NOAA estuarine and coastal ocean science framework

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

NOAA Estuarine and
C'
Coastal Ocean Science
ATES Of Framework

...... . ......
_4

QH
541 .5 October 1987
E8
@63 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
1987 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
c.2 NOAA Estuarine Programs Office

NOAA Estuarine and
Coastal Ocean Science
Framework

October 1987

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

Property of CSC Library

QH541.5.E8 N63 1987 c.z
MAR 27 1997

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
C. William Verity, Secretary

National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration
j. Curtis Mack II, Assistant Secretary

COVER PHOTOGRUH: The satellite image from the
Nimbus 7 Coastal Zone Color Scanner depicts phyto-
plankton distribution along the U.S. east coast.
Higher concentrations are shown in reds and
yellows, lower in blueg and greens. This image
illustrates the high productivity and importance
of this estuarine and coastal ocean system.

NOAA ESTUARINE AND COASTAL OCEAN SCIENCE FRAMEWORK

Table of Contents

Pacre

Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

NOAA Estuarine and Coastal Ocean Policy . . . . . . . . vii

Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix

Chapter I. Introduction: The Estuarine and Coastal
Ocean Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
A National Concern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Federal Roles and Responsibilities . . . . . . . . 5
NOAA's Legislative Authorities . . . . . . . . . 8
Estuarine and Coastal Ocean Science Framework 9
Current NOAA Programs that Address Framework
Priorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Chapter II. Freshwater Inflow and Circulation . . . . . 19
Objective . . . . . . . . . . a a . * . . . . . . 19
Problem Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
- Observation and Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . 21
- Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
- Synthesis and Prediction . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Chapter III. Toxics, Nutrients, and Pathogens . . . . . 31
objective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Problem Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Strategy : * * * * * * I * I I I I * * I * I 1 1 34
- Observation and Assessment . . . . . . . . . . 35
- Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
- Synthesis and Prediction . . . . . . . . . . . 46

Chapter IV. Habitat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
objective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 51
Problem Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
- Observation and Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . 54
- Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
- Synthesis and Prediction . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

Chapter V. Living Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
objective . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Problem Definition . . . . . . . . 65
Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
- Observation and Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . 67
- Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
- Synthesis and Prediction . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

Chapter VI. Framework Implementation . . . . . . . . . 79
Implementation Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Internal Coordination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Application to Management Programs . . . . . . . . 84
Federal Coordination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Future Outlook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

Appendices

APPENDIX A Estuarine and Coastal Ocean Legislative Crosscut
APPENDIX B Federal Estuarine and Coastal Ocean Activities
APPENDIX C Workshop Summaries
APPENDIX D Regional Summaries

FOREWORD

The NOAA Estuarine and Coastal Ocean Science Framework provides
long-term scientific direction in four critical estuarine and
coastal ocean problem areas: freshwater inflow and circulation
alterations; toxics, nutrients, and pathogens; habitat degra-
dation; and declines in living resources. The scientific agenda
described in the Framework is the foundation for NOAAIS
long-range planning to address these problems. Details f or
implementing the Framework will be developed in a series of
Program Plans that will determine NOAA's short-term priorities
in the context of the Framework. These Program Plans will be
reviewed annually and together with the Framework, will guide
NOAA's estuarine activities into the next century.

NOAA ESTUARINE AND COASTAL OCEAN POLICY

Estuaries and their associated coastal waters are the site of
critical ecological processes that are the basis of the ocean's
biological productivity. Adding to their ecological value,
much of the Nation's economic growth and development is depen-
dent on these coastal waters. At the same time, the fertile
estuarine environment is highly susceptible to a variety of
adverse natural and human-related factors. The National oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) considers the improved
health and productivity of these coastal waters to be of the
highest priority. To enhance Federal and state capabilities to
manage this critical environment, NOAA has developed a long-term
scientific strategy to support the wise use and management of
estuarine and coastal resources. This strategy, NOAA's
Estuarine and Coastal Ocean Science Framework, addresses
critical estuarine and coastal ocean issues in time scales
relevant to public policy decision- making.

NOAA's goal in estuarine and coastal ocean science is to under-
stand and predict natural ecosystem processes to ior;vide the
capability to assess the effects of human activities on estua-
rine and coastal ocean resoul:ces. NOAA wi..ll achieve this goal
by directing the Agency's multi- discip lih ary resources and
capabilities on the objectives described in the following
problem areas:

Freshwater Inflow and Circulation

To improve our capability to predict the effects of hydro-
logical forcing on estuarine and coastal ecosystem function-
ing through increased understanding of circulation and
changes in freshwater inflow.

Toxics, Nutrients, and PathoSeLis

To define the extent of environmental degradation caused by
contaminants in the estuarine and coastal ocean environment
and to determine the effects of contaminants on living
resources.

Habitat

To understand the importance of habitat and to predict the
effects of habitat loss or physical alteration on popula-
tions of living resources.

Living Resources

To understand the causes of living resource declines and to
predict the effects of human activities on populations of
important species.

Vii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction

our Nation's estuaries and their associated coastal waters are
vital, productive natural systems. They also support a great
number of commercial, recreational, residential, and industrial
activities. Demographic trends indicate that by 1990 approxi-
mately 75 percent of the Nation's population will live in the
coastal states. Accompanying this coastal population growth will
be increasing pressures on and competing uses of the coastal and
estuarine environment and its resources. There is a clear need
for effective and timely scientific information to support a
balanced approach to the development of our estuarine and coastal
areas. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) is uniquely qualified to respond to this challenge.
NOAA's legislative responsibilities and capabilities in resource
conservation, atmospheric science, ocean system dynamics, biologi-
cal processes, and coastal ecosystems management provide a solid
foundation for addressing these issues through an inter-discipli-
nary approach.

This Estuarine and Coastal Ocean Science Framework provides
long-term guidance for addressing the priority resource manage-
ment issues of our estuaries and coastal oceans. NOAA-s goal in
this effort is to understand and predict natural ecosystem
processes to provide the capability to assess the effects of
human activities on estuarine and coastal ocean resources. The
four areas of concern addressed in the Framework are: 1) altera-
tions in freshwater inflow and circulation; 2) toxics, nutrients,
and pathogens; 3) habitat loss and degradation; and 4) declines
in living resources. Each of these categories comprise separate-
chapters of the Framework, as described below. Strategies to
address the problem areas are examined according to NOAA's
functions of observation/ assessment, research, and synthesis/
prediction. A series of specific questions delineates the
information needed to carry out each strategy.

Freshwater Inflow and Circulation

Estuarine and coastal ocean waters are influenced by a complex
set of hydrological forces including freshwater inflow and
circulation patterns. Changes to these forces can have dramatic
consequences on the distribution a,-td effects of contaminants in
the system. In addition, alterations of freshwater inflow, such
as by diverting or damming the rivers that normally flow into
estuaries, can affect the salinity and thus the productivity of

estuarine and coastal systems. Advances in our basic knowledge
of how freshwater inflow and circulation patterns influence the
transport of contaminants and biological productivity will
greatly enhance our ability to manage these valuable ecosystems.

Toxics, Nutrients, and Pathogens

Human activities and waste products introduce many contaminants
to estuaries and coastal systems, including toxic chemicals,
nutrients, and pathogens. Although a number of studies demon-
strate that many of our estuaries and coastal waters are "contami-
nated," these studies have not fully determined the sources, ex-
tent, and magnitude of contamination or its effects., Research
and assessments are needed to identify the sources and magnitude
of contaminants and how these materials are transported and
altered after they enter the environment. Research efforts
should also be initiated to determine the effects of contaminants
on individual organisms, populations, and communities of orga-
nisms. With improved knowledge, we will significantly increase
our capability to predict the effectiveness of contaminant
control measures and enhance our ability to conserve estuarine
and coastal resources.

H4bitat

Many estuarine and coastal areas that provide critical habitat
for many important fisheries are being degraded and are rapidly
disappearing. Human activities and natural causes have resulted
in the loss of half of our Nation's coastal wetlands since 1780;
the rate of loss is now estimated at 60 square miles per year in
areas of Louisiana. Our ability to assess the immediate and
long-term effects of human activities on estuarine resources
depends on an increased understanding of habitat functions, the
quantity of habitat loss, and the rate of recovery of damaged
systems. our ability to mitigate habitat loss through existing
regulatory programs also depends on new information. An improved
understanding of habitat functioning is critical for the
effective management of our estuarine- dependent fisheries.

Living ResourgLes

Estuaries and coastal regions are among the most biologically
productive ecosystems in the world, providing critical habitats
for many of our important fisheries. However, dramatic declines
in several of these fisheries have occurred, because of habitat
loss or pollution, overfishing;, environmental alterations,
disease, and natural variability of the stocks. Effective
fisheries management requires an improved understanding of these
factors and of key trophic relationships in the ecosystem.

Improved knowledge of these ecological processes must then be
combined with current information on the health, distribution,
and abundances of important organisms. Predictive models can
then be developed to evaluate alternative fishery and habitat
management strategies.

Framework Implementation

The NOAA Estuarine and Coastal Ocean Science Framework is the
Agency's long-range strategy for coordinated and concerted action
to address the deterioration of the Nation's estuarine and
coastal resources. Through directed scientific investigation,
NOAA will improve our understanding of ecosystem functioning and
our prediction of the impact of alterations on estuarine eco-
systems. This, in turn, will provide the Nation's estuarine and
coastal resource managers with a stronger scientific basis for
management and regulatory decisions.

To implement the Framework, NOAA will concentrate the Agency's
multi- disciplinary resources and capabilities on the problem
areas described herein. Primarily, this will be accomplished
through detailed annual Program Plans, which will identify Agency
strdtegies to address priority issues over the short-term,
specifying proposed program directionS dnd funding levels. NOAA
will also use its oversight and consultative responsibilities
with state and regional management plans to emphasize Framework
priorities. For instance, in NOAA's evaluations of state Coastal
zone management programs, the Agency will encourage alignment of
the states" coastal management goals and standards more closely
with the Framework's objectives in areas such as wetlands
mitigation, water management, sedimentation control programs,
fisheries and habitat data collection, and non-point source
controls.

it is also crucial that NOAA ensure close integration of its
management and technical activities in estuarine programs. For
this purpose, NOAA will rely on its existing programs and
facilities, including laboratories, ships, Estuarine Research
Reserves, Sea Grant Colleges, and coastal zone management
liaisons with the states. These facilities have the potential to
provide an extensive network of estuarine and coastal ocean
expertise. NOAA will strengthen this network and existing
information dissemination activities, to improve the transfer of
information to managers of estuarine and coastal resources. NOAA
will also work to improve coordination and communication with
other Federal agencies that have i:2sponsibilities affecting the
estuarine and coastal ocean environment. The Framework recom-
mends an ad-hoc interagency committee of such agencies, to
identify strategies for coordinating major Federal program
initiatives.

I
I
I
I
U Chapter I
t
I INTRODUCTION
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.
I

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION: THE ESTUARINE AND COASTAL OCEAN SYSTEMS

I. A NATIONAL CONCERN
While estuariesi and their associated coastal waters comprise
less than one percent of the ocean environment, they are the
most valuable component of the world"s oceans (see Figure 1).
These fertile environments represent the biological foundation
of the entire marine ecosystem. Enriched by nutrients from the
land, mixed by tides and currents, and saturated by sunlight,
estuaries feed, support, and shelter a rich and varied ecologi-
cal system -- and as a result provide a remarkable level of
biological productivity. Salt marshes, for example, yield ten
tons of organic material per acre per year, compared to only
four tons per year produced by fertile hay fields.

Estuaries provide the food, shelter, and spawning grounds for
over 70 percent of our commercial fisheries by weight, worth
$5.5 billion to the GNP in 1986. Seven of the ten most valuable
commercial fisheries -- Gulf shrimp, sockeye salmon, menhaden,
pink salmon, oyster, South Atlantic shrimp, and blue crab --
depend on the estuaries to survive. The estuarine and coastal
ocean systems are also critical in sustaining recreational
fishing, an industry that generates expenditures of over $7.5
billion annually.

Not only are these environments extremely valuable in terms of
productivity, but for centueies society has also placed enormous
value on coastal areas for living, working, and recreation.
Today, over 70 percent of our population lives in coastal states
(including those bordering the Great Lakes), and it is predicted
that by 1990 this figure will rise to approximately 75 percent.
Much of the growth in population is expected to occur along the
Gulf and Southeast coasts, where development has not yet severe-
ly degraded many important estuarine and coastal ecosystems (see
Figure 2).

Clearly, this growth has not come without a price. Dramatic
increases in population and accompanying land-use changes, as
shown for the Chesapeake Bay in Figure 3, correspond with major
changes in water and sediment quality and significant declines

1
For the purpose of this Framework, the estuarine and
coastal ocean complex includes not only the traditionally
defined estuarine system, but also the coastal waters
where saltwater and freshwater mix, as well as the waters
of the Great Lakes.

ESTUARINEICOASTAL SYSTEM
PRODUCTIVITY

310

Pie Chan snows in* prooonionai size ano relative
Proauctivity of the estuarinsicoa3tal system in
grams of cart)on per rnster2 pair ytar

162

OPEN OCEAN

E ARYICOASTAL
CONT11NENTAL SYSTEM
SHELF

UNITED STATES POPULATION DENSITIES, 1970

7 6

AL@
our jj@

4
N

--- -----------
Viewed from Southeast

Olank s less than 2 oersons/ sq. mi. draws tw thm STWM
emrce-. U.S. L97o ciiinaus at Paguiation my camao) L@10@ . I

FIGURE 2

Population
(millions)

Improved
Land, (%) Less than 5% 5%-50%

Pollen Forests
(acknowledged)

Sedimentation Furnace Bay Chesapeake Bay at fatchester
Rate
(cmtyr)

Metal Load Chesapeake Bay at talchester Furnace Boy
(codmum p.p.m)

SAVS Waterweed, pondweed waterweed, pondweed wild celery, few others wild celery, milfoil All SAV
wild celery abundant sporadic, celery abundant pondweed gone

Diatoma Eplotytes and clear water forms Decrease in all species Decreased epiohytes
Increased eutrophic forms
20,000
10,000 Shad
Fishery 0
Landings
(x 10) 600,000
300,000 Menhaden
0
TIME HISTORY OF NORTHERN CHESAPEAKE BAY, 1600 TO 1980. An important aspect of understanding how Cheseapeake Bay will
respond to pollution is to examine the Bay's past. In the northern Bay, human activity, beginning at the top of the chart with population
growth has been changing water quality since the time line began.
(Source: US Environmental Protection Agency, 1983)
FIGURE 3
in submerged aquatic vegetation and estuarine-dependent
fisheries. Accompanying the coastal population increase is
competition for estuarine and coastal resources. Competing uses
such as water diversions, waste discharges, and habitat alter-
tions have profoundly affected the integrity of our estuarine
and coastal ecosystems and ultimately may jeopardize their
economic value -- often in the form of long-term environmental
degradation, fisheries loss, property value declines, and
threats to public health and safety.

Many of the rivers that normally flow into the estuaries have
been diverted, leveed, or dammed, to meet our agricultural
energy, and flood control needs. These modifications and diver-
sions alter the freshwater inflow to estuaries, resulting in
fundamental changes to the ecosystem. Obstructions on these
rivers also prevent many of our most valuable anadromous fish
from returning upstream to spawn, and often irreversibly alter
their habitat. For examplye, large scale construction of hydro-
electric dams in the Columbia River, combines with intensive
logging practices, has led to severe declines in the Northwest
salmon fishery.

The use of coastal waters for waste disposal has also caused
significant degradation of estuarine and coastal resources. New
York City and Los Angeles release 1.5 billion and 900 million
gallons of sewage effluent per day, respectively. Boston dis-
charges 500 million gallons per day, along with a half million
gallons of raw sludge per year. These discharges include thou-
sands of tons of nutrients that -tisrupt inshore ecosystems,
resulting in shellfish closures and fish kills. Sewage dis-
charges have led to closure of one-third of the 4000 acres of
clam flats in the vicinity of Boston Harbor, while nutrient-
induced oxygen depletion triggered massive fish kills off the
New Jersey coast in 1976, precipitating a $60,000,000 loss to
the commercial clam fishery alone. Sewage disposal has also
affected the shrimp industry in Pensacola/ Escambia Bay, Florida,
where catches declined from 902,000 pounds in 1968 to 17,000
pounds in 1971.

Industrial waste discharges, often containing highly toxic mate-
rial, may be even more threatening. The effects of industrial
pollution have been strongly felt in New Bedford Harbor, Massa-
chusetts -- a major center of the U.S. fishing industry. Lob-
sters are a lucrative component of the New Bedford catch, yet
they are no longer taken from the Harbor's resident popula-
tions. Years of dumping wastes from neighboring electrical
industries has raised the level of polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs) in the harbor sediments to over 200 parts per million.
NOAA has estimated that the total loss to commercial lobstermen
is $2,100,000, and to recreational fishermen, $1,900,000.
Revenues lost to date from beach closures are estimated to be
$14,700,000, while declines in residential property values have
exceeded $30,000,000.

Wetlands loss is another significant factor affecting the
vitality of estuarine and coastal resources. Research has
established that over 120,000 juvenile shrimp per acre are
sustained by Louisiana's shallow marsh regions. However, some
areas of coastal Louisiana are losing an estimated 60 square
miles of coastal wetlands per year. This loss may have a
significant effect on the size of Gulf shrimp harvests. In San
Francisco Bay, diking and filling have reduced the original 300
square miles of wetlands to less than 75 square miles. Corre-
sponding to these wetland losses has been a decline of f ish and
shellf ish harvests. In fact, the salmon population in the
Sacramento River has decreased by over 50 percent.

The evidence clearly indicates that, @the health of our estuaries
is declining. it is time to re-examine what should be done to
conserve one of the Nation's most valuable resources. Unfor-
tunately, the effects of human activities and natural changes to
our estuarine and coastal environment are not well understood.
We cannot reliably predict the fate and transport of effluent
from sewage treatment plants in Boston Harbor or Chesapeake Bay,

determine what organisms are exposed to its toxics, or antici-
pate where nutrient- induced anoxia will lead to more fish kills.
We have yet to discern how PCBs are transported from New Bedford
Harbor, Raritan Bay, or Elliott Bay to other areas through the
f ood chain. We know that Gulf shrimp require wetland habitat
for survival, but we do not know precisely how many shrimp are
lost with the loss of each acre of wetland. NOAA has developed
this Estuarine and Coastal Ocean Science Framework to focus
NOAA's resources and capabilities on the important problem areas
outlined in subsequent chapters. The remainder of this chapter
presents a synopsis of Federal agency responsibilities in the
estuarine and coastal ocean system, NOAA's authorities to
conduct estuarine activities, and an overview of current NOAA
programs that address Framework priorities.

II. FEDERAL ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Governmental responsibilities to address the problem of the
deterioration of our Nation's estuarine and coastal resources
are derived from common law, public trust obligations, Consti-
tutional law, and specific statutory mandates. Because estu-
aries and coastal waters involve common property resources that
cross geo-political boundaries, the Federal Government and the
individual states share jurisdiction and responsibility for the
wise use and management of the resources in this area.

Federal legislation affecting water quality, coastal zone manage-
ment, and fisheries management and conservation has sought to
provide incentives for increased state involvement in the day-
to-day management of estuarine/ coastal resources. Federal
initiatives responding to these laws have been directed toward
strengthening state and regional resource management capabili-
ties and making the results of Federal research and information
activities available to guide management decisions. By estab-
lishing a National Estuary Program under the Water Quality Act
of 1987, Congress reinforced the existing Federal role that was
established in the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 -- that
of providing scientific and management support in response to
state management needs and national concerns. As a result of
these and other historical Federal mandates, a number of dis-
tinct estuarine and coastal related programs have evolved in
several agencies. An overview of NOAA's programs is included in
Section III of this Chapter and a detailed legislative analysis
is provided in Appendix A. A summary of the other Federal
programs is provided below and Appendix B describes them in
greater detail.

Environmental Protection Acrency (EPA)

Within the Federal Government, EPA has the lead for controlling
environmental pollutants. EPA's mission is to reduce the
public's exposure to harmful pollutants, protect sensitive
ecosystems, and improve management of environmental regulatory
programs. EPA develops standards and criteria for the states to
use in regulating point source discharges of pollutants. These
sources include sewage treatment plants, power plants, refin-
eries, and petrochemical producers and other industries. EPA
has taken the lead in coordinating studies and assisting states
with developing basin management plans for the Great Lakes,
Chesapeake Bay, as well as six other estuaries through the
National Estuary Program. The Water Quality Act of 1987 now
provides EPA with new estuarine- related authorities. In
particular, EPA is responsible for establishing management
conferences for estuaries of national significance. Through
these conferences, research and management programs will be
integrated to protect and improve water quality, enhance living
resources, and provide a mechanism to enable conflicting uses to
be balanced so that the environmental integrity of the estuary
is maintained. The Water Quality Act also authorizes EPA to
administer a program requiring states to develop non-point
source action plans for reducing non-point source pollutants in
surface water. EPA has also begun implementing its Near Coastal
Waters Initiative, a long-term planning strategy designed to
improve EPA's ability to manage the environmental quality of
near coastal water ecosystems.

Soil Conservation Service (SCS)

The SCS mission covers three major areas: soil and water conser-
vation, natural resource surveys, and community resource protec-
tion and development. Through its nationwide network of conser-
vation specialists, the SCS provides technical assistance to
farmers, ranchers, and foresters on methods to control erosion
and sedimentation through best management practices, and to
control non-point sources of water pollution. The SCS maintains
extensive data archives on wind and water erosion, land-use and
cover, conservation practices, and treatment needs. To assist
land owners in protecting natural resources, the SCS also
administers cost sharing programs that offer special assistance
for installing certain conservation practices, protecting
wetlands, and improving water quality.

U.S. Army Corps of Encrineers (Corps

The Corps is vested with the authority to maintain navigable
waterways and to issue permits for the transportation of dredged
material for ocean dumping and for the discharge of dredged or
fill material into the waters of the United States. As the
Federal organization that administers the dredge and fill permit

programs in the Nation's estuaries and coastal waters, the Corps
programs are critical to the maintenance of estuarine system
productivity. The Corps receives over 10,000 permit applica-
tions annually. The Corps estuarine- related research is, there-
fore, primarily related to identifying solutions for dredged
material disposal. Some of these efforts include determining
the bio-magnification and b io- accumulation of contaminants in
the estuarine environment, and developing guidelines for
disposal of highly contaminated sediments.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)

The FWS has general responsibility for maintaining the fish and
wildlife resources in the United States and providing public
access to these resources. Its functions include responsibility
for fish and wildlife resources and habitats of national inter-
est through research, management, and technical assistance to
other Federal and non-governmental agencies.

The operations of the FWS include those conducted in the coastal
zone, the contiguous lands, and the waters that flow into the
zone. Major FWS programs involving coastal 'issues include
permit review and resource planning; land acquisition and
habitat management (through refuges and easements); management
of migratory birds, anadromous fish and endangered species; and
a broad research activity addressing causes and effects of
habitat change and coastal contaminants. These programs provide
for the collection, synthesis, and interpretation of diverse
information on species, populations, and habitats that is
assembled, analyzed, and applied for management purposes.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)

The- USGS performs hydrological investigations in streams and
subsurface waters. Some of this work is conducted in estuaries
or at the fall lines of river systems. The USGS operates down-
stream gauges on major rivers and streams, and conducts site-
specific investigations of estuarine circulation, geochemistry,
and ecology. Much of this work is conducted in the Potomac
River, where hydrodynamic and geochemical processes, as well as
long-term changes in wetlands ecology are being studied. In San
Francisco Bay, the USGS is studying processes that influence
water and sediment chemistry.

Other Federal Agencies

In addition to the above, other Federal agencies also have
programs that affect the estuarine and coastal ocean system.
Within the Department of the Interior, the National Park Service
manages several coastal and barrier island areas, while the
Forest Service manages extensive portions of the Nation's
coastal estuarine regions. Also, Interior's Bureau of Land

Management and Minerals Management Service regulate mineral
exploration and development in coastal/ estuarine areas. The
Bureau of Reclamation regulates water and power resource
management in the western United States, and the National
Science Foundation supports individual investigators to conduct
basic research on a wide range of topics that relate to
estuarine and coastal concerns. The Department of Energy
supports a substantial amount of research on the effects of
energy facilities on estuarine and coastal waters.

III. NOAAIS LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITIES

NOAA's authorities to describe and assess estuarine and coastal
areas, to conduct research, and to provide information for
management have historical roots dating back to 1807, when
Congress established the Survey of the Coast. An overview of
the legislation that requires NOAA to undertake programs in
estuarine and coastal assessment, research, and synthesis/
prediction is provided below. A more extensive analysis of
NOAA's estuarine and coastal-related legislation is provided in
Appendix A. -

A. Observation and Assessment

Estuarine observation and assessments describe the coastal
environment, its physical characteristics, water and sediment
quality, and the animals and plants that depend on these waters
for their habitat. The primary laws that give NOAA authority to
collect and archive oceanographic, geophysical, climatic, and
pollution data include the National Ocean Survey Act (NOSA), the
National Climate Program Act, and the Marine Protection, Re-
search, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA). Observation and assessment
activities also include the development of nautical charts,
assessment of fishery stock size and health, and monitoring
ambient levels of pollutants in the sediment and water column.
These activities are primarily mandated by the NOSA, the
Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MFCMA), and
the MPRSA respectively.

B. Research

NOAA's ongoing estuarine and coastal research efforts emphasize
physical processes, ecosystem dynamics, pollutant effects,
living resources, and their habitats. Research on the effects
of contaminants on estuarine organisms and their subsequent
effect on fisheries and human health also constitute a primary
focus for many of NOAA's research programs. With respect to
physical processes, the NOSA and the MPRSA convey authority to
conduct studies in both circulation dynamics and chemical
transport. Life-history, disease, and aquaculture studies to
support conservation of living resources are governed primarily

by the MFCMA and the National Aquaculture Act. Programs de-
signed to identify the importance of habitat and the effects of
habitat alterations (including pollution) stem from both the
MFCMA and the MPRSA. Finally, efforts to discern the effect of
contaminants on food chain organisms and living resources are
primarily through the National Ocean Pollution Planning Act, the
MPRSA, and the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

C. Synthesis and Prediction

NOAA encourages wise management of the Nation-'s estuarine and
coastal system by providing synthesis and predictive capabili-
ties, as well as financial support for fisheries conservation
and management, habitat conservation, and coastal zone manage-
ment. Fisheries management includes the administration of
interstate grants to assist the states in the development of
management measures and protected species programs. Specifical-
ly, the Agency synthesizes technical information and develops
predictive models to allocate fisheries resources among various
user groups and to assess endangered species. These activities
stem from the Anadromous Fish Conservation Act, the MFCMA, the
Marine Mammal Protection Act, and the Endangered Species Act.

NOAA also synthesizes information on human effects (i.e., habi-
tat alteration and pollution) on estuarine and coastal habitats,
and provides extensive recommendations to state and Federal
agencies, as well as to private developers based on mandates
found in the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act and the MFCMA.
To ensure the management of the coastal zone, NOAA is given
authority to encourage and assist states in the development of
comprehensive coastal zone management programs, to approve and
oversee such programs, and to provide matching grants to the
states with approved programs, under the Coastal Zone Management
Act. Finally, the National Sea Grant College Program provides
the Agency with authority to fund grants for education as well
as for advisory services.

IV. ESTUARINE AND COASTAL OCEAN SCIENCE FRAMEWORK

A. Purpose of the Framework

In early 1986, the NOAA Administrator initiated a NOAA-wide
planning effort to coordinate and focus NOAA's estuarine and
coastal-related programs. The purpose of this effort was to:

1) Define the major estuarine/ coastal problems and
related issues of national or broad regional concern;

2) Integrate existing NOAA estuarine/ coastal- related
activities to address the priority issues;

3) Identify those NOAA estuarine/ coastal- related
activities that may require increased emphasis to
address the priority issues; and

4) Provide the basis for the development of a NOAA
estuarine/ coastal initiative that identifies
activities requiring new or enhanced funding.

B. Plannincr Process

To develop an estuarine and coastal ocean Framework, a committee
of representatives from the NOAA line offices gathered informa-
tion to identify important estuarine and coastal ocean issues.
To ensure that the Framework reflected the concerns of academia
and state representatives, NOAA,'s Estuarine Programs Office
(EPO) sponsored two workshops that focused on estuarine and
coastal research and management needs. Summaries of these
workshops are contained in Appendix C.

From these workshop discussions, the NOAA estuarine planning
committee distilled the priority issues into four broad problem
areas that encompass the breadth of concerns identified and that
also conform to NOAA's major programmatic responsibilities. As
discribed in the Framework, these problem areas are: 1) altera-
tions in freshwater inflow and circulation; 2) toxic, nutrient,
and pathogen contamination; 3) habitat degradation; and 4) the
decline of living resources. within each problem area, ques-
tions were developed to identify the information most urgently
needed, and strategies were formulated to provide long-term
direction for NOAA,'s programs in estuarine and coastal ocean
science. Figure 4 provides a conceptual diagram of the
relationships between these general categories.

C. Framework Goal

To understand and predict natural ecosystem processes to
provide the capability to assess the effects of human
activities on estuarine and coastal ocean resources.

Because estuarine and coastal ocean systems are affected by
both human activities and natural forces, we must determine the
relative importance of each in order to effectively manage the
resources. The goal statement reflects the fact that the first
crucial step toward improved management of estuarine and coastal
areas is a better understanding of ecosystem functioning. With
improved understanding, we can Vetter predict the impact of
human activities on the estuarine and coastal environment.

D. Framework Objectives

Within the context of this stated goal, objectives for each
problem have been developed:

Freshwater Inflow and Circulation -- To improve our capabil-
ity to predict the effects of hydrological forcing on
estuarine and coastal ecosystem functioning through
increased understanding of circulation and changes in
freshwater inflow.

Toxics, Nutrients/ and Pathogens -- To define the extent of
environmental degradation caused by contaminants in the
estuarine and coastal ocean environment and to determine the
effects of contaminants on living resources.

Habitat -- To understand the importance of habitat and to
predict the effects of habitat loss or physical alteration
on populations of living resources.

Living Resources -- To understand the causes of living
resource declines and to predict the effects of human
activities on populations of important species.

E. Framework Overview

In Figure 5, the priority problem areas and information needs
derived from the workshop questions are arrayed under the
categories of observation and assessment, research, and
synthesis and prediction. These categories comprise the
sequence of steps required to address estuarine resource
management problems: observation and assessment of existing
information, research to answer remaining questions, and
synthesis of information to improve our ability to predict the
effects of management actions. Components of the Framework have
been targeted for potential redirection of existing programst
for program enhancements, or for new funds. Implementation of
the Framework will be coordinated by NOAA11s Estuarine Programs
office, as discussed in detail in Chapter VI.

V. CURRENT NOAA PROGRAMS THAT ADDRESS FRAMEWORK PRIORITIES

The following is a brief summary of NOAA1's current programs in
observation/assessment, research, and prediction/synthesis and
their relation to the problem areas identified in the Frame-
work. Subsequent chapters of the Framework detail areas where
these programs should be augmented or redirected.

A. Observation and Assessment
NOAA's assessment efforts includ@ collecting, archiving, and
synthesizing environmental data. The National Estuarine
Inventory (NEI), which describes the characteristics of 92 U.S.
estuaries, is a major element of NOAA,'s assessment activities.
The NEI includes information on physical, hydrological, and
land-use characteristics of each estuary described. This

NOAA ESTUARINE AND
COASTAL OCEAN SCIENCE FRAMEWORK

External HYDROSPHERE Human
Forcing Societg
Precipitation Circulation & Shipping
Freshwater and
Dredging
Inflow
ndes <@
Toxic waste
Nutri nts & Disposal
Pathogens and
Winds Pollution

constriactilan
Choulcal and
Processes ia @ic
BIOSPHERE War"

Soler
Radiation
Habitat Living nshins
and
rces Recreation

nr.URZ 4
Estuarine and Coastal Ocean Science
A Fraxnework for Action

A. aNzRwMCN a C. 5"MMS 6
AS111104W P"bWrm 1
C319pew IT: 1. hydrololiad does 1. famil fonctiarls emw
CIR31ATIO4 M41) 2. bib= utlisin 2. inaw ad fidnetm S. MPPLY cimustich modals
FIWS@ Mal 3. W=q6k= fkXC iQ'kif4
4. apimadic own"

c2upen III: I. manis ad mon 1. inbunal. cKling 1. wbl pwulatim Qfft&A
MUM. "Milm Me 2. himmical I r 1 1. q0andic WM"* tole Ill. hmlth cammm
MUM S. 1--i-- 49ftm a. " & P*48"CM S. contasin"W =101500
4. wadtwing swimmo* 4. mortaft drd pt"10tivtty
ad ruNCIZON

ChR*w IV., 1. aritiod hmtsft t- fammic.701 Vohs t. add pwdatton effects
warmis 2. hiftwical. I, S. febseal vocialAiltr 2. otto"M dowdmy
3. pot witt9ftion 3. cknuladve Fm , 1
4. ampOW&AM bV - pion

ChRitw V2 t. hismical twuls 1. lay twphic P*h-P 1. add pi*mlatian eff
LrV= WF33MM 2. daltimm ad hosith 2. 11 M0 On Pet"MVP a. CURAlati'm aft al.1 thrests
8. GONIMse Valm 3. polu*icn & taxtalitr 4. poLicy WrAcn fs
4. hw%wt on eomyVan 4. indwas Va. oftsme
+:D S. roplaicre *ffwu
- o. priocity WwKim

FIGURE 3

inventory should be updated and supplemented in estuaries where
changes in freshwater inflow are particularly problematic for
estuarine ecosystem functioning.

Another component of the Agency's estuarine and coastal ocean
observation and assessment activities is the National Status and
Trends Program, which monitors the key contaminants in selected
fish, molluscs, and sediments at 150 sites around the country.
The survey compares trends on a national basis and provides a
basis for determining whether conditions are improving or
worsening. This program should be supplemented in coastal areas
where a more detailed understanding of the magnitude of anoxic
and contaminants problems is required.

NOAA also assists with data collection and assessment concerning
critical habitat types. In an effort to update available infor-
mation on habitat types, NOAA and its counterpart state coastal
management programs are using Fish and Wildlife Service maps to
estimate acreage by habitat type and to digitize the informa-
tion. NOAA is also assessing the acres of wetlands lost since
the completion of various surveys by evaluating the adoption of
NOAA11s permit recommendations to the Corps of Engineers. To
provide a stronger basis for making recommendations to regula-
tory agencies, these and other assessment'- projects related to
habitat should be strengthened as discussed in Chapter IV.

Lastly, NOAA conducts assessments of existing information on
important estuarine-dependent living resources. Trends in
fisheries recruitment, distribution, and abundance are key to
determining the effect of fishing activities, natural varia-
bility, and the effects of contaminants or habitat loss on
fishery resources. NOAA is developing information on the
distribution and abundance of approximately 150 species of
estuarine- dependent fish and invertebrates, using an analysis
technique developed for the NEI. In some regions, NOAA has also
attempted to improve the fishery statistics available from the
states for estuarine species through administration of fisheries
grant programs. However, historical data on catch and effort
are sporadic and vary considerably from state-to-state. In a
pilot study, NOAA is working with Maryland and Virginia to
conduct stock assessments for key species in the Chesapeake
Bay. This model could be used for key species in other coastal
areas, using advanced statistical and analytical studies
developed as part of this program. For some species, however,
information is so poor that data collection on distribution,
migration, abundance, and residence may be necessary to
undertake even gross estimates.

B. Research

Improving the knowledge of the physical and ecological dynamics
that drive the estuarine system is a significant thrust of

NOAA's estuarine research program, along with research on
fisheries and the importance of habitats in sustaining these
resources. Also important are NOAA's efforts to document the
effects of contaminants on food chain organisms, fishery re-
sources, and ecosystem processes. Examples of ongoing research
in these areas follow.

Limited resources within NOAA have been allocated to establish
the functional value of estuarine habitat types to fisheries
productivity. The problem of cumulative effects of habitat loss
is of critical importance to sustained estuarine health. With-
out applied research on the relative importance of major habitat
types, it will remain difficult to provide regulatory agencie
with the information necessary to demonstrate the cumulative
effects of thousands of small-scale habitat alterations on the
long-term productivity of the ecosystems.

With respect to contaminants and pathogens, NOAA laboratories
are investigating the effects of these agents on the reproduc-
tive success of flounder, and are attempting to correlate
contaminant levels in the sediment with observations of tumors
in f ish. By and large, these ef f orts have been in response to
concerns regarding the relatively unknown. eff ects of contami-
nants on commercially and recreationally important resources in
highly polluted estuaries or coastal waters. Additional eff orts
should focus on ecologically important species and effects of
contaminants on fisheries at the population level.

Phytoplankton, rooted aquatic vegetation, and benthic algae are
important units of productivity in both the open ocean and the
estuaries. Without an understanding of the nutrient cycle in
the estuaries, and the natural and man-made perturbations
affecting this cycle, effective regulation of nutrient inputs
from non-point source runoff and sewage treatment plants is
d if f icult. Moreover, a thorough understanding of the lower end
of the food chain will assist the management of fishery re-
sources at the upper end of the food chain. While substantial
work on this aspect of estuarine productivity has occurred
offshore, little has been undertaken within the estuaries. The
few efforts that have addressed certain aspects of productivity
should be integrated into a larger study.

To summarizel in the problem areas identified by the Framework,
there are significant gaps in NOAA's research activities. These
omissions and suggested areas of expanded research are discussed
in the following chapters.

C. Synthesis and Prediction
NOAA has only recently begun pilot efforts to address estuarine
synthesis and prediction needs. For example, to estimate the
cumulative effects of pollution or habitat loss on living marine

resources, NOAA has begun an effort to develop models to predict
population changes attributable to these factors. NOAA's pollu-
tion studies focus on estuarine-dependent species that are
exposed to lethal contaminants during their early life in
nursery areas. Considerable life-history data are required on
estuarine-dependent species to effectively use this approach.
Collection of these data should be a priority for prediction of
pollution ef f ects. Regarding the effects of habitat degradation
on fisheries, current NOAA synthesis efforts include: 1) a simu-
lation model of marsh disintegration and its effects on fish-
eries caused by loss of interface between marsh and open water
and 2) a model to predict salinity distributions and consequent
effects on fisheries caused by modified freshwater inflow caused
by channelization.

NOAA anticipates that the modeling
of environmental processes will zew
become an increasingly impor-
tant aspect of the Agency's compe"ato at a System-Wido
estuarine and coastal pro-
grams. Thus, NOAA will con-
tinue to devote resources Modallog Approach
to the development of models
that provide the greatest
benefit for estuarine and
coastal resource manage-
ment purposes. In addition,
NOAA should initiate the
development of a hierarchy
of models that can be linked kvz
to produce a successful
estuarine and coastal
ocean ecosystem predic-
tive capability. Such
an eff ort is needed if
the Agency is to enhance
its capabi-lity to support
complex management decisions
that require trade-offs
between ecosystem uses
Figure 6 illustrates how
such a hierarchy can be used
to develop a system-wide predic-
tive capability. In the illustra-
tion, a circulation model, a benthic
flux model, a near-shore habitat mod6-1,
and models for non-point and point source
pollutants are integrated to determine the
effects of various processes on fisheries production.

Conclusion

In summary, a variety of current NOAA programs and activities
address certain aspects of the estuarine and coastal ocean
problem areas described in the Framework. However, priority
attention on these specific problems will require increased
efforts for some programs, redirected emphasis for others, and
some new funding initiatives. Subsequent chapters of the Frame-
work detail these needs for each area; Chapter II - Freshwater
Inflow and Circulation; Chapter III - Toxics, Nutrients, and
Pathogens; Chapter IV - Habitat; and Chapter V - Living
Resources. Chapter VI describes the program integration
necessary to transfer NOAA,'s observation/ assessment data,
research results, and synthesis/ prediction information to
estuarine and coastal resource managers at the Federal, state,
and local levels.

I
I
I
I
Ili
Chapter 11
I'
I FRESHWATER
I INFLOW
I AND CIRCULATION
I
I
I
I
I
I
11 Y.
I
I
I

OBJECTIVE

To improve our capability to predict the effects of hydrological
forcing on estuarine and coastal ecosystem functioning through
increased understanding of circulation and changes in freshwater
inflow.

PRIORITY QUESTIONS

A. Observation and Assessment

1. What is the existing information base on the
hydrological characteristics?

2. What is known about potential changes in freshwater
inflow that may influence important estuarine systems
in the future?

B. Research

1. How do estuarine forcing functions and physical
setting combine to produce the observed circula-
tion and density regimes exhibited by selected
estuaries?

2. What are the quantitative relationships between
freshwater inflow and fisheries productivity?

3. What is the effect of alterations in natural water
inflow and circulation patterns on estuarine
structure and function?

4. How do episodic events such as floods influence
circulation, sedimentation, and biological pro-
cesses in estuaries?

C. Synthesis and Prediction

1. What conceptual approaches (models) can be used to
assess and predict the effects of freshwater inflow
and circulation changes on ecosystem structure and
functioning?

2. How can NOAA's modeling capabilites be used not
only for navigation but also for improved under-
standing of ecosystem functioning?

CHAPTER II

FRESHWATER INFLOW AND CIRCULATION

I. OBJECTIVE

II. PROBLEM DEFINITION

Estuarine waters are driven by a complex set of hydrological
forcing mechanisms, such as freshwater inflow, tides and tidal
currents, surface wind stress, ocean exchange, and offshore sea
level variations. At present, we have little understanding of
the relationship of these mechanisms to the productivity of
ecosystems. Further complicating our ability to evaluate this
relationship, hydrological forcing mechanisms tend to exhibit
significant temporal and spatial variability. Advances in our
basic knowledge of estuarine dynamics will greatly enhance our
ability to predict the effects of hydrological processes on the
biology of these ecosystems.

of particular concern is the alteration of the quantity, rate,
and timing of freshwater inflow into estuarine systems by
damming or diverting major sources of freshwater that would
normally flow into the estuary. Variations of freshwater inflow
can have a dramatic effect on estuarine salinity. The salinity
of estuarine waters is a major factor in the health and survival
of estuarine-dependent fisheries. In addition, as competing
upstream municipal, commercial, industrial, agricultural, and
recreational demands for water increase, the availability and
quality of water to downstream locations is drastically
altered. Modern large-scale agricultural operations require
enormous volumes of freshwater for irrigation, and their return
flows to rivers, streams, and estuaries are generally contami-
nated with pesticides and toxic pollutants. Land drainage,
damming, and channelization of rivers for flood protection or
navigation also alter the freshwater supply to estuaries.

Figure 7 shows the approximate freshwater flow for the major
rivers of the United States. Alterations of freshwater inflow
have resulted in numerous documented negative effects on our
estuarine and coastal ocean environments. For example, in San
Francisco Bay, freshwater flow was diverted for agricultural and
municipal us;es, resulting in a marked reduction in water quality
and an increase in major anoxia events, especially in the 1950s

and 1960s. Projected population growth in the Bay area by the
year 2000 will double the ratio of wastewater inflows to fresh-
water inflow, further complicating an already difficult problem.
Even now, the sediments of San Francisco Bay have some of the
highest concentrations of DDT and heavy metals in the world. In
the Chesapeake Bay, salinities are expected to increase two to
four parts per thousand in the next few decades because of
projected changes in freshwater inflow. This could have a
serious impact on commercially important species such as
oysters. Although oysters normally thrive in salty water, so do
their parasites and diseases. Estimates of the net loss in
oysters because of the rapid spread of these organisms range
from 50 percent to 85 percent, under the worst case projections.

APPROXIMATE FRESH WATER FLUX DENSITY

MEAN ANNUAL DISCHARGE OF MAJOR RIVERS
PER UNIT OF COASTLINE

Approximate flux of fresh water from major rivers along the coast
of the cetermineua United States (UNESCO, 1974).

FIGURE 7

Circulation and mixing of estuarine waters are also major
factors that control the movement of nutrients and contami-
nants. Circulation transports salt, heat, sediments, plankton,
and contaminants from rivers into the estuary, from one region
of the estuary to another, and between the estuary and the
coastal ocean. Vertical mixing from wind and wave action,
upwelling, and turbulence all mix these quantities into the
water column, and influence depletion (dissolved oxygen) or
aggregation (plankton blooms) in the estuary.

Estuarine circulation also exerts a major influence on many
f isheries stocks. Important species such as striped bass,
salmon, blue crab, menhaden, and shrimp have larval forms that
either develop in or pass through the mouths of estuaries.
Seventy percent of the U.S. commercial catch is composed of
species that are considered estuarine-dependent. For these
species, larval recruitment and success of the resulting year
class depend in large part on the circulation dynamics of
estuaries and the associated coastal ocean waters. NOAA
research has shown a direct relationship between blue crab
spawning and circulation in Chesapeake Bay. Further research on
the relationship between circulation and biological populations
needs to be conducted.

III. STRATEGY

NOAA's strategy for improving our capability to predict the
effects of hydrological forcing on estuarine functioning is
described in terms of observation assessment, research, and
synthesis/prediction. The primary needs are: A) assessment of
existing information on estuarine circulation and hydrological
forcing functions; B) research on the underlying dynamic
relationships that affect selected estuarine environments and
the quantitative relationships among estuarine hydrodynamic
characteristics, contaminant fate, and fisheries productivity;
and C) synthesis of available information on the relationship
between estuarine forcing functions and effects on critical
living marine resources.

A. Observation and Assessment

1. What is the existing information base on the hydro-
logical characteristics of major U.S. estuaries that
can be used for comparative studies to assess eco-
system functioning?

Underlying an understanding of the water quality and biota of
estuaries is a knowledge of the hydrological processes that
af f ect them. Estuaries are by definition mixtures of freshwater
and saltwater that produce a unique salinity regime depending on
the balance between the quantity of freshwater inflow and the

magnitude of saltwater mixing. The salinity regime is further
influenced by processes within the estuary, such as meteorolog-
ically induced water movements that account for the majority of
water exchange with the ocean in shallow bays that have weak
astronomical tides. These processes also include density
currents that may account for substantial movement of high
salinity water into the estuary.

A number of processes -- river inflow, tidal exchange, wave ac-
tion, storm tides, and density currents -- can be considered to
be physical forcing functions causing the estuary to exhibit the
observed circulation and density (salinity/temperature) regime.
ude of these -forces changes in time and space
within an estuary and from estuary to estuary, it is not possible
Because the magnit

to measure currents and salinity in one estuary and expect to
apply the results directly to another. It is possible to under-
stand the relative impact of each of the forces on a specific
estuary, to judge which of the forces are most influential on the
transport processes and subsequently the water quality and biota
in the estuary, and to incorporate that information into models.
It is therefore important to assess existing information on the
hydrological characteristics of estuaries as an aid to under-
standing and eventually predicting estuarine structure and
functioning. With this in mind, it is recommended that a
national inventory of the hydrological characteristics of major
estuarine systems be developed. This has been accomplished in
part through the development of the National Estuarine Inventory.
However, a more intensive effort is warranted. For instance, the
inventory should also be organized on a computer-based data
system and should define, in a systematic and comprehensive'
manner, estuarine salinity regimes, freshwater inflow volume and
rates, tidal prism information, and other important hydrological
characteristics. This inventory, when adapted to a computer-
based data system, will provide analytic capabilities and serve
inter-estuarine comparative needs for assessing relative eco-
system functioning for representative types of estuaries.

2. What is known about potential changes in freshwater
inflow that may influence important estuarine systems
in the future?

Freshwater inflow is a major estuarine process that influences
habitat, the physical estuarine environment (e.g., circulation,
salinity/density distribution), contaminant fate, and resource
distribution. Changes in freshwater inflow can therefore have a
major influence on important estuarine functions. Priority areas
related to this question include assessing future plans for fresh-
water flow alterations and potential concerns in major watersheds
where freshwater inflow is a problem for estuarine ecosystem
function, such as San Francisco Bay, Albemarle Sound, and along
the Texas Coast. Assessments of the influence of such altera-
tions should be made on the basis of known impacts in other water-
sheds that have been subjected to flow diversions.

B. Research

1. How do estuarine forcing functions (inflow, wind,
tides, etc.) and physical setting (temperature,
salinity, bathymetry, etc.) combine to produce the
observed circulation and density regimes exhibited
for selected types of estuaries?

Research must be conducted to understand the combination of
conditions that produces unique hydrodynamical environments. The
research will include modeling of selected types of estuarine
systems combined with a measurement/verification program. A
portion of this work is ongoing in the NOAA "core" estuarine
program. Core enhancements and new monies will lead to the
important advances for this problem area especially in the area
of model development and the application of new measurement
technology. Priority tasks include:

la. Define how the major estuarine forcing functions
affect estuarine structure and functioning for
selected types of estuaries.

Studies are needed in estuaries of different sizes, bathymetries,
climate regions, and types that consider all' major forcing func-
tions (e.g., inflow, wind, run-off, ocean exchange, etc.) as they
relate to circulation, mixing, and internal density changes.

This should be done in a three-dimensional format to ascertain
vertical structure in time and space over reasonably long periods
of time. We need to.understand the relative impact of each of
the forcing functions, judge which are most influential for
various estuarine types, and determine the water quality and
biological response. To incorporate this information into
predictive models requires a substantial amount of information on
the meteorological, tidal, and storm surge characteristics of the
estuary as well as freshwater and oceanic inflow.

1b. Determine the importance of freshwater inflow and
circulation to the dynamics of selected estuarine
systems.

Freshwater inflow and circulation are critical factors related to
estuarine functioning. Measurement programs now under develop-
ment could supply the necessary information to improve our under-
standing of the importance of these hydrological factors. A
major problem exists in the measurfiment of the flux of important
quantities through cross-sections in estuarine systems. The
principal difficulty arises from the very small percentage of
area in which conventional measurements are actually made in a
cross-section of a given estuary. Current meters, for example,
provide only point measurements of limited duration. Advances in
acoustical measurement technology have demonstrated that it is

possible to observe layering in estuarine systems acoustically
and to provide integrated current measurements for individual
layers. Studies are being carried out to determine if it is pos-
sible to measure salt flux acoustically as well. Acoustical mea-
surements can provide integrated values of currents in long time
series formats across estuarine layers. The combined use of
recent advances in measurement technology and hydrodynamical
modeling would represent an effective approach to the determina-
tion of the relative importance of freshwater inflow and
circulation for selected estuarine dynamic systems.

1c. Determine the importance of estuarine dynamical
process to selected estuarine functions.

Transport of nutrients and other materials between estuaries and
associated coastal waters is important in determining the fate of
contaminants, changes in habitats, the biological productivity of
the estuary, and fishery recruitment. The exchange of nutrient-
rich waters and sediments has important consequences for early
life-stage marine organisms and vegetation. The larvae of many
estuarine- dependent species are transported between estuaries and
coastal waters by local circulation. Estuarine circulation and
freshwater inflow patterns determine the distribution of sedi-
ments and contaminants within the habitat.- Therefore, research
must be conducted on the importance of selected estuarine
dynamical processes to selected estuarine functions, such as
contaminant flushing, habitat, and fisheries.

2. What are the quantitative relationships between
freshwater inflow and fisheries productivity?

Estuarine hydrodynamics influence the productivity of estuarine-
dependent fishery species. our understanding of fundamental
relationships must be applied to the predictions of changes in
fisheries production that may be due to man-made changes in the
magnitude or timing of freshwater flow to estuaries. Identifying
the controlling mechanisms and quantifying specific effects of
water management activities (such as agricultural, municipal and
industrial diversions of freshwater, dam construction, and wet-
land drainage) will be necessary in order to manage fisheries.

There is evidence to indicate that relationships between fresh-
water inflow and fishery production (or species abundances) can
be either positive or negative, depending on the species and the
estuary. The relationship depends upon the range of water flow
relative to the volume capacity or-, tidal prism of the estuary,
the shape of the estuary, and its location relative to prevailing
winds and storms. Also, the seasonality of inflows appears to be
important. Research efforts should consider all possible factors
to determine the mechanisms responsible for the effects of fresh-
water flow variations on indicators of fisheries- related produc-
tivity.

3. What is the effect of alterations in natural water
inflow and circulation patterns on estuarine struc-
ture and function?

Spatial and temporal variation in salinity, largely determined by
circulation and freshwater inflow, constitutes one of the most
significant physical parameters influencing contaminant and bio-
logical distributions within estuaries. Variability in circula-
tion and freshwater inflow volumes can also alter the location
and size of nurseries or habitats. Migration and spawning
patterns may be keyed to circulation, river f low, or salinity,
and these patterns can be interrupted, organisms can be flushed
out of a system and/or find it uninhabitable as a result of
variation in flow. Thus, there appears to be considerable
coupling between flow patterns and both the distribution and
abundance of organisms, and the availability of nutrients.

However, knowledge of the degree of coupling, the relationship
between chemical and biological processes, the timing, and the
variability of flow is limited. Alterations of freshwater inflow
patterns can compound already complex dynamical interactions
about which we have less than adequate scientific information.
Knowledge of the details of biological responses to seasonal
inputs and variations in flow is mandatory if we are to under-
stand the effects of circulation and freshwater inflow on estu-
arine systems. Priority tasks for this area of study include:

3a. Determine how freshwater inflow affects turbidity
in estuarine systems.

The estuarine location where freshwater inflow velocity equals
the bottom density current is called the null zone. Because of
relatively strong vertical motions, the null zone tends to have
high concentrations of sediment and organic particulate matter in
the water column, making it a region of high biological productiv-
ity. The position of the null zone is controlled partly by estu-
arine density dynamics, but largely by freshwater discharge. The
relation between productivity and null zone characteristics is a
topic of needed research.

3b. Determine how circulation patterns and freshwater
inflow affect estuarine habitat types and productivity.

To effectively manage estuaries, one must have the capability to
predict currents, water quality, and biological populations that
change because of natural and humain-induced alterations in the
physical forces that drive the system. Changes in freshwater
inflows (from extreme drought conditions to major floods with
upstream storage reservoirs), tidal regime (due to physical
modification), sea level (short-term and long-term), and the
morphology of the estuary (dredging and filling) are examples of
alterations that affect currents. Models offer great potential

for use in estuarine management because they can be used to
forecast the effects of various management scenarios related to
circulation, freshwater inflow,, water quality, biological
populations, primary and secondary productivity, and nutrient
cycling. Relationships between circulation, freshwater inflow,
and important processes for selected estuarine systems must be
studied in order to understand how these functions affect habitat
types and productivity.

4. How do episodic events such as floods influence
circulation, sedimentation, and biological pro-
cesses in estuaries?

It has been demonstrated that extreme events such as floods,
hurricanes, and winter storms can dominate estuarine sedimen-
tation and biological processes for short periods of time, that
they can dominate sedimentation and biological transport rates
over longer periods of time, and that if they lead to changes in
basin geometry, their effects can be persistent. Less extreme
events such as freshets may play even larger roles in controlling
sedimentation processes and patterns. Research areas that need
to be addressed include storm and tidal energy dissipation, the
effect of extreme flow events on filtering efficiency, and the
importance of storm events in releasing nutrients and contam-
inants from sediments to the water column. A priority task of
study is the relationship between flooding events and both estu-
arine sedimentation and biological processes. Sedimentation pro-
cesses in estuaries are extremely variable in time and space.

They not only undergo tidal and seasonal cycles but are occasion-
ally disturbed by major storms or floods that can dominate the
sedimentation of the system, or at least segments of it. Because
of these vagaries, it is frequently more effective to begin an
investigation of estuarine sediment systems by examining the end
products of these processes rather than the alternative. To
date, there have been few timely studies of actual episodic
events regarding estuarine processes. We do know that these
extreme events can dominate an estuarine system in the short-term
and their impact can be observed over longer periods of time.
However, the relative importance of these infrequent events needs
to be evaluated if we are to understand the impact of human
activities on the physical and biological system. Specif ically,
research needs to be done on the relationship between flooding
events and both estuarine sedimentation and biological projects.

C. Synthesis and Prediction

1. What conceptual approaches (models) can be used to
assess and predict the effects of freshwater inflow
and circulation changes on ecosystem structure and
functioning?

Priority tasks include developing conceptual approaches (models)
that can be used to predict the effects of freshwater inflow on
populations of important living resources. Another area of study
is understanding what improvements in present hydrodynamical
modeling capabilities can be used to better predict the fate of
contaminants, sediment transport, and biological effects in
estuarine systems.

Projects should also be initiated to evaluate and synthesize
relevant data and then to develop and test conceptual approaches
(models) that can be used to relate human-caused stress and
natural factors for selected estuarine systems and selected
species. Specific projects to' -be addressed include: a summar-
ization and evaluation of data for selected estuarine fisheries
to document the levels of variability in population parameters;
an evaluation of information documenting effects of stress on
selected fish population parameters; developing population models
to evaluate the relative impacts of various stresses and environ-
mental management strategies on selected fishery stocks; summariz-
ing and evaluating data describing ecosystem changes (e.g., com-
pensation) that occur when the abundance of a key species is
changed; and developing models to evaluate system impacts that
may occur because of environmental or fishery management
strategies.

2. How can NOAA's modeling capabilities for navigation,
meteorological forecasting and economic assessment
be used for improved understanding of estuarine-
coastal ecosystem functioning?

Existing hydrodynamical models for assessment of physical-bio-
logical interactions including drift, transport, and recruitment
of marine species can be adapted to specific estuarine research
needs. In addition, the simulation of salinity and temperature
in these models can be adapted to other water column constituents
such as nutrients and contaminants. Available models of blue
crab larval drift can be extended to other marine species that
have an estuarine-dependent life stage, such as oysters, and can
also be adapted to include more complex behaviors such as
swimming, and even to sediment transport. The use of remotely-
sensed estuarine characteristics such as sea surface temperature,
turbidity, and chlorophyll can be applied to monitoring important
changes and the calibration/verification of hydrodynamical
models.

For decades, meteorologists have made use of fluid-dynamical mod-
els to predict weather. In addition, NOAA meteorologists have
been able to integrate satellite remote sensing data into their
forecasting analysis procedures. It is hoped that the NOAA
expertise in fluid-dynamical modeling of the atmosphere and the
application of remotely sensed data can be utilized to improve
our understanding of the effects of hydrodynamical forcing
(especially those that are meteorological in nature) on estuarine
systems.

In addition to modeling, accurate data and information on the
currents and water levels in estuaries are vital to the under-
standing of the transport of sediments, nutrients, contaminants
and fish larvae. Recent developments in measurement technology
and telemetry have enabled scientists to obtain accurate data on
estuarine current and water level conditions. These data can be
used in their own right for navigation- related uses or to verif y
numerical models of estuaries. The capability to predict tides
using a numerical model for navigational purposes was demon-
strated in Delaware Bay, but cost, personnel, and computer hard-
ware constraints made this impractical for long-term operation.
It may yet be possible in the future, given the declining cost of
hardware, to apply this type of model to selected estuaries.
Numerous management applications, only some of which are dis-
cussed above, can be investigated using hydrodynamic models
similar to those used by NOAA for meteorological and tidal
predictions.

I
I
I
I
11*, Chapter III
I
I TOXICS,
I NUTRIENTS,
I AND PATHOGENS
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.
I
I
I

OBJECTIVE

To define the extent of environmental degradation caused by con-
taminants in the estuarine and coastal ocean environment and to
determine the effects of contaminants on living resources.

PRIORITY QUESTIONS

A. Observation and Assessment

1. What are the sources and loading rates of nutrients,
toxics, and pathogens in estuarine and coastal
waters?

2. What is the current status and significance of toxic,
anoxic, and pathogen distribution?

3. What statistical data are available to relate
contaminant exposure to living resources?

B. Research

1. What is the internal cycling of contaminants?

2. What is the role of episodic events?

3. What are the effects of toxics on estuarine
organisms?

4. What are the effects of nutrient loadings on
ecosystem productivity?

5. What are the effects of pathogens on estuarine
resources?

C. Synthesis and Predictign

1. what conceptual approaches (models) can be used
to relate contamination of broad areas of estuarine
habitats to population changes for representative
species of concern?

2. How can information transfer and predictive capa-
bilities be improved to better inform the public
of the consequences of fiaheries contamination on
harvest and marketability?

Chapter III

TOXICS, NUTRIENTS, AND PATHOGENS

I. OBJECTIVE

To define the extent of environmental degradation caused by
contaminants in the estuarine and coastal ocean environment and
to determine the effects of contaminants on living resources.

II. PROBLEM DEFINITION

A variety of contaminated materials is introduced into the
estuarine waters of the United States as the result of increased
human activity along the shorelines. These materials often
include contaminants that are a serious threat not only to the
estuarine ecosystem, but also to human health. Studies show
that there is considerable contamination in the biota, water
column, and the benthos associated with estuarine systems
nationwide, especially within those bodies of water adjacent to
major urban centers. Figures 8, 9, and 10 summarize these
findings. Figure 8 illustrates the results of the NOAA Status
and Trends Program, which found high levels of toxic materials
in the sediment of urban estuaries. Figure 9 shows that
estuarine and coastal areas experiencing hypoxia (low oxygen
concentrations that can be traced to nutrient enrichment) are
located adjacent to population centers that discharge sludge
into the surrounding waters. Finally, Figure 10 shows the
correlation between coprost6nol (a compound found only in human
waste) and the closure of shellfish grounds.

Human activities and waste products introduce many different
contaminants to estuaries, including toxic chemicals and metals,
nutrients that can cause eutrophication, and a number of human
pathogens. Some of these substances occur naturally, but the
rates and amounts of these materials cycling into estuarine
environments are sometimes increased by human activities. This
pattern is valid for many naturally occurring elements and
chemical compounds, including plant nutrients, heavy metals, and
a number of organic compounds. Other chemicals, primarily a
great variety of organic compounds, do not exist to any
appreciable extent in a natural state, and are present in the
environment only because of industrial activity.

CONCENTRATIONS OF TOXICS IN ESTUARINE SEDIMENTS

oww@ G"

oftwfte ftow

06 Imam 10@

1.0

AROMATIC CHLOROSIPHENYLS
DOT RESIDUES HYDROCARBONS (PCBG)

c@ am
Qkw .534
26.437
30$

MIS "44

cb@
S-W

fty
am
a." NNW

S- OW" am
a- P@

eft

aft"
S..w
oft
ow
c- wr
ft-
=36
(ngig (ppb) weig" (two *v -own) (PP61

(From NOAA's NSAT Progress Report. Benthle Surveillance Prolact. 1964)
FIGURE 8

HYPOXIC AREAS & SLUDGE PRODUCTION
IN ESTUARINE & COASTAL WATER$

OF THE UNITED STATES

-0 20
20

20
U 20
K3
/,3
do U 20 ism 10 K3
40 . 101 Ton. 0,V SWift(Year 40
U M 0 2= so
60

40 20
0 20
C3 H"O@g Areas %I "a fteg

(Sources: US DOE-@ Ll OAA , Me llonwide Review Of HYPOXia.1964 and
NOA A, MOS, do nit fyine :nd ElaluteltlaS Alternative ocean Dump Sites. 1962)

FIGURE 9

90io
SHELLFISH CLOSURES

SEWAGE TRACER LEVELS IN SEDIMENTS
Boston Harbor
(2blo

34
1,11 (204 3"
to
(n :0
Lam 114

100

Raritan Say

51 IS

'00
W= 100
48 a" Wis 100
charkate
C!Osed for Shol fish
jF,arn IM Nor= Shellfish perdida, 8"
Aril,sow, NOAA. FDA) I too 57
Pensacola
C03,09tanal say J L(31= W@m
ism sectirne"Is ippe-dry 1-1-1 9@0
1000 (From MAI Status am Trends Apalachicola Taffuts Say le"llan Sticom Sound
No 11 Data Aecorl. NOAAl say River

FIGURE 10
33

The addition of nutrients, metals, organic compounds, and
pathogens to estuaries threatens the health of estuarine
ecosystems and contaminates seafood. Nutrient over-enrichment
can cause shifts within the biological community to less
desirable species and stimulate nuisance growths of algae and
depletion of oxygen when these growths decay, frequently with
attendant kills of fish and other resources. The primary threat
of the metals and organic compounds is their potential toxicity
to marine organisms and to humans. Many of the contaminants -- -_ -1
for example, heavy metals such as cadmium and copper, and
synthetic organics compounds such as DDT and PCBs -- are toxic
to marine organisms and humans even at low concentrations, i.e.,
parts per billion to parts per million. Pathogens associated
with wastes from human activities, especially sewage treatment,
present a threat to humans for periods ranging from a few hours
to weeks and possibly longer periods after their introduction
into the marine environment. Humans can contract a variety of
disorders, including serious diseases such as hepatitis, if they
become infected with pathogens while swimming or through the
consumption of contaminated fish or shellfish.

To protect human health and the marine environment from the
threat posed by contaminants that enter the- estuarine ecosystem,
we must improve our understanding of the behavior and effects of
such materials. This knowledge will assist in the development
of improved ways to manage and control contaminant inputs to
estuaries. Knowledge is needed regarding the sources and
magnitudes of contaminant additions and how these materials are
transported and altered after they enter the environment. Major
efforts are needed to understand the effects of contaminants on
marine species at individual, population, and community levels.
With improved knowledge, we will significantly increase our
capability to predict the consequences of existing and proposed
control measures for contaminants and enhance our ability to
cope with these contaminants wisely.

III. STRATEGY
The strategy for meeting these needs includes: 1) observation
and assessment to identify point and non-point contaminant
sources, monitor the trends of contaminant concentration; 2)
research to understand and model the physical and biological
processes that transport contaminants; and 3) synthesis to
describe the responses of living marine resources to contaminant
loading and habitat degradation. Using the above information we
will be able to accurately assess the threat to ecosystem func-
tions posed by toxics, nutrients, and pathogens.

A. Observation and Assessment

1. What are the sources and loading rates of nutrients,
toxics, and pathogens in estuarine and coastal waters?

Efforts are needed to identify the sources of estuarine contami-
nation and to quantify the magnitude of the relative and abso-
lute amounts of these materials coming from various sources.
The National Coastal Pollution Discharge Inventory (NCPDI) repre-
sents a first attempt to collate and quantify these figures.

The contributions from non-point sources, such as those associ-
ated with land runoff and atmospheric inputs, are very difficult
to determine at present. Efforts to improve the means to make
such source measurements should include identification of the
physical and chemical forms of the contaminants from the various
sources. In this area, remote sensing vehicles equipped with
spectrally correct color scanning equipment could aid in the
tracking of sediment plumes and algal blooms associated with
eutrophication. A large suite of equipment is available for
this purpose. Airborne units include LIDAR (a flourescence
detection system which can determine the types of phytoplankton
in the water column) and the Multi-channel Ocean Color Sensor
(MOCS, a spectroradiometer using visible imaging and the Air-
craft Ocean Color Instrument). High altitude color photography
is also possible using the NASA high altitude aircraft.

.2. What is the current status and significance of
toxic compound distribution, nutrient, and patho-
gen distribution affecting U.S. estuaries?

Until quite recently, there was no nationwide program to regular-
ly assess the status and trends of the pollution problems in
U.S. estuarine and coastal waters or to interpret such informa-
tion in terms of the overall ecological health of these areas.
NOAA has recently instituted a program in response to this
need. Such efforts need to be expanded both temporally and
spatially in order to determine the severity of pollution
problems in estuarine areas that are most in need of research
and management actions.

There are also efforts underway to search for perturbations that
can be traced to contaminant loading in the estuarine environ-
ment. An accurate baseline must be established from which
variations in contaminant loading can be measured and trends
assessed. Historical data represencs one of the great untapped
resources available to establish such. baselines. EPA and other
agencies (NASA, Navy, NOAA, etc.) have archived tremendous
amounts of data over the years in computerized files. Using
this information, investigators would not only be able to
establish meaningful "zero points" above which future trends
could be measured, but would also be able to examine a host of
important historical characteristics. Priority needs include:

2 a. Determine the extent of hypoxia in coastal and
estuarine waters.

In a nationwide study conducted by NOAA, hypoxic areas were
identified in coastal and estuarine waters. Priority concern
was assigned to those regions that exhibited severe or repeated
hypoxia and/or eutrophication. In the cases studied, hypoxia
occurred as a result of stratification (particularly due to
salinity differences in estuaries) combined with excessive
nutrient loading (point and non-point) and phytoplankton produc-
tion and decay. These conditions, combined with poor flushing,
circulation, and/or calm wind conditions helped to determine the
duration of the hypoxic conditions and stresses on benthic
organisms. There is sufficient evidence to suggest that severe
hypoxic conditions result in mass mortalities among sessile
shellfish and some bottom-dwelling finfish species. These
conditions disrupt the economic system through the loss of fish
catches and cause increased ecological stress by decay of the
affected fish populations. Therefore, future efforts should
address not only the problem of hypoxia monitoring, but should
also be concerned with the accurate prediction of such condi-
tions. In this case, as with many others, an examination of
historical data might provide the clues necessary to point the
way toward a viable solution for hypoxia forecasting.

Coastal areas identified as having severe hypoxia were the New
York Bight/New Jersey Coast and the Louisiana Coast west of the
Mississippi in the Gulf of Mexico. Estuaries identified as
having severe hypoxic problems by region, were:

Northeast:
Hudson -Raritan/ East River/Western Long Island
Sound and Northern Chesapeake Bay

Southeast:
Western Albemarle Sound/Upper Neuse
River/Biscayne Bay

Gulf of Mexico:
Tampa Bay/Perdido Bay/Mobile Bay/Lake
Pontchartrain

West Coast:
Budd Inlet in Puget Sound

2b. Determine the extent of tox1c materials in bottom
sediments of coastal and estuarine systems.

The increased industrialization of the coastal areas of the
United States has resulted in elevated levels of toxic materials
(PCBs, heavy metals, etc.) in adjacent coastal waters. New
York, Boston Harbor, and Commencement Bay, Washington, are

examples of areas heavily impacted by pollutants that can be
traced to increased human activity. It is reasonable to project
that additional areas will come under the influence of these
materials as the population pressures on the shoreline and its
resources increase. The increase in pollution will particularly
affect the Southeast and Gulf coasts, where 94 and 98 percent of
their respective commercial harvest is composed of estuarine-
dependent species. PCBs can now be found throughout the coastal
and shelf waters of the Northeastern United States and have
resulted in the closure of commercial fishing for striped bass
in the Hudson River.

NOAA's estuarine programs must'include the continuous monitoring
of areas in which there is a known contaminant impact. Such
observations are necessary in order to determine the increase or
decrease in concentrations of various toxics. in addition,
sampling should include areas outside those showing the most
serious degradation, so that any movement of materials attribut-
able to sediment transport or other factors can be quickly deter-
mined. Finally, relatively pristine areas should be sampled to
ensure that they have not become contaminated. If toxics or
pathogens are found at low levels in what was previously a
"clean area", immediate steps must be taken to identify the
source of these pollutants and avert a more serious problem.

2c. Determine the distribution of pathogens as repre-
sented by closed areas or diseased organisms.

There are several types of pathogens, including those associated
with sewage sludges and bio-toxicants such as "red tide" orga-
nisms. There is evidence of contamination by pathogens in all
of the major industrialized estuaries. Pollution- related
closures of shellfishing grounds generally occur because of
pathogens associated with human waste (coliform bacteria). In
fact, the coliform, "most probable number" is an index used by
most authorities to make decisions regarding the closure of
fishing or swimming areas. At present, there are many areas
throughout the country where shellfishing and finfishing are
banned. Notably, the New Bedford, Massachusetts area recently
underwent a closure involving 28 square miles. The increased
number of areas closed to fishing is another rough index of a
problem that managers of coastal and estuarine areas must
resolve. This data provides the baseline from which increased
degradation or recovery can be measured. Such information can
be portrayed graphically, on maps or charts, and can serve as a
valuable management tool.

There may even be ways in which these data could serve as sign-
posts, pointing to possible pollution sources. In addition, as
the areas decrease in size, through the application of wise
management techniques, the results can be distributed in a
readily understandable format. NOAA has initiated a project to

determine the basis for shellfish harvesting limitations in
estuaries around the Nation and to identify sources of pollution
in those estuaries where harvest limitations are due to patho-
gens. The results of this project should be helpful in addres-
sing the more general problem discussed above.

3. What statistical data are available to relate con-
taminants exposure to living marine resources?

A comprehensive information base on the effects of contaminants
on living resources exists in the extensive assortment of
published and grey literature. These data need to be synthe-
sized with respect to their use in helping to understand how
contaminant exposure affects living marine resources.

B. Research

1. What is the internal cycling (availability, transfor-
mation, and residence) of toxics, nutrients, and
pathogens?

Although pollution studies have clearly shown that many of our
estuaries are contaminated, they did not determine the full
extent of impact throughout the ecosystem. Thus, in general, we
have an incomplete understanding of the present extent and
magnitude of estuarine and coastal water contamination, and the
relative and absolute contributions of different point and
non-point sources. The difficulties in tracing a contaminant
from its sources to its effect on the estuarine system are
further complicated by a lack of knowledge concerning the fate
of these materials after they enter the estuary and the various
forms in which the contaminants enter the estuaries. Priority
needs include:

la. Define the mechanisms that control the fate and
transformation of toxics, nutrients, and patho-
gens in estuarine and coastal systems.

After entering an estuary, contaminants are transported by chemi-
cal, biological, and physical processes. In order to improve
predictions concerning the transport, transformation, and fate
of contaminants in estuaries, field and modeling studies of
water movements, including such processes as tidal mixing, wind
forcing of estuarine circulation, and vertical dispersion, are
required (see Chapter II). Efforts to improve our understanding
of the role of other processes such as volatilization and
photolysis in determining contaminant distributions are also
needed. A more complete knowledge of the role of sorption of
contaminants on particles in determining the transport and
ultimate fates of these materials is especially required.

During their physical transport, chemical contaminants often
undergo transformations by chemical and biological processes
into new chemical species and physical forms that may represent
an increased or decreased environmental threat in terms of
toxicity or nutrient enrichment. Therefore, studies on how
biological and chemical processes change the physical and
chemical states of various contaminants as they move through
estuaries should be conducted in concert with the physical
process resea'rch. These studies should include efforts to
develop a better understanding of the important chemical
reactions that help determine contaminant forms and con-
centrations in the environment. Research concerning the
association/disassociation of contaminants to form chemical
complexes with other components in estuarine waters and how the
formation of these complexes affects contaminant toxicity is
needed, as is research on how biological processes, especially
those caused by bacteria and other micro- org anis ms, can alter
the types and amounts of contaminants. Because pathogens are
living organisms, studies on these contaminants need to
establish their survival, reproduction, and distribution
pattern.

Finally, in order to use our knowledge concerning contaminant
fates, transformations, and transport to help solve environ-
mental problems, there is a great need to improve our capabili-
ties to estimate or predict the actual distributions in space
and time of contaminants so that the exposure of living re-
sources to contaminants can be determined. Relevant subtopics
include: 1) determine the diagenetic processes that control the
absorption and desorption of contaminants by particles and 2)
determine how diagenetic processes affect pore water composition
of the overlying water.

lb. Define the role of fine grained sediments in the
fate and transformation of toxics, nutrients, and
pathogens.

Many of the most insidious contaminants are relatively insoluble
in water and have a high affinity for fine particles. The low
concentrations of dissolved metals in estuarine waters may be
the result of this affect. Once contaminants are absorbed,
their distribution, transport, and accumulation are affected,
and indeed may be controlled by the estuary's sedimentation
processes. The partitioning of contaminants among the water,
sediments, pore waters, and biota, however, may change as
sediments and their associated contaminants are exposed to
different environmental conditions by natural physical, geologi-
cal, chemical, and biological processes. Relevant subtopics to
be addressed include: 1) determine to what extent and by what
mechanism the distribution of contaminants in an estuary are
controlled by the transportation and accumulation of fine-

grained sediments and 2) determine how periodic resuspension of
sediments affect the absorption and desorption of particle-
associated contaminants.

1c. Define the role of organisms in determining the
fate, transport, and transformations of toxics,
nutrients, and pathogens.
Studies are needed to develop a better understanding of the
pathways and rates of nutrient and toxics cycling through the
different trophic levels of estuarine ecosystems. Such studies
should emphasize the biological and physical- chemical processes
that control dynamics of nutrient regeneration and distribution
within estuaries and the relative importance of these internal
processes in controlling biological production as compared to
the importance of additions of nutrients from external sources.

2. What is the role of episodic events such as floods,
storms, and hurricanes on sedimentation and the
associated contaminant fate in estuarine and coastal
systems?

Sedimentation processes in estuaries are extremely variable in
time and space. Sedimentation not only undergoes tidal and
seasonal cycles, but also is occasionally influenced by major
storms or floods that may dominate the sedimentation process in
estuarine systems. We know that these extreme events can cause
major short-term changes in the sedimentation process; they also
can have major effects on estuarine and coastal ocean systems
over longer periods of time. However, the relative importance
of these infrequent events needs to be evaluated if we are to
understand the impact of human activities on the system.
Priority needs include:

2a. Develop institutional mechanisms to study rare and
unpredictable storm events.

The study of storm events that may exert a controlling influence
on estuarine sedimentation is hampered by two problems. One is
the technical problem of maintaining instruments to measure
conditions for very long, relatively uneventful periods in order
to observe rare but significant storm conditions. The second
problem is the inability of traditional funding mechanisms to
respond quickly enough to ensure that observations can be made
in the critical period during or immediately after storms.
1.
There is a need for establishing a coordinated research plan
that can be implemented quickly for studying storm events. This
plan should have application to estuaries and coastal areas in
addition to a wide variety of other applications.

2b. Determine conditions under which episodic events
control the distribution of particle associated
contaminants.

It has been demonstrated that extreme events such as floods and
storms can dominate estuarine sedimentation processes for short
periods of time, that they can dominate sedimentation rates over
longer periods of time, and that if they lead to changes in
basin geometry, their effects on circulation and sedimentation
can be persistent.- Less extreme events, such as freshets and
severe storms may play even larger roles in controlling sedimen-
tation processes and patterns. Research areas that need to be
addressed include storm and tidal energy dissipation, the effect
of extreme flow events on filtering efficiency, and the impor-
tance of storm events in releasing nutrients and contaminants
from sediments to the water column.

3. What are the effects of toxics on populations of
important marine organisms?

Additional research is needed to improve our understanding of
the effects that various toxic contaminants and nutrients have
or could potentially have on estuarine ecosystems and living
resources. studies on toxic contaminants need to go beyond
laboratory toxicity studies and should focus on effects of
contaminants on organisms and populations. Innovative means to
evaluate toxicity under actual or simulated field conditions
need to be developed and used for a wide range of estuarine
situations. Also, the present efforts to shift emphasis away
from relatively short-term studies concerned with acute toxicity
to longer-term research projects concerned with chronic, sub-
lethal effects need to be continued and strengthened. These
longer-term studies should focus, not just on the effects of
contaminants on individual organisms, but also on how these
contaminants influence the entire ecosystem. Priority studies
should include the following:

3 a. Determine valid indicators of stress (lethal and
sublethal) on important species because of exposure
to toxic contaminants.

stress may be evaluated within the marine environment in much the
same way as it is in terrestrial environments. Examinations of
individual organisms may reveal lesions and deformities because
of malformations of spinal cords and other structures. Micro-
scopic and enzymatic analysis may reveal malfunctions in the
energy utilization or reproductive system of the particular
species involved. The degree to which the animal has been
damaged by a stressful situation caused by nutrient or contami-
nant exposure may be determined, in many cases, by an "index"
based on the quantities revealed by the analysis. Exposure to
microorganisms may also be revealed using immunological tech-

niques. All of these scientific procedures need to be quant-4-
fied into a format suitable for management purposes. The ideal
solution would be a model that, given toxicity inputs and environ-
mental conditions, could provide a most probable stress index.

3b. Determine specific contaminants that compromise
organism 'functioning to the degree that populations
are affected.

Contaminants may affect populations in many ways. A major con-
taminant spill may result in the wholesale destruction of some
benthic species from a particular area. In general, however,
toxic effects of such spills tend to be less observable because
they often interact with the physiology of the organism causing
problems that are not immediately evident. For instance, shell-
fish such as oysters and scallops may have their reproductive
capabilities reduced by exposure to certain chemicals. The
result will be a reduced population in the future and a reduction
in the value of the harvest available. Massive fish kills are
also familiar to most coastal dwellers, as is the contamination
of shellfish by organisms causing paralytic shellfish poisoning
(PSP). The results of toxic exposure may also result in a
population or species that, although suffering no ill-effect,
becomes unfit for human consumption because of bioconcentration.
Furthermore, external lesions and other deformities not only make
fish less able to survive in the estuarine environment, resulting
in reduced populations, but also reduce their desirability in the
market place.

Again, knowledge of toxic qffects on individuals or populations
is of little use in itself except as a scientific exercise. To
be effective, such information must be presented in a managerial
context so that the funds expended may be recouped through effec-
tive decision-making processes. Once the toxic effects are well
quantified, the information can be synthesized in a science-
management context so that adequate risk assessments may be
prepared when required.

3c. Determine the synergistic effects of a combination
of contaminants on important populations.

For most of the toxic contaminants of greatest concern, we have
at least some idea of the mortality dose-response relation for
some common fish and invertebrate species. However, there is no
guarantee that the most sensitive species have been studied, or
that the effects of combinations of cuntaminants has been addres-
sed. Further, much of our information concerning toxicity is
derived from relatively' short-term studies based on mortality.
our knowledge of long-term effects of exposure to toxics, espe-
cially sublethal chronic effects that may not directly lead to
death, but do have major impacts on the ability of organisms to

survive and reproduce, is much less extensive. In summary, our
understanding of the cumulative effects of contaminants is
inadequate.

Studies of bottom-dwelling organisms have indicated a decrease
in species diversity and domination by pollution -tolerant
species where sediments contain high concentrations of toxi-
cants. Amphipods, which are a major dietary component of
several species of estuarine and coastal fish, are among the
forms that drop out. Some investigators have speculated that
these ecological shifts could have adverse effects on fisheries
production; however, such changes have not been demonstrated
convincingly in estuarine field studies.

A combination of field and laboratory studies is required in
order to determine cause-and-effect relationships between
chemicals and biological effects. In field studies, statistical
modeling could be used as a tool to investigate such relation-
ships. Laboratory investigations will also be necessary to
further understand relationships between biological pertur-
bations and individual chemicals or groups of chemicals.

3d. Determine how the addition of contaminants affects
estuarine trophic structure and dynamics.

In contrast to our understanding of the process of eutrophica-
tion, relatively little is known about the trophic implications
of toxicant additions. Research to date has focused largely on
correlative field observations or on laboratory studies of ef-
fects at the organism, tissue, and cellular levels. Relatively
little work has focused on population- or community-level
effects. However, the laboratory studies conducted to date have
demonstrated that many pollutants have the potential to influ-
ence processes governing plankton growth (e.g., respiration and
photosynthesis) and to produce acute or sublethal effects in
individual planktonic organisms. Other experimental evidence
suggests that exposure to chlorinated hydrocarbons or toxic
metals such as copper and mercury may cause shifts in the
dominant cell size of phytoplankton populations from larger to
smaller f orms. Since the basic trophic pathways in an estuary
represent the foundation of the food chain and thus, the
productivity of the area, mechanisms which adversely affect this
structure are of vital interest to the estuarine manager. The
coordination of ongoing field and laboratory efforts to identify
factors that cause unnatural perturbations in the trophic system
is required so that accurate prediction of such events is
possible.

3e. Determine the threat to human health posed by the
presence of toxics in seafood.

Research on selected toxic substances, such as mercury, has
shown that bioconcentration of these materials through the food
chain can have a devastating effect on the human population as
was evidenced by the mercury contamination in the Minimata Bay
incident. For most of the toxic materials that contaminate fish
and shellfish, there is inadequate knowledge to assess the human
health consequences of consumption of such contaminants. We
need to establish the dose-response relationship between these
contaminants and the pathologies they may cause in order to
establish acceptable limits for occurrence of these materials in
seafood from estuaries. Research should address both the cir-
cumstances and conditions that lead to the contamination of
estuarine seafood at levels that threaten human health, and the
relationship between the concentrations of contaminants found in
the edible tissue of estuarine fish and shellfish and the threat
to human health.

To address this problem, studies are needed concerning the
specific factors that control accumulation of toxic contaminants
in estuarine living resources as well as the factors that
control the depuration, metabolic breakdown, and other means of
eliminating these contaminants from such resources. Research is
also needed to determine potential human exposure to contami-
nated resources under various conditions and the mechanisms that
control such exposure. There is also a special need for further
research to develop effective indicators of the level of risk to
human health associated with living resources from a specific
area or the hazards which may exist in specific areas used for
recreational or other activities.

4. What are the effects of natural and human-caused
nutrient loadings on ecosystem productivity?

NOAA research in areas such as the New York Bight and Chesapeake
Bay have shown a positive relationship between human-caused
nutrient loadings and ecosystem productivity. However, we are
not presently able to reliably estimate the relations between
specific concentrations of nutrients in estuaries and the actual
effects they cause in estuarine ecosystems. Research eff orts
should f ocus on the f ollowing determinations:

4a. Determine the effects of eutrophication on critical
life stages of important estuarine-dependent
populations.
Euthrophication, or nutrient over- errichment, has the effect of
reducing the available oxygen supply in the water column. Such
conditions are dangerous to benthic organisms of all types and
can lead to a reduction in important estuarine resources species
either through adult mortality or the disruption of complex
metamorphic life stages. Aesthetically, eutrophication is
responsible for extensive, unsightly $'algae slicks" that affect

the popularity of estuarine beaches when they wash ashore. As
in all environmental problems, the cause and cure must be addres-
sed and a prediction tool developed. In this way, managers may
not always be able to prevent low dissolved oxygen events, but
will be able to draw upon their knowledge of past incidents to
accurately forecast these situations with a reasonable degree of
accuracy.

4b. Determine how the addition of excessive nutrients
affects trophic dynamics and community composition.

Considerable evidence suggests that the addition of biostimu-
lants, especially organic carbons, phosphorus (in freshwater),
and nitrogen (in marine systems) can lead to detrimental changes
in aquatic food webs. Low levels of over-enrichment may enhance
primary production and increase the biomass of desirable orga-
nisms; however, sustained, high-volume additions of organic
matter or nutrients generally produce undesirable shifts in
community structure and environmental quality. As a result of
associated changes in trophic dynamics, the accumulation of
pollutants in sediments, and the recycling of excess carbon and
nutrients, effects may continue after the sources of pollution
are removed. Research efforts in this area should focus on
acquiring a better understanding of the factors that determine
the trophic rates and pathways. Under such conditions, the
roles and dynamics of the microbial components are of special
interest. Also of concern to both environmental managers and
scientists are the incremental and cumulative effects of bio-
stimulants, and the reversibility of such effects.

Evidence also suggests that' fishing or stocking practices can
alter the complexion of predator species and, in turn, result in
fundamental changes in estuarine food web dynamics. By-and-
large, such observations stem from studies of grossly polluted
systems or systems whose fauna have been significantly altered
as a result of fisheries management practices. Even in the most
intensely studied estuaries, ecosystems response to contaminants
generally is understood on a qualitative rather than a quan-
titative level. Models may exist that permit retrospective
analyses, but rarely is prediction of contaminant response
possible.

5. What are the effects of pathogens on estuarine
resources?
Estuarine research involving the so'nrces and effects of marine
pathogens should focus on the determination of the mechanisms
through which pathogens affect populations of important living
resources.

C. Synthesis and Prediction

1. What conceptual approaches (models) can be used to
relate contamination of broad areas of estuarine
habitats to population changes for representative
species of concern?

There is a need to refine conceptual approaches that have been
developed recently by NOAA scientists to relate pollution to
effects on populations of important living marine resources -- I
primarily those which are estuarine- dependent. our objective is
to develop the capability to predict population changes (losses
in particular) that can be expected to result from land-use and
effluent discharge practices. In order to make successful
population predictions, field-tested models are required that
can accurately simulate actual conditions. Because these models
may have hundreds of variables, the construction of the initial
algorithm is usually the most difficult and * crucial aspect of
any such undertaking. It is essential, then, that those tasked
with the collection of estuarine information work closely with
the management cadre so that as many "gaps" as possible are
filled and our understanding is as thorough as possible. Only
in this way will our forecasting gain a reputation for relia-
bility. we will then be able to advise other agencies on the
long-term effects of their policies on estuarine-dependent
populations of living marine resources.

2. How can information transfer and predictive capa-
bilities be improved to better inform the public
on the consequences of fisheries contamination on
harvest and marketabAity?

The public usually becomes aware of adverse impacts on a parti-
cular fishery when the price per pound of a desirable food
species begins to increase in the market place. This situation
may be the result of increased mortality because of either the
introduction of toxic materials into the environment or unwise
overf ishing. In the f ormer case, however, the impact may be
much wider than the average person realizes. In many cases, the
decline of a f ishery results in lost livelihood and unemployment
as occurred in the Chesapeake Bay oyster and scallop fisheries.
As another example, a few years ago there was evidence that
bluefish in the New York Bight were contaminated by levels of
PCBs that exceeded the Food and Drug Administration action
limit. A report was published showing that both the retail fish
markets and sportfishing industry x4ere adversely affected. Not
only did the demand for bluefish decrease, but the sales of
items associated with the offshore activity (bait, diesel fuel,
tackle, fees to park and to use public toll roadst etc.) also
declined.

It is clear that there are real and perceived contaminant
effects on the economy of a fishery. The public is increasingly
aware of insidious threats to human health and tends to react
aggressively against any situation that it perceives to be
harmful. It is therefore extremely important that NOAA ensure
that its reporting on contaminate affects is accurate, timely,
and concise.

In many cases, it is not possible to prevent red tides, fish
kills, or other catastrophic marine events. However, suf ficient
support information now exists to permit the timely prediction
of such problems and the rapid dissemination of health bulle-
tins. If accurate and timely information on these events can be
developed, NOAA and other Federal agencies such as EPA and the
U.S. Public Health Service may effectively reduce economic
losses and threats to human health. Models have been developed
that use relatively simple surrogate variables to predict the
presence of pathogenic amoebae in oceanic sediments. Other such
management devices need to be developed so that assessments may
be rapidly generated as required. As previously noted, only
cooperation between the field investigator, manager, and modeler
can result in the finely tuned simulation tools necessary for
successful decision- making.

I
I
I
I
I-, Chapter IV
I
I HABITAT
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

I
no

OBJECTIVE

To understand the importance of habitat and to predict the
effects of habitat loss or physical alteration on populations of
living resources.

PRIORITY QUESTIONS

A. Observation and Assessment

1. What are the critical fisheries habitats for food,
cover, spawning, nursery areas, migration?

2. What are the existing distributions, rates of
change, and documented causes of loss for estua-
rine habitat types?

3. What is the extent and status of past mitigation
actions?

B. Research

1. What is the relative functional importance of
primary estuarine habitat types for important
living marine resources?

2. What is the natural variability in habitat
functions, and how do perturbations and long-
term changes in environmental factors affect
habitat functions?

3. What are the effects of cumulative habitat loss
on fisheries productivity and economic value, both
regionally and nationally?

4. Does habitat restoration through mitigation and
enhancement compensate functionally for habitat
loss or alteration?

nthesis and Prediction

1. What conceptual approaches (models) can be devel-
oped and used to assess and 'predict the effects of
cumulative habitat loss on regional fisheries
production?

2. What is the significance of the contribution of
estuarine productivity, both primary and secondary,
to offshore ecosystem productivity (i.e., are
offshore stocks dependent upon estuarine
productivity)?

CHAPTER IV

HABITAT

I. OBJECTIVE

To understand the importance of habitat and to predict the ef-
fects of habitat loss or physical alteration on populations of
living resources.

II. PROBLEM DEFINITION

Loss of important estuarine habitat is a national-level concern,
especially in view of the fact that 70 percent of the U.S. com-
mercial fisheries catch is dependent on these areas for spawn-
ing, nursery, and feeding. Estuarine areas are being degraded
and wetlands that provide fishery habitat are rapidly disap-
pearing in many areas of the country. In 1780, what is now the
continental United States had an estimated 11 million acres of
coastal wetland -- by 1978 only 5.7 million acres remained. In
Louisiana, which contains roughly half the Nation's coastal
wetlands, losses prior to 1956 were estimated to be 16.5 square
miles/year. The most recent data indicate this rate is now 60
square miles/year (Figure 11). Connecticut has lost over 66
percent of its coastal marsh, while California's San Francisco
Bay wetlands have been reduced 75 percent (from 300 to 75 square
miles). In Chesapeake Bay, submerged aquatic vegetation de-
creased drastically between 1965 and 1980 (Figure 12), simul-
taneously with declines of several estuarine-dependent species
such as American shad, striped bass, white perch, alewife, and
blueback herring. Physical and chemical-related processes
associated with human activities, as well as natural causes,
contributed to these losses. Current estimates that approxi-
mately 75 percent of the U.S. population will live in coastal
states by 1990 suggest that even greater losses will occur over
time, as the competition for limited space and resources in-
creases.

The loss or modification of ecologically important habitats
affects estuarine productivity. Because suitable estuarine
habitat is required by a significant number of marine organisms
for spawning, growth, and survival, the biological productivity
of an estu arin e/ coastal system declines as the quality and
quantity of habitat decreases. Furthermore, productivity will
continue to decline until habitat loss is reversed. This
process has been documented in scientific studies that demon-
strate strong correlations between deteriorating habitat and
fishery declines (e.g., loss in productivity and yield of a
species). However, the combination of events that control

LOUISIANA COASTAL MARSH LOSS

I J.

($ogreisii U& Fish and wildlife service, stational wetlands Research coatorl,

FICURE 11

1965 1980

01
4,

Oecline in submergeo aquatic vegetation (SAV) from 1965 to 1980 in the C!"411aVillakill BAIV

(Source: US Environmental Protection Agency. 1983)

?
GUR
1 52 2 12

productivity is poorly understood. Consequently, the effects of
human activities on fisheries production versus natural proces-
ses affecting habitat availabilities are difficult to evaluate.
Therefore, the agencies responsible for coastal management are
either forced into a reactive posture with regard to wetlands
degradation and adjacent upland modification, or must base
preventive programs on less than complete scientific informa-
tion. Without better quantification of the relationships
between productivity and the quality and quantity of habitat,
public decisions on land-use will continue to be made on the
basis of supposition rather than established fact regarding the
effects of habitat alteration on estuarine and coastal produc-
tivity.

our ability to assess the immediate and long-term effects of
society's activities on fisheries habitat will depend on our
knowledge of habitat functions, the- quantity of habitat loss,
and the rate of recovery of damaged systems. Resource managers
must have this information to predict what losses of living
marine resources would occur in the event of habitat altera-
tions. Unfortunately, in most locales we have a poor under-
standing of the functional value of estuarine habitats, quality
of various wetland types, or their rate of* loss. Additionally,
we have not developed effective mitigation and enhancement
approaches to ameliorate habitat loss through regulatory pro-
grams. The effectiveness of current mitigative measures in
replacing lost habitat is not yet proven, and information is
lacking on the rate of successful replacement or enhancement.
In most instances, we do not even know whether previous habitat
mitigation attempts have been successful. This knowledge is
critical for effective management of habitats through the
permit- mitigation process.

To minimize habitat degradation, we must understand the role and
value of different habitats and the best techniques for mitigat-
ing or restoring damaged habitats. We must also inventory the
destruction of wetland habitats and modification of adjacent
upland areas, monitor habitat changes through the regulatory
program, and ensure that our management and administrative
processes effectively translate this information to the
decision-making process.

III. STRATEGY

NOAA's strategy for habitats is: 1) to collect and assess infor-
mation on habitats that are critical to fisheries populations of
concern; 2) conduct research on the relationship of estuarine
habitat to productivity of fisheries of concern; and 3) to deter-
mine the distribution and rate of loss of estuarine habitat
types that are important to living marine resources. This will
be accomplished by collecting and- evaluating existing data;

collecting new information for resource dependence on estuarine
ecosystems from field studies; and collecting data from remotely
sensed imagery to map important habitats.

A. Observation and Assessment

The assessment of information is an important element of the hab-
itat component of NOAA's efforts in estuaries. Questions to be
addressed are:

1. What are the critical fisheries habitats for food,
cover, spawning, nursery areas, and migration?

If we are to wisely manage estuarine-dependent fishery popula-
tions, we must know which habitats are critical to their contin-
ued survival. We know a great deal about a number of species'
life history and general distribution, particularly in their
adult life stages; however, we know very little about the early
life history of most species of concern. Generally, we do not
know where these species spawn or which areas are important
nursery and feeding areas. The characteristics of such areas
must be determined for species of concern in order to protect
them from unwise use or modification. - Priority areas of
consideration include:

la. Determine the seasonal distribution (vertical and
horizontal) of each lif e-history stage of impor-
tant species and the major areas of concentration.

1b. Determine the substrate type, water quality para-
meters, food availability, etc. that are necessary
for successful growth, maturation, reproduction,
and survival.

2. What are the existing distributions, rates of
change, and documented causes of loss for estua-
rine habitat types?

Coastal marshes, aquatic macrophytic beds, and tidal flats serve
as nurseries for many commercially important fish and shellfish,
and provide a significant amount of the organic matter processed
by nearshore marine ecosystems. There is concern that much of
this highly productive coastal habitat, is disappearing because
of both direct destruction (dredging or filling) and indirect
effects of pollution, herbicides, fertilizers, etc. These loss-
es have affected, and will continue'to affect, the coastal fish-
eries but it is difficult to document them systematically.
Part @f the reason is that no standard documentation of habitat
changes exists among the coastal states. Coastal wetlands
mapping differs from one state to the next.making it impossible
to compare losses or modifications of wetland coverage and to
relate these to potential impacts on fisheries, particularly
those that cross state boundaries.

very little information on the disappearance of coastal habitats
on a large scale is available. To address this lack of informa-
tion, measurement of change in coastal habitat areas, location
and health must be undertaken. The only technology that has
potential for performing all of these tasks within reasonable
cost and time constraints is digital remote sensing by satel-
lites. A regional and national inventory of major habitat types
and their rate of loss or gain is required. Finally, NOAA
should develop a wetlands data and information management system
to monitor cumulative impacts. Priority areas of consideration
include:

2a. Determine the existing quantity and distribution
of estuarine and coastal habitat types by state,
county, and watershed.

The coastal and estuarine wetlands of the United States should
be assessed every five to ten years and monitored annually in
regions of significant change. Remotely-sensed data from the
Multispectial Scanner (MSS) and Thematic Mapper (TM) sensors, as
well as "ground -truth ing 11 by wetlands and estuarine ecologists,
will be required. An operational protocol capable of handling
any format of MSS or TM data must be established for all U.S.
regions. The protocol must provide a uniform basis for habitat
classification, and thereby allow intercomparison of two or more
images, regions, or times. The protocol would also include
substantial "ground -truth ing" procedures for validation of
satellite measurements. The establishment of an operational
classification system based on the protocol (including software
and algorithm development) would be a one-time cost, and once
established would be shared by all users.

2b. Determine the historical rate of change of estua-
rine and coastal habitats by region, state, county,
and watershed.

A uniform documentation of vegetational coverage and change
should be completed. The derived products would consist of maps
and tables listing areal coverage (hectares) by state, county,
and watershed for each classified type.

2c. Determine the documented causes for the changes
(in particular, losses) of estuarine and coastal
habitats.

NOAA should develop a system to a0count for nationwide coastal
habitat change caused by Federal projects, permits, and other
authorizations, as well as natural causes, which together result
in habitat loss or degradation. Remotely sensed data, as well
as knowledge of Federal agency projects and approvals of pro-
jects, will be required to assess the loss rates attributable to
legal, permitted, and illegal activities. These data must be

related to the historical data base on wetland acreages. At pre-
sent, state and Federal agencies estimate losses based only on
permitted activities under the Corps' jurisdiction. However, we
have no measure of what is actually being lost, as there is no
follow-up to evaluate permitted projects, nor do we account for
other projects (legal and illegal) or natural change.

The creation of a standardized computer-based accounting system
would assist in the collection of such information. There must
be a common, uniform reporting basis, not solely for habitat
types, but also on causes of habitat loss (e.g., dredge and
fill, navigation channels, marinas, housing developments) and on
estimates of acreages subject to degradation or deterioration
from contaminants. Efforts are also necessary to determine wet-
land gains and losses that are attributable to natural causes.
These data need to be compiled and updated yearly an regional,
state, county, and watershed bases so that managers and scien-
tists can direct their management efforts and research appro-
priately. A wetlands and information management system should
be established to incorporate these data.

3. What is the extent and status of past mitigation
actions?

There is a great deal of pressure to develop mitigation and en-
hancement approaches to ameliorate habitat loss through the regu-
latory process. As discussed earlier, the effectiveness of
mitigative measures in compensating for lost habitat is poorly
known, as is information on the rate of successful replacement
or enhancement. In most instances, we do not even know if the
actions were successful. This knowledge is critical for effec-
tive management of habitats through the permit- mitigation
process. NOAA must continue to stress that there are no trade-
offs for the removal or destruction of natural habitat, and that
mitigation should be considered to minimize adverse impacts only
when projects are deemed to be in the public interest. A survey
of past mitigation, compensation, and restoration attempts to
determine their success would help to measure the utility of
such management approaches in compensating for lost functional
values and resource production.

B. Research

1. What is the relative functional importance of
primary estuarine habitat types for important
living marine resources?

To address this question, research in both spawning and nursery
areas must be conducted. Research on early life-history must
identify biological, physical, and chemical characteristics of
primary spawning areas for selected estuarine-dependent species;
determine the relative importance of factors which affect sur-

vival of eggs and larvae; determine the transport mechanisms
that deliver larvae to estuarine nursery areas; and determine
the importance of offshore intrusions of nutrient-rich water to
support the feeding of early life-history stages. Habitats that
need to be addressed include high and low marshes, seagrass
meadows, mangroves, intertidal, and subtidal unvegetated
habitats. Priority areas of concern include:

la. Determine the relative importance of the quality
of nursery area habitat as it affects abundance,
distribution, growth and survival of juvenile
living marine resources including an assessment
of conditions limiting food supply, relative
importance of predation, and relative mortality
rates.

Research needs to be conducted on the relative importance of the
quality of nursery areas as they affect abundance, distribution,
growth, and survival of juvenile living marine resources. Qual-
itative studies should include those conditions limiting food
supply, the relative importance of predation, and relative
mortality rates.

1b. Determine the biological, physical, and chemical
characteristics of primary spawning and nursery
areas for selected species.

Qualities of the nursery area that must be considered include:
plant composition and density; sediment type, composition and
organic content; and hydrologic conditions. All of these f ac-
tors influence species composition, abundance and interactions.

1c. Determine the factors that affect survival of eggs
and larvae.

Once larvae have entered estuaries, survival is dependent on the
size, accessibility, and type of habitat available, as wen as
postlarva naturally occurring physical, chemical and biological
processes. Research topics should include habitat utilization in
terms of the life-history of the organism. For instance,
species- specific settlement of postlarvae into different
habitats and seasonal use of habitats for purposes of feeding,
refuge from predation, and spawning should be studied. Research
should also be directed toward resource use, predator use, and
predator-prey interaction and factors that control them.
I
2. What is the natural variabil ity in habitat' func-
tions, and how do perturbations in environmen-
tal factors affect habitat functions?

Research needs to be conducted to determine how the variability
of wetlands to open water and the amount of interface between

the two affect secondary production, the exchange of nutrients
and detritus, and exploitation of the habitat. The influence of
changing water levels due to subsidence and/or sea level rise on
habitat functions that provide living marine resources with
space, food and/or protection has not been adequately address-
ed. Research is also needed on how long-term environmental
patterns are reflected in variability among species abundances
and how long-term changes in geomorphology of estuaries in-
fluence migration routes of living marine resources. Attention
also should be given to whether recruitment patterns to estu-
aries are related to variability in morphological features among
estuaries.

3. What are the ef f ects of cumulative habitat loss
on fisheries productivity and their economic value,
both regionally and nationally?

our ability to assess immediate and long-term effects of habitat
alteration will depend on our knowledge of habitat functions,
both spatially and temporally, the quantity of habitat loss, and
the rate of recovery of damaged systems. Resource managers must
have this information to predict the losses of living marine
resources that would occur in the event of habitat alterations.
Specifically, research is needed to address the impacts of
perturbations on fishery habitats, including migration pathways.
What are the impacts of altered freshwater inflows on vegetation
patterns and resulting changes in functional processes? What
are the impacts of construction of shoreline structures and what
are their relative habitat values? What is the cost to living
marine resources of re-impounding wetlands? . A major problem
exists and will continue to exist pertaining to dredging and the
need to find disposal sites. open water disposal of dredged
material continues to be an important issue and increasingly
affects estuarine and coastal habitats on a regional basis. The
value of the habitat that is lost to disposal activity is rarely
known. These are just a few of the information voids that exist
and need to be addressed regarding the well-being of living
marine resources. Priority areas of concern include:

3a. Determine population effects due to regional wet-
land losses for important species.

For species that are dependent upon particular estuarine habitat
types, we need to assess the consequences of habitat loss or
modification throughout the species,' range. This will require
considerable life-history and popUation information and the
development of suitable conceptual approaches to relate mortal-
ity to habitat loss within the natural variability that is known
to exist for all populations.

3b. Determine the effects of changes in freshwater
inflow on major estuarine ecosystems (e.g., San
Francisco Bay, Columbia River, Pamlico- Albemarle
Sound, Texas coastal estuaries) resulting from
chanqed veqetation patterns and changed functional
processes.

changes in estuarine habitats (e.g. marsh loss due to decreased
freshwater input) have profound implications for resources
dependent upon such areas. For selected areas known to have
been adversely affected by either too little or too much fresh-
water inflow, we need to quantitatively assess the effects such
changes have had on living marine resources and ecosystem func-
tioning.

4. Does habitat restoration through mitigation and
enhancement compensate functionally for habitat
loss or alteration?

We do not know whether re-created habitat that was ostensibly
provided to compensate for lost habitat actually replaces the
functional value of the lost habitat and thus compensates for
lost resource productivity. Habitat mitigation through the
restoration and enhancement of damaged habitat, and the gener-
ation of new or replacement habitat is used by regulatory
agencies such as the Corps of Engineers to ameliorate losses of
submerged and emergent wetlands and subtidal shallow-water
habitat critical to the growth and survival of living marine
resources. Several techniques have been developed to propagate
marshes, mangroves, and seagrass meadows and to create shallow
habitats for estuarine and coastal species. Although this
mitigation concept may be an effective way to reduce the rate of
habitat loss, we do not know the extent to which these ap-
proaches are successful or whether such restoration adequately
compensates for the loss of natural habitat.

We have been able to document the proper way to create replace-
ment habitat of similar appearance to that which was lost. We
need to conduct research to determine whether all the original
functional values are eventually restored as well. The science
of mitigation is still imperfect, and there is little basis upon
which to judge whether mitigated habitats (which may take many
years to develop, if they do at all) support estuarine produc-
tion to an extent similar to natural habitat. Federal and state
agencies have attempted mitigation, but have not evaluated the
results in terms of success or failtire. It is therefore timely
for a research strategy to address priority topics in the follow-
ing areas:

4 a. Determine whether functional values of mitigated
habitat compare to natural values, at what rate
does the replacement of functional process take
place, and what is the interim living marine
resource loss.

To address success and replacement functions for mitigation
requires long-term evaluation. This can be done by studying
mitigation attempts that were initiated at different times.
Evaluation techniques used to determine relative habitat value
should also be applied to mitigated habitat over a long period
of time. In addition, research efforts are needed to determine
relative habitat value, including sediment development, plant
cover, microbial and detrital development, faunal utilization,
and trophic linkages. The strength in this approach is that
where reliable experimental designs can be established, there is
the potential for determining quantitative measures of failure
and success, and conclusions rather than inferences can be drawn
as to future mitigation procedures that could be employed
routinely.

4b. Assess and determine the most appropriate
methodologies to contribute to the success of
mitigation actions.

Although technologies exist to propagate marsh, seagrass, and
mangroves, we do not know the appropriate ratio of restored
acreage to that acreage needed to offset the loss of functional
characteristics upon which living marine resources are depen-
dent. Nor is there sufficient information available on popula-
tion density. Under most circumstances, uniform coverage
marshes are planted, although recent research strongly suggests
that reticulated marshes may provide greater access to the marsh
for fishery organisms. Experiments should be conducted on the
use of dredged material to restore shallow water habitats impor-
tant to fishery species. Within this question is the need to
conduct research on whether in-kind wetland habitat replacement
is necessary or can replacement be made with other kinds of
plant species? The resolution of this question is a function of
available information on the relative value of different estua-
rine habitats and is vital to effective habitat conservation.
In addition, the use of mitigation banking as a method to
compensate for habitat lost must be evaluated, as the viability
of this approach is in question.

C. Synthesis and Prediction

1. What conceptual approaches (models) can be devel-
oped and used to assess and predict the eff 'ects of
cumulative habitat loss on regional fisheries
production?

Our objective is to develop the capability to predict future
population change (i.e., losses) that would be expected to occur
with a continuation of current agency policies that now result
in significant cumulative habitat loss throughout the range of
important marine species. For example, wetland losses may
significantly affect shrimp and menhaden populations. We hope
to be able to advise agencies that are responsible for such
policies on the desirability of changing those that are detri-
mental to habitats critical to the continued existence of
valuable living marine resources.

Research is needed on developing conceptual approach models that
relate changes in primary habitat types such as wetlands to the
productivity of selected living marine resources. This will
primarily involve the collection of basic life-history and
population data for selected species. once this information is
available, conceptual approaches that utilize existing popula-
tion dynamics models will need to be developed. Later, the
models can incorporate sensitivity analyses on different aspects
to estimate potential ranges of impact of various types and
degrees of habitat alterations on living marine resources.
Additionally, research should be directed at developing popu-
lation models that allow estimation of habitat values to
different life stages, recruitment among populations, and
different potential sources of natural, pollutant, and fishing-
induced mortality. Priority areas of concern include:

la. Develop population models and the biological data
needed to operate the model that allow estimation
of habitat to different life stages, recruitment
among populations, 'and different potential sources
of mortality due to habitat alteration.

Existing population dynamics models need to be modified to incor-
porate factors pertinent to early life-history survival and re-
production for the species of concern. Such models are now
under consideration; additional work should be done to relate
population dynamics to habitat change. Moreover, considerable
data will be required to operate the models, if they can be
developed. We need to know a considerable amount about a
species population's characteristics in order to separate mor-
tality caused by habitat alteration from natural variability in
populations.

1b. Conduct sensitivity analyses on aspects of the
models to estimate potential ranges of impact of
various degrees and kinds of habitat alterations.

If conceptual models can be satisfactorily developed for select-
ed species and suitable data are available, a sensitivity analy-
sis can be conducted to refine estimates of mortality attribut-
able to habitat loss over broad areas of the species range.

1c. Determine the relationships between loss of habi-
tat and change (decline) in fishery resources.

This task involves a synthesis of findings from research on estu-
arine coupling and from related estuarine investigations of
habitat issues and pollution effects. Achieving such a synthe-
sis would be a major step toward addressing the central estua-
rine-related management concern: Do human activities in estu-
aries adversely affect fisheries yield, and if so, how might
they be avoided or minimized? A synthesis of the estuarine
coupling studies should be built around answers to questions
such as the following: What is the relative importance of major
habitat types to fishery production? What are the implications
to fishery production of altering the quantity or quality of
estuarine habitats? Can secondary production be protected or
improved by managing for specific levels of primary production?
Is control of primary producers by predators a major factor in
estuaries with detritus-based food webs?

2. What is the significance of the contribution of
estuarine productivity (primary and secondary) to
offshore ecosystems productivity (i.e., are off-
shore stocks dependent upon estuarine productivity)?

Because many inshore-dependent fish species are migratory and
thus are harvested away from nursery areas, control of the
harvest to ensure optimum utilization of a fishery resource
requires an understanding of the origin of the stocks contri-
buting to that fishery, knowledge of the inshore waters from
which they originate, and the migratory patterns of the
species. Perhaps of equal importance is the contribution to
offshore ecosystems of food in the form of both detritus and
animals that were either produced or nourished in estuaries.
Recent evidence suggests that offshore stocks in the Southeast
cannot be supported by the plankton productivity alone from
of f shore waters. In fact, it may be that estuarine-derived
detritus is providing the critical balance. Detritus, in turn,
may be the primary nourishment of the vast populations of men-
haden, which are the principal forage species for many important
recreational and commercial species found predominantly off-
shore. Offshore stocks of valuable living resources may thus be
dependent both directly and indirectly on the productivity of
estuaries.

Tasks to be accomplished to address this question are: 1) deter-
mine the significance of the flux Of oxidizable organic matter
from estuarine to shelf ecosystems and how this varies from one
estuary to another; 2) determine the significance of the estua-
rine portion of the life cycle to the entire life cycle of
selected estuarine-dependent species; 3) determine how signifi-
cant estuarine-dependent species are as prey for coastal and off-
shore species; and 4) determine how significant estuarine-depen-
dent species are as predators of coastal species.

I
I
I
I
I,, Chapter V
I
I LIVING
I RESOURCES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

OBJECTIVE

To understand the causes of living resource declines and to
predict the effects of human activities on populations of
important species.

A. observation and Assessment

1. What are the historical trends of estuarine-
dependent stocks?

2. What is the present distribution, abundance,
and health of estuarine-dependent fish stocks?

3. What is the economic value of fisheries?

B. Research

1. What are the key trophic pathways in estuarine
ecosystems and how does the flux of essential
nutrients, carbon compounds, and energy through
these systems influence fisheries productivity?
2. How are trophic pathways affected' by natural
events and human activities?

3. What are the relative effects of fishing, pollu-
tion, and natural mortality on fishery population
dynamics?

4. What are the ecosystem impacts of harvesting and
stocking fishery resources on food web dynamics
and predator-prey interactions?

C. Synthesis and Predictign

1. What conceptual approaches (models) can be devel-
oped and used to relate fishing mortality to that
caused by habitat degradation and natural factors?

2. What are the cumulative effects of human activities
on important fishery populations?

3. What are the trade-offs (i.e., economic, ecological,
and social) for various national or regional
estuarine and coastal policy options?

4. What are the predicted consequences of proposed or
existing fishery management regulations?

5. What are the priority estuaries for NOAA's scienti-
fic attention?

CHAPTER V

LIVING RESOURCES

I. OBJECTIVE STATEMENT

To understand the causes of living resource declines and to
predict the effects of human activities on populations of
important species.

II. PROBLEM DEFINITION

The vast majority of our highly-valued living marine resources
are critically dependent upon estuarine environments. In f act,
estuarine-dependent species comprise approximately seventy
percent of the U.S. commercial catch (see Figure 13). This
proportion is much higher in the South Atlantic (94 percent) and
Gulf of Mexico (98 percent). Dramatic declines in several of our
commercially and recreationally important fisheries are shown in
Figure 14. These declines have been attributed to overfishing,
loss of habitat, pollution, environmental alteration, disease,
and natural variability of the stock. Most of these stocks have
probably declined because of interactive or additive effects of
many of these factors. Thus, effective fisheries management
requires an understanding of these factors and traphic inter-
actions.

To a great extent, previous research on trophic interactions in
estuaries has been dominated-by descriptive and qualitative stu-
dies. Research emphasis should be shifted from characterizing
estuarine food webs through the use of gut content analyses and
laboratory feeding studies to the dynamics of trophic inter-
actions. Also important is research on microbial and benthic
processes, especially as they relate to detrital feeding and the
recycling of nutrients and carbon. Deciphering the influence of
natural versus human- associated factors on the coupling of pri-
mary and secondary production is also of concern, as is obtaining
an improved understanding of the nutrient, carbon, and energy
fluxes through estuarine systems.

We are chiefly concerned with the pathways in ecosystems that
lead to fish productivity and how human activity alters that
productivity. Research is needed to provide knowledge of the key
trophic pathways and the factors that affect energy flow in the
estuarine ecosystem. This understanding of ecological processes
must then be combined with information on the current health,
distribution, and abundances of ecologically important estuarine
organisms. With an understanding of the ecological linkages and
information on the current status of fishery stocks, managers of
fisheries and habitat resources will be better able to manage
estuarine-dependent living marine resources that might otherwise
be threatened by overfishing and/or habitat degradation.

COMMERCIAL FISH LANDINGS
EBTUARINE-OEPENOENT AND MARINE

1.4

1.3

1.2

1. 1

0.9

z 0.8

z
0.7

C 0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
_" 1. --@_

RE Estugfine-DoPendent

Cz Strictly Mari"*

(Source: MOAA/MMFS. Fishll*s 3t&tletlcs Division. 1947)

FIGURZ 13

III. STRATEGY

The strategy for meeting these needs consists of: 1) observation
and assessment of fishery stocks; 2) research on ecosystem dy-
namics, natural and human effects on trophic pathways, fishery
population dynamics, and food web dynamics; and 3) synthesis and
prediction to @ relate fishing mortality and habitat degradation,
and the effects of human activities on fishery populations.
Additional efforts will include analysis of policy options for
estuarine resource management, and establishing priority estu-
aries for scientific attention.
I

DECLINES IN LANDINGS FOR ESTUARINE DEPENDENT SPECIES
(Source: NO AAJ NMFS, Fisheries 8 tails tic a Division, i *a 7)

(metric Tons) 10.000

STRIPED BASS

2.000-
STURGEON 5,000- 7
7/
1.000 -

66 70 75 ao So

$a 70 76 $OGG 10,000

SHAD

AMERIC N OYSTER 5.000
77-7-
20'OOO_///7 10,000-

SOFT &HILL CLAM$
0
of 70 a ao eG
10.000-///// 5.000--

FIGURE 14 0- 6670 is so $a
46 TO 75 Go ag

A. Observation and Assessment

1. What are the historical trends of estuarine-
dependent stocks?

Historical trend information for stocks of estuarine-dependent
species of recreational, commercial, and ecological value would
provide a basis for assessing relationships with human develop-
ment trends in coastal areas. SiAch information is currently
developed for selected stocks by reconstructing population data
from historical fishing catch and effort data, where possible.
Priority areas related to this problem are: 1) assemble and
A
(Z :R]@

evaluate the quality of available data; 2) develop methods to
relate dissimilar data from separate collecting programs to

provide a common national data set; and 3) reconstruct population
estimates from existing data on catch/effort or other relatable
data set (e.g., juvenile indices, landing data) for primary
estu arin e- dependent species of fish and shellfish for selected
coastal regions.

2. What is the present distribution, abundance, and
health of estuarine-dependent fish stocks?

Because many estuarine-dependent species are migratory, and thus
are harvested away from nursery areas, it is difficult to link
quality of the nursery areas to the abundance and health of these
species. optimum utilization of a fishery resource requires an
understanding of the origin of the stocks contributing to that
fishery, knowledge of their habitat requirements, the "health" of
the species. 10
stocks, and the migratory patterns of It is als
important to know the range and extent of estuarine-dependent
stock within coastal fisheries. We have developed considerable
knowledge of the biology and population dynamics of a number of
important species, particularly those found offshore. However,
we know very little of the early life-history of many estuarine-
dependent species, although this is critical information required
for management of such stocks' habitat. To. analyze the effects
and interactions of contaminant and pathogen exposure and fishing
on yields of inshore-dependent fishery resources, we need to
understand the interaction among natural population dynamics,
pollution- related mortality, and fishing mortality. The inter-
actions between human-induced and natural stresses (including
infectious disease agents) and how fishery resources react to
cumulative stress must also be understood and evaluated. Another
important task is to coordinate the state-level collection of
data on living marine resources to determine distribution, popu-
lation dynamics, health, and abundance. Information is needed on
species' distribution, migration, movement patterns, stock defi-
nition, abundance, residence time, and seasonality of use of
estuarine habitat by life stage (including age and size struc-
ture). Information on the distribution and prevalence of disease
and other fish disorders is also essential to evaluating health
of the stock.

3. What is the economic value of fisheries?

If habitats important to recreational and commercial species are
to be properly weighed in public policy decision- making, the
value of the living resources that are supported by such habitats
must be recognized. Fishery valuatl'un in the past has tradition-
ally not considered all present and future values of such species
to society. Innovative approaches must be developed and uti-
lized. -

Potential tasks to address this question include: 1) obtain and
evaluate population data regionally for important species o 'f f ish
and shellfish; 2) evaluate methodologies for projecting values of
fisheries to society taking into account their full range of
influence on our quality of life; 3) select appropriate metho-
dologies for species of primary interest and develop estimates of
value, regionally; and 4) hold a national workshop to evaluate
results.

B. Research

1. What are the key trophic pathways in estuarine
ecosystems, and how does the flux of essential
nutrients, carbon compounds, and energy through
these systems influence fisheries productivity?

Estuaries are dynamic, heterogeneous marine environments.
specific environmental conditions reflect not only the local
physio-chemical setting, but also inputs from upstream, upland,
and oceanic environments, including water, organisms, and
substances ranging from suspended sediments and detritus through
nutrients and toxic substances. All of these are imposed on
resident microbial, floral, and faunal communities. Much of the
scientific attention that has been paid to estuaries focuses on
characterizing the structure of such communities and the temporal
and spatial variability of the systems that support them. Estua-
rine assemblages may take on many forms; however, it is unlikely
that all are of equal value for the support of fishery resources.
For example, the role and relative importance of seagrass-domi-
nated estuaries along the Mid-Atlantic may well be different from
those of mangrove dominated estuaries along the Gulf Coast, or
mudflat dominated estuaries in New England. For further progress
to be made, emphasis must be placed on understanding the trophic
linkages between structural elements in estuarine food webs.
This includes identifying those linkages that are of greatest
consequence to fishery production and the factors that control
the complexity and composition of trophic linkages. Better
understanding is also required of the rates at which materials
cycle through estuarine food webs and the factors governing
trophic processes and products. Priority areas related to this
problem are:

la. Determine the major sources of food (fixed carbon)
in selected estuarine and coastal ecosystems.

We need an understanding of the relative importance of major
sources of organic carbon in estuarine ecosystems. New tech-
niques and recent studies have greatly enhanced our understanding
of the overall structure of estuarine food webs and the relative
contributions of major groups of estuarine primary producers --
rooted aquatic vegetation, terrestrial vegetation, phytoplankton,

benthic algae, and estuarine microbes. For example, new tech-
niques such as stable isotope analyses have enabled scientists to
go beyond traditional stomach content examinations and laboratory
feeding experiments in evaluating the relative importance of
various sources of fixed carbon for the support of estuarine
secondary (fishery) production. Also, recent studies suggest
that bacteria may be key factors in disruptive events such as
episodes of hypoxia/anoxia and blooms of nuisance algae, as a
result of their role in carbon and nutrient regeneration. Atten-
tion must now be focused on variations in primary productivity
and their implications for trophic dynamics. Within individual
estuaries, what controls autotrophic production? How do the
relative contributions of autotrophic groups vary over space and
time? What is the trophic significance of such shifts? What are
the food chain effects of aperiodic variations associated with
storm events and ecological succession?

1b. Determine the linkages between plant production
and harvestable fishery species.

It is now possible to describe major trophic pathways in well-
studied estuarine systems and to develop models of the overall
flux of carbon, nutrients, and energy. However, it is difficult
to relate such calculations to fishery production. Generally,
detailed information is lacking about food webs that support
commercially or recreationally important estuarine finfish and
shellfish. A limited number of efforts are underway to define
.more precisely the distributions and habitat requirements of
estuarine species. These need to be expanded, with emphasis
placed on the feeding habits and nutritional requirements of
early life-history stages as well as adults.

1c. Determine the efficiency and plasticity of path-
ways linking primary production and fishery species.

We need to know whether changes in species that comprise the food
chain will have an adverse effect on species of concern. Among
the most contentious issues in studies of the coupling of estua-
rine primary and secondary production is the relationship between
the quantity and quality of available food items and fisheries
productivity. Research indicates that all other things being
equal, estuaries with the highest quality foods should produce
the highest fishery yields. In this regard, more detailed infor-
mation is needed on the chemical composition and nutritional
quality of potential estuarine food items, as well as the ability
of species of concern to f eed on th2se items. The issue is made
more complex because: 1) organisms vary in their ability to
derive nutrition from given foods and 2) the availability of food
items varies within and among estuaries as well as over time.
Relatively little is known about the factors that determine the
acceptability of foods to a species or a particular life-history
stage. In addition, better understanding is needed of the

ecological "trade-offs" that may be involved with feeding on
larger quantities of low-quality food. In this regard, research
on the following questions should be pursued: 1) What factors
determine the importance of plankton-based versus detritus-based
food webs in individual estuaries? 2) How are plant and animal
matter processed in estuarine food webs? and 3) What are the
relative magnitudes of organic matter import to, export from, or
sedimentation in estuaries?

id. Determine the relative magnitude of organic
matter input to, export from, and sedimentation
in representative ecosystems.

The pool of organic matter available to estuarine food webs
depends on the primary production within systems, the import of
organic matter from oceanic, terrestrial, and fluvial sources,
the export of organic matter to coastal waters, and the balance
between materials sequestered in benthic sediments versus those
that are resuspended by physical events or bound in biological
activity. This type of information is not available or complete,
except perhaps in the most heavily studied estuaries, yet it is
essential for assessing and comparing the coupling of primary and
secondary production among systems or within a system over time.
Resources should be devoted to developing such estimates for a
representative suite of estuaries around the country.

2. How are trophic pathways affected by natural
events and human activities?

Considerable evidence exists to demonstrate that the addition of
large quantities of wastei3 (toxic as well as non-toxic) from
human activities can bring about detrimental changes in estuarine
ecosystems. Evidence also suggests that stocking practices,
particularly in the Great Lakes, and fishing can alter the comp-
lexion of predatory species and, in turn, result in fundamental
changes in estuarine food web dynamics. By-and-large, such
observations stem from studies of grossly polluted systems or
systems whose fauna have been significantly altered as a result
of fisheries management practices. Even in the most intensely
studied estuaries, ecosystem response generally is understood on
a qualitative rather than a quantitative level. Models may exist
that permit retrospective analyses, but rarely is prediction of
ecosystem response possible. In order for a link to be made
between improved understanding of estuarine trophic dynamics and
the influence of human perturbations of estuarine ecosystems, the
following must be addressed:

2a. Understand how the addition of biostimulatory
materials may alter trophic dynamics by affecting
rates and pathways.

Considerable evidence suggests that the addition of biostimu-
lants, especially organic carbon, phosphorus (in freshwater), and
nitrogen (in marine systems) can lead to detrimental changes in
aquatic food webs. Low levels of nutrients may actually enhance
primary production and increase the biomass of desirable orga-
nisms. However, sustained, high-volume additions of organic
matter or nutrients generally produce undesirable shifts in
community structure (i.e., species, size, and composition) and
environmental quality. As a result of associated changes in
trophic dynamics, the accumulation of pollutants in sediments,
and the recycling of excess carbon and nutrients, effects may
continue after the sources of pollution are removed. Research
efforts in this area should focus on acquiring a better under-
standing of the factors that determine the trophic rates and
pathways. Under such conditions, the roles and dynamics of the
microbial components are of special interest. Also of concern to
both environmental managers and scientists are the incremental
and cumulative effects of biostimulants, and the reversibility of
such effects.

2b. Determine how the addition of toxic materials
alter trophic dynamics.

In contrast to our understanding of the process of eutrophica-
tion, relatively little is known about the trophic implications
of toxicant additions. Research has focused largely on corre-
lative field observations or on laboratory experimental studies
of effects on organisms, their tissue, and cellular levels.
Relatively little work has focused on population- or
community-level effects. . However, the laboratory studies
conducted have demonstrated that many pollutants have the
potential to influence processes governing plankton growth (eg
respiration and photosynthesis) and to produce acute or sublet*h@i
effects in individual planktonic organisms. Other experimental
evidence suggests that exposure to chlorinated hydrocarbons or
toxic metals such as copper and mercury may cause shifts in the
dominant cell size of phytoplankton populations from larger to
smaller f orms.

Many questions that were raised on the trophic effects of bio-
stimulatory materials are also pertinent to the ef f ects of toxic
substances. However, the issue is complicated by the many
combinations of contaminants that may occur within individual
estuaries. A piecemeal toxicant-by -toxicant approach may prove
less efficient than investigations on the suite of contaminants
present at individual study locales, 'f ollowed by attempts to make
generalizations and identify similarities with results from other
sites. To address this task, research should: 1) determine the
mechanisms and extent to which toxicants cause alterations of
estuarine food webs; 2) determine the point at which, for
selected contaminants, the addition of a specific toxicant causes
significant alteration in estuarine food webs; and 3) determine
to what degree toxicant- mediated trophic changes are reversible.

3. what are the relative effects of fishing, pollu-
tion, and natural mortality on fishery population
dynamics?

The primary question with regard to pollution and natural events
that cause mortality is: What is their relative contribution to
fish mortality in relation to that caused by fishing pressures?
This must be considered against a *backdrop of natural mortality
(e.g. due to currents which sweep larvae to areas lacking
sufficient food) and mortality caused by human activities
(habitat alteration). Priority tasks are:

3 a. Develop basic lif e-history and population data
for estuarine-dependent species.

Fishery biologists have developed and used models to relate popu-
lation and recruitment information to predict future stock abun-
dance, particularly for offshore stocks. We need to develop
basic fishery information on the early life stages of estu-
arine-dependent species so that similar approaches can be devel-
oped and used for these species as well. This task will require
a substantial increase in efforts now being conducted indepen-
dently and to varying degrees in each coastal state. Specif i-
cally, these efforts need to be augmented and coordinated.

3b. Use models to quantify the effects of fishing
mortality on populations of representative
species in relation to estimates of population
loss resulting from human activities and natural
factors.

For selected species, we need to determine the relative contribu-
tions of fishing pressures, environmental effects, pollution, and
habitat alteration that lead to mortality. For species that have
significant mortality attributable to human-induced causes, addi-
tional information on population dynamics, reproduction and
recruitment will be needed to clarify the primary causes of such
mortality. This approach, if successful, should be utilized for
those species regionally whose population dynamics are related
potentially to stress by human activities, particularly
estuarine-dependent species that are or will be subject to
habitat-related mortality caused by chronic factors.

4. What are the ecosystem impacts of harvesting and
stocking fishery resources on food web dynamics
and predator-prey interaccions?

Recent studies in the Great Lakes have demonstrated the signifi-
cance of stocking and selective harvesting in shaping aquatic
food webs. These practices have the ability to change the com-
position of predator populations and, in so doing, alter the mix

of primary producers. The changes are similar to those associ-
ated with the addition of excess nutrients and organic carbons.
These studies have resulted in a spirited environmental debate on
the relative importance of predation versus eutrophication in
determining the nature of coastal and estuarine food webs.

Despite the success of such studies in the Great Lakes, little
similar work has been attempted in estuarine environments.
Greater effort should be devoted to examining the impact of
selective harvesting on estuarine trophic interactions. Estua-
rine fish and shellfish populations are often heavily exploited,
and the possible breakdown of mechanisms that normally keep
populations in check has been suggested as a contributing factor
to the occurrence of nuisance algal blooms in the Northeastern
and middle Atlantic estuaries. Priority areas related to this
problem are: 1) determine whether, for representative ecosystems,
harvest-related population declines are a major factor in causing
change in trophic structure and, if so, what the mechanisms are;
2) determine how extensive and long-lasting the changes are; and
3) determine at what point fishery practices cause significant
alterations in food web functioning and whether they are
reversible.

C. Synthesis and Prediction

1. What conceptual approaches (models) can be devel-
oped and used to relate fishing mortality to that
caused by habitat degradation and natural factors?

A priority need in determining the effects of human activities on
estuarine-dependent living marine resources is the ability to
relate mortality caused by fishing pressure to that caused by
natural factors, pollution, and habitat loss. This can be
simulated by development of conceptual approaches that may lead
to numerical models. Developing such conceptual approaches will
require considerable expert thought. Developing the information
on population dynamics, reproductive success, growth rates, etc.,
will require substantial basic fisheries research (as specified
above). Priority tasks are: 1) from population data developed
above, evaluate and synthesize the relevant data on population
size, recruitment, harvest, etc., for use in evaluating natural
variability in relation to human-caused stress and harvest
mortality; 2) evaluate the effects of stress on selected species
population characteristics; 3) from available methologies,
develop the conceptual approach that will best allow a prediction
of population response to harvestr, natural, and human-caused
factors; 4) test the approach by simulating population responses
to various combinations of mortality attributable to fishing
pressure, natural factors, and "pollution"; and 5) convene a
national workshop to review and improve the model.

2. What are the cumulative ef f ects of human activi-
ties (including physical alteration, introduc-
tion of contaminants, nutrient over- enrichment,
changed freshwater inflows, altered circulation
patterns, and fishing pressure) on important
fishery populations?

It is necessary to combine the models of population changes
attributable to all major habitat changes in relation to fishing
mortality and natural mortality. The ability to develop such a
conceptual basis for prediction is at this point speculative but
is considered to be a prime objective. Priority tasks related to
this problem are: 1) evaluate all models needed to assess cumula-
tive effects for several representative regions having human-
caused problems that potentially affect estuarine-dependent
populations of concern; 2) assemble and organize data for all
components of the selected model and for all major threats for
specific ecosystems; 3) evaluate data quality and take steps to
assure data adequacy; 4) conduct modeling of all factors affect-
ing a population and evaluate results; 5) convene national work-
shop to review and improve cumulative effect assessment; and 6)
assess additional species and ecosystems.

3. What are the trade-offs (i.e., economic, ecolog-
ical, and social) for various national or re-
gional estuarine and coastal policy options?

An a ssessment is needed to guide national policy decision-making
for estuarine and coastal habitat and resource management. Such
an assessment should consider the biological, economic, and
social factors that will be *effected by various policy options.
However, for such an assessment to be useful, estuarine and
coastal ecosystem values to society must be adequately determined
using methods that incorporate the true benefits of such re-
sources. Outdated, simplistic approaches have not resolved these
conflicts because the true value of such ecosystems to society
are difficult to quantify. Innovative approaches must be devel-
oped for trade-off analysis to become an acceptable means of
policy development. Priority tasks related to this question are:
1) assemble and evaluate data needed to make cumulative assess-
ment of ecosystem effects of policy options for a test ecosystem;
2) obtain adequate economic methodology to assess economic
effects of resource changes, changes to the general quality of
life and costs of alternative land-use decisions; 3) develop
methodology to relate effects of., policy options in terms of
ecosystem productivity, quality' of life and traditional
economics; 4) evaluate policy options using relational metho-
dology; 5) predict effects and consequences of various policy
options; and 6) convene a national workshop to review assessment.

4. What are the predicted consequences of proposed
or existing fishery management regulations?

We need to be able to predict the consequences of proposed fish-
ery management actions on future stock dynamics. Currently, our
ability to predict future stock abundance is limited by a lack of
basic fishery information on early life-history stages, particu-
larly for estuarine-dependent species. Moreover, our scientific
data on the population characteristics of even the best known
species are less than sufficient for our needs, primarily because
of the breadth of the area involved and the difficulty of dealing
with living resources and their myriad variations of abundance,
growth, survival, etc. Predicting the effects of fishery regu-
lations on such an imperfect base of knowledge is a substantial
challenge. Priority tasks related to this problem are: 1) select
a species appropriate for study and evaluate necessary data on
population structure, fishing pressure, pollution and habitat
alteration threats, etc.; and 2) compare the effects of alter-
native management options using cumulative assessment metho-
dologies described above.

5. What are the priority estuaries for NOAA's scien-
tific attention?

An assessment is needed to establish priorities for additional,
site-specific estuarine and coastal ecosystems effort. This
assessment should consider the importance of the ecosystem in
providing long-term, sustained biological productivity of those
species of interest to man and that may be experiencing or ex-
pected to experience stress that could limit productivity. Our
purpose would be to identify. those systems in need of immediate
NOAA attention to resolve specific environmental problems. These
can be identified using an approach such as the following: 1)
assemble a synthesis of comparable data from all major U.S.
estuaries on living resource value and importance, contaminant
and nutrient loads, flushing rates, sediment characteristics, and
land-use status and projections; 2) develop relational metho-
dology to compare estuaries' features and characteristics; 3)
apply methodology using available data; and 4) evaluate results
and refine as necessary.

I
I
I
I
U
I' . Chapter VI
I FRAMEWORK
I IMPLEMENTATION
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

CHAPTER VI

FRAMEWORK IMPLEMENTATION

I. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY

NOAA's organization for implementing the Estuarine and Coastal
ocean Science Framework is shown in Figure 15. The Chief
Scientist, in consultation with the Assistant Administrators of
the NOAA line offices, will oversee implementation of the
Framework and related Program Plans. The Estuarine Programs
Office (EPO), within the Office of the Chief Scientist, will
coordinate activities and provide administrative support, while
the Estuarine and Coastal ocean Policy Committee will provide
technical and policy guidance for the Chief Scientist.

To carry out the science strategy of the Framework, NOAA will
focus its multi- disciplinary resources and capabilities on the
problem areas described therein. Primarily, this will be
accomplished through the development of Estuarine and Coastal
Ocean Science Program Plans, which will detail NOAA's estuarine
program direction on a yearly basis, using the Framework as
overall guidance. Through the annual review of Program Plans,
priorities will be set for estuarine activities in the upcoming
year. These Program Plans will include a description of pro-
gress made by NOAA in addressing the long-range strategy of the
Framework.

In conducting Program Plan activities, NOAA will rely on its
vast network of research facilities and programs, which en-
compass the full geographic and scientific scope necessary for
accomplishment of Framework goals. The EPO will work closely
with the line offices to ensure that the Agency's management and
technical capabilities are closely integrated, and that all
activities conducted or funded by NOAA in connection with
Framework implementation adhere to the protocols of the NOAA
quality assurance program.

Office of the Chief Scientist

NOAA's Chief Scientist will be responsible for establishing
policy, guiding program activities, and resolving conflicts over
program priorities within NOAA. D&cisions regarding the initi-
ation, enhancement or redirection of specific estuarine program
activities will be made by the Chief Scientist in consultation
with the Assistant Administrators and the Under Secretary,
through the annual review of Estuarine and Coastal Ocean Science
Program Plans.

Organization for Implementation of the
NOAA ESTUARINE &
COASTAL OCEAN FRAMEWORK

UNDER SECRETARY
Assistant Secratarij
NOAA E3tuarine A
Coastal Ocean Chief Scientist
Office
Committee

=hnarl Motion National Oc ic
Marine Environmental :nn
Fisheries Satellite Data Atno3ph
Service Information
Service

FIGUIRZ is

Under the direction of the Chief Scientist, EPO will develop
annual Program Plans in consultation with the NOAA line
of f ices. These Program Plans will include a report on NOAA's
progress in meeting the objectives of the Framework. The report
will also suggest options for improving coordination and effi-
ciency among NOAA's estuarine and coastal programs, including
activities in estuarine research and assessment, fisheries
research, coastal management, and habitat conservation. In
addition, the Program Plans will describe NOAA's estuarine and
coastal activities in relation to the endeavors of other Federal
and state agencies. The report will examine how NOAA's activi-
ties and products (data, technical findings, analyses, interpre-
tive documents) relate to those of other agencies and identify
cooperative activities to be initiated, enhanced, or redirected
in the future.

To advise the Chief Scientist on the implementation of the Frame-
work, an Estuarine and Coastal Ocean Policy Committee will be
established. The committee will be comprised of representatives
from each NOAA line office. Personnel from the Sea Grant univer-
sities, state coastal management programs and state fisheries
agencies will be invited to advise the committee on selected
issues. The committee will meet regularly to review progress on
L
a'.
'is.
F.M.h.
Service

the Framework, and will provide recommendations to the Chief
Scientist on improving NOAA's estuarine and coastal programs.

Facilities and Procgrams

NOAA's principal laboratories, support facilities, and data
centers are shown in Figure 16. The NOAA fleet, as described in
Figure 17, contributes technical and logistical support to the
research programs of these facilities. In addition, NOAA also
administers the Sea Grant College Program and the Estuarine
Research Reserve System, as well as the coastal zone and
fisheries management programs that link NOAA to the coastal
states. These facilities and programs are shown in Figure 18.

The Sea Grant system is a network of twenty-nine programs
located on the Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, Pacific, and Great
Lakes coasts conducting marine research, education, and advisory
services. Administered by NOAA's Office of Oceanic and Atmo-
spheric Research, the Sea Grant system provides NOAA with direct
links to the Nation's university community. It also provides a
unique mechanism for forging a scientific partnership between
the Federal Government and the states.

NOAA'S FACILITIES NETWORK

National Marine Fisheries Service Laboratories
ALASKA Environmental Research Laboratories*
National Ocean Service Ship Seaport Facilities
National Environmental Data Centers

UNITED STATES

HAWAII
FIGURE 16 PUERTO RICO
81

The GENERAL DESCRIPT*N missiom
NOAA 1\\ \ \\.
Fleet
N"

CLASS NOAA SHP "No a P@Omffr
I S.Mft m 30 4=1 11 311 1 :4 0
Soomm. M 44= 11 111 24 0
FL 271- Im 3 1 3,1 -6 1 0
Somm, 10011 301010 -'a- a
sum Vol, ml IAW I I n 4
0- S.ML-VA 231 IAXI 1 11 22 4 4 1 0
wwak No 231 1= , 1 4 .
smm VIA 7215- iJ1D 12 31
14.10a m a NOW It is1 2 2
molloft,ml '43 w It a 2
3.00L *w, ?S 'm 13 u 0
sommo, m 11's w lo- n I I
om" a , lo -.!! , a 31 's
.dompool, N vvoso"mhm 147 im 41 is 'S
T cm@ 14 '43 ou 'o 30 1
O.w Slow Jovill'l Siom GloM CA '?, sm, 'a 31 3
-dM. 'woom, m" "A 'a ?So 24
pmmogqol, me '27 in , 4
f- olftd, 133 a
v ftclow, SossL Va a no 0 13

9 3
AN 9 4

FIGURE 17

NOAA'S COASTAL ZONE MANA43EMENT PROGRAMS.

NATIONAL ESTUARIN'E RESEARCH RESERVE SYSTEM
ALASKA &
NOAA'S SEA GRANT UNIVERSITY NETWORK

UNITEO STATES

National ests"Las,
ftesearab ftsetv E3
Sloo, rrant
InstitutLons

co"tal Zone
rAmmomposent
0 Coastal zone management peogiclimas
HAWAII Pircm1camom not Shown:
I rEl'2

@@A L A S 0'

AMCiC&R S00104
macth macianas
,r,, u, : M, LI. Islands 45PUERTO RICO
FIGURE IS

The National Estuarine Research Reserve System is administered
by NOAA's National Ocean Service. It consists of carefully
selected estuarine areas of the United States that are desiq-
nated, preserved, and managed for research as well as educa-
tional purposes. The reserves are chosen to reflect regional
differences and to include a variety of types in accordance with
the classif ication scheme of the national program. Because all
of the reserves are part of a national system, they collectively
provide a unique opportunity to address the estuarine research
and management issues of the Framework.

Federally- approved state coastal zone management programs exist
in twenty-nine states and territories. Operating under the
auspices of NOAA's National Ocean Service, these programs work
through a state-agency coordination/ oversight role, for day-to-
day management of estuarine and coastal ocean resources. The
state-level coastal management agencies will clearly benefit
from NOAA-'s scientific efforts, and also will provide insight
into how NOAA's future science agenda will. be shaped.

Under authority of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, the
National Marine Fisheries Service's Habitat Conservation Program
addresses all forms of estuarine and coastal development affect-
ing living marine resources and their habitats. It is staff ed
by biologists and other technical specialists in NOAA facilities
in most coastal states. The mission is to evaluate proposed
projects, programs and policies of other Federal agencies (or
authorized by such agencies) and to make scientific recommen-
dations in the public interest to conserve habitats important to
living marine resources. This program is a primary user of the
information to be developed under the Framework as it is
directly involved in influencing decision-making affecting
estuarine and coastal ecosystems.

II. INTERNAL COORDINATION

The coordination of research efforts and communication of scien-
tific information to resource managers and other users is an
important aspect of NOAA,*s responsibilities. Daily, NOAA is
required to draw upon its scientific expertise in forming com-
ments, recommendations, and position statements on proposed
water development or other land-use projects that may adversely
affect marine resources for which NOAA has management responsi-
b Uity. it is critical that NOAA us(e the best scientific inf or-
mation available for these purposes. However, research con-
ducted at specific locales is often narrowly focused in terms of
discipline or subject area. A thorough synthesis of the infor-
mation available throughout NOAA's facilities,, as well as from
other agencies and institutions, is imperative. NOAA needs an
ongoing capability to synthesize and translate research

findings into forms that will be useful to resource decision-
makers on a local, regional, state, and Federal level. in order
to fill this need the following efforts will be initiated:

� To assure a strong coastal/estuarine focus that links
coastal communities. academic scientists, resource managers,
and other users, coonerative arrancrements amoncT NOAA-
sRonsored programs will- be encouraged. These cooperative
programs could: 1) conduct applied research to answer
questions directly related to regional resource management
needs; 2) analyze and synthesize existing information
concerning problems that affect regional estu arin e/ coastal
environments; and 3) develop educational programs for local,
county, state, and Federal agency representatives whose
decisions are crucial to the health and maintenance of
regional estuarine and coastal habitats.

� To better communicate estuarine and coastal ocean data and
infoZmation. an electronic data exchange wgl be established
to link NOAA. Sea Gr!jnt institutions, Estuarine Research
Reserves, and coastal management Rrogram . Eventually, such
an exchange might be extended to include other Federal and
academic facilities, as well. To m inimize costs, this
network should be based on existing systems (e.g. through
NESDIS/NODC systems, SIGNET, OMNET, etc.). The specific
software parameters and hardware characteristics appropriate
for this system must also be explored in the context of
existing NOAA capabilities. Such a system would signifi-
cantly enhance NOAA's ability to communicate rapidly and in
a comprehensive manner to all of its estuarine and coastal
ocean related facilities and programs, and assure more
effective coordination with the program activities of other
Federal agencies.

� To provide a cohesive nAtional program, a scientific network
will be initiate . A directory of the facilities participa-
ting in this network would describe areas of expertise. In
addition, workshops could be held at the participating. facil-
ities to address particular issues of national concern.
This network of facilities would also serve as a mechanism
to organize and survey national estuarine and coastal ocean
priorities. The results of such a survey would support an
estuarine/ coastal data base constructed to identify the most
critical issues and problems for NOAA and the Nation to
address.

III. APPLICATION TO MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS

The application of Framework results to NOAA,*s management
programs is an important aspect of the Agency's work. Estuarine
and coastal research must be planned and conducted in a manage-

ment decision-making context. This will encourage the applica-
tion of scientific findings to decisions for reducing water
quality degradation, minimizing habitat destruction and conserv-
ing the living resources of the Nation's estuaries. The pro-
grams and facilities described above provide a crucial mechanism
for directing and applying NOAA research and information
products to the management needs of Federal, regional, state,
and local decision- makers.

NOAA's management programs provide a valuable mechanism for
implementing scientific findings. Through its coastal zone and
fisheries habitat conservation and management responsibilities
NOAA has oversight responsibility and grant authority to provide
support to coastal states for vital resource programs. To link
the scientific and technical information developed through the
Framework with progress made by the coastal states, NOAA will
rely on the existing network established through coastal,
fisheries, and habitat conservation and management authorities.

� To encouracre effective manacrement of coastal resources at
the state level, NOAA will rely on the cirant and review
authority of the Coastal Zone Manacrement Act. Through this
Act, NOAA and participating coastal states are able to
evaluate key resource issues such as those identified in the
Framework: freshwater inflow alterations, contaminants,
habitat degradation, and declines in living resources.
Evaluation of state efforts to address these issues will
assist NOAA in making recommendations for improvement.
Improvement activities will be monitored as annual work
program tasks or as "significant improvements in the
national interest" under Section 303(2) of the Coastal Zone
Management Act. Information on coastal state progress in
addressing estuarine and coastal management issues will be
collected by NOAA, synthesized, and transferred back to the
states to describe the status of the problem from a national
perspective and identify states that may have innovative or
particularly creative approaches for dealing with particular
resource management problems. Such a collection effort
would be accomplished at a relatively low cost, as it would
rely on existing in-house capabilities.

� To encourage effective management of inter-iurisdiational
fisheries, NOAA will rely on the arant authority provided in
P.L. No. 99-659 to promote and encourage state data@
ga hering activities and fishery manacrement. Title III of
this new law, which replaces' the Commercial Fisheries
Research and Development Act of 1986, increases the ability
of NOAA to select projects and apply conditions that will
focus funding on higher priority inter-jurisdictional
fisheries needs. The Anadromous Fish Conservation Act

provides for grants to states and other entities concerned
with anadromous fish. NOAA will focus attention on using
this grant authority to address the needs identified in the
Framework.

0 To encourage habitat protection. NOAA's Habitat Conservation
Prociram will step- up its- reseaZch and management efforts to
address short- and long-term effects and becrin an initiative
with the Regional Fishery Management Councils to adont a
habitat molicy with an obiective of no net habitat loss.
Under the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act,
as amended in 1986, the Councils must now address habitat
issues in each fishery management plan, and may require
Federal agencies to respond to their inquiries regarding
habitat concerns and issues. NOAA's Habitat Conservation
Program will increase regional assistance to the Councils to
support this effort.

IV. FEDERAL COORDINATION

Responsibilities for science, management, and regulation of
estuarine and coastal ocean resources are distributed widely
among executive agencies. In addition to NOAA, Federal agencies
such as the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Corps of Engineers,
the Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Geological Survey,
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the U.S.
Coast Guard, and Department of Agriculture, all have programs
and reponsibilities that significantly affect the use and
understanding of estuarine and coastal resources. It is
critical that Federal agency*actions be conducted in a coordi-
nated manner, to minimize duplication of effort and ensure that
* common understanding of each agency's core role in addressing
* stu arine/ coastal issues is recognized. Coordination of Federal
efforts in this area is also critical for assuring the availabil
ity of the best scientific information for resource management
purposes.

0 To assure effective Federal agency coordination an ad hoc
inter-acrency committee will be formed, grepresenting the
acrencies that conduct estuarine and coastal ocean Rrograms.
This ad hoc committee would meet on an as-needed basis to
identify strategies appropriate for coordinating major
national c oa stal/ estuarine program initiatives, and to
define more clearly the rempective Federal roles and
responsibilities in the multi-jurisdictional estuarine and
coastal environments. The committee will take maximum
advantage of existing interagency groups that have
responsibilities paralleling those of the A_d hoc committee,
such as NOAA's National ocean Pollution Policy Board.
Furthermore, if the Policy Committee determines that a

formalized mechanism is appropriate for a particular
pollution- related issue, the National Ocean Pollution Policy
Board could be used for that purpose.

V. FUTURE OUTLOOK

Estuarine and coastal science is at an important threshold.
Computer and satellite technologies enable us to consider
questions that were once unimaginable. We can stand outside the
biosphere and observe this system, monitor changes on global
scales and collect, store, and analyze billions of bits of data
almost instantaneously. Science and technology present an
enormous opportunity and equally large challenge -- the chal-
lenge to understand through rigorous and creative inter-discipli-
nary science the consequences of the often unwitting and
pervasive manipulation of the estuarine and coastal ecosystem.
Slowing the momentum of these degenerative processes cannot be
accomplished overnight. The impact of decades of toxic pollu-
tion, of habitat destruction, and resource extraction will shape
the estuarine and coastal environment for many future genera-
tions. However, the opportunity to harness these negative
forces lies in effective application of new technical skills and
commitment -- long-term, sustained commitment -- to directing
attention and resources to the needs of this most productive of
marine environments.

The Estuarine and Coastal Ocean Science Framework is NOAA's
first step in that renewed commitment. Through this Framework,
the Agency will dedicate its talents and resources to the
ation's nearshore waters. This is a dedication that will carry
beyond the current wave of enthusiasm well into the next
century. We believe that the science focus we have adopted, the
collaborative efforts we anticipate with other agencies, and
support for this endeavor from the citizenry will make a
dramatic difference for the future of our estuarine and coastal
ocean systems.

ATMOSS42A,"

NOAA Estuarine and
W of Coastal Ocean Science
U Framework

October 1987

Appendices

NOAA Estuarine and Coastal Ocean Science Framework

APPENDICES

Table of Contents

APPENDIX A: Legislative Crosscut

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A - I
Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A - 3
Inter and Intra-Agency Planning . . . . . . . . . . . A - 4
Estuarine Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A - 7
Estuarine Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A - 13
Estuarine Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A - 21

APPENDIX B: Federal Estuarine/Coastal Activities

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B - I
Environmental Protection Agency . . . .. . . . . . . . B - 1
Department of the Interior . . . . . . . . . . . . . B - 3
U.S. Geological Survey . . . I I I * * o * * I * B - 3
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service . . . . . . o o o B - 3
Army Corps of Engineers . . . . . . . o . . . . . . . 3 - 5

I
APPENDIX C: Workshop Summaries

Estuarine Research Workshop Summary (June 4-5,
1986, Raleigh, North Carolina) . . . . . C - I
Research Strategies Needed to Manage the
Nation's Estuaries . . . . . . . . o . . . . . . C - 3
Estuarine Management Workshop Summaty (June 25-26,
1986, Washington, D.C.) . . . . o . . . . . . . . . C - 9
Estuarine Management Work Group Meeting
June 25-26, Washington, D.C.) . . . . . . . . . . . C - 12

APPENDIX D: Regional Summaries

Northeast Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D - 1
Southeast Region . . . . . . . . . . . o . . . . . . D - 3
Gulf of Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D - 5
Southwest Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 - 7
Northwest and Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D - 8
Great Lakes Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D - 9

I
I
I
I
U
I
I
I
I APPENDIX A
I Legislative Crosscut
I
I
I
I
I

I
I
I
I
I

NOAA's Estuarine Legislative Crosscut

National Ocoanic and Atmospheric. Administration
Anthony I CaNo. Adown6sliMoo
NOAA Eshoadne Prog(ams Offica
Vifulflia K. Tippie. Doloclof

NOAA's authorities to assess or describe estuaries, to conduct research in the estuaries
and to help manage estuarine resOUrces is founded on a plethora of Federal legislation
spanning decades. In fact, as early as the late nineteenth century, the National Marine
Fisheries Service and the Coast and Geodetic Survey (organizations which later became a
part of NOAA) were governed by legislative mandates that affected the estuaries. Since
then, Congress has enacted legislation that confers greater authority on NOAA to address
specific issues such as fishery management, pollution research, and the determination of
tides and circulation - all of which require efforts within the estuaries.

Despite NOAA's many estuarine legislative authorities, no document has been developed that
specifically relates this legislation to NOAA's estuarine programs. The estuarine
legislative crosscut addresses this by integrating NOAA's estuarine responsibilities with
Congressional intent. The crosscut identifies the primary pieces of legislation that give
NOAA authority to coordinate estuarine programs and to undertake efforts in assess- ment,
research and management. It is not intended to be a comprehensive analysis of estuarine-
related legislation, nor a compendium of laws. Instead, the crosscut links activities
with specific sections of Federal legislation and creates a framework within which to
understand NOAA's responsibilities for the estuaries.

For more information contact:

Ms. Sharon K. Shutler
NOAA Estuarine Programs Office
(202) 673-5243

Mr. Hal Creel
NOAA Office of General Counsel
(202) 673-5206

NOWS ESTUARINE LEGISLATIVE CROSSCUT

Table of Contents

INTER AND INTRA - AGENCY PLANNING

NOAA Intra Agency Planning ................................................... I
NOAA Inter Agnecy Planning ................................................... 2

ESTUARINE ASSESSMENT

Archives ................................................... 5
Data Analysis ................................................... 6
Environmental Description ................................................... 8

ESTUARINE RESEARCH

Physical Processes ................................................... 12
Ecosystem Dynamics ................................................... 12
Living Resources .................................................... . )
Habitat Resources ................................................... 14
Contaminant Effects ................................................... 15
Fishery Utilization ................................................... 16

ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT

Living Resources ................................................... 19
Habitat Resources ................................................... 20
Coastal Resources ................................................... 21
Public Outreach ................................................... 21
Enforcement ................................................... 22

INTER AND INTRA-AGENCY PLANNING

NOAA was granted broad estuarine coordinating and planning authority in the Fat ( of 1986,
when Congress established the Fstuari ne Programs Of f ice within HOAA to develop a nat iona 1.
estuarine strategy for the Administration that integrates its research, regulatory and
trusteeship responsibilities. The law charged this office to coordinate not only NOAA's
internal programs in estuarine research and assessment, f isheries research, coastal.
management, and habitat conservation, but also its external efforts with other Pedc-ral and
state agencies.

With the passage of the Water Quality of 1987, EPA and NOAA are now required to submit,
jointly, a biennial report describing the health of the Nation's estuaries. In addition,
EPA is to provide up to $5,000,000 annually to NOAA for ecosystem and trend assessment, a
water quality sampling program, and estuarine research.

Amendments to the National Ocean Pollution Planning Act established the National. Ocean
Pollution Programs Office within NOAA to prepare a 5-year plan to order national oceall
pollution needs and problems. Many of the pollution issues occur with the Nation's
estuaries. The Office also is responsible for reviewing budget requests from all Pederal
Agencies.

M, Ila

CAPABILITIES LEGISLATION DESCRIPTION

INTER AND INTRA-AGENCY PLANNING

NOAA Intra-Agency Planning

Estuaries: NOAA Estuarine Magnuson Fishery Conservation Administrator of NOAA
and Coastal/Ocean Science and Management Act Amendments shall establish an Estuarine
Framework of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-659, Programs Office to develop
Sec. 406 and implement a national
estuarine strategy that
integrates the research,
regulatory,and trusteeship
responsibilities of the
Administration, and to
coordinate the estuarine
activities of the various
organizations within the
Administration including
activities in estuarine
research and assessment,
fisheries research,
coastal management, and
habitat conservation.

NOAA Inter-Agency Planning

9 National Estuary Program Magnuson Fishery Conservation The NOAA Estuarine Programs
and Management Act Amendments will coordinate the es tuarine
of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-659, activities of the
Sec. Administration with the
activities of other Federal
and state agencies and
provide technical. assistance
to other Federal a(jencies'
and to state and local
agencies.

CAPABILITIES LEGISLATIVE DESCRIPTION

INTER AND INTRA-AGENCY PLANNING

National Estuary Program Water Quality Act of 1987, The EPA Administrator shall
Pub. L. No. 100-4, Sec. 320 provide up to @5,000,000 per
fiscal year of sums to be
appropriated to NOAA to carry
out research in estuaries
for long-term trend assess-
ment, ecosystem assessment,
comprehensive water quality
sampling, and identification
of the movements of nutrients,
sediments, and pollutants
through estuarine zones and
their impacts.

Five Year Pollutibn Plan National Ocean Pollution The Administrator of NOAA
Planning Act of 1978, shall establish the National
33 U.S.C. 1702, as amended Ocean Pollution Program
Office to review each depart-
ment agency pollution budget
request and, in conSUltation
with other appropriate Federal
officials, prepare a
comprehensive 5-year plan for
the overall Federal effort in
ocean pollution research, and
development and monitoring.

1. ESTUARINE ASSESSMENT

Estuarine assessment is the first step in describing an estuarine system. Assessment
addresses the physical. environment, water and sediment quality, and associated animals and
plants. To assess an estuary, existing information must first be identified and
analyzed. This step reveals where additional data are necessary to complete the
assessment. NOAA programs, therefore, include archiving and analyzing data and developing
descriptions of the estuarine environment.

DATA ARCHIVES. NOAA maintains extensive archives for oceanographic, climatic, satellite,
fisheries, and pollution data, much of which are available to the public upon request.
NOAA also publishes an annual catalogue of all of its estuarine-related activities and
disseminates annually an inventory of @ill Federal pollution research.

DATA ANALYSES. Data analyses entail gathering information from a variety of sources and
standardizing it. NOAA's data analysis activities include building data bases on
physical, chemical, and biological factors, as well as on land-use patterns. Much of this
information iz currently being incorporated into a comprehensive data base, the National
Estuarine Inventory (NEI). The NEI covers 92 U.S. estuaries. Much of this information is
graphically displayed in a series of data atlases. Analyzing data bases also is part of
NOAA's assessment programs. In major estuaries such as the Chesapeake Bay and Puget
Sound, NOAA analyzes data to assess the effects of weather and oceanographic conditions oil
fisheries, recreation, and transportation.

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION. A number of NOAA's programs describe the status of estuarine
systems, resources, or levels of contaminants. These programs rely on observational data
collection and monitoring. The data generated are used to predict trends in environmental
quality and abundance of living resources. NOAA's nautical charting and tides and
circulation programs fall under the category of environmental description and provide
valuable information to the maritime industry and recreational boaters.

CAPABILITIES LEGrSLATIVE DESCRrPTrON

ASSESSMENT Describe the estuarine
system: Physical
environment, water and
sediment quality,
plants and animals.

ARCHIVES

� Oceanographic and Geodetic Data National Ocean Survey Conduct hydrographic
33 U.S.C. 883(a-e) and topographic surveys;
take tide and current
observations; compile,
analyze, process*and
publish data and chdrts.

� Weather, Climate & Satellite Data National Climate Program Act Conduct global data
15 U.S.C. 2904 collection; assess
the effect of climate
on the natural environment;
develop systems to manaqe
and disseminate climatological
data.

Weather Service Organic Act Collect and distribute
15 U.S.C. 313 meteorological information
and record climatic
conditions of the United
States.

Land Remote-Sensing Policy of the United States
OD Commercialization Act to acquire and disseminate
of 1984, remote-sensing data.
15 U.S.C. 4203

CAPABILITIES LEGISLATION DESCRIPTION

ASSESSMENT

Federal Aviation Act Promote and develop
49 U.S.C. 1463 meteorological science
and support research
projects in meteorology.

DATA ANALYSIS

e National Estuarine Marine ProtectiOD, Research Develop comprehensive
Inventory and Sanctuaries Act research program: long-
Title 11, 33 U.S.C. range effect of Pollution,
1441 et seq. overfishing and man-induced
changes of ocean ecosystems;
cooperate with EPA in
assessing feasibility of
regional management plans
for coastal disposal of waste.
Agriculture Marketing Act Improve standards and
7 U.S.C. 1622(g) quality of fish and
shellfish products.
Environmental Assessments National Climate Program Act Develop systems to
15 U.S.C. 2904 manage and disseminate
climatological informa-
tion and assessments.

CAPABILITIES LEGISLATION DESCRIPTrON

ASSESSMENT

National Environmental Policy Act Prepare an environmental.
42 O.S.C. 4332 impact statement for major
Federal actions that
significantly affect the
quality of the human
environment.

Federal Water Pollution Assess injury, destruction, or
Control Act, as amended loss of natural resources
(Clean Water Act) in the coastal and marine
33 U.S.C. 1321 environment caused by
discharge of oil from
vessels or onshore or
offshore facilities.

Comprehensive Environmental Assess injury, destruction, or
Response, Compensation and loss of natu 'ral resouri-es in
Eiability Act, (Superfund) the coastal an(] marine
42 U.S.C. q607, 9611 environment caused by releases
of hazardous substances from
facilities.

CAPABILITIES LEGISLATION DESCRIPTION

ASSESSMENT

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

0 Navigation, charting National Ocean Survey Provide charts for safe
tides, circulation 33 U.S.C. 883a-e, navigation; conduct tide
44 U.S.C. 1310 and current observations;
publish tide tables, and maps;
print and distribute
nautical charts; cooperate with
other agencies and
private organizations.

Stock Assessment Magnuson Fishery Conservation Assess present and future
and Management Act conditions of fishery
16 U.S.C. 1853(a)(3) stocks.

Anadromous Fish Conservation conduct biological surveys
Act to conserve, develop, and
16 U.S.C. 757b enhance anadromous fish.

Monitoring

Marine Protection, Research Develop comprehensive
and Sanctuaries Act research program on long
Title If range effects of poll.ution;
33 U.S.C. 1441 et seq. assess the capacity of
the marine environment
to receive materials
without degradation;
monitor programs and
assess the health of
the marine environment,
including contaminant
levels in biota, sedimelits,
f ish a nd S I I k @ IIf i 'i I

CAPARILfTrEs LEGIS LATION DESCRIPTION

ASSESSMENT

National Ocean Pollution Monitor reseai:ch efforts
Planning Act of other Federal agencies
33 U.S.C. 1701 et s-eq. and use of such research
in determinations that
affect the environmental
quality of the Great Lakes,
Chesapeake Bay, PklgC--t Sound
and other estuaries of
national significance.

11. ESTUARINE RESEARCH

The review and synthesis of data gathered in the characterization phase helps to identify
topics where additional research is needed to support management decisions. NOAA's
estuarine research activities emphasize physical processes, ecosystem dynamics, and living
marine resources and their habitats. Research on the effects of contaminants on estuarine
organisms and their subsequent effect on fisheries utilization is also conducted.

PHYSICAL PROCESSES. Circulation patterns, together with chemical and biological.
processes, are important in determining the fate of contaminants introduced into an
estuary. NOAA, therefore, has research programs on circulation dynamics and contaminant
transport which emphasize how estuaries trap dissolved, as well as particle-born,
pollutants. NOAA also is examining the role that benthic organisms play in both
resuspending and transporting contaminants.

ECOSYSTEM AND NUTRIENT DYNAMICS. Estuaries are among the most productive ecosystems if)
the world. This productivity is due partly to nutrients and their role in stimulating
biological growth, although much is still unknown. Circulation patterns, nutrient
dynamics, pui'mary production, and decomposition combine to create a constantly varying
environment. To better understand these relationships, NOAA researchers are investigating
the dynamics of food webs in estuaries and the role of nutrients and physical conditions
in regulating productivity.

LIVING RESOURCES. NOAA has extensive research programs designed to study finfish and
shellfish. To understand natural and anthropogenic factors affecting their productivity,
NOAA investigates the life history of economically important fish and shellfish to
determine their biological requirements. NOAA also investigates diseases in a number of
species and conducts aquaculture research to artificially create environments that can
support valuable living resources such as salmon, striped bass, and shrimp.

ESTUARINE HABITATS. Estuarine habitats, vital to commercial and recreational fisheries,
are threatened by development-related activities such as disposal of sewage and industrial
wastes, dredging, filling, freshwater diversions, damming, and channelization. Through
its research program, NOAA is determining the importance of fishery habitats, the effects
of habitat loss on f ishery resources, and the potential benef its of habitat restoration,
enhancement, and mitigation.

ESTUARINE RESEARCH (cont'd)

CONTAMINAN,r EFFECTS. NOAA draws from a pool- of research experts and facil itit--S to examine
the biological effects of pollutants such as synthetic organics (e.g. , pesticides and
PCBs), toxic metals, petroleum hydrocarbons, and excessive nutrients on living
resources. NOAA examines not only the effects of contaminants on edible fish and
shellfish, but also on food chain organisms.

NOAA also conducts programs to determine the public health significance of contaminants in
fish and shellfish. These programs are designed to determine the kinds and levels of
contaminants in tissues of f ishery products and the chemical. form and interaction of those
contaminants.

CAPABILITIES LEGISLATION DESCRIPTION

RESEARCH National Sea Grant College Promote research
Program related to ocean
33 U.S.C. 1121 & coastal resources
in all of the sub-
categories listed
under this heading.

PHYSICAL PROCESSES

� Circulation Dynamics National Ocean Survey Conduct hydrologic and
33 U.S.C. 883a, 883d other surveys; research
in geographical sciences.

� Chemical Transport Marine Protection, Research Develop comprehonsive
and Sanctuaries Act research program on the
33 U.S.C. 1441 et seq. long-range effects
of pollution, including
effects on the marine
environment, fish and
shellfish.

ECOSYSTEM DYNAMICS Marine Protection, Research Develop comprehensive
and Sanctuaries Act research program on the
33 U.S.C. 1441 et seq. long-range effects
of pollution, including
effects on the inarine
environment, fish and
shellfish.

U-1

CAPABILITIES LEGISLATION DESCRIPTION

RESEARCH

LIVING RESOURCES

0 Life History Magnuson Fishery Conservation National standdrds:
and management Act conservation ineasures
16 u.s.c. 1.851 based on best sci-
entific information.

Anadromous Fisheries Conduct biolojical
Conservation Act studies to conserve,
16 U.S.C. 757 develop, and enhance
I anadromous fish.

Fish and Wildlife Act Conduct investi,latiolls on:
16 U.S.C. 742d the production (*)I- fish and
fish by-products; fishery
statistics; availability
and biological. requirements
of fish and wildlift_@ resources
(commercial an,] sport).

Pacific Northwest Electric Power Recommend meastires to
Planning and Conservation Act protect, mitiqate anti
16 U.S.C. 839b enhance fish and wildlife
and their habitats affected by
hydroelectric projects
on the Columbia River
and its tributaries.

Disease Agricultural Marketing Act Improve standards &
7 U.S.C. 1.622(c) quality of fish &
shellfish producLs.

CAPABILITIES LEGISLATION DESCRIPTION

RESEARCH

Marine Protection, Research monitor diseases in
and Sanctuaries Act fish and shellfish.
Title 11
33 U.S.C. 1442

Fish and Wildlife Act Conduct investigations on:
16 U.S.C., 742d the production of fish and
fish by-products; fishery
statistics; availability
and biological. requirements
of fish and witdlife resources
(commercial and sport).

9 Aquaculture National Aquaculture Act Augment existing com-
16 U.S.C. 757(b) mercial and recre-
ational products.

HABITAT RESOURCES

Fisheries-Habitat Magnuson Fishery Conservation National standards:
Interactions, and Management Act conservation measures
16 U.S.C. 1851 based on best scien-
tific information.

e Habitat Alterations, Fish & Wildlife Coordination Act Interagency constil-
Habitat Enhancement 16 U.S.C. 662(a) tation to give fish
& wildlife resources
equal consideration
with other project
purposes.

DESCRIPTION

RESEARCH

Pacific Northwest Electric Power Recommend measures to
Planning and Conservation Act protect, mitigate and
16 U.S.C. 839b enhance fish and wildlife
and their habitats affected by
hydroelectric projects
on the Columbia River
and its tributaries.

Federal Power Act Prescribe Fishways
16 U.S.C. 811 during the construction
of dams or diversions.

CONTAMINANT EFFECTS
Living Resources,@ National Ocean Pollution Develop program
Food Chain Planning Act for coordinated
33 U.S.C. 1701 et seq. pollution research,
development and
monitoring. Coordinate
research to support
preservation and
protection of estuaries
of national significance.

Marine Protection, Research Develop comprehensive
and Sanctuaries Act research prograin on the
33 U.S.C. 1441 et seq. long-range effects
of pollution on biota,
sediments, water colunin
co
and fish.

CAPABILITIES LEGISLATION DESCRIPTION

RESEARCH

Acid Precipitation Act of 1980 Direct research into the
42 U.S.C. 8902-3 effects of acid precipitation
on fisheries, etc.

Superfund Assess injury, destruction, or
42 U.S.C. 9607(f), 9611(h); loss of natural resources in the
coastal and marine environment
caused by
releases from facilities of
hazardous substances.

Clean Water Act Assess injury, destruction, or
33 U.S.C. 1321 loss of natural resources in the
coastal and marine environment
caused by discharge of oil from
vessels or onshore or offshore
facilities.

Magnuson Fishery Conservation National standards:
and Management Act conservation measures
16 U.S.C. 1851 based on best scientific
information.

FISHERY wrILIZATION

e Contaminants in Fish Lacey Act Unlawful to import,
Products 16 U.S.C. 3372 export, purchase, etc.
fish and wildlife taken,
possessed, transported, or so]d
in violation of any law of the
United States or any state,
foreign, or Indian tribal laws.

CAPABILITIES LEGISLATION DESCRIPTION

RESEARCH

Chemical Interactions Food, Drug, & Cosmetic Act, Mandatory requirements
Contamination of Shellfish Fair Packaging & Labeling for food including fish
Act and shellfish.
15 U.S.C. 1451-61

Agricultural Marketing Act Improve standards &
7 U.S.C. 1622(c) quality of fish &
shellfish products.

National Ocean Pollution Develop program for
Planning Act coordinated poll.ution
33 U.S.C. 1701 et seq. research, development
& monitoring.

Marine Protection, Research Monitor diseases in
and Sanctuaries Act fish and shellfish.
33 U.S.C. 1442

111. ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT

NOAA encourages wise management of the Nation's estuarine resources. NOAA administers
programs for managing the Nation's marine fisheries, protecting valuable marine and
estuarine habitats, and balancing coastal development and conservation activities.
Additionally, NOAA provides expertise to Federal and state agencies that have management
responsibilities in coastal areas.

LIVING RESOURCES. NOAA is authorized to manage living resources. These authorities
extend to both finfish and shellfish as well as to endangered species and marine
mammals. Because most species for which NOAA has management responsibility spend portions
of their life cycle in the estuary, NOAA provides information and expertise to the States
to assist them in their management programs. Through the Commercial Fisheries Research
and Development Act and the Anadromous Fish Conservation Act, NOAA provides grants to
states, universities, and other organizations to assess estuarine fisheries.
COASTAL RESOOkES. The Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) authorized the first national
program to promote the wise use and protection of coastal land and water resourct-]@s. This
Act, administered by NOAA, provides funds, policy guidance, and technical assistance to
coastal states to help them establish and maintain coastal zone management programs. 11he
CZMA also provides for the designation of national estuarine research reserves, consisting
of land and water areas that are managed as natural research laboratories for scientists
and the public.

PUBLIC OUTREACH. Communication is an integral component of NOAA, and in partiCUlar, its
National Sea Grant College Program. Universities and institutions funded by the program
develop products for the public that communicate estuarine scientific findings and convey
other information about estuaries. A film produced by the program in 1985, "The
Chesapeake Bay - A Twilight Estuary," -is a good example of Sea Grant's broad communication
capabilities. The film provides an effective mechanism for informing the public of tile
stresses on the Chesapeake system and the role research has played in identifying those
stresses. Publications providing advice to mariners and fishermen also are part of the
program.

CAP EGISLATION DESCRIPTION

MANAGEMENT Manages livin(-I resources and
protected species; administers
coastal zone management program.-
provides advic-e.

LIVING RESOURCES

� Fisheries Management Magnsuon Fishery Conservation Exclusive management
and Management Act authority for fish
16 U.S.C. 1812 within the EEZ and
anadromous species
throughout migratory
range.

� Interstate Fisheries Anadromous Fisheries Department of Commerce
Grants & Management Conservation Act and Interior, with states,
16 U.S.C. 757 conserve, develop, and
enhance anadromous
fishery resources.
� Protected Species Marine M@mmal Protection Responsibility for
Management Act, 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq. protecting and manage-
ing marine mammals under NOAA
jurisdiction.

Endangered Species Act Responsibility for
16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. the management,
conservation and re-
covery of endangered, and
threatened specios.

CAPABILITIES LEGISLATION DESCRIPTTION

MANAGEMENT

HABITAT RESOURCES

Fish and Wildlife Act Conduct investigations on:
16 U.S.C. 742d et seq. the production of fish and
fish by-products; fishery
statistics; availability
and biological requirements
of fish and wildlife resources
(commercial and sport).

Pacific Northwest Electric Power Recommend measures to
Planning and Conservation Act protect, mitigate and
16 U.S.C. 839b enhance fish and wildlife
and their habitats from
hydroelectric projects
on the Columbia River
and its tributaries.

Federal Power Act Prescribe fishways
16 U.S.C. 811 during the construction
of dams or diversions.

Habitat Advisory Fish and Wildlife Coordination Interagency consultation
Services & Resource Act to give fish and wilkilife
Planning 16 U.S.C. 661-62 resources equal consideration
with other project purposes.

Clean Water Act Comment to Corps of
33 U.S.C. 1344(q) Engineers on fish and
habitat impacts of
Corps dredge an(] f i I I
pe r tu i t S.

CAPABILITIES LEGISLATION DESCRIPTION

MANAGEMENT

COASTAL RESOURCES

� Coastal Resources Coastal Zone Management Enter into grants
Program Act, 16 U.S.C. 1454 with coastal states
to develop and implement
a management program
for the coastal zone.

Marine Protection, Research Cooperate with EPA to
and Sanctuaries Act assess feasibility in
33 U.S.C. 1443 Coastal areas Of regional
plans for disposal of
waste materials.

� National Estuarine Coastal Zone Management Act Designate representative
Research Reserves 16 u.s.c. 1461 estuarine areas as National
Estuarine Reserves in
which education, research
and interpretive activities
are conducted.

PUBLIC OUTREACH

0 Communication, Marine National Sea Grant Program Conduct research,
Advisory Service 33 U.S.C. 1121 et seq. education, and
advisory services
for marine resOLjrce!i.

CAPABILITIES LEGISLATION DESCRIPTION

NANAGEMENT

0 Estuarine Education National Sea Grant Program Conduct research,
33 U.S.C. 1121 et seq. education, and
advisory services
for marine resources.

Coastal Zone Management Act Through natural field
16 U.S.C. 1461 laboratories, provide
estuarine research and
public education programs.

ENFORCEMENT Superfund Recover damages or seek
42 U.S.C. 9607(f), 9611(h) funds from SuperfUnd for natural
resources subject
to NOAA trusteeship injured,
destroyed, or lost by releases
of hazardous substances
into the coastal. an(] marine
environment from a facility.

Lacey Act Provides for the Secretary
16 U.S.C. 3373 to impose civil and criminal
penalities and permits sanctions
on any violation of the statute.

I
I
I
I
U
I
I
I
I APPENDIX B
I Federal Estuarine/Coastal Activities
I I
I
I
I
I
1 7
1
1

FEDERAL ESTUARINE COASTAL ACTIVITIES

This section provides a brief summary of the major estua-
rine/coastal activities supported by federal agencies other than
NOAA, including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS), and the Corps of Engineers (COE). While many other
agencies have related programs, this section focuses on those
perceived to have a central role in federal estuarine/coastal
research and management.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)

The EPA assumes lead responsibility in the federal government
for identifying, evaluating, and controlling environmental
pollutants. Priority elements of the EPA mission are to reduce
public exposure to harmful pollutants, protect sensitive
ecosystems, regulate hazardous waste facilities, clean-up
Superfund sites, and improve management of environmental
regulatory programs. The Clean Water Act (CWA) (section 104(n))
requires the EPA to promote studies of the Nation's estuaries
and to report every six years.

EPA's National Estuary Program was originally established in
1985 through a Congressional appropriation under the CWA.
Estuaries included in the first year were--Narragansett Bay,
Buzzards Bay, Long Island Sound, and Puget Sound. San Francisco
Bay and Albemarle/Pamlico Sound were added in 1986. The 1987
amendments to the CWA, the Water Quality Act of 1987, establ-
ished the responsibility for the National Estuary Program in
Sections 317 and 320. The Act instructs the Administrator of
EPA to give priority consideration to eleven named estuaries,
the six estuaries already participating and New York-New Jersery
Harbor, Delaware Bay, Delaware Inland Bays, Sarasota Bay, and
Galveston Bay. In addition, the Water Quality Act continued
authorization for the Chesapeake Bay and Great Lakes Programs.

Program Description

EPA has substantial respansibilities in estuarine research,
management and planning,

Research

a. Through its laboratories at Narragansett, Rhode Island
and Newport, Oregon, EPA conducts research on marine,
coastal, and estuarine water quality and marine
processes.

EPA's Environmental Research Laboratory, located at
Narragansett, responds mainly to legislative
requirements of the CWA, the Marine Protection Research
Sanctuaries Act, and to a lesser extent, the Toxic
Substances Control Act, Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA), and Superfund legislation. The
Laboratory is responsible for the following research:
(1) estuarine and marine disposal and discharge of
single contaminants or complex effluents, dredged
materials, and other wastes; (2) water use designation
and quality criteria for estuarine and marine water and
sediment; and (3) environmental assessment of ocean
discharges. These research program areas involve the
development, evaluation, and application of techniques
and test systems for measuring and predicting the
transport, fate, and biological and ecosystem effects
of wastes in estuarine and marine systems.

b. Management

Through the Water Quality Act, EPA is conducting
management-oriented estuarine restoration and
protection programs in seven major estuaries around the
country.

The EPA's National Estuary Program is designed to take
advantage of existing authorities within'the Water
Quality Act, other federal statutes, and state and
local legislative authorities for point and non-point
sources to adequately protect the Nation's estuaries.
The EPA program emphasizes the need to focus and
integrate the efforts of existing pollution abatement
and control monies. The goals of the program are to:
(1) increase public understanding of the complexities
of a particular estuary; (2) increase understanding of
the need for and benefit of area-wide or basin plan-
ning, management and pollution control; (3) develop
plans for the control of pollutant loadings; (4)
encourage acceptance of the public and private costs of
increased pollutant abatement; (5) transfer technical
assistance and scientific expertise to State and local
governments to implement action plans; and (6) protect
and restore water quality and living resources to the
estuary.

B - 2

c. Planning

Near Coastal Waters Strategic Plan

EPA has begun implementing its Near Coastal Waters
Strategic Plan, a long-term planning strategy designed
to improve EPA's ability to manage near coastal water
environmental quality. The term "near coastal waters"
is defined as inland waters to the head of the tide,
the territorial seas, and the contiguous zone including
areas of greater distance where necessary to protect
coastal barrier islands and the mouths of certain
estuaries. The Great Lakes are also included. The
implementation plan will address five major national
environmental problems: toxic contamination; eutrophi-
cation; pathogens; habitat loss/alteration; and changes
in living resources. The plan will incorporate the
following types of tools: regulatory; research and
data collection; innovative management techniques;
institutional changes; intra- and interagency coordi-
nation; technology transfer; and public outreach.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

1. U.S Geological Survey (USGS)

The USGS is responsible for the classification of public lands,
and examination of the geological structure, mineral resources,
and products of the national domain. Over the years, its
mission has expanded to include hydrological investigations of
water in streams and underground. Some of this work is
conducted in estuaries or at the fall line for waters flowing
into estuaries. For example, the USGS is examining the
influence of different land uses on the water quality of the
streams that flow into the Susquehanna River.

Program Description

The Water Resources Division of the USGS provides
hydrological data on surface and ground water and conducts
research to assure competent hydrologic investigations.
Programs of particular interest include long-term operation
of down-stream gages on major rivers and streams, site-
specific investigations of estuarine circulation, geo-
chemistry, and ecology. Much of this work is conducted in
the Potomac River, where hydrodynamic and geochemical
processes, as well as long-term changes in wetlands ecology
are being studied, and the San Francisco Bay, where the USGS
is researching processes that influence water and sediment
chemistry.

2. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)

The FWS has general responsibility for maintaining the fish and
wildlife resources in the United States and providing public
access to these resources. Its functions include responsibility
for fish and wildlife resources and habitats of national
interest through research, management, and technical as3istance
to other federal and non-governmental agencies.

Program Description

The operations of the FWS include those conducted in the
coastal zone, the contiguous lands, and the waters that flow
into the zone. Major FWS programs involving coastal issues
include permit review and resource planning; land acquisition
and habitat management (through refuges and easements);
management of migratory birds, anadromous fish and endangered
species; and a broad research activity addressing causes and
effects of habitat change and coastal contaminants. These
programs provide for the collection, synthesis, and inter-
pretation of diverse information on species, populations, and
habitats that is assembled, analyzed, and applied for
management purposes.

As examples of FWS estuarine studies, important research in
the Northeast Region includes documentation of coastal
wetland changes, migratory waterfowl distributions, and the
effects of hunting pressures. In addition, the FWS conducts
soecial studies on.striped bass and American shad; damage to
estuarine systems, such as the Chesapeake Bay, from point and
non-point discharges; and the effects of development activi-
ties on important fish and shellfish breeding grounds and
waterfowl habitat.

In the Southeast Region, the FWS conducts research on
endangered species, such as the Florida Manatee and various
coastal birds and sea turtles. For example, FWS has
initiated field studies to evaluate the habitat requirements
of the Manatee. Additionally, FWS personnel are examining
the effects of peat mining in coastal areas on coastal fish
and wildlife.

Major research in the Texas Gulf Coastal area is being
conducted on the impact of soil desposition on bays and
channels, largely through desposition of dredged materials
dumped in shallow estuarine waters and from contaminated
agricultural runoff. Studies of wetland losses are being
aided by Geographic Information Systems (GIS). The GIS

B - 4

technology that documented wetland losses of 80 percent in
Louisiana have resulted in public recognition of the
potential long-term effects of coastal change on fish and
wildlife populations. GIS has become a major decisionmaking
tool for predicting potential impacts of development
activities of habitats. Prototype methodologies are also
being developed to assess cumulative impacts.

Primary research in the Southwest Region focuses on the
restoration of fish and wildlife to the San Francisco Bay
area and the study of impacts caused by diversions and diked
systems, and management and restoration of the endangered
southern sea otter. Kesterson National Wildlife Refuge
research on selenium and other problems is being guided by an
Interagency Technical Coordination Committee comprised of
state, other federal agencies, and FWS personnel.

Contaminant monitoring on the Great Lakes Region includes
examination of fish tumors, research into the causes of the
declining lake trout populations, and the fate and effects of
contaminated sediments. In addition, research efforts focus
on the impacts of power plant discharges to the Lake Erie
system and biota.

In Alaska, the FWS is examining the impact of North Slope oil
and gas development on migratory fish. It is also developing
techniques for the genetic identification of Alaskan and
Canadian stocks of salmonids for fisheries managment pur-
poses.

Finally, most of the development of the analytical tools for
estuarine planning and management is centered at the National
Wetlands Research Center (NWRC) formally National Coastal
Ecosystems Team of Slidell, Louisiana. Principal NWRC
activities are: (1) development of habitat-descriptive
methods - their validation and transfer to users; (2) the
development of community and species "profiles" to assist
with site-specific and regional planning; and (3) special
issue studies for FWS operations.

ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS (COE)

The COE has broad responsibilities in inland waters and near-shore
areas stemming primarily from the Rivers and Harbors Act, the CWA,
the Water Resources Development Act, and the Marine Protection,

Research and Sanctuaries Act. These laws provide the COE with the
authority to maintain navigable waterways, and to issue permits for
the transportation of dredged material for ocean dumping and for the
discharge of dredged or fill material into the waters of the United
States.

Program Description

a. Coastal Engineering Program: The COE missions require
coastal engineering expertise in the design, construction,
operation, and maintenance of three general types of projects
or facilities in and near the surf zones of the U.S oceanic
and Great Lakes shores: (1) habors for small craft for
commercial and recreational fishing; (2) harbors for large,
ocean-going vessels for coastal and international commerce;
and (3) shore and beach restoration, protection, and
stabilization.

Research activities include developing methods for predicting
sediment transport and shoaling, improving methods to collect
littoral data, and improving wave estimation to assess
physical factors in beach erosion and nourishment.

b. Flood Control and Navigation Program: This program is
designed to improve cost-effectiveness of flood control
programs and navigation-related activities including channel
or canal, construction and maintenance.

Research includes developing: (1) improved methods for
dredging; (2) more effective sediment traps; and (3)
estuarine-specific physical models (numerical and physical)
to assist project design and maintenance.

c. Environmental Quality Program: Projects associated with this
program focus on determining the impact of COE water
resources projects on the environment. In particular,
research examines methods to mitigate shore-line erosion,
identifies the ecological effects of rubble structures, and
determines the effects of channels and jetties on fish and
shellfish migration.

d. Wetlands Project: Priority wetland research needs have been
identified in two major areas: (1) development of techniques
to identify and delineate wetlands and (2) assessment and
quantification of wetland values for use in evaluation of
permit activities. These studies include developing regional
procedures in identifying and delineating wetlands during the

B - 6

fall and winter seasons, and evaluating plant tolerance to
inundation and saturated soil conditions.

e. Dredged Material Research Development, and Monitoring
Programs: Under Section 404 of the CWA and Section 103 of
the Ocean Dumping Act, the COE is responsible for permitting
the placement of dredged and fill material in the Nation's
waterways and the transportation of dredged material for
disposal in the oceans. At present, the COE receives more
than 10,000 permit applications annually under Sections 404
and 103. These permits must comply with criteria and the
COE's long-term effects of dredging operations provides the
information for the criteria.

Studies are designed to: (1) determine bioaccumulation and
biomagnification in the aquatic environment; (2) develop
procedures to reduce adverse impacts; (3) develop upland
plant and animal bioassays procedures; (4) develop or improve
techniques for predicting contaminant concentrations in the
effluent from these sites; and (5) improve methods for
leachate prediction and control. The COE is also examining
procedures to identify and assess the elements necessary for
a long-term strategy for dredged material disposal, and to
provide user guidance to permit effective disposal.

f. Dredged Contaminated Sediments Project: To mitigate the
impacts of dredging contaminated sediments, the COE is
collecting data on the re-suspension of sediments and
contaminants. The COE is also developing guidelines for
dredging highly contaminated sediments. The COE is
conducting a demonstration project at Indiana Harbor-Great
Lakes, where innovate foreign equipment will be used in a
pilot demonstration for,PCB sedimentb.

g. Satellite and Surveying Application Program: The Satellite
and Surveying Application Program develops and applies new
technology for surveying and satellite remote sensing and
positioning interpretation techniques, data handling, and
assessing satellite-acquired data for water resource planning
and management models. Research activities in the current
program include using satellite data for detecting and
mapping areas wetlands, applying satellite data to solve
coastal engineering problems, and evaluating remote sensing
techniques to monitor changes in aquatic vegetation in
coastal and estuarine environments.

8 - 7

I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX C
I Workshop Summaries
I I
I
I
I
I
1 7
I
I
I

ESTUARINE RESEARCH WORKSHOP SUMMARY
June 4-5, 1986
Raleigh, North Carolina

NOAA conducts research in the Nation's estuaries through a net-
work of NOAA laboratories and Sea Grant universities. In order
to focus its research and develop NOAA's Estuarine Plan, scien-
tists from Sea Grant universities and the NOAA laboratories met
to identify major research needs in estuaries. The issues iden-
tified by this team of researchers were organized under five
broad categories.

1. Coupling of Primary and Secondary Productivity

- Major energy pathways
- Role of natural processes and human activities
2. Water Management and Estuarine Productiv'ity

- Effect on biological structure and function
- Relationship between forcing functions and hydrologic
characteristics

3. Sediment Management and Estuarine Productivity

- Role of organisms in sedimentation
- Role and impact of episodic events on sediment

4. Habitat Requirement for Living Marine Resources

- major processes controlling productivity
- Recruitment and fisheries productivity relationship

5. Input of Nutrients and other Contaminants to the Estuaries

- Bioaccumulation and effects
- External nutrient loading and internal nutrient cycling

C - 1

List of Participants

NOAA SCIENTISTS

Donald Atwood, OAR, AOML, Florida
John Boreman, NMFS, NEFC, Massachusetts
Tony Calabrese, NMFS, NEFC, Connecticut
Bud Cross, NMFS, SEFC, North Carolina
Herb Curl, OAR, PMEL, Washington*
Brian Eadie, OAR, GLERL, Michigan
Hal Stanford, NOS, OAD, Washington D.C.
Don Malins, NMFS, NWFC, Washington*
Howard Harris, NOS, Pacific Office, Washington*
Garry Mayer, OAR, SG, Washington D.C.
Jim Thomas, NMFS, EPO, Washington D.C.
Virginia Tippie, NMFS, EPO, Washington D.C.

SEA GRANT SCIENTISTS

B.J. Copeland, North Carolina
Jerry Schubel, New York
Scott Nixon, Rhode Island
H.J. Harris, Wisconsin*
David Armstrong, Washington
Joy Zedler, California*
Neal Armstrong, Texas
Don Boesch, Louisiana*

*Provided written input

C 2

RESEARCH STRATEGIES NEEDED TO MANAGE
THE NATION'S ESTUARIES

Because of the enormous importance of estuaries to society, re-
sulting from the numerous and varied purposes they serve and be-
cause of the stressed nature of many estuaries resulting from
these multiple and conflicting uses, it is not surprising that
society has demanded that government direct its attention at man-
aging and, when necessary, rehabilitating these valuable natural
resources. It is also not surprising that this attention has
been directed at developing strategies to stop pollution, safe-
guard habitats for critical species and restore the aesthetic
values and living resources of the estuaries. The responses of
our elected officials at all levels to citizen demand for action
and the estuarine programs which have been generated by our fed-
eral and state agencies responsible for protecting and managing
our estuaries have been laudable. Most of these programs, how-
ever, have been only marginally effective in improving our abil-
ity to manage because not enough attention has been paid to fun-
damental research to provide the knowledge necessary for effec-
tive management programs. Research information often is not sum-
marized in a manner to be properly applied to management prob-
lems.

The management of these most complex and variable segments of
the world ocean is a formidable job. Those with whom we charge
this responsibility must be provided access to the best scienti-
fic and technical information available. Management is a dyna-
mic process; one which depends upon timely and accurate informa-
tion. with greater knowledge, the limits on what is possible
are extended and the likelihood of making appropriate and effec-
tive management decisions is increased.

In an ideal world, estuarine management would be based on a com-
prehensive understanding of ecosystem functioning. Estuarine
managers would be able to predict, more often than not, how
coastal systems respond to specific suites of environmental con-
ditions. While such understanding is not within our grasp as
yet, a directed effort to move to4ards improved prediction
should form the framework for NOAA's estuarine research. In
this regard, estuarine studies must be seen as components of an
iterative process:

Studies of estuarine Prediction of effects
function in response h@ on estuarine systems
to natural events and and resources
human activities
t @ I
Evaluation of predictions Surveillance/
monitoring

Studies of estuarine function in response to natural events and
human activities. Prediction of effects on estuarine systems
and resources. Surveillance/monitoring. Evaluation of predic-
tions.

NOAA conducts research in the nation's estuaries mainly through
a network of Sea Grant universities, NOAA laboratories and by
grants and contracts. In order to focus research efforts into a
national program, leading estuarine scientists from the network
have identified the essential research needs. Nine critical
questions were identified by the team of scientists, represent-
ing Sea Grant universities and NOAA laboratories, which fall
under the following broad management problems:

� Ecosystem Coupling and Productivity
� Physical Forcing Functions in Estuaries
� Roles of Anthropogenic Inputs

Ecosystem Coupling and Productivity

Research Questions:

0 What are the major energy pathways and how are they
affected by natural and human activities?

0 What processes control variability in productivity?

0 What is the relationship between recruitment and
fisheries productivity? 7 7
Estuarine ecosystems are characterized by high levels of primary
and secondary productivity. The connection between high primary
productivity and the quality and magnitude of secondary produc-
tivity is uncertain and the question of the importance and eco-
logical efficiency of individual food chain pathways remains un-
resolved. Food chains in estuarine ecosystems are connected
quantitatively and qualitatively and it is the goal of research

C - 4

to understand the relationships between the quantity and quality
of biomass at one producer level and the quantity and quality of
biomass at the next level.

Many of society's activities have decreased the transfer effi-
ciency of energy from lower to high trophic levels. The major
impacts of human activities on energy pathways come through hab-
itat alterations from the addition of waste effluents and agri-
cultural and urban runoff. Food chains have been affected by
introduced toxic substances and nutrient enrichment causing
blooms which increase shading and deplete oxygen supplies.
Along with an understanding of the fundamental relationships
within estuarine food webs, we need to know such things as how
wetland destruction or habitat alteration affect fisheries pro-
duction, how various materials (e.g. toxics) are transferred
through the food chain, how blue-green algae produced in some
estuaries impacts secondary consumers, and whether detritus is a
major source of carbon.

An estuary's primary role traditionally has been seen as that of
a nursery for commercially and recreationally important fish and
shellfish species. However, it has been observed that some estu-
aries produce far more fish than others and it is not clear how
essential that role is. Understanding the role that estuarine
habitat plays and the impacts of anthropogenic inputs on the
quantity of fish produced will provide a key to effective fish-
eries management.

To learn what makes one estuary more productive than another,
scientists must address questions about habitat selection,
species migration, species residence times, food availability,
circulation and exchange patterns, habitat quality and the ef-
fects of environmental variations on survival, growth and move-
ment of fish and shellfish. Because much of the habitat value
in estuaries comes as nursery areas for species spawned else-
where, recruitment of the young must be crucial to the develop-
ment of fisheries production. Although considerable work has
been done in this area, we still do not know the nature of the
relationship between recruitment (how animals arrive and the
importance of numbers) and fisheries productivity. Answers will
help resource managers establish criteria to protect the
estuarine characteristics that provide answers to critical
questions of whether improved and enlarged nursery habitat will
enhance fisheries production in our Nation's estuaries.

Physical Forcing Functions in Estuaries

Research Questions:

0 How do alterations in natural water inflow patterns
affect biological structure and function?

C - 5

0 What is the relationship between major forcing
functions and hydrologic characteristics?

0 What is the role and impact of episodic events on
sedimentation?

An important problem facing our Nation today is the allocation
of freshwater resources. As municipal, commercial, industrial,
agricultural and recreational demands for water increase, the
availability of water to downstream estuaries decreased or is or
navigation also alters the freshwater supply to estuaries. The
prospects of altered precipitation patterns as a result of glo-
bal climate changes predicted during the next century may also
affect the amount of fresh water received by our estuaries.
Changing land uses around estuaries and near the upstream tribu-
taries affect the quantity, quality and timing of freshwater
inflows. Since by definition estuaries involve the inflow and
mixing of fresh water and salt water, any variation can cause
significant changes in estuarine productivity. The interrela-
tionship between freshwater inflow and primary and secondary
production in the estuaries poses a prime research question.
Water flow is a major factor controlling the aging of an
estuary.

One of the crucial questions concerning water management is the
need to know the quantitative relationship between freshwater
inflow and fisheries production in specific estuaries and region-
al groups of estuaries. We need to determine how much fresh-
water inflow is too much or too little on a seasonal or annual
basis; e.g., the factors that control the response and recovery
of an estuary's physical and biological system to large changes
in water input are not know. Cycles in freshwater inflow may
create permanent changes to higher levels of biota and contri-
bute to the variability of spawning activities. On the ocean
side of the estuary, coastal upwelling represents a major intru-
sion of water with different temperature and nutrient character-
istics that may or may not stimulate an estuary's productiv-
ity. we need to develop a better understanding of physical
forces for different types of estuarine systems in order to man-
age for optimum conditions of salinity, nutrient availability,
larval recruitment and waste dilution.

The rate and variability of processes mediating the release and
exchange of materials from sediments to the overlying waters are
virtually unknown. Episodic events such as hurricanes and
floods may be influential in determining those parameters. A
major controlling factor is the chemistry of sediments and their
interstitial waters; these processes can be drastically altered
by catastrophic events such as storms or sediment slumping.

C - 6

Role of Anthropogenic Inputs

Research Questions

0 To what extent do organisms affect sedimentation?

0 What is the relationship between bioaccumulation and
effects?

0 What is the relationship between external nutrient
loading and internal nutrient cycling?

Sediment quantity and quality can affect estuarine productiv-
ity. In addition, man's activities in the watershed affect sed
iment processes such as the inputs of sediment, their rates of
accumulation, turbidity and their contaminant loadings. To
better manage the impacts of sediment processes, researchers
need to examine the rates of accumulation and the changes in
sediment composition between where the sediment enters the
estuary and where it accumulates. We also need to better des-
cribe the processes that control the movement of fine-grained
sediments and the absorption and desorption of contaminants.
The capability should also be developed to predict the relation-
ship between the patterns and rates of sediment accumulation and
habitat type for a range of environmental conditions.

The transport of most chemical species of concern to and through
an estuary is in the particulate phase. The bio-availability of
this material to filter feeders and to deposit feeders is con-
trolled by the strengths of the contaminant binding forces and
chemistry of the guts or organisms through which it passes. In
areas of high estuarine productivity filter feeding organisms
may control most of the sedimentation by bio-packaging of sus-
pended particulate matter. Biological repackaging may control
the downward flux of hydrophobic chemicals, uptake from the
sediments and sediment accumulation rate. Therefore, the dyna-
mics of population and productivity may be extremely influential
in determining the sedimentation rate and the rate of accumula-
tion of sediment-bound contaminants. The degree to which sedi-
ments bind, and thus "detoxify", pollutants also must be
determined.

Observations indicate that nutrient enrichment and toxic contam-
ination problems in estuaries are increasing.. More people are
living near our Nation's estuaries and increases in their use of
inorganic fertilizers, conversion pf wetland to urban and agri-
cultural use, waste disposal, storm-water runoff and the increas-
ed use of a large number of synthetic chemicals may overwhelm
the estuary's ability to act as a nutrient and sediment sump,
thereby increasing estuarine nutrient and contaminant levels.
We do not yet understand the multiple relationships among nu-
trient inputs, recycling and biological production; and research
is needed to test how estuarine ecosystems respond to nutrient

C - 7

input in terms of recycling and nutrient removal. The relation-
ship of new nutrient supplies to recycled nutrients is critical
to understanding biological responses which lead to eutrophica-
tion and serious oxygen depletion (hypoxia).

Scientists need to study the ultimate fate of a host of synthe-
tic organic chemicals and metals found in the estuary. The rela-
tionship between biological exposure and effects is specific to
the receiving species. In each case, meaningful effects must be
defined and the exposure which causes them measured. With con-
siderations of appropriate environmental controls and synergisms
such effects can not be predicted using existing capabilities.
Variations in sensitivity at different life stages, incubation
time, water uptake, and feeding experiences all contribute to
variability and exposure to contaminants.

C 8

ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP SUMMARY
June 25-26, 1986
Washington, D.C.

NOAA administers programs for managing the Nation's marine fish-
eries, protecting valuable marine and estuarine habitats, and
balancing coastal development and conservation activities. NOAA
also provides expertise to federal and state agencies that have
management responsibility in coastal areas. NOAA and Sea Grant
personnel in estuarine management and information related pro-
grams met with state managers familiar with fisheries, water
quality and coastal zone management disciplines to identify na-
tional estuarine management and information needs for the NOAA
Estuarine Plan. The participants identified the following re-
source and policy categories relating to estuarine management.

Resource Issues

1. Freshwater Inflow

- Quantitative models for impact assessment
- Trends and impacts of flow alteration

2. Habitat

- Relation and importance of habitat to fisheries and
ecosystem integrity
- Evaluation of habitat restoration and rehabilitation
techniques

3. Toxics

- Quality, significance and appropriate use of toxics data
- Pathways and effects of toxics

4. Nutrients

- Loading of nutrients from natural and anthropogenic
sources
- Nutrient transfer models

5. Pathogens

- Measurement and monitoring techniques
- Effects assessments

C - 9

7. Land Use

- Measurement techniques to assess the impact of land use
- Impacts/effects on the physical environment

Policy Issues

1. Institutional Roles and Relations

Issues

- Internal Coordination
- External Coordination
- Leadership

Recommendations

- Elevate Estuarine Programs Office
- Establish Interagency Work Group
- Develop NOAA-wide policy statement
- Establish National Estuarine Research Center

2. Information and Public Understanding

Issues

- Target information for users
- Information synthesis and dissemination

Recommendation

- Establish Estuarine Information and Dissemination Center

C 10

List of Participants

NOAA MANAGERS

National Marine Fisheries Service

Edward Christophers, NE Pat Fair, SE
John Hall, SE Robert Lippson, NE
Jackie Wyland, NW Daphne White, F/M
Ken Roberts, F/M Dean Parsons, FIS
Virginia Tippie, EPO

National Ocean Service

Andrew Robertson, OAD Louis Butler, OAD
Daniel Basta, OAD Millington Lockwood, CG
Nancy Foster, OCRM Frank Christhilf, OCRM
Ben Mieremet, OCRM Reed Bohne, EPO
Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research'

Shirley Fiske, Sea Grant
Coastal Zone STATE MANAGERS

Patricia Hughes, MA
Ralph Cantral, NC
Fred Calder, FL
Terry Stevens, WA
Gary Magnuson, Coastal States Organization

Fisheries/Water Quality

Peter Jensen, MD
Michael Bellanca, VA
John Gottschalk, Citizens Program for Chesapeake Bay
Rudy Rosen, National Wildlife Federation
Herbert Windom, Skidaway Institute of Oceanography - Georgia
Lauriston King, Texas A&M Sea Grant

C - 11

Estuarine Management Work Group Meeting
June 25-26
Washington, 0. C.

On June 25-26, 1986 representatives from NOAA met with indivi-
duals from state, academic and private organizations to identify
major estuarine issues from a manager's perspective. The meet-
ing was held in conjunction with an estuarine research work
group to provide information needed in the development of a
NOAA-wide Estuarine Plan.

Following introductory remarks and an overview presentation of
NOAA's program activities in estuaries, the management work
group identified issues relating to resource information, pro-
gram coordination and direction. The following summary outlines
the major issues and themes identified at the meeting.

Resource Issues

The meeting participants identified eight categories of manage-
ment concern and general resource questions for each category.
The list of questions was later refined to identify key concerns
in each category. The following summary characterizes the scope
of the discussions and identifies the key concerns as recognized
by the group.

Physical Alteration

The commercial and aesthetic amenities of the estuarine environ-
ment continue to attract intense residential and industrial
development. The resultant physical alternation of estuarine
features to accommodate this growth stresses the vitality and
resilience of an estuary to support healthy fish and shellfish
populations.

Consistent comprehensive information on the status and value of
the estuarine environment is needed to identify habitats most in
need of protection. Managers need data on the trends and rate
of loss of these habitats. This information must distinguish
between the losses that can be controlled (anthropogenic) and
those which occur naturally.

Second, beyond characterizing the nature of the resource and
rate of losses, management makes decisions on individual devel-
opment proposals. Determining the cumulative effect on the
estuary of existing and future permit decisions is the least
tractable but potentially most significant aspect of estuarine

C - 12

management. How will these changes affect flow regime, trans-
zort mechanisms, commercially important species, and the broader
ecosystem? Beyond the adjacent estuarine shoreline, how do
changes in land use in upland portions of the watershed effect
the health of the system. Finally, once the physical alteration
has occurred, what alternatives for mitigation and restoration
are available to managers? Can dredged material be used to
enhance fishery habitat? What areas should be avoided as dis-
posal sites? Better information on the wide range of mitigation
techniques, costs and benefits, feasibility and overall useful-
ness is needed.

Key issue: Understanding the'functional importance of habitat
to fisheries production and the ecosystem.

The group recommended that information be developed to assess
the value of various types of habitat, describing tangible and
intangible benefits in as quantifiable a manner as possible.
The values of these habitats must be communicated effectively to
influence permit decisions. Useful tools in this effort would be
a comprehensive data base on wetlands and an index describing
the benefits and values of various types of habitat to fisheries
production.

Freshwater Inflow

Estuaries are defined by the volume and mixing of fresh and
saline waters. Reductions or other modifications in freshwater
inflow have been shown to cause significant changes in productiv-
ity and species composition. The reduction in freshwater inflow
from dams and diversions of inland rivers as streams is a major
concern. Information on the trends in water diversion and con-
sumption is needed.

In assessing the consequences of proposed diversions, managers
need better information on the effects of freshwater flow reduc-
tions to biological populations and long-term ecosystem produc-
tivity. Those effects must be defined clearly in both economic
and political terms.

Key Issue: Better predictive tools primarily in the form of
mathematical models are needed to determine the potential conse-
quences of freshwater flow modifications. NOAA and the USGS
should develop strategies and res-earch programs that will result
in useful guidelines for water management.

Toxics

Toxic pollutants both inorganic and organic affect the quality
and productivity of the estuarine environment. Information
needs have been expressed for all facets of the toxics issue.

C - 13

First, better identification of t-he sources of toxic contami-
nants both co-int and non-point is needed. in addition to the
geographic location of _J.nput, data is needed on the type and
amount of the various constituents that comprise the loadings.
Once in --.L-.e estuary information is need on the transport of
these materials, It-heir dispersion and transformation charac-
teristics and the eventual deposition sites within the estuary.
These equations must also indicate the rates and locations of
resuspension in the water column through biological or geochem-
ical pathways.

Second, research and information on the effects of toxic sub-
stances to biological systems was recognized as crucial to
informed management decisions. From a biological perspective,
assessment of the cumulative effects over time of doses of a
variety of contaminants should be considered. How do these
chemicals interact in both a synergistic and additive context
and what kinds of sublethal, chronic effects can be predicted
for the diversity, fecundity and health of fishery resources?
Research should particularly target the effects on juvenile
stages of fish populations and their supporting seagrass habi-
tats. This is a critical development stage for which informa-
tion is noticeably lacking. The biological and chemical in-
formation on toxic effects must be translated into economic
terms to consider the consequences to harvest and product
marketability.

Finally, managers need better predictive and assessment tools to
improve the quality of decisions relating to toxics. What are
the best and most cost-effective methods to chemically identify
toxicants? Are basal metabolic procedures efficient in gauging
effects and what species are most appropriate as bio-indica-
tors. With the wide range of procedures for assessing toxic con-
tamination, it is difficult for management to make consistent
decisions on the nature and importance of the threat to the envi
ronment. This leads to the concern many suggested was funda-
mental to the toxics issue; i.e., the quality and significance
of information available on toxic contamination.

Key Issue: Quality and significance of data on toxicants. In-
formation on toxics should be intercalibrated more widely among
laboratories. NOAA should work to expand its quality assurance
and quality control programs beyond its own contractors to other
universities and state laboratories. 71n doing this NOAA needs
to develop consensus on the best tools and methods available to
measure toxics. Special emphasis should be placed on how best
to interpret information on the use of biological indicators of
toxic contamination. The research community must make clear the
limits of the data developed on toxicants and its appropriate
use for decisionmakers. Understanding the natural versus anthro-

C - 14

pogenic contributions to the toxics problem is central to ",'*he
portrayal of the data.

Existing management programs specifically the NPDES program can
be improved significantly. Currently, information gathered
through this permit system provides only a rough measure of
toxic innuts @o estuaries. Information on biological oxygen
demand and total suspended solids is collected but little else
is available. Strengthening of the permit system is necessary
to better understand the contaminant loads to the system.

Nutrients

Like toxics, information is needed on the sources, loading and
resuspension rates of nutrients to estuarine systems. Because
nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus are naturally occur-
ring and fundamental components of estuarine systems, it is espe-
cially important to distinguish between the nutrient inputs than
can be controlled and those that contribute to the natural bio-
logical aging of the system. Additional investigations of the
role and relation of nutrient loading to species diversity and
estuarine food web structure should be conducted and the results
effectively communicated to management.

Management tools available to control nutrient input bear im-
provement, particularly for non-point sources. Predictive
models describing effects of alternative nutrient control stra-
tegies are promising but require better data on basic estuarine
processes.

Key Issue: Distinguishing natural and anthropogenic nutrient
contributions.

Research is needed on methods to screen natural versus anthro-
pogenic inputs of nutrients and the vulnerability of biological
systems to accommodate these loadings. Information is lacking
on how nutrients are cycled through estuarine systems and the
role of sediments as sinks and sources of nutrient loads.

Particularly relevant is the role of large episodic events such
as hurricanes in the aging and nutrient enrichment of estuarine
systems. Finally, how do we translate this information into
effective regulatory programs that provide demonstrable results
that legislatures can understand and support.

C - 15

Habitat Rehabilitation

while there is increased emphasis through federal and state regu-
latory programs to compensate for habitat losses, lit-t-1e is
known or understood about the technical problems associated with
creating or rehabJ..litating various habitat types. A comprehen-
sive assessment of habitat rehabilitation efforts should be con-
sidered. Such assessment should describe the criteria to be
used to gauge the success and effectiveness of rehabilitation
projects, consider the value of natural versus man-made habitats
and propose criteria for selecting the habitat types and condi-
tions that are most amenable to successful rehabilitation.

The administrative aspects of habitat rehabilitation should also
be examined to address questions of the role of government and
private sector in the permitting, design, development and moni-
toring of habitat sites. Information is also needed on the
effectiveness of broad habitat program concepts such as mitiga-
tion banking to consider whether these strategies have the unin-
tentional effect of encouraging higher rates of wetland destruc-
tion and development.

Key Issue: Does habitat mitigation work?

Research and information on the habitat mitigation efforts and
successes should be assembled and disseminated. Study is needed
on the long-term benefits of habitat rehabilitation efforts and
weighed against habitat protection alternatives. This analysis
should include the comparative costs of rehabilitation versus
protection, the values of restored habitats, the kinds of trade-
of-E in quality and productivity associated with rehabilitation,
and the enforcement aspects of ensuring that new habitat is prop-
erly created and maintained.

Overfishing

A healthy, productive fishery resource is a basic indicator of
estuarine quality. Declines in fishery harvest can be attri-
buted to water quality and habitat management practices. How-
ever, it is important not to overlook the effect of simply har-
vesting fish and shellfish stocks at a rate that exceeds the
capacity of the estuary's biological systems. Management deci
sions on allowable fishery harvests are often based on uncertain
scientific information and political criteria.

Basic, consistent data are needed on the status and trends of
estuarine-dependent stocks. Research should further attempt to
define the causes and consequences of changes in fishery stocks
as a result of natural variability. This kind of research is
truly interdisciplinary and requires contributions from many
facets of estuarine science. it is important that managers have

C - 16

the best possible information on the man-made versus natural
causes of stock variability.

From the regulatory perspective, new mechanisms and procedures
should be explored to more efficiently manage fishery harvests.
it is particularly important to consider the problems associated
with interjurisdictional management of estuarine species. There
is little consensus on the effectiveness of existing fishery man-
agement practices such as net size requirements, limited entry,
size restrictions, etc. Comprehensive study of this issue would
be useful. Such a study should also consider the use of fish
hatcheries to support higher fishery productivity. What effects
do hatchery raised stocks have on the genetic variability of the
resource, resistance to disease and implications for continued
poor management practices? The fundamental question concerning
this issue is what effect does overfishing have on the sustained
productivity of the estuarine environment.

Key Issue: Ecosystem impact of overfishing.

When certain stocks are overharvested, both subtle and obvious
effects occur throughout the ecosystem. Information on the
implications of overfishing to other levels of the food chain
and other important commercial stocks is poorly defined. The
development of predictive models that address the ecosystem
implications of overfishing would improve management decisions.
State and Federal managers should place greater emphasis on
ecosystem interaction and focus management plans on a multi-
rather than single species basis.

Pathogens

Disease of fish and shellfish from pathogenic agents has impor-
tant consequences in terms of direct economic losses, market-
ability and consumer perceptions. Managers need better infor-
mation on the movement and fate of pathogens through the estua-
rine environment as well as the trends in closures of areas for
harvest nationwide. once areas have been closed, little guid-
ance is available on how best to manage these areas. It would
be useful if basic criteria and standards were developed for
monitoring conditions and regulating uses of these areas.

Restoration of these areas for commercial and recreational use
can be a costly and lengthy proce'ss. Better information on
clean-up techniques and costs of alternatives such as relaying
shellfish for depuration should be developed. In the movement
of products from the estuary to market, management must ensure
that public health is protected. Better methods for measuring
and identifying pathogens in fishery products are needed. This
information must be combined with reliable assessments of the
potential risk to human health from product consumption.

C - 17

Key issue

Develop better methods for measuring/monitoring Pathogens and
their effects.

Rapid, inexpensive methods for detecting pathogens in water and
shellfish tissue are needed. These methods should provide a
consistent basis for decisions on closure of areas for harvest.
Every attempt should be made to develop standards for closure
that can be implemented on a state-by-state and county level
basis.

Land Use

The shape and form of coastal development is the dominant in-
fluence on the productivity and health of an estuary. Each use
commercial, residential, agricultural, recreational and indus-
trial influences and alters the estuarine environment in distinc-
tive ways. Land use patterns around estuaries change in dynamic
fashion. Reliable information systems that provide data on the
current and anticipated uses in the estuarine coastal zone are
important management tools that require more sophisticated devel-
opment. As land use changes from rural to more urbanized, deci-
sions are made that weigh the value of estuarine resource
against the economic benefits of proposed development. The eco-
nomic assessment process continues to struggle with criteria for
valuing natural resources. Continued attention should focus on
proper measurement of the costs and impacts associated with land
use decisions in the estuarine environment. The subtle but sig-
nificant effects of development are poorly measured. Problems
such as long-term changes to fisheries productivity and estua-
rine circulation require refined modeling capabilities.

Gauging the cumulative effects of changing development patterns
is a central management function. When the potential effects of
development become evident, managers must consider the most
appropriate mix of controls and strategies to minimize unneces-
sary harm to the environment.

Questions that deserve greater attention include how best to
establish a cost-effective balance between point and non-point
pollutant loadings, how to weigh coastal development proposals
with alternative upland uses, how to best fit available regu-
latory tools to particular development'proposals, do planning
strategies such as special area management plans (SAMP) work,
and finally what are most effective means to persuade deci-
sionmakers to adopt particular management strategies?

C - is

Xey Issue

How to predict the affect of land use change on estuarine water
quali 4-Y.

Concern was expressed that a wide array of methods are used to
characterize estuaries and the adjacent land uses. There should
be uniform and consistent methods developed to measure the basic
features and land use patterns of estuaries. The participants
stressed the important of developing models to help predict eco-
system changes in land use patterns. Such models need to be lon-
gitudinal, demographically based and clearly link land use
changes with changes in estuarine quality. To complement the
system it would be useful if a compilation of the important regu-
latory tools and strategies from local, regional and national
perspectives were prepared. A resource assessment system and
regulatory analysis would provide needed support for managers
information and control strategy needs. Information should also
be developed that catalogs the potential effect of different
kinds of development on the major environmental components of an
estuary. It is particularly important to consider the changes
in rates of sedimentation and sediment type that will result
from various projects. Regional differences in estuaries must
also be considered in these analyses. The type of terrain, vege-
tation, circulation and degree of development must be considered
in management deliberation. While development patterns and the
capability of each estuary to sustain change will vary, manage-
ment would benefit from the development of broad principles and
national assessment tools'that would establish a framework for
subsequent site-specific management decisions.

Institutional/Policy Issues

On the second day of the workshop participants divided into
three groups to consider issues of an institutional or policy
nature that cut across the various resource-related concerns
expressed above.

Information

The synthesis, packaging and dissemination of NOAA's informa-
tion-related activities were majdr areas of concern. Managers
frequently expressed the need to have information on basic
estuarine characteristics assembled and synthesized in a manner
that understandable and easily retrieved. It was recognized
that NOAA maintains the bulk of estuarine environmental data
available from a national level and that programs are underway
to organize that information in a form useful for decision-
making. However, this information is still difficult to re-

C - 19

trieve and not always responsive to the time frames recessary
for management.

It was therefore recommended that a discrete estuarine informa-
tion applications group be established which would be familiar
with the limitations and uses of the NOAA data, while also
res@oonsive to the needs of external users.

Dissemination of information on NOAA's estuarine-related pro-
ducts and services could also be improved. The concern was ex-
pressed that important interest groups, users and the Congress
are not getting the right kind of data or level of information
synthesis be a specific component in each major NOAA estua-
rine-related program. mechanisms should be developed to dis-
tribute information to both technical and non-technical groups.
An annotated estuarine bibliography of NOAA products may be use-
ful in this regard. In this process it was urged that the users
and producers of information plan together in the early stages
of product development to ensure that the results of the effort
are applied efficiently.

Program Coordination and Diregtion

NOAA has an exceedingly diverse array of estuarine-related pro-
grams, but there is little uniformity in the priority and level
of effort devoted to estuarine concerns within the agency. This
problem is manifest both is a geographic sense among regional
offices and by the scientific and management disciplines repre-
sented in the agency.

The participants recommended that as a first step, NOAA develop
a policy statement that describes the agency mission and commit-
ment to estuaries. That statement should emphasize that NOAA's
role is in the development of an agenda for addressing estuarine
problems and needs from the national perspective. NOAA should
place a higher priority among all its components on estuarine
protection. This would be supported by 1) adopting a stronger,
more'active role in estuarine research and management; 2) improv-
ing contacts with other federal agencies and programs; 3) parti-
cipating in the development of estuarine related-policies at
other federal agencies, and; 4) using existing NOAA/coastal
State mechanisms to provide guidance and information on the pro-
gress, direction and cooperative opportunities provided by
NOA6A's estuarine programs.

In assuming a stronger leadership role NOAA should emphasize
development of programs and products that anticipate long-term
needs to predict change and cumulative effects. Predictive
tools such as biological indicators of degraded environments,
criteria and standards, permitting, policy and resource manage-
ment strategies and models represent the kinds of products
managers consider most appropriate for development at the

C - 20

federal level. NOAA should consider establishing an Estuarine
Prediction Center to develop, synthesize and distribute NCAA's
estuarine services.

C 21

I
I
I
I
11
I
I
I
I APPENDIX D
I Regional Summaries
I
I
I
I
I
I

APPENDIX D

Regional Summaries

Water quality, habitat and living resource conservation are con-
cerns applicable to all the Nation's estuaries. However, these
problems are manifested differently in degree and scope among
the various regions of the country. This summary provides a re-
gional context to the national strategies developed in the plan.

NORTHEAST REGION

Characterization

The shoreline of the Northeast United States is interrupted by
numerous estuaries that, although they can be discussed in terms
of two distinct sub-regions, range broadly in size and other phy-
sical characteristics. These estuaries, extending from Maine to
Cape Cod, were formed by glaciers that removed the soil cover,
leaving a rocky shoreline and deeply carved steep-sided channels
through which the estuaries run to the ocean. From Cape Cod to
Maryland, the physical characteristics are the result of melting
glaciers and rising sea level. Examples of these estuaries in-
clude the Narragansett and Delaware Bays, and the Long Island
Sound. Many of the Northeast estuaries played essential roles
in the development of this region as an early center of industry
and human population. Estuarine waters served as routes for
transportation and commerce, and provided the surrounding popu-
lations with recreational opportunities and abundant seafood.

With respect to living resources, the Northeast estuaries served
as habitats to commercially and recreationally important fisher-
ies. The extreme northern component of this region supports sal-
mon, sea-run brook trout, shad and river herring as well as
clams, scallops, and of course, lobster. From Cape Cod south-
ward, important fisheries include striped bass, bluefish, flound-
er, menhaden, oysters, and clam.

Issues

Unfortunately, many of these estuaries also serve as receptacles
for human and industrial wastes. The history of waste disposal
in the Northeast is long. The legacy of the American industrial
revolution is reflected in high metal concentrations in the sed-
iments of many Northeast estuariei, and historical archives are
replete with accounts of sewage contamination and typhus out-
breaks caused by eating tainted shellfish. Many problems remain
today because of outdated and overloaded sewage treatment facil-
ities and inadequate treatment of industrial wastes. In addi-
tion, a vast majority of coastal Superfund sites are found in
the Northeast. High levels of PCBs have been found in New

D - I

Bedford Harbor, Massachusetts, and in the resident lobsters and
finfish. It has been designated a Superfund site, closing 28
sauare miles to fishing. Increased incidences of --Fish disease
in Boston Harbor and Buzzards Bay have been linked to toxic con-
tamination. Buzzards Bay has experienced shellfish bed closures
along with PCB hotspots such as in the Acushnet Estuary. In Nar-
ragansett Bay, major concerns include the deterioration of the
quohog fishery, beach closures from contaminated waters and the
long term decline in finfish, oysters, scallops, and soft clams
due to eutrophication. For these reasons, the major threat to
estuarine quality in the Northeast generally is contamination,
rather than processes such as physical destruction of estuarine
habitats.

Key issues associated with the Northeast region include:

- Eutrophication
- Large phytoplankton blooms
- Toxic contamination
- Toxic transport and resuspension
- Microbial contamination (shellfish, for example,
in the New York Bight)
- Municipal and industrial discharges
- Urban runoff
- Raw sewage discharges
- Combined sewer overflows

D 2

SOUTHEAST REGION

Characterization

The Southeastern estuarine region, beginning with the Chesapeake
Bay and extending south to Florida, is characterized by three
distinct types of shoreline formations. The first formation,
typified by the Chesapeake Bay, is a coastal plain estuary form-
ed from a drowned river bed. The estuaries of North Carolina
and central Florida consist of lagoons landward of extensive bar-
rier islands, while low lying, marshy shorelines characterize
the coasts of South Carolina and Georgia. With the exception of
Florida, the Southeastern coast is bordered by nearly 100 miles
of plain and is characterized by tidal marshes, riverine swamps,
and wetlands.

The region is well known for its abundance of fishery resour-
ces. In the Chesapeake, oysters and blue crabs are the key
shellfish resources, while menhaden, bluefish, flounders, and
anadromous species represent some of the most important fin-
fish. Extending from North Carolina to Florida, popular shell-
fish include blue crabs, oysters, shrimp, and scallops. Finfish
include menhaden, bluefish, anadromous species, croaker, mullet,
seatrout, spot and flounder.

Issues

The attractive coastal islands off Georgia, the beautiful beach-
es of the outer Banks, and,intricate estuarine waterways com-
bined with the pleasant climate of the Southeast has made this
region a haven for primary residences and vacation homes. This
very attraction has led to explosive development pressures from
residential construction and relocation of industries. All pop-
ulation trends indicate the Southeast will continue to be faced
with the enormous problem of balancing development pressures
with coastal resource management. For example, the population
along the shores of Maryland's portion of the Chesapeake Bay
grew by 50% between 1950 and 1980, and Florida's coast is being
settled at a rate of 3,000 - 4,000 people a week.

Non-point source runoff is a critical problem throughout the
Southeast. Runoff from agricultural practices along the rivers
of the Chesapeake and from the so7called "mega farms" of North
Carolina dump loads of sediments,,pesticides and nutrients into
these estuaries. Runoff has led to often severe problems of
eutrophication, low levels of dissolved oxygen, and changes in
the fishery structures and in fishery habitat. Wetlands and
marshes, so critical as nursery areas for larval and juvenile
fish, are being lost to agricultural land conversions and con-
struction at alarming rates.

D - 3

With resnect to the Chesapeake Bay, the major issues can 'Ice su'.'11-
marized as follows:

- Dramatic increases in anoxic bottom water from
nutri.ent enrichment
- Drastic declines in submerged aquatic vegetation
- Increases in turbidity
- Shift from freshwater spawning fishes to saltwater
fishes
- increasing prevalences of fish diseases

For estuaries extending south of the Chesapeake Bay through
Florida, the issues include:

- Large scale clearing on megafarms in North Carolina
- Massive development impacting wetlands
- Changes in hydrologic conditions and movement of nursery
areas seaward
- Heavy nutrient loadings
- Periodic hypoxia/anoxic conditions
- Loss of seagrass beds especially in Tampa Bay
- Loss of shellfish from residential and urban develop-
ment
- Physical loss of habitat from dredge and fill especially
in Tampa Bay
- Contaminant hotspots in Baltimore Harbor, Elizabeth River
and Savannah River

D 4

GULF OF MEXICO

Characteriza t4 on

The Gulf of Mexico is characterized by low coastal plains, exten-
sive saltwater marshes, and high levels of sediment deposition.
The Gulf of Mexico also has the largest volume of wetlands in
the country, constituting nearly 50% of the total coastal wet-
lands in the contiguous United States. Major depositional fea-
tures include the Mississippi and Atchafalaya River Deltas,
where large amounts of land-based sediments are deposited out-
side the river mouth in adjacent shallow coastal waters forming
deltas. In other areas of the region, sediment transported and
deposited by ocean currents has built offshore bars enclosing
shallow, sometimes extensive bodies of water known as bar-built
estuaries. Entrances to these estuaries tend to be narrow, so
that exchanges with the sea are highly restricted. Estuaries of
the northern Gulf also have the largest drainage areas in the
Nation, receiving runoff from two-thirds of the contiguous
United States, primarily through the Mississippi River water-
shed.

The Gulf is reknowned for its recreational and commercial fish-
eries, a resource upon which the local coastal economies have
become increasingly dependent with the decline in the oil indus-
try. The fish and shellfish of highest importance include menha-
den, shrimp, oyster, blue crab, spotted seatrout, red drum, pom-
pano, grouper, snapper, and flounder. The Gulf produces the
largest volumes of menhaden and shrimp in the country. Total
fisheries of this region represent 39 percent of the national
total by weight, and 28 percent by value. An overwhelming
majority of these fish are dependent on estuaries as critical
habitats and food sources.

Issues

The coastal wetlands and adjacent inland wetlands of the Gulf
are being lost at dramatic rates. It has been estimated that
nearly 50 square miles of these valuable wetlands are being lost
.each year. Subsidence, channelization, pipelines, draining and
levee construction along the Mississippi River all combine to
further the demise of the wetlands and vital fisheries habitat
in the region. The Gulf also suffers from extensive hypoxia,
believed to be related to excessive nutrients flowing from the
Mississippi River and into its delta. In 1985 alone, 8,000
square kilometers of the Louisiana shelf were hypoxic, a state
which could severely affect the fisheries resources.

Important estuarine issues in this region can be summed up as
follows:

D - 5

Loss Of up to 25,000 acres/year of marsh habitat
.i.
due to oil and gas canals, dredging, salzne
intrusion, levee construction, development, and
subs.41-dence
Freshwater diversion leading to changes in sal4nity levels
of estuaries and population levels of 'Fisheries,
especially in Texas
- Large quantities of industrial and municipal waste water
discharges, petrochemicals, and pesticides, adversely
affecting water quality to the detriment of public health
- Barataria Estuaries complex in Louisiana, a
highly productive region for seafood, water
commerce, mineral extraction, and recreation
is becoming anoxic and polluted from expanded
urban and agricultural development
- Eutrophication and oxygen depletion (especially as a
result of a two-fold increase in nitrogen concentrations
from agricultural runoff into the Mississippi River) may
be connected to noxious blooms of "red tide" organisms and
other noxious phytoplankton that has toxic affects on
predators of seafood

D 6

S0UTHWEST REGION

Characterization

The Southwest region extends from the Mexican border to Mendo-
cino, California. The coast is chacteractized by uniformly up-
lifted, resistant rack. The largest estuary in the region, the
San Francisco Bay, formed when sections of the continent can-
taining former river valleys sank below sea level because of
active mountain building. With this geomorqphology, astuaries
are a relatively rare phenomenon along the entire west
coastline.

Estuarine-related fisheries that have had Iona standing regional-
importance include salmon, steelhead trout, striped bass, and
sturgeon. Marine mammals frequent the numerous open bays, and
harbor seals and sea lions use San Francisco Bay as hauling
grounds.

The beautiful estuaries and bays of the Southwest offer scenic
vistas of rugged cliffs and headlands with windswept trees above
a pounding surf. The beauty of San Francisco Bay and and of the
semi-tropical palm-fringed bays of Southern California, such as
Mission Bali and San Diego Bay, are highly valued.

Issues

This region is not without environmental problems. The San Fran-
cisco Bay area, for example, has lost nearly all of its wetlands
from diking and levee construction to Provide land far massive
agricultural development. irrigated agriculture presents one of
this estuary's greatest challenges - a redirection of 40-60 of
the freshwater flow resulting in a decline in water quality, dra-
matic alteration of fisheries resources and the ecosystem.

In San Francisco Bay, the most critical issues are:

- Industrial and municipal discharges and
agricultural drainage from the Sacramento and San
Joaquin
- Loss of wetlands due to diking and filling
- Radical changes in fish populations due to large
diversions in freshwater inflow
- Very high levels of toxic contaminants in shell-
fish
- Reduction of striped bass by 80%
- Accumulation of toxic contaminants in sediments
- Bioaccumulation and/or biomagnification of toxic
contaminants in the marine food web
- Altered benthic species distribution, including
kelp, from sewage and other offshore discharge
- Contamination by pathogens of coastal recreational
areas due to sewage, vessel discharges, and
runoff

D - 7

NORTHWEST AND ALASKA

Characterization

This region encompasses Oregon, Washington, and Alaska, and is
characterized by rugged, rocky outcroppings gradually shifting
to low coastal flats and marshes in Washington. The Columbia
River estuary and Puget Sound are the dominant estuarine systems
of the Northwest region.

In Alaska, 34,000 miles of tidal shoreline represent approx-
imately one-third of the total U.S. coastal shoreline. This
large area is characterized by glacier-fed fjords, large open
low relief estuaries, and hundreds of small bays and inlets.
The delta regions along the-Alaskan coast contain broad tidal
and freshwater marshes. The Yukon River Delta is comparable in
size and complexity to the Mississippi River Delta.

The fisheries are extremely important to the estuarine regions
of the Northwest Region and Alaska. In the Northwest, key spe-
cies include Pacific salmon, steelhead trout, shad, flounder,
crabs, and clams. In addition to these species, important
Alaskan fisheries include sablefish and scallops. Both regions
support abundant populations of marine mammals including harbor
porpoises, sea lions, and harbor seals. Both support habitat
for the endangered humpback whale. Alaska also supports other
mammals such as northern fur seals, sea otters, walruses, and
beluga whales.

Issues

The problems in the Northwest differ largely in magnitude from
those of Alaska. The Northwest area, as typified by Puget
Sound, has become increasingly industrialized and suffers often
from high concentrations of contaminants. These contaminants
are introduced from a large number of point sources; including
municipal treatment plants and industrial dischargers, such as
oil refineries, pulp and paper mills, aluminum and steel pro-
cessing plants, and chemical companies. Non-point sources from
both urban areas and logging and farming practices, supply sub-
stantial volumes of metals and fecal coliforms. Shellfish bed
closures due to bacterial contamination from runoff are rising
even in rural embayments in the Sound. The entire eastern
shore, where most of the population in the Puget Sound live, is
uncertifiable for shellfish harvest as a iesult of sewage treat-
ment plants, combined sewer overflows, and urban runoff. Major
problems facing Northwest estuaries include:

- Toxic concentrations in sediments
- Toxic bioaccumulation in food webs
- Bacterial contamination of shellfish

D - 8

Liver tumors and fin erosion in bottom fish,
such as English sole

In Alaska, population pressures have yet to exert comparable de-
gradation of estuarine waters and habitat. It is the resource
extraction industries such as fishing, oil and gas, logging, and
mining, that will continue to be the focus of estuarine manage-
ment concerns.

GREAT LAKES REGION

Characterization

The Great Lakes estuarine zone includes Lake Michigan and the
United States shore of Lakes Superior, Huron, Erie, Ontario, and
St. Clair. The Lakes occupy basins carved and deepened by Pleis-
tocene glaciers from pre-glacial erosional basins and valleys of
the St. Lawrence River system, and by erosion of sedimentary
rocks along structural axes. No true estuaries occur in the
Great Lakes, although their coastal shallows and marshes have
qualities common to estuaries. more importantly, its coastal
population rivals or exceeds in size any other region of the
United States. Additionally, the retention of contaminants is
far longer and more severe than ocean coastal areas because of
the absence of flushing tides and indirect access to the vast
sink provided by the oceans. The watershed of the lakes is
largely a plain with hundreds of small streams. Many of the
streams have glacial lakes and swamps in their courses. Large
areas of the northern part of the watershed around Lakes Super-
ior, Michigan, and Huron are forest, scrub, swamp, or bog. The
southern parts are mainly cultivated or urban.

The Great Lakes are of great value to waterfowl and other fish
and wildlife. The freshwater fishes include trout, bass, smelt,
salmon, whitefish, northern pike, walleye, alewife, alke her-
ring, yellow perch, and many others. Some of the native fishes,
including longjaw cisco, deepwater cisco, blackfin cisco, and
blue pike are endangered, and the lake sturgeon is close to ex-
tinction. The Lakes and their basin are migration stops for
many species of migratory birds of the central, Mississippi, and
Atlantic flyways. Many varieties of ducks and Canadian geese
use the Lakes. The marsh and upland, bay and river habitats
also are important for upland game birds, and small and big game
animals.

Issues

Areas of the southern regions of the Great Lakes are heavily pop-
ulated and industrialized with the accompanying discharge and
runoff problems. For example, combined sewer overflows and
storm drains in many cities deliver untreated sewage or indus-
trial wastes shunted away from Publicly-Owned Treatment works

D - 9

together with toxic urban runoff, directly into near coastal
waters whenever it rains. Combined Sewer Overflows (CSO's)
along the Rouge River in Detroit, Michigan produce a flow of
industrial waste equal in volume to the Rouge, which enters the
Detroit River and the Western end of Lake Erie during major
storm events. Phosphorus loads from these CSO's constitute the
third largest municipal load of nutrients to Lake Erie.

For the Great Lakes, atmospheric deposition is considered a sig-
nificant source of degradation. Studies show that a significant
portion of all loadings of metals to the Great Lakes are through
atmospheric deposition, with trace organisms believed to follow
the same path.

other activities that create problems are agricultural runoff,
land-fills, wetlands drain and fill, sediment dredging/dispo-
sition, and 61 hazardous waste sites that have the potential to
contribute contaminants to Lake Ontario.

-A summary of environmental quality problems includes:

- Loss of species habitat
- Microbial contamination of swimming waters
- Significant species changes observed in plankton,
benthos, and finfish
- Fishing closures, public health advisories due to PCBs,
pesticides and dioxins
- Annual anoxic episodes in Lake Erie and Green Bay
- Phytoplankton blooms in swimmable waters due to nutrient
loadings
- Closure of commercial fisheries and sport fishing
consumption advisories due to toxic contaminants

D - 10

3 6668 )0002 8292