[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
r-T T 1 -ile Coastalwealth of Massachusetts ecade of Coastal Zone Management elebrating a D ITr 1 -393 - 1978-1988 . M4 S67 1968 When the sixty original framers of the Massachusetts Coastal Zone Manavrnent Plan began their efforts during my first administration, I believed that these Massachusetts citizens would produce an effective coastal pro ram that could serve as a model for the nation. Actions over Yle past ten years have proved that faith well founded. With our innovative efforts Al in land acquisition, agricultural and boatyard preservation, wetlands restrictions and barrier beach protections, we have accepted the challenge of a national leadership role in environ- mental protection. In 1983, 1 was especially pleased to si into law legislation creating the MCZM office within EO A. By officially sanctioning the program and establishing a specific office, we served notice to the nation of our serious concern and intention to preserve our coast for future generations. I look forward to the next decade of MCZM. Governo ichael S. Dukakis Commonwealth of Massachusetts I am proud of the emphasis Massachusetts citizens and legislators have placed on environmental protection and, in particular, efforts to conserve our fragile coast. The creation of the MUM Plan and its acceptance by the federal govern ment in 1978 were milestones in the CommonwealtHs environ- mental history. Continued support for the MUM program from local municipalities, environmental roups and legis- lators and the positive reviews from the U.S. Department of Commerce have shown us that the agencies and offices of EOEA are on the rifht track. However, there is still much to do, from cleanup o our state's coastal waters to acquisition of coastal properties allowing greater public access to the shore. The next decade of MUM should be even busier and more exciting than the first ten years. Secretary James S@'Hoyte Executive Office of Environmental Affairs Participants in the MCZM P@ogram: Executive Office of Environmental Affairs (EOEA) Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management (MCZM) Office Department of Environmental Management (DEM) Department of Environmental Quality Engineering (DEQE) Department of Fisheries, Wildlife, and Environmental Law Enforcement (DFWELE) Department of Food and Agriculture (DEN) Metropolitan District Commission (MDC) @@ @ecretary J Division of Conservation Services Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) Office The Coastalwealth of Massachusetts A Ten Year Review of the Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Program, lW8-1988. Massachusetts' 1,500 miles of magnificent tidal shoreline is a national treasure -a resource that as played an important role in our Common- wealtWs history and constant growth. Its future oppp-1 depends on how well we can manage the many demands that our state's citizens and visitors now place on this limited resource. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts took a major step towards protecting its coastline with the creation of the Massachusetts Coastal Zone Manage- ment Program a decade ago. Upon its official designation on April 24, 1978, the Program set as its goal the "attempt to resolve conflicts where possible and to establish values and priorities for the use of coastal resources to help mitigate conflicts in the future." Over the course of the past ten years, the MCZM Program has striven to both protect the land and waters of our coastal zone and guide development so as to best utilize our limited coastal resources. Through the dedication of local officials and citizen activists, the commit- ment of the MCZM staff, and the cooperation of MCZM's sister agencies, the MCZM Program has become one of the most highly regarded coastal programs in the country. However, even with the successes that have been achieved, activities in the coastal zone have caused additional concerns. As we continue to address the traditional issues affecting the coastline and begin to solve some of the new pressing issues that confront our coastal communities, we now realize that there are no simple solutions. Every improvement to the coastal environment tends to make it even more attractive to the ever faster growing popula- tions of coastal communities. While increased development pressures have led to added demands on the Commonwealth's already fragile ecosystem, the state is fortunate to have the MCZM Program as a mechanism for addressing these coastal concerns. A major MCZM goal for the next decade is to increase public awareness and concern for this resource by creating a well-defined and balanced coastal agenda, statewide. The coastal zone is a priceless state resource and it is an integral part of our Commonwealth's maritime tradition and future. 11. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CENTER <@ c@7 2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE Richard E Delaney Director, Coastal Zone Management Office L*4 ORR CHARLESTON SC 29405-2413 IN3_ PkOWWtY Of CSC Library Introduction MCZMHistory Developed under the authority of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amend- ed, the MUM Program was the first state effort on the east coast and fourth in the nation to receive federal approval. However, approval did not come easily. It took three-and-a-half years of effort from scores of concerned citizens to create the MUM Management Plan. This citizen participation has continued to play an integral role in the successful implementation of the MUM Program, including valuable inputs from the Coastal Resources Advisory Board (CRAB) and various informal discussions between state officials and local interest groups. In 1983, due to the success of the MCZM Program in setting a "coastal agenda," it was given an important vote of confidence by the state legislature with the passage of a bill that established a perma- nent Office of Coastal Zone Management within the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs. Over the years the MCZMP has sought to encourage the wise allocation of public funds, which would maximize public investment while protecting important coastal resources. Fort SezvalilMarblehead HarborIpifies the rocky type of shoreline found along Massachusetts'NortgS ore. Z AtS 7_ ? Igo, Owl .Z: 2 The Coastal Zone As officially defined, the Massachusetts Coastal Zone extends landward to 100 feet beyond specified major roads, rail lines or other visible rights-of-way and seaward to the edge of the territorial sea and includes all of Cape Cod, Martha's Vineyard, Nantucket and Gosnold, MUM Policies Twenty-seven official policies were established in the 1978 MCZM Management Plan. Since then, their significance has grown and evolved along with the Program itself. The MCZMP has ex- panded to keep pace with increased scientific knowledge, technological advances, and the demands of one of the statds fastest growing populations. At the present time, 40 percent of the Commonwealth's population lives within coastal communities and 70 percent resides within a one hour drive of the shore. The original policies of 1978 are now being reviewed in the light of the experience of the last ten years. MCZM policy implementation is farfrom a static process. It is an active give-and-take balancing act between competing interests for the use of a finite area. MCZM and the Nation Massachusetts can be proud of its coastal heritage, its evolutionary work in the area of environmental protection, and its leadership role among coastal states today. The Massachusetts coastline has figured prominently in our nation's history and, with appropriate management, will continue to serve the nation through its fishing, commercial, tourism and recreational facilities. Recognizing its responsibilities to its coastal residents, as well as all of the citizens of the nation who are attracted to the coast, the Commonwealth has actively supported the 'federal consistency" review process. As required by the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, the MCZM reviews all federally conducted or supported activities that directly affect the coastal zone to assure that they are in compliance with approved state environmental management programs. This system of checks and balances is unique in federal-state relations. It allows the Com- monwealth to bring to public attention and review federal projects that potentially threaten the local environment, and thereby allows the opportunity for project modification orfor alternative actions to be considered. This relationship also allows the federal government to review state CZM programs, to verify that the states are implementing the provisions of the CZMA and that they are adhering to their approved plans. MCZM has consistently received high praisefor its leadership on the national level and for its close work with the Commonwealth's coastal communities, in planning for and managing the use of the shoreline. 3 41, Coastal Hazards The Blizzard of '78 wreaked havoc on the coastal communities of Plymouth, Marshfield, Scituate, Hull, Winthrop, Revere, Gloucester, Rockport and Boston by dumping 27 inches of snow on eastern Massachusetts. But it was the storm surge, combined with unusually high tides and huge waves, that inflicted the most damage along the coast during the storm. Effects on man-made structures in coastal areas were devastating and erosion was severe. Homes that were located on barrier beaches, cliffs and other coastal areas toppled from their foundations and roads broke apart, as subsurface sands were washed away by the encroaching sea. Ushered in by this awesome demonstration of sea power was the Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Program. Immediately, MCZM personnel were charged with the responsibility of organizing 15 local disaster assistance centers for victims of the storm; a storm with damage estimates in excess of $225 million. Because of the storm, Massachusetts received funding for the acquisition of storm damaged property as a pilot project from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) through the Flood Insurance Act, Section 1362. As a result, properties in Scituate and Hull were pur- chased by the Commonwealth. Later, MCZM officials, working with the state's Department of En- vironmental Management, provided technical assistance to the legislature in support of a proposed $3 million bond issue that would be used to acquire flood-prone coastal areas. Over the past ten years since that storm, Massachusetts has been actively working to protect its natural barrier beaches, barrier islands and the two wetland resources that characterize a barrier beach system, dunes and beaches. Policies of the 1978 Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Plan call for the protection of these resource areas, for their value as storm buffers and because barrier beaches protect other wetland areas that are valuable to marine productivity and as natural habitats. Over the years those policies have been applied to numerous state programs. The implementation of these policies is primarily accomplished through the Coastal Wetlands Restriction Program (under Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 130, Section 105) and the Wetlands Protection Program (Chapter 131, Section 40). Under the Restriction Program, a list of per- mitted and prohibited activities is actually attached to the deed of a parcel of land. The Wetlands Pro- tection Program gives local conservation commi .sst.ons the authority to condition the environmental impact of a project using state-generated guidelines. In addition, CZM's Community Assistance Grants program, which provided financial assistance to coastal communities to study coastal prob- lems, stipulated a specific priority area for coastal hazards. And the federal consistency review process allows MCZM to ensure that federally funded, licensed or implemented projects do not encourage growth in hazard prone areas and that theydo notdamage the natural protective functions of a barrier beach. The Blizzard of'78 lashed at the shoreline and tore away seawalls, homes and other structures. In Eastham on Cape Cod, houses on unprotected barrier beaches were swamped, including the "Outermost House" (upper left) made famous in a book by Henry Beston. 5 Substantive new regulations for the Wetlands Protection Act, Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 131, Section 40, were promulgated on July 10, 1978 by the Department of Environmental Quality Engineering with the assistance of Coastal Zone Management specialists. The regulations provide specific performance standards that must be followed to protect the storm damage prevention and flood control characteristics of beach, dune and barrier beach areas. Regulations for inland wetlands were updated in January of 1983 and wildlife habitat regulations were added in 1987. To better enforce these regulations in coastal areas, DEQE has hired two coastal enforcement agents through a MCZM grant, starting in 1986. Massachusetts was the first state in the nation to issue Executive Orders on "Barrier Beaches" and restrictions on Off-Road Vehicle (ORY) use. The Barrier Beach Executive Order #181 of August 8, 1980 prohibits the use of state funds to encourage growth and development on barrier beaches and establishes barrier beaches as a state priority for ac- quistion. Executive Order #190 of December 24, 1980 directs DEM and the Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and Recreational Vehicles (DFWRY), now DFWELE, to develop guidelines for the use of ORVs on Massachusetts public coastal lands and to exclude their use on environmentally sensitive areas, such as dunes, salt marshes and tidal flats. Since 1978, MCZM funds have helped DEM and later DEQE to map and restrict coastal wetlands, using aerial photos and ground verification. After evaluation by a team of scien- tists, including a marine fisheries biologist, geologist and civil engineer, those wetlands that best meet the interests of the Coastal Wetlands Restriction Act are proposed for restrictions. Following information meetings, public hearings and on-site inspections, the restriction maps and orders are finalized, approved by the Massachusetts Board of Environmental Management and recorded in the registry of deeds. This on-going process continues. In 1982, Massachusetts became the first state to participate in the Federal Emergency Management Agency's program to purchase storm-damaged properties from willing sellers. This program, part of Section 1362 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, is intended to reduce the loss of developed property within flood hazard areas by acquiring and removing them as opposed to preventing new construction by regulation in those areas. The program pays pre-flood value for buildings and current market value for land which meets specified requirements. As part of the program, a state or municipality must enter into a legally binding agreement to take title to and manage the property in a manner that is consistent with sound land management use. Ten properties in Hull and eighteen in Scituate that were damaged during the Blizzard of '78 were sold by landowners to FEMA, who then gave title to the properties to DEM. MCZM completed the historical shoreline change digital mapping project for the entire Massachusetts coast in May 1985. The maps were generated to give federal, state and local officials and the public a better understanding of past trends in shoreline accretion and erosion. 6 4 0 L Sediment materials, such as sand, are moved by wave action and currents from one beach area to others in a natural process of shoreline change. Any interruption of that process, such as the construction of a groin, can result in severe erosion of the unprotected beaches. Dunes ' if stabilized by beach grasses and other vegetation, prevent direct wave attack against inland areas, while beaches, Uecause of theirgradual slope, act to lessen the impact of destruc- tive waves. The beach grass plantings are part of a major erosion control effort at the Cape Cod National Seashore. Thefederal Coastal Barriers Resources Act (CBRA), which prohibits mostfederal expen- ditures andfinancial assistancefor development within units of the Coastal Barrier Resources System, became law on October 18, 1982. A total of 41 sites in Massachusetts have been designated as undeveloped coastal barriers by the Department of the Interior. Maps of the CBRS were produced in April 1983 and delineation of the units become final. In 1987, 18 additional units were proposed for addition to the Massachusetts inventory and many existing unit boundaries were modified. In 1988, legislation was filed that would provide for the purchase of storm damaged prop- erty through a $10 million pilot project, administered by EOEA. Coastal lands that are repeatedly damaged by storms would be acquired through their voluntary sale by the land- owners. They would be used for conservation and passive recreation purposes. MCZM issued a report entitled "Massachusetts Coastal Submergence Program: Passive Retreat of Massachusetts Coastal Upland Due to Relative Sea-Level Rise." Using the historic (and conservative) rate of sea-level rise of 0.01 foot per year or 0.45feet in 45 years (1980-2025), scientists calculated that 65 acres of upland area will be lost annually to sea level rise and land submergence, and that approximately 3,000 acres will disappear by the year 2025. Other less conservative but still moderate rates of sea level rise (1. 14 feetlyear and 1.57feetlyear) would produce 45-year losses of 7,459 and 10,273 acres, respectively. Extreme estimates of an 11.3-foot rise by the year 2100 would lead to significant geographical and economic consequences. The information contained in the report is intended for planning, design and conservation efforts in coastal communities. 7 lk 0 Marim Etwironnwnt In 1967, the newly approved Article 97 of the Massachusetts Constitution guaranteed every citizen the right to clean air and water. It was inspired by an environmental consciousness that was sweeping the nation. Yet, throughout the two decades following that pronouncement, the Commonwealth's coastal waters have continued to serve as a repositoryfor society's wastes. The passage ofArticle 97, unfortunately, did little to stem the flow. This legacy of polluted harbors, increased closures of shellfish beds due to contamination, and recent observations of high levels of cancers in fish from state waters has now sparked a new environmental awareness and a determination from state agencies and citizen activists to end these disquieting trends. Along with the passage of thefederal Clean WaterAct of 1972, came sources offunding that permitted states to define their water quality problems and initiate programs to address them. Over the past decade, water quality issues have remained one of the foremost concerns of the Massachusetts agencies that are charged with the mission of the Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Program. The work of the Boston Harbor Water Quality Committee (the "Sargent" Committee) in 1983 and 1984 led to theformation of the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority in 1985. This was a major step in the process for restoring Boston Harbor to a more pristine state. Laws, such as the Ocean Sanctuaries Act and the Wetlands Protection Act, have also been used to protect both offshore and nearshore waters from abuse and overuse. Included among the 27 policies of the Coastal Zone Management Program are many that concern the marine environment, such as protection of ecologically significant resource areas, support for national water quality goals through coordination with existing water quality planning and management agencies, and the development of a state review process for projects in water bodies and contiguous land areas to minimize interference with water circulation, sediment transport and water quality. Progress has been slow; it takes a long time to reverse centuries of pollution, But thefact that we have managed to make inroads, despite increased development and recreational use of the coast, is a positive sign in the effort to protect our shores. Milestones in the Commonwealth's history of marine environmental protection over the past decade include: A Coastal Wetlands Protection Act was passed in 1963. It was the first state program in the country to protect wetlands. Regulationsfor these coastal resourceareas werepromulgated in 1978 as part of the MCZM Program. The Coastal Wetlands Restriction Act was enacted in 1965, providing another innovative method for regulating the type of development allowed in sensitive environmental areas. Amendments were approved and regulations were developed in 1979. A humpback whale breeches in the waters of Stellwagen Bank, an area that has been placed on the federal Marine Sanctuaries Site Evaluation List. Another visitor to the Bank, the endangered North Atlantic Right Whale, has been named the state marine mammal. 9 *A rk A; V-1 Waquoit Bay, with South Cape Beach (bottom right) and Washburn Island (center), has been designated as an Area 4 of Critical Environmental Concern since 1979. Afederal-state etrt has resulted in t t e 17th National Estuarine Research Reserve. The Massachusetts fishing industry landed a catch valued at $279 million in 1987. Commercially valuable species include cod, haddock, winter and yellowtail flounder, sea scallops and lobster. Early Massachusetts settlers used them Jrorfertilizer, but lobsters are nowfound in much diminished numbers. New limits in allowable size mayhelp juveniles reach reproductive maturity, leading to an increase in the population. Ad" J r" Ilk 'ilk 10 In 1978, the North River was designated as thefirst "Scenic River" under the Massachusetts Scenic Rivers Program. This program is designed to control the alteration of selected rivers and the contiguous lands within 100 feet of their banks for scenic and recreation purposes and to prevent their pollution. The first of the Commonwealth's coastal Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) was designated in December of 1978. Sandy Neck in Barnstable, on Cape Cod, was chosen for its beautiful and relatively undeveloped barrier beach and marsh system; its environ- mental, recreational and visual resources; and its use as a breeding habitat for Terrapin turtles. Since then, eight other areas have been designated as coastal ACECs: Parker RiverlEssex Bay, Ellisville Harbor, Pocasset River, Waquoit Bay, WeymouthlHingham Back River, Inner Cape Cod Bay, Weir River and Pleasant Bay. Regulations for the Ocean Sanctuaries Act of 1970 were issued by DEM in July 1978, again as a result of the MCZM Program. These regulations are directed toward protecting the five ocean sanctuaries from any exploitation, development or activity that would alter or endanger their ecology or appearance or that of the Cape Cod National Seashore. In 1987, an EOEA committee submitted a report to the legislature that proposed amendments to the Act, to more realistically address issues of ocean dumping of treated wastewater streams and water quality. Massachusetts became the first state in the nation to formulate and institute a state-wide fisheries policy when the MCZM-funded Marine Fisheries Management Policy Report was approved in July, 1982. The report was written in response to Executive Order #165 which called for theformulation of a comprehensive fisheries policy to guide development, management and enhancement of the Commonwealth's living marine resources. Included are policies on regulations, licensing, environmental concerns, marine programs, marketing, research and mariculture. Also in 1982, MCZM released "PCBs -A Status Report on PCB (Polychlorinated biphynel) Pollution in the New Bedford, MA Area." This report, a compilation of existing information, led to the designation of the Acushnet River estuary as a federal Superfund clean-up site. In 1983, two areas in or near Massachusetts waters were placed on the draftfederal Marine Sanctuaries Site Evaluation List: Stellwagen Bank and Nantucket SoundlShoalsl Oceanographer Canyon. DEM resumed administration of the Massachusetts Rivers and Harbors Program after it was reauthorized and funded by the state legislature in 1984. The program is designed to assist communities upgrade their waterways. Projects include dredging, construction or rehabilitation of piers, wharves, bulkheads, sea walls, groins, jetties, boatways and public access facilities within strict environmental parameters. On October 30, 1985 the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries with assistance from the Department of Environmental Quality Engineering and the Office of Coastal Zone Management issued a White Paper on "Massachusetts Marine Fisheries: Assessment at Mid-Decade." The report highlighted stresses on the marine environment and the Massa- chusetts fisheries industry. In response to the report, a Marine Resources Coordinating Committee was formed to develop and direct strategies to address the concerns outlined in the paper. A ) 1985 also saw Governor Dukakis sign legislation creating the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority to specifically address the Boston Harbor cleanup project and speed development of secondary treatment facilities for Boston area sewerage. Buzzards Bay was one of four estuaries selected by Congress to be studied under a special $4 million appropriation to the U.S. EPA budget in 1985. The Buzzards Bay Project, jointly managed by EPA and EOEA, has received approximately $400,000 per yearfor the first phase of the project with a primary goal of protecting water quality and the health of living resources in the Bay. The fiscal 1988 budget has grown to over $1 million. The Project is charged with developing an environmental master plan that will ensure an acceptable and sustainable level of environmental quality for Buzzards Bay. On January 25, 1988 EPA and the state designated Buzzards Bay as "an estuary of national significance," joining five other estuaries in the National Estuary Program. Massachusetts is also involved in a similar effort in Narragansett Bay, as the upper reaches of the Bay and many of the tributaries are within the Commonwealth. Work is underway to have Massachusetts Bay added to the list. -Ir =Shore Sanctuary Ocean Sanctuaries of Massachusetts as deiined by M.G. L.C. 132A ss. 13-16 and 18 South Essex Ocean Sanctuary achusetts Say Cape Cod Ocean Cape Cod Bay Sanctuary Ocean Sanctuary Cape Cod Bay Cape Massachusetts General Laws, A le Chapter 132A created the Ocean 2@ Sanctuaries Program. In 1987, an ?0111 Nantucket Ocean Sanctuaries Study Group Sound report was sent to the legislature for their action in amending the Act. Cape and III lands Ocean Sanctuary 12 sm Ripples in a salt marsh hide the rich diversity of life in these valuable coastal waters. Waquoit Bay, in Falmouth and Mashpee, already a state ACEC, was selected to become the 17th National Estuarine Research Reserve with official designation in 1988. The goals of the NERR program are to preserve representative estuarine systems for research and educational purposes, with resulting data used to make management decisions in similar areas across the nation. In 1987, Massachusetts entered into the federal Nonpoint Source Control Program. The program is administered by EPA under authority of the Clean Water Act Amendments of 1987 In 1988, Massachusetts added its name to the list of states proposing or enacting legislation Vol to prohibit the use Of antifouling paints with the chemical additive tributyltin (TBT). As of April 1, 1988, the Massachusetts Department of Food and Agriculture banned the use of TBT-paints on all non-aluminum vessels under 25 meters in length. Paints with limited TBT release rates of less than three micrograms per day can be used on larger vessels. Legislation has been proposed on both the federal and state level. A landmark April 1988, federal-state agreement will allow $2 million in fines, previously assessed by EPA against the state, for past water pollution violations to be allocated to an Environmental Trust Fund, dedicated to the research, monitoring and clean-up of Boston Harbor and Massachusetts Bay. 13 fA 4*0 -I.LJLLL @Av Yf I..Mwqpmm v;al 14- Gawral Developtwnt MCZM policies on general development, public1private investment, and ports and harbors were developed in response to the rediscovery of the urban waterfront. Although the state has had a long and rich tradition of association with the sea, our urban waterfronts have recently become a magnetfor housing and other forms of private, non-water-dependent use; unfortunately, such development pressure often displaces water-dependent activity and threatens to make the shore "off-limits" to the public at large. The state's interest in coastgl development, during the decade of the MCZMP, can be looked at as consisting of two phases. The first five years concentrated on rehabilitation of existing structures and construction Of new marine facilities. While financial assistance continued to play an important role in the second phase, the majorfocus over the past few years has been on the development of Massachusetts laws to regulate work in tidelands. These intertidal flats and submerged lands have been regulated under the common law doctrine, known as the "public trust," which grants access to tidelands for "fishing, fowling and navigating" in intertidal areas and ownership by the Commonwealth below the low tide line. Recent sweeping changes in Massachusetts coastal law are based upon recognition that the Commonwealth's authority can extend to those areas which have been filled as well as those that are still subject to tidal action. Consequently, virtually all of the urban waterfronts in Massachusetts are now subject to a level of state control. Foremost among the state's interests are the protection, in perpetuity, of the public's right to access the tidelands and support for water-dependent industries and activities that have played such an important role in the Commonwealth's history. During the past ten years, the state has recorded many milestones in its efforts to develop urban coastal resources. The 1978 MCZM Program identified 12 "Designated Port Areas" (DPAs). Within a DPA, both filled and flowed tidelands are reserved exclusively for uses that are either maritime industrial or which occur in a manner that does not significantly diminish the capacity of the DPA to accommodate maritime industry in the future. DPAs are found in: Gloucester, Salem Harbor, Beverly Harbor, Lynn, MysticRiver, Chelsea Creek, East Boston, South Boston, Weymouth Fore River, Plymouth Cordage Park, New Bedford-Fairhaven, and Mt. Hope Bay. A Community Assistance Grants Program was initiated in 1977 as a state-federal effort, administered by MCZM. Through it, MCZM awarded over $1 million to help pay for some 82 local projects in the areas of. port and harbor development and waterfront renewal plans, preliminary engineering studies, applied science investigations, recreation plans, and coastal hazard mitigation studies. Instrumental in providing leverage for further fundraising, the first $240,000 of MCZM grants resulted in more than $10 million of investment in coastal improvements. In addition to the grants program, $84,000 in special funds was awarded in 1978 to Gloucester, Plymouth and Salem for urban waterfront demonstration projects. New buildings along the Boston waterfront and elsewhere in the Commonwealth have incorporated visual and physical access amenities for the public in accordance with state licensing processes. 15 CFIP PROJECTS (ROUNDS 1, 11 & 111) COMMUNITY PROJECT COMMUNITY PROJECT Barnstable Hyannis Gateway Park Mashpee Great River Boat Ramp Beverly Public Pier Ockway Bay Boat Ramp of Boston Dry Dock Park Pirate's Cove Boat Ramp your 01011IN111 'community. Pier 10 Rehabilitation New Bedford South Terminal Fender System , @, t, Chatham Barn Hill Road Landing Steamship Pier P US DMAWEN1 O@ CO % Crow's Pond Town Landing Newburyport Waterfront Embayment _CT el Mill Pond Town Pier Oak Bluffs Harbor Protection Ryder's Cove Landing Orleans Paw Wah Pond Landing Chilmark Menemsha Bulkhead Repair Rock Harbor MACMILLAN WHARF REHABIUTATION@' Danvers Popes Landing Provincetown MacMillan Wharf Dennis Sesuit Harbor Bulkhead Quincy Houghs Neck Park Edgartown Memorial Wharf Bulkhead Nut Island Park (.@AA MASSACHUSETTS OFFICE OF Memorial Wharf Superstructure Salem Collins Cove Bulkhead = COA5TAL 70HE MANAGEMV4T Falmouth Eel Pond Dock Winter Island Marina TOWN OF PROVINCETOWN Gay Head West Basin Boat Ramp Saugus Lobsterman's Landing Gloucester Harbor Cove Docking Facility Scituate Town Wharf State Fish Pier Somerset Pierce Beach Park Harwich Saquatucket Marina Village Waterfront Park Hingham Harbor Facilities Swampscott Fish House and Pier Hull Pemberton Wharf Swansea Ocean Grove Parking Facility Lynn Marine Park Pier Tisbury Shellfish Hatchery LPA Docking Facility Wellfleet Shirttail Point Facilities Marshfield Harbor Community Park Yarmouth N.H. Ave. Access/Protection Town Pier Wilbur Park Walkway A Supreme Judicial Court decision in the Boston Waterfront Development Corp. V. Common- wealth case breathed new life into the public trust doctrine allowing access to Massachusetts trustlands along the shore. The Court ruled that private developers were subject to the implied condition that the property be used for the public purpose for which the land was originally granted. If they did not meet those requirements, the state could reclaim former tidelands, including those that had been filled for over 150 years. The Court emphasized the tenacity of the public trust doctrine over time and established that protection of the public interest in each parcel of tidelands is a perpetual responsibility of the government. The Coastal Facilities Improvement Program (CFIP) was created in Chapter 589 of the Acts of 1983 as one part of comprehensive legislation addressing coastal matters. State bond funds in the amount of $18 million were allocated for use by eligible coastal commu- nities for the construction, reconstruction, repair or maintenance of coastal facilities. 49 projects in 32 communities were assisted in three rounds of grants. CFIP was reauthorized in 1987foranother three years with a $10 million allocation. Chapter 91 of the Massachusetts General Law was amended in 1983 to provide greatly in creased substantiveand procedural protection topublic rights in tideland, bothflowed andfilled. The following year, the legislature and Governor Dukakis declared a moratorium on the enact- ment of irrevocable license bills and other special tidelands statutes, further strengthening the public trust doctrine. In 1986, DEQE published draft revisions to the Waterways Regula- tions which overhauled the entire licensing framework and included policy initiatives expressed in the 1983 amendments. Planning boards coping with development in local harbors received a boost in 1987 as MCZM released "Guidelines for Harbor Planning" and the reauthorized Coastal Facilities Improve- ment Program allocated $1 million towards the production of comprehensive plans. MCZM will award these harbor planning grants in the 1988-1991 time period. 16 Massachusetts agencies completed licensing actions on the first ten major applications for non-water dependent use of filled tidelands along the waterfront in 1987. Public access provisions consistent with the public trust doctrine and Chapter 91 were incorporated in the developers'plans. Dredging projects also received attention in 1987 with the publication of MCZM's Dredging Handbook and the reauthorization of DEM's Rivers and Harbors Program under the Open Space Bond. This program funds a significant portion of locally-sponsored dredging projects. A new program, intended to allow the state to purchase development restrictions to threatened boatyards, was established in the 1987 Open Space Bond with MCZM chairing the organi- zational committee. The Boatyard Preservation Program is modelled after the Commonwealth's successful Agricultural Preservation Program. The Public Access Board of the Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and Environmental Law 60 Enforcement was formed in 1962. Over the past decade the Board has been involved in the repair and construction of boat launching facilities in: Plymouth Harbor, New Bedford, Apponagansett Bay, Pease Park and Sconticut Neck, Hither Creek, Back River, Cashman Park, Cole River, Pamet River, Blish Point, Clark Cove and Scituate Harbor. In 1987, the Board published "Public Access to the Waters of Massachusetts," listing 121 boat and canoe launching sites which have been designated state access facilities. Designated Port Areas 3 2 1 .Gloucester Inner Harbor 4 2. Salem Harbor 5 Massachusetts 3. Beverly Harbor 6 7 Bay 4. Lynn 8 5. Mystic River 6. Chelsea Creek 7. East Boston 8. South Boston 9. Weymouth Fore River 10. Plymouth Cordage 10 11. New Bedford- Fairhaven Cape Cod Bay 12, Mt. Hope Bay 12 C 0 C a P e Jaojv!@ Nantucket Sound The original CZM Plan described 12 Designated Port Areas where tidelands are reserved for water-dependent industry or other uses not harmful to the DPA@s capacity to accommodate future maritime commerce. 17 mo -1q MLFI, -01 Eneigy When the MCZMP came into force, two major accidents had just illustrated the problems of spilling oil on coastal waters. The December 16, 1976 ARGO MERCHANT incident off Nantucket showed Massachusetts that its waters were not immune to shipping accidents. Favorable ocean currents, fortunately, dispersed the 7.7 million gallons of fuel oil out to sea. The coast of Brittany, France, was not as lucky less than two years later. The AMOCO CADIZ breakup on March 17, 1978 demonstrated just how devastating an oil spill could be to beaches and wildlife. When the MCZMP was officially approved, energy projects and energy facilities siting found their way into those initial 27 policies, with particular emphasis on the issues of commercial, industrial and energy development in urban ports, harbors and in the offshore Georges Bank region. The energy policies demonstrate a commitment by the Commonwealth to minimizing any adverse impacts onfisheries, water quality, wildlife and the marine environment. This commitment has led to confrontations with the federal government with regard to offshore oil and gas development in the Georges Bank area, one of the most productive fishing grounds in the world. The Coastal Zone Management Program has worked diligently over the past decade to reduce conflicts between the va rious groups interested in the Georges Bank region and to insu re that adequate safeguards are in place before oil and gas wells are drilled and other energy development projects are initiated. Massachusetts worked with several states and national environmental groups to amend the federal Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act in 1978, The amendments increased the states'roles in the development of federal leasing policy and created an offshore oil spill compensation fund. The Coastal Energy Impact Program (CEIP) was established by Congress in 1976 and administered under the CZMA to help states and local communities deal with the social, economic and environmental impacts Of coastal energy activity. The federally funded program, administered in Massachusetts by EOEA, provided assistance in the form of grants and loans. Significant projects included development of oil spill contingency plans. Work to restore this funding program is now underway. The U. S. Department of the Interior offered for sale 116 blocks on Georges Bank in Sale #42 during December 1979. Bids of $816.5 million were accepted on 63 blocks. Massachusetts succeeded in persuading the Department of the Interior to develop a training program for oil rig personnel to recognize and minimize conflicts with the fishing industry. For the first time, DOI required drilling operations to employ personnel trained in the use of oil spill containment equipment and to subscribe to some of the strictest drilling standards nationwide. The drill floor on the ALASKAN STAR hummed with activity during the sinking of two test wells. Actions CZM led to the requirement that all drilling operations be staffed with personnel trained in oil sl@nVl containment and clean-up. 19 Ak 'Wl 7t Pow- x 200M C13 <1 Cape 006 Y, S soln -20ol?7 2000, 20 The Massachusetts Oil Spill Contingency Planning Program was inaugurated in January 1980. The project is designed to give coastal communities the organization, training and equipment necessary to respond immediately to an oil spill. Cape Cod, Martha's Vineyard, and the North and South Shores have completed plans, funded through the CZM- administered Coastal Energy Impact Program. The Cape and Martha's Vineyard began the training phase in 1981. During the 1970s and 80s scientific studies added to our understanding of the unique characteristics of Georges Bank and its fisheries productivity; however, DOI continued to plan further lease sales even as its estimates of petroleum resources were further reduced. Massachusetts believed the best protection for the fisheries resource was to prevent drilling on the Bank. Therefore, when DOI proposed Lease Sale #52, Massachusetts filed suit. A preliminary injunction was granted on March 28, 1983 and the sale was cancelled on November2l. The Commonwealth again sued DOI in 1984 in an attempt to stop Lease Sale #82, scheduled for September 26, 1984. The Conservation Law Foundation, representing several environ- mental and fishing groups, was party to the suit. Citing violations of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act and the National Environmental Policy Act, the District Court decided in the Commonwealth's favor on September 25, 1984 and granted a preliminary injunction against the sale. just a few hours after that announcement, DOI cancelled the sale, scheduled for the next day. DOI had not received a single bid from any of the oil companies, an unprecedented occurrence in offshore leasing. Massachusetts is now challenging DOI's five year plan for 1987-1992. Along with four other states and various environmental groups, the Commonwealth questions whether the plan subscribes to the tenets of the OCS amendments and considers the impacts of leasing programs on the condition of the coastal zone. Massachusetts recommends placing all areas of 400 meters depth or less, effectively all of Georges Bank, off limits to oil and gas drilling. The ARGO MERCHANT broke in two on shoals off o Nantucket, spillin millions of :Z. gallom @el oil; luckily for 'Uassachusetts, Tevasling winds and seas took the oil away 0. hore. Georges Bank, a relatively shallow area some 60 miles east of Cape Cod, is the feeding and breeding ground for man nmerc all important species. The ZatceZfishinIg Feet lands about 90% of the U.S. catch from the Bank. The ALASKAN STAR oil ' was moved to a site on the Georges Bank inrA181. Wells drilled at that time came up dry. 8 21 "lift Recreation Getting onto our shores -will it be a right for all citizens or a luxury for a few? Over the years the Massachusetts coast has attracted lovers of the sea, but as the population of our coastal communities continues to soar, the beaches, parks and historic sites will be increasingly pressured. Coastal areas, not now owned by state and local governments, are threatened by conflicting multiple uses, many of which are non-water-dependent. From the very beginnings of the MCZM Program, the state recognized its role in maintaining coastal public access opportunities for all its citizens and developed policies that focused on recreation as well as visual, cultural and historic environments. This commitment was demonstrated through the develop- ment of programs for: 1) state-level acquisition of coastal lands; 2) financial assistance to municipalities; 3) project reviews for the protection and enhancement of amenities; and 4) technical assistance and other support services to communities with threatened coastal resources. On several occasions, MCZM and other government officials have worked closely to ensure that proposed activities in or near historic districts or sites respect their preservation intent. Representative cases include the Coast Guard facility on Cape Cod Canal (1983) and three historic lighthouses at the Cape Cod National Seashore (1986). With respect to visual access, Chapter 91 waterways regulations explicitly require consideration of "the extent to which the project blocks the public view of the coast or the ocean or is incompatible with the existing characteristics of its neighborhood," During the pastfezv years, visual access considerations have been an important part of MCZM and DEQE review of all proposed waterfront buildings, and have occasionally produced significant layout and design changes. In addition to these accomplishments, funds from the Community Assistance Grants Program and the Coastal Facilities Improvement Program have upgraded waterfront parks, recreational facilities and visual access opportunities. Other highlights over the past ten years have included: The Coastal Acquisition Program, initiated in 1978 and administered by DEM, obtained 4A; several majorproperties over the past decade, including South Beach in Edgartown, Halibut Point in Rockport, Washburn Island in Falmouth and the 402-acre South Cape Beach in Mashpee. Some 1,230 total acres were acquired at a cost of approximately $20.3 million; this nearly doubled the number of DEM-owned coastal properties from 8 in 1978 to 15 today. The 1987 Open Space Bond contains $30 million to continue this vigorous coastal acquisition effort. The Urban Heritage State Parks Program, also initiated in 1978 and run by DEM, helps revitalize older urban centers whileproviding open spaceforpeople in densely populated areas. Heritage State Parks have been created in the coastal communities of Fall River and Lynn. Will our children's children be able to enjoy the Massachusetts shore? Ag ressive state coastal acqu,.sition programs are preserving public beaches and other recreationalopen spaces for use by futu re generations. 23 I - V AF -11 ft-Itz- 771 4- The Board of Underwater Archaeological Resources, established in 1973 j'EOEEA was transferred to CZM in 1988. Regulations promulgated by Board in 1985 established a permitting process for exploration and recovery of shipwrecks, and artifacts in state waters. Here, a diver inspects one of the numerous wrecks off the Cape Cod coast, N Development of the Hyannis Gateway Park Marina was funded in part by a CFIP grant. The.Pullic Trust doctrineprotect, public rights to'lishig, fowling and ion" in the intertidal zone. in Massachusetts, species com only navilat* in caug itfrom shore include bluefish, yellowtail flounder and striped bass. 'W -T A 17 The first phase of DEM's Boston Harbor Islands State Park Development Program (originally planned in 1972) included clean-up, seawall repair, new piers, trail improvements, water- taxi service, and staffing by trained, live-in managers. Annual visitors in 1987 increased 77% over 1986, and total visitor-trips per year are presently estimated at 220,000. The 1986 master plan for the next phase of improvements foresees an increased capacity to 600,000 visitor-trips per year by the year 2000. Another DEM program, which began in 1977, focuses on Scenic Rivers. Under this program, a total of nine river segments within the coastal zone have attained "classified" status which gives them top priority for protection and entails close monitoring. Two coastal rivers have attained "designated" status, the ultimate goal for all rivers on the classified list, The North River has been designated a State Scenic River and is subject to a state protective order and a DEM-adopted management plan; the Merrimack River has been designated a Local Scenic River and is subject to a locally-developed, DEM-approved protection strategy. The 1978 Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) setforth in a coordi- nated manner a five-year agenda for outdoor recreation and natural and cultural resource conservation, including a call for innovative statewide programs of coastal acquisition and urban state parks. Subsequent SCORPs in 1983 and 1988 reinforced the earlier programs. The SCORP process was established in 1965 as a requirement imposed by the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund Act on all states receiving grants from the fund. 7i With financial assistance from the Coastal Energy Impact Program in 1980, the MCZM office planted the seeds for what eventually has become a major waterfront reclamation project for the Dorchester waterfront. In 1981, MDC opened Tenean Beach as thefirst link in a nine- mile-long, 84-acre esplanade on the banks of the Neponset River. The planned pedestrianl bicycle connections with holdings in South Boston and the Blue Hills Reservation will make this one of the largest open space and conservation projects in the entire Boston metropolitan area, rivaling the success of the Charles River Esplanade. A Massachusetts Landscape Inventory, completed in 1982, was thefirst major survey of the Commonwealth's scenic areas in fifty years. The inventory allows state and local acquisition and conservation efforts to concentrate on prime landscapes. Among these "scenic landscape units" are I I in the coastal zone; each unit is defined as at least one square mile where visual quality is consistently high. COASTWEEK was created in 1982 as a follow-up to the Year of the Coast (1980) with Massachusetts Coastal Resources Advisory Board members instrumental in its development. Since its inception, Coastweek (now Coastweeks) has become an annual event in some 27 states and several foreign countries. 25 ,65 The Nantucket Land Bank was authorized in 1983 at a Town Meeting and by the Massa- chusetts Legislature. This unique local initiative attempts to preserve coastal beaches and open space through assessment of transfer taxes on real estate. The Department of Public Works instituted an open space program in 1985. $10 million was authorized for the purchase of land or easements within or adjacent to public ways for the purpose of "restoring, preserving, or enhancing areas of scenic beauty or special environ- mental value." Three coastal properties have been funded under this program at Brewster, Chilmark and Truro. The 22-acre Truro acquisition abutting Route 6 now affords Cape Cod vacationers and residents a spectacular view of the hook of Cape Cod and, on a clear day, completely across Cape Cod Bay to Plymouth's Manomet Cliffs -a vista that otherwise would have been blocked by a proposed residential subdivision. 7'j Barnstable used a 1985 CFIP grant of $1 million for development of the Hyannis Harbor Gateway Park, including removal of three existing buildings to establish a direct visual link to the harbor. A 1987 grant for the rehabilitation of Pier 10 in the Boston Marine Industrial Park will afford the public a means of access to the working waterfront of South Boston. i The 1987 Open Space Bond reauthorized the Self Help Program which assists municipalities in acquiring land for conservation and passive recrea tion pu rposes. Established in 1961, the Self Help Program has provided financial assistance to numerous coastal projects, including acquisitions on the Mashpee River, the Forest River in Salem, the North River Driftway and marshes in Scituate, and property in Truro. Many of these projects have also used funding from the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund which is administered nationally by the National Park Service. While the intent of the Self Help Program is to preserve lands and waters in their natural state, the Land and Water Conservation Fund also supports development of outdoor recreation support facilities. Major projects over the past decade are: Charlestown Waterfront Park, Revere Beach, St. Peter's Park in Gloucester, Chelsea Waterfront Park, Long Wharf in Boston, and the Bourne Marina. NEW STATE PARKS 1980 Plum Island (52.5 acres) 1981 Halibut Point (50.0 acres) 1982 South Cape Beach (401.9 acres) 1983 Washburn Island (335.0 acres) d 1983 South Beach (24.2 acres) V "XI"N"'k 1984-7 Brewster Beach (91.3 acres) 1987 Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve Headquarters (22.0 acres) Y" The Boston Harbor Islands State Park now hosts over 220,000 visitors per year with a 14" three-fold increase expected by the turn of the century. This view is from Gallops Island. 26 Pq Coastal areas protected by the state's Wetlands Protection and Wetlands Restrictions Acts provide habitat for a wide variety of birds and other animals. 27 MCZM Policies ,Zeip r se of the Massachusetts CZM Program is to rotect and carefully manage the development and use of the ,u Po , coastal zone and its valuable resources. T Co e, th ?,is is larvly accomplished through existing EOEA agencies and guided by 27 Coastal Zone Management Pro am Policies. These policies are individually summarized below. The regulatory policies and non-regulatory policies are use:Fin conjunction with state regulatory programs and decision-making and reflect state management priorities. Regulatory Policies Non-Regulatory Policies Policy 1 Protect ecologically Policy 8 For coastally-depen- Policy 14 Encourage and assist Policy 21 Improve public access significant resource areas (salt dent enerr y facilities, consider commercial fisheries research to coastal recreation facilities, and marshes, shellfish beds, dunes, siting in a ternative coastal loca- and development, restoration alleviate auto traffic and parking beaches, barrier beaches, and tions. For non-coastally-depen- and management of fisher @;y problems through improvements salt ponds) for their contribu- dent energy facilities, consider resources, development o in public transportation. Link tions to marine productivity siting in areas outside of the extensive and intensive aqua- existing coastal recreation sites and value as natural habitats coastal zones. Weigh the en- culture, and enhancement of to each other or to nearby coastal and storm buffers. vironmental and safety impacts anadromous fisheries, initiated inland facilities via trails for Policy 2 Protect complexes of of locating proposed energy at local, state and federal levels. bicyclists, hikers and equestrians marine resource areas of unique facilities at alternative sites. Policy 15 Ensure that state and and via rivers for boaters. productivity (Areas of Preserva- Policy 9(a) Accommodate federally funded public works Policy 22 Increase capacity of tion or Restoration (APRs)/ exploration, development and pr@oj.@cts proposed for location existing recreation areas by facili- Areas of Critical Environmental production of offshore oil and within the 100 year coastal flood tating multiple use and by Concern (ACECs)); ensure that gas resources while n-finimizing lain wi"' improving management, main- activities in or impactin such impacts on the marine environ- n exa e bate existing tenance and public support T of c ' ctin complexes are and ment, especially on fisheries, ha _aids , damage natural facilities. Resolve confli ' 11V ses carried out to minimize adverse water quality and wildlife, and buffers; whenever possible throug effects on marine productivity, on the recreational values of the (b) be reasonably safe from improved management -rather habitat values, water quality, coast, and minimize conflicts flood and erosion related than through exclusion of uses. and storm buffering of the with other maritime -dependent damage; and Policy 23 Provide technical entire complex. uses of coastal waters and lands. (c) not promote growth and assistance to developers of Policy 3 Support attainment Encourage maritime-dependent develo ment in damage prone private recreational facilities and of the national water quality facilities serving supply, support or buUer areas, especi 11 1 oiia &n sites that increase public access goals for all waters of the coastal or transfer functions to locate undeveloped areas A s. to the shoreline. zone through coordination with in existing developed ports. Policy 16 Encourage acquisition Policy 24 Expand existing recre- existing water quality planning Policy 9(b) Evaluate indigenous of undeveloped hazard prone ation facilities and acquire and and management agencies. or alternative sources of energy areas for conse rvation or recrea- develop new public areas for Ensure that all activities en- (coal, wind, solar and tidal tion use, and ovide technical coastal recreational activities. dorsed by CZM in its policies power) and offshore mining to assistance forVazard area Give highest priority to expan- are consistent with federal minimize adverse impacts on zoning and mitigation of sion or new acquisitions in and state effluent limitations the marine environment, erosion problems. regions of high need or where and water quality standards. especially with respect to fish- Policy 17 Provide fundin for site availability is now limited. Policy 4 Condition construction eries, water quality, and wild- protection from tidal flo ing Assure that both transportation in water bodies and contiguous life, and on the recreational and erosion, emphasizing the access and the recreational land areas to minimize inter- values of the coast. use of non-structural measures facilities are compatible with ference with water circulation Policy 10 All development where feasible. social and environmental charac- and sediment transy t dto must conform to existing applic- Policy 18 Encourage, through teristics of surrounding fr an preserve water quail y and able state and.federal require- technical assistance and review communities. marine productivity. Approve mentsgioverning subsurface of publicly funded development, Policy 25 Encourage energy permits for flood or erosion wa te scharges, sources of compatibility of proposed deve- conservation and the use of alter- control projects only when it air and water pollution and lopment with local community native sources such as solar and has been determined that there protection of inland wetlands. character and scenic resources. wind power in order to assist in will be no significant adverse Polig 11 Protect designated Policy 19 Promote the widest meeting the energy needs of the effects on the project site or scenic rivers in the coastal zone. possible public benefit from Commonwealth. adjacent or downcoast areas. Support designation of areas channel dredging, unn th t Policy 26 Ensure that state and Polic for Preservation or restoration destated ports and deve oped federally funded trans ortation .y 5 Ensure that dredging p and disposal of dred*ed matenial as' sign free areas." har are given hi hest priority and wastewater projects prinia- minimize adverse effects on Policy 12 Review proposed in the allocation of 11rderal and rily serve.existi%.developed. water quality physical processes, developments in or near desig- state dredging funds. Ensure that areas, assignm% ighest prionty marine productivity and nated or registered historic this dredging is consistent with toprojectswhic meettheneecls public health. districts or sites to ensure that marine environmental policies. of urban and community Policy 6 Accommodate off- federal, state, and private Policy 20 Encourage, through development centers. shore sand and gravel mining actions requiring a state permit technical and financial assistance, Policy Z7 Encourage the revital- needs in areas and in ways that res ect their preservation intent expansion of water-dependent ization and enhancement of will not adversely affect marine anSminin-dze potential adverse uses in designated ports and existing development centers resources and navigation. impacts. developed harbors, redevelop- in the coastal zone throu h Policy 7 Encourage the location Policy 13 Review developments ment of urban waterfronts, and technical assistance and federal of maritime commerce and proposed near existing public expansion of visual access. and state financial support for development in segments of recreation sites in order to mini- residential, commercial and urban waterfronts designated mize their adverse impacts. industrial development. as port areas. Within these areas, prevent the exclusion of maritime -dependent industrial uses that require the use of lands subject to tidelands licenses. 28 Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management 100 Cambridge Street, Room 2006 Boston, Massachusetts 02202 (617) 727-9530 Coastal Zone Management operates several regional offices in the coastal zone. Please contact the Boston office for more information. page Photo Credits inside (top) Richard Sobol cover (bottom) EOEA file photo 1 Cynthia Harris 2 CZM file photo 4 Richard Kelsey 7 (left) CZM file photo (right) Anne Smrcina 8 Anne Smrcina 10 (top) Arial Photos International, Inc. (middle) Joseph Pelczarski (bottom)Arnold Carr 13 CZM file photo 14 Cynthia Harris 16 Anne Smrcina 18 David Drake 20 U.S. Coast Guard file photo 21 Bud Danenberger 22 Anne Smrcina 24 (top left) Anne Smrcina (top right) Arnold Carr (bottom) CZM file photo 26 Gene Peach 27 Anne Smrcina Cover graphic from a woodblock print by Katsushika Hokusa, 1760-1849. Writer/Editor: Anne 1. Smrcina Design/Production: Cynthia Harris Contributors: Patricia Hughes Judith Pederson Jeff Benoit Dennis Ducsik Typesetting: Adams & Abbott, Inc. Printing: Graphic House, Inc. The preparation of this publication was funded by the Office of Coastal Resources Management, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, under a program development grant to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Publication of this document approved by Ric Murphy, State Purchasing Agent Estimated cost per copy $.99 at 8M-6-88-803461 Massachusetts Coastal Zone Managcinent 100 Cambridge Street, Room 2006 Boston, Massachusetts 02202 (617) 727-93-30 Jill 3 6668 00002 1008