory of'riparian habitats and associated
wildlife along the Columbia and Snake Rivers, vols. 2A and 2B.
Corvallis, OR: Oregon Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, Oregon
State 'University.

Thomas, D.W. 1982. Significant shoreland and wetland habitats in the
Clatsop Plains and the Columbia floodplain of Clatsop County,
Oregon. Astoria, OR: CREST.

Thomas, D.W. 1980. Study of the intertidal vegetation of the Columbia
River Estuary, July - September 1980. Vancouver, WA: Pacific
Northwest River Basins Commission.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1987. Baker Bay bathymetric differenc-
ing, draft rep ort. Portland, OR.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Portland District). 1986. Clatsop

D-4

County, Oregon Diking Improvement District #9 Flood Damage Reduc-
tion Study: Draft Detailed Project Report and Environmental Assess-
ment.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1987. Columbia River downstream of
Bonneville Dam maintenance disposal plan. Portland, OR.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1979. Concept plan for waterfowl
wintering habitat preservation, Washington and Oregon coasts.
Portland, OR.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1986. Pacific Bald Eagle Recovery
Plan. Portland, Oregon.

United States Department of Aquaculture, Soil Conservation Service.
1986. Soil Survey of Grays Harbor County Area, Pacific County and
Wahkiakum County, Washington.

Wahkiakum County. 1987. Wahkiakum County overall economic development
program. Cathlamet, WA.

Waterfront Review Committee. 1986. Astoria waterfront revitalization
plan. Astoria, 01@: City of Astoria.

Watson, J.W.; Anthony, R.G. 1986. Ecology of Bald Eagles in the Tongue
Point area, lower Columbia River. Portland, OR: U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers.

Wilson, S.L.; Jones, K.K.; Higley, D.L.; Holton, R.L. 1982. Seasonal
changes in community structure of benthic infauna at six stations
in the Columbia River Estuary. Corvallis, OR: State University,
School of Oceanography..

D-5

APPENDIX E

PLAN REVISION PARTICIPATION

The following individuals attended plan revision advisory committee
meetings or provided comments on draft plan material.

Citizens

Deanne Bruner, Astoria
Howard Bruner, Astoria
Dorothy Burkhard, Lewis and Clark
Jack Burkhart, Lewis and Clark
Pirkko Carlson, Astoria
William Carlson, Astoria
Casey Cochran, Warrenton
Samuel Cochran, Warrenton
Chris Doumit, Cathlamet
Charles Haglund, Svensen Island
Marie Haglund, Svensen Island
Marvin Holland., Cathlamet
Gerry Johnson, Astoria
Ruth Kaste, Wahkiakum County
Ivan Larsen, Astoria
Mark Laukkanen, Wahkiakum County
Mark Linquist, Cathlamet
Ardell McPhail., Ilwaco
Dennis O'Conner, Lewis and Clark
Duane Ostling, Cathlamet
Herb Palmberg, Warrenton*
Larry Quigley, Cathlamet
Daniel Stephan, Wahkiakum County
Elroy Svensen, Wahkiakum County
Esther Svensen, Wahkiakum County
LeRoy Wika, Cathlamet

State Agency Representatives

Oregon Department of Economic Development
Greg Baker

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Bruce Sutherland

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
Brent Forsberg
Steven Stanley
T.Edwin Cummings

Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development
Gail McEwen
Patti Snow

Oregon Division of State Lands
Ken Franklin
Janet Neuman

E-1

State Agency Representatives cont.

Oregon State University Sea Grant/Extension-,,,,,,....
,Jim Bergeron

Washington Department of Ecology
Randy Davis

Washington Department of Wildlife
Will Nelson

Local Government Representatives

City of Astoria
Paul Benoit

City of Warrenton
Walter Camp
George Cooper

Clatsop County
Elizabeth Fox
Curt Schneider

Clatsop Economic Development Committee
Jim Hill
Duncan Lav

Hammond mooring Basin
Jack Zimmerman

Port of Ilwaco
Frank Heer
Bob Petersen

Town of Hammond
Stephanie Hampton

Wahkiakum Port District #1

Wahkiakum Port District #2
Steve McClain

Federal Agency Representatives

National Marine Fisheries Service
Robert Emmett
David Miller
Ed Murrell

Soil Conservation Service
Don Leach

E-2

Federal Agency Representatives cont.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Sheryl Carrubba
Patrick Keough
Thomas Morse

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Nancy Ellifrit
Karen Ingels
David Sill

E-3

." 91111
I
I 1 3 6668 14108 2984