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



                                   United States                    Office Of Water                 EPA 503/8-90-005
                                   Environmental Protection         (WH-556)                        September 1990
                                   Agency
   V'r 0111 E PA                   Saving Bays And Estuaries
                                                                 IF -
                                   A Primer For Establishing
                                   And Managing Estuary Programs
                                   Appendices G, H, And I




                                                                                        A       e






                                                                                          @11  :1  11( (r



                                                                                                                           r






                                                                                          r6r,





        QH7 6
        .S38
        1990




                                                                                                          Printed on Recycled Paper









                                                        qlnoS VEeZ
                                             --"S TV367203 VVOkJ
                                 e029=03 ;0 qU9JJ42VCtM 64                                            Appendix G

                                                  The Economics of Improved
                                                             Estuarine Water Quality:
                                                                          An NEP Manual for
                                                                          Measuring Benefits


                  This appendix of Saving Bays and Estuaries:           A Primer for
                  Establishina and Managing Estuary Projects presents a summary of
                  The Economics of Improved Estuarine Water Quality: An NEP
                  Manual for Measurina Benefits. The Primer, which describes the
                  National Estuary Program's origin, statutary provisions, and
                  approach, is designed for EPA's program and Regional offices,
                  coastal States, and other interested parties. For more information,
                  contact an EPA Regional office.

                                                                                             Introduction to The
                                                                                             Manual
                  Section 320 of the Clean Water Act provides for the development of
                  Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plans (CCMPs) for
                  estuaries of National significance. To ensure the greatest return on
                  resources spent, it is often necessary to document the economic
                  benefits associated with alternative management strategies.

                  The Economics of Improved Estuarine Water Ouality: An NEP
                  Manual for Measuring Benefits is designed to assist estuary
                  program managers and staff in evaluating the economic benefits of
                  various water pollution abatement options. The manual defines
                  economic benefit as the dollar value associated with incremental                            ta
                  improvements in the use, or potential use, of an estuary. The                               n
                  concepts used to measure these benefits are derived from                                    V
                  economic theory, according to which individuals acquire                                     Or
                                                                                                              n
                  satisfaction (or utility) by consuming goods and services. The                              0
                  manual explains the concept of economic benefit, describes how
                  pollution abatement projects generate such benefits, and how such
                  benefits can be measured.

                                                                                             Generating Economic
                                                                                             Benefits
                  The economic benefits of water pollution controls are produced in
                  stages. These stages, as shown in Figure 1, are interrelated, each
                  affecting the other. Reducing the quantity of effluents discharged                  9661      o 33,

                                                                                                                            G1








                                                                                                                                                                   pro&


                                                                                                               Water Pollution Controls





                                                                                                                 Effluent Reductions





                                                                                                            Water Quality Improvements




                                                                                                              Changeir       itic Habitat




                                                                                                     Behavioral Responses of Economic Agents




                                                                                              Value of Changes in Uses and Services of the Water Body



                                                                                              Recreational Uses                    Navigational Uses
                                                                                              Commercial Fishing Uses              Human Health Uses
                                                                                              Industrial Uses                      Aesthetic Uses
                                                                                              Irrigation Uses                      Option Value Uses
                                                                                              Municipal Water Supply Uses          Existence Value Uses


                                                                                Figure 1.          Causal Relationships and Economic Benefits


                                                                           into a water body improves water quality, which in turn can lead to
                                                                           changes in the aquatic habitat. Once the economic agents directly
                                                                           affected by the water body (e.g., recreationists, commercial
                                                                           fishermen, and homeowners) perceive these changes, they may
                                                                           alter the way in which they use the body of water. The measured
                                                                           value associated with changes in use or potential use represents
                                                                           the economic benefits of the project.

                                                                           The economic benefits created by water quality improvements can
                                                                           be grouped into two broad categories: user benefits and intrinsic
                                                                           benefits. User benefits are those benefits associated with the use
                                                                           of the resource and that affect industry, agriculture, the municipal
                                                                           water supply, commercial fishing, navigation, recreation, health,
                                                                           habitat, and aesthetics. These benefits can be measured by using
                                                                           commonly available market prices or can be inferred from the
                                                                           market prices.

                                                                           Intrinsic benefits are benefits associated with a resource that are
                                                                           not directly related to the use of that resource. Intrinsic benefits
                                                                           express an individual's subjective perception of improved well-
                                                                           being and can be personal or intergenerational, short term or long
                                                                           term.        The sources of benefits created by water quality
                                                                           improvements are categorized in Figure 2.



                   G2

















                                                                                                             Industry


                                                                                         Withdraws[          Agriculture


                                                                                                             Municipal Water Supply
                                                                          Direct
                                                                                                             Commercial Fishing


                                                                                         Instreant           Navigation                        Boating


                                                                                                             Recreation                        lishl.g
                                                     Us r                                                    Health                            Swimming
                                                     Benefits
                                                                                                             Consumptive Recreation
                                                                                                             (e.g., Duck Hunting)

                                                                                                             Agriculture
                                                                                           Habitat Based     (e.g., Better Grazing Area)
                                                                                                             Nonconsumptive Recreation
                                                                                                             (e.g., Wildlife Photography)
                                                                          Indirect                           Water Enhanced Recreation
                                                                                                             (e.g., Camping)


                                                                                           Aesthetic
                                                                                                             Property Values
                                                                                                             (Near the Water Body)
                                                                                                                                               Short Term
                                                                                                             Personal                          r
                                                                                           Option            F_                                I Long Term
                                                     Intrinsic                                               Intergenerational (Bequest)
                                                     Benefits
                                                     (Userand
                                                     Nonuser)                              Existence


                                           Figure 2.                   Sources of Benefits of Water Pollution
                                                                       Control



                                                                                                                                                                                            Evaluating Benefits
                                    The incremental economic benefits generated by a proposed
                                    pollution abatement project are evaluated by comparing the
                                    situation with the project to the situation without it. The annual
                                    value of the uses or potential uses of the water body with the
                                    project, minus the annual value without the project, represents the
                                    incremental annual economic benefits created by pollution controls.

                                    To evaluate pollution abatement projects, a distinction must be
                                    made between primary and secondary benefits. Primary benefits
                                    are the direct impacts of, or the increases in well-being resulting
                                    from, the proposed project. Secondary benefits are those benefits
                                    indirectly created by the project, either through the stimulative
                                    effect of additional activities generated by the project or through the
                                    demand-inducing effects of the expenditures required by the
                                    project.

                                    A major difficulty in estimating benefits is that benefit categories
                                    and estimation methods are sometimes related in awkward and
                                    overlapping ways. One technique may measure the joint benefits
                                    of more than one category, or it may not capture all the benefits




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          G3











                                                       accruing to that category. This introduces the possibility of double-
                                                       counting some of the benefits of water pollution control and not
                                                       fully counting others.

                                                       One way to avoid or reduce the possibility of double-counting is by
                                                       gathering anecdotal data, for example about boating use. Marina
                                                       operators have a good sense of who their customers are and what
                                                       recreational habits they have. Talking with marina staff will yield
                                                       anecdotal information on the split between boating and fishing, for
                                                       example. These data can then be used to estimate various benefits
                                                       more accurately.

                                                       Further, each situation that requires benefit estimation is unique:
                                                       different types of data and different assumptions will be required for
                                                       each. Moreover, each situation and selected methodology has its
                                                       own level of uncertainty. If extreme uncertainty exists, no single
                                                       method will yield reliable results. Instead, more than one model
                                                       should be used and the information obtained should be correlated.


                                                       Another fundamental problem in water quality economics is that
                                                       water is a common property resource (air, water, or another
                                                       resource that is essentially free or available to many users). Such
                                                       resources tend to be overused relative to some optimal level. To
                                                       understand this phenomenon, it is necessary to understand the
                                                       basic concepts of consumer surplus (demand curves or willingness
                                                       to pay) and producer surplus (supply curves).

                                                       The difference between what individuals actually pay and the
                                                       amount that they are willing to pay is the consumer surplus-the
                                                       conventional dollar measure of the satisfaction that individuals
                                                       derive from consuming a good or service, exclusive of what they
                                                       pay for it. Producer surplus is the measure of a change in the well-
                                                       being of any economically productive entity. The changes in
                                                       consumer and producer surplus provide the conceptual basis for
                                                       measuring economic benefits. The potential for numerous benefits
                                                       resulting from improvements in water quality is addressed in the
                                                       manual, and several examples are discussed. The document
                                                       closely examines two major benefit categories:             recreational
                                                       benefits and commercial fishing benefits.

                           Recreational
                                 Benef its
                                                       The recreational benefits of pollution abatement projects include
                                                       swimming, health, fishing, boating, and intrinsic benefits. The
                                                       manual provides detailed methods to evaluate these benefits. The
                                                       travel cost method, the contingent valuation survey method, or the
                                                       participation/unit-day valuation method can be used to calculate
                                                       swimming benefits.      In the travel cost method, the key to
                                                       calculating individual consumer surplus is to estimate the



              G4












                   demand for beach recreation.          Ordinary demand curves are
                   estimated by using price and quantity-demanded data. However,
                   since there is no charge for using most public beaches, travel costs
                   provide surrogate prices to estimate demand.

                   The essence of the travel cost method is that the combination of
                   the number of day trips to a site and the round-trip travel cost for
                   each recreationist permits an empirical estimate of the demand for
                   a recreation site. More distant consumers bear heavier travel and
                   related costs and usually will visit the site less frequently than those
                   who live closer, all else being equal. Since the travel cost method
                   is based on actual recreational visits, it is one of the most valuable
                   techniques for estimating consumer surplus.

                   An alternative method for determining the willingness to pay for
                   water pollution controls is the contingent valuation survey method.
                   This method differs from the travel cost method in that it attempts
                   to gather information directly about an individual's valuation of
                   nonmarket goods, such as changes in water quality, by creating a
                   hypothetical market through a survey questionnaire. An advantage
                   of this approach is that it can be designed to elicit intrinsic values.
                   However, considerable skill is required to design the survey.

                   The participation/unit-day valuation method relies on previously
                   estimated values of individual consumer surplus (or willingness to
                   pay) for an average day's recreation. By applying these values to
                   the estimated daily use of a beach, the dollar value for an increase
                   in the supply of recreational beach days can be approximated. The
                   advantages of this method are its simplicity and minimal data re-
                   quirements. The disadvantage is that it cannot be used to estimate
                   the aggregate, annual consumer surplus for the increased
                   attractiveness and safety of the beach.

                   Numerous potential health benefits are associated with water
                   pollution abatement projects. Only swimming-related health effects
                   associated with pathogens are discussed in the manual because
                   this is an area where adequate data and dose/response information
                   often exist. The method proposed in the manual to estimate
                   swimming-related health effects (1) defines the population at risk,
                   (2) applies a dose/response relationship to determine the likely
                   incidence of gastroenteritis under current water quality conditions
                   (without the pollution abatement project) and under the improved
                   conditions (with the pollution abatement project), and (3) values the
                   reduction in swimming-related illnesses.

                   To analyze the demand for various fishing activities, the manual
                   recommends treating the recreationist's decision as a sequence of
                   three choices. First, the person chooses whether to go fishing.
                   Second, the person selects the types of fishing (surf, beach, small
                   boat, pier, etc.) in which to participate. Third, the person chooses



                                                                                                                                  G5











                                                          the preferred level of participation. Each stage of this decision
                                                          process may be influenced by a variety of economic and
                                                          environmental factors.

                                                          To determine the economic benefit of a proposed action affecting
                                                          recreational fishing, it is necessary to follow a four-step process:
                                                          (1) define the affected fishing habitat, (2) determine how physical
                                                          conditions affect recreational quality and quantity, (3) estimate the
                                                          baseline recreational activity and value of recreational fishing, and
                                                          (4) estimate changes in recreational activity and economic value.

                                                          Occasionally, gross fishing expenditures are used as a measure of
                                                          the economic value of recreational fishing. While expenditures are
                                                          prima facie evidence that recreationists place value on fishing, the
                                                          expenditures on such recreational trips are not a useful estimate of
                                                          that value. Gross expenditures represent a cost that detracts from
                                                          the net economic value of the recreational experience. Many of the
                                                          gross expenditures are not directly related to fishing. Further,
                                                          striped bass fishermen, for example, might spend less per fishing
                                                          trip in 1986 than in 1981 because of failing fuel prices. This,
                                                          however, is not evidence that striped bass fishing has fallen in
                                                          value.


                                                          Changes in recreational boating most likely will result from the
                                                          increased use of a body of water by boat owners. The manual
                                                          describes a two-step procedure to predict recreational boating
                                                          benefits:    (1) estimating the change in recreational boating
                                                          participation and (2) determining the value of that change.

                                                          A contingent valuation approach is recommended to measure the
                                                          intrinsic benefits of water quality improvements. Intrinsic benefits
                                                          are all the benefits associated with a resource that are not directly
                                                          related to the current use of that resource. Intrinsic benefits can be
                                                          categorized as the sum of option (bequest) value and existence
                                                          value. Option value is the amount of money that individuals are
                                                          wiling to pay to ensure access to a resource (or a level of
                                                          environmental quality) in the future, regardless of whether the
                                                          individual is a current user. Existence value is an individual's
                                                          willingness to pay for knowing that the resource exists, independent
                                                          of any anticipated use.

               Commercial Fishing
                                   Benefits
                                                          Estuaries provide spawning and nursery habitats for commercially
                                                          valuable fish. Water quality improvements can increase these
                                                          commercial fish stocks, resulting in expansion of the fishing
                                                          industry. The economic benefits associated with this expansion
                                                          can be determined by comparing the commercial fishing market
                                                          under current water quality conditions with the market that could



              GIS











                  develop if pollutant stresses were reduced or eliminated. The
                  manual focuses on evaluating the benefit of pollution abatement
                  programs on shellfishing.

                  Shellfishing may be totally restricted by states in areas where
                  pollution levels exceed health standards. This can result in major
                  revenue losses for the State's shelifishing industry. In areas that
                  border the closed beds, firms may be required to keep the
                  harvested shellfish in decontamination tanks for several days after
                  harvesting, which increases production costs.

                  Water pollution controls have resulted in the reopening of shellfish
                  beds in a number of states. In some cases, pollution controls may
                  not reverse shellfish contamination sufficiently to reopen the beds.
                  Consequently, any empirical estimate of these benefits must
                  include adequate justification that the proposed controls would, in
                  fact, lead to the reopening of the shellfish beds. The manual
                  defines the economic benefits of reopening the beds for four
                  different scenarios.


                                                                                              Conclusion
                  Because there are numerous and subtle factors to consider when
                  estimating the benefits of pollution abatement, the manual
                  describes types of analyses that can be made rather than dictating
                  specific methodologies. To assist further in planning the best
                  approach to measuring benefits, a list of technical publications that
                  address industrial point-source effluent guidelines, limitations, and
                  standards is provided.


























                                                                                                                             G7







                                                                                                         Appendix H



                                                                                    Living, Resources
                                                                                                  Appendices



                    A prime measure of the health of an estuary is the condition of its
                    living resources. A decline in or impairment of living resources
                    usually points to an underlying problem. The cause might be loss
                    of habitat, poor water quality, overharvesting, or disease. The
                    decline might also be the result of natural variability. The cause
                    notwithstanding, it is essential that an estuary's Comprehensive
                    Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP) include, as integral
                    components, living-resources management and habitat-prutection
                    elements.


                    These appendices provide useful information to be used in
                    incorporating    living-resources   management       strategies    and
                    techniques into CCMPs.

                            ï¿½  Appendix H1 includes case studies of three successful
                               management programs for living resources.               The
                               management programs chosen address selected aspects
                               of shellfish management, waterfowl management, and
                               finfish management.
                             ï¿½ Appendix H2 is a catalog of many Federal authorities
                               and programs related to estuary living-resources
                               management. It is a useful key in the support of living-
                               resources management and habitat-protection goals and
                               objectives of the National Estuary Program conferences.


                    Together, the two appendices provide an overview of some
                    techniques and mechanisms available to estuary managers for the
                    management of estuarine living resources.







                                                                                                   Case Study 1




                                                                                Interstate Fishery
                                                                                            Management


                                                                                             Framework
                                                                                             Amendment of the
                                                                                             Salmon Fishery
                                                                                             Management Plan
                                                                                             for the Coasts of
                                                                                             Washington, Oregon,
                                                                                             and California


                   Estuaries serve as nurseries and spawning routes for important
                   species of marine and anadromous fish whose commercial and
                   recreational value reaches hundreds of millions of dollars per year.
                   Many of these species, such as salmon, must be managed to
                   ensure viability. Local management is difficult because salmon
                   species and populations cross many jurisdictions. To provide an
                   institutional framework for dealing with fisheries issues, Congress
                   has established eight regional councils whose membership includes
                   appropriate Federal and State officials, representatives of relevant
                   Indian Nations, and fishery-conservation groups. These councils
                   are responsible for developing, monitoring, and revising
                   management plans for ocean fisheries operating from 3 to 200 nmi
                   offshore.


                   This case study presents a fishery management plan for
                   commercial and recreational salmon fishing off the coasts of
                   California, Oregon, and Washington. The plan shows how a
                   geographically wide-ranging species can be managed cooperatively
                   among different jurisdictions while still addressing local fishery
                   concerns.









        Management Strategies

                                                       The Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC) recognized
                                                       shortly after its establishment in 1976 that the steady decline in
                                                       salmon stocks was due to conflicting and inconsistent management
                                                       decisions among the States of California, Oregon, Idaho, and
                                                       Washington. In response, the PFMC has developed an amendment
                                                       to the current fishery management plan           (FMP) structured to
                                                       respond quickly to changing harvest and habitat conditions in the
                                                       salmon fishery. I

                                                       Issues addressed by the plan include

                                                          ï¿½   Determining harvest rates that are consistent with the needs
                                                              of   population    replacement,     treaty   obligations,    and
                                                              maintenance of commercial and recreational fisheries, yet still
                                                              achieve conservation goals

                                                          ï¿½   Minimizing salmon mortality due to catch/release sportfishing
                                                              and habitat degradation

                                                          ï¿½   Coordinating agencies and interests representing member
                                                              States, countries, Indian Nations, according to provisions in
                                                              the United States/Canada Salmon Treaty to ensure fair,
                                                              consistent management decisions

                                                          ï¿½   Restoring or replacing natural habitat, including achieving
                                                              water quality and quantity suitable for salmon, and
                                                              maintaining access for migration, spawning, and rearing.

                                                       To resolve these issues, the PFMC depends on up-to-date
                                                       biological data and advice from its advisory committees. (See
                                                       Figure H1-1.)

                                                       Actual management is based on boundary zones determined by
                                                       where along the coasts the spawning stock will return, although the
                                                       specifics of the zones may change as new data on salmon stocks
                                                       become available. Each boundary zone is managed to meet the






                                                        Under original requirements of the PFMC authorizing legislation,
                                                       any changes to fishery management plans were subject to lengthy
                                                       and complex amendment procedures. These could add as many
                                                       as 9 months to implementation of the plan revisions. In 1984,
                                                       PFMC developed a comprehensive amendment to cover future plan
                                                       adjustments quickly and with flexibility. This is the Framework
                                                       Amendment of the Salmon Fishery Management Plan for the
                                                       Coasts of Washington, Oregon, and California.


             H1-2

































                      SCIENTIFIC AND
                      STATISTICAL Ci ' EE                           TECHNICAL T







                       ADVISORY SUBPANFI                            SELECT GROUPS






                                     PACIFIC FISHERIES MANAGE14ENT COUNCIL
                                            Federal Representatives
                                            State Representatives
                                       Private Citizen Representatives

                                                       A
                                                       I
                                                       v

                                                  ENFORCEMENT
                                                     NMFS
                                                     USCG
                                                State Personnel



                  The PFMC consists of 13 voting members: the Regional Director of
                  the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), four chief fishery
                  officials, one each from Washington, Oregon, California, and
                  Idaho, and eight private citizens who are familiar with fishery
                  conservation, management, and harvest in the PFMC area. These
                  citizens are appointed by the Secretary of Commerce from lists
                  submitted by each member State governor. Nonvoting members
                  include representatives from the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), the
                  U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and
                  the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Decisions are enforced
                  by the NMFS, the USCG, and the appropriate State enforcement
                  personnel.    These agencies also consult with the PFMC on
                  regulatory changes and enforcement practices.           The State
                  enforcement personnel are crossdeputized and have the authority
                  to enforce regulations from 0 to 200 nmi offshore.


                  Figure HI-1.    Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC)
                                  Administrative Organization


                                                                                                                       1-11-3











                                                      goals of the overall management plan, but may also be managed
                                                      to achieve local goals developed to satisfy regulatory needs or
                                                      other special circumstances, such as treaties with specific Indian
                                                      Nations or the United States/Canada Salmon Treaty.               Each
                                                      boundary zone has a harvest quota, based on a number of factors,
                                                      including

                                                         ï¿½ Age of uncaught fish (year-class escapement levels)

                                                         ï¿½  Catch levels of previous years

                                                         ï¿½  Assessment of two-year- and three-year-old fish populations

                                                         ï¿½  Age distribution from prior years

                                                         ï¿½  Environmental conditions


                                                         ï¿½  Hatchery production levels.

                                                      The Washington Department of Fisheries (WDF)/National Bureau of
                                                      Standards Regulation Analysis Model (Figure 1-11-2) has been
                                                      developed to apply these factors to track the fishery population
                                                      throughout the entire salmon life cycle. It and similar models
                                                      provide a means to rapidly adjust fishing efforts, based on the most
                                                      recent information, including seasonal and long-term data.

                                                      Regulatory adjustments can be based on daily telephone
                                                      interviews, surveys of boat landing areas, aerial surveys, analysis of
                                                      commercial sales transactions, analysis of fish scales, and
                                                      recovered fish tags. Long-term and annual data are also collected
                                                      from sources such as commercial fishing log books submitted to
                                                      the State; punch cards completed by recreational fishermen to
                                                      identify the species, size, location, and catch date of salmon; and
                                                      the records of salmon processors, and public and private
                                                      hatcheries.


                                                      Other methods for controlling the fishery are licensing, setting daily
                                                      catch and size limits for recreational fisherman, limiting commercial
                                                      and recreational fishing seasons, and restricting fishing gear.

                                 Results

                                                      The FMPs and the Framework Amendment developed by the PFMC
                                                      have promoted proactive management of salmon stocks. Some of
                                                      the key steps in improving fisheries administration have included

                                                         ï¿½ Basing management on geographic stock areas rather than
                                                            on political boundaries

                                                         ï¿½ Adjusting seasonal fishing efforts, based on the most recent
                                                            short- and long-term data available


             1-11-4















                                 HISTORICAL RASE-PERIOD DATA INPUT
                                 I Stock catch by time and area
                                 I Maturity proportion&                                                  Database on biology and
                                 I Population growth and fishery length/woight                           populotionof salmon
                                   Natural mortality
                                   Fishery characteristics, e.g., seasons,
                                   size limits, etc.




                                 MODEL CALIBRATION PHASE
                                 I Backcalculate initial stock population size                           Refines database
                                   at recruitment                                                        information with
                                   Compute saturation, fishing, and induced                              more recent data
                                   mortality rates



                                                       Independent preseason abundance forecasts for
                                                       individual stocks based upon jack/adult           Predicts juvenile/
                                                       relationships, average juvenile/adult hatchery    adult ratios
                                                       survival, etc., collected by WDF



                                 Adjust Model Stock Sizes to Preseason Abundance Forecasts
                                 I Compute model recruit scale factors


                                                                                                         Reflects regulatory
                                                       Historical catch and effort analysis by           and exploitation
                                                       timi/arta/fishery to determine anticipated        rates of Canada
                                                       effort (used to adjust model fishing rates)       and other States


                                 ADLLT EQUIVALENT SIMULATION RUN                                         Estimates of salmon
                                 I Estimate adult terminal run sizes in absence of prior                 population sizes,
                                   interceptions by fisheries subject to treaty-sharing                  excluding treaty
                                   obligations, given anticipated regulations for                        caught fish
                                   noncounting fisheries
                                               i

                                 COMPUTE TREATY AND LOCATION REQUIREMENTS                                Determines treaty
                                 I Subtract spawning escapement goals from adult                         and nontreaty
                                   equivalent run sizes and divi4s by 2                                  allocations
                                               i

                                 REGULATION SIMULATION ANALYSIS             Meet stock a
                                 I Test various regulatory options               No
                                                                A
                                                                L

                                 STOCK ESCAPEMENT OBJECTIVES                              Viable regulatory
                                 (run size leaving ocean fisheries)                       options
                                 I Spawning escapement goals
                                 I Treaty allocation requirements
                                 I Inside non-Indian fishing opportunity



                             Figure W-2.               Washington Department of Fisheries/ National
                                                       Bureau of Standards Regulation Analysis Model



                                     ï¿½       Considering important local needs, such as treaties with
                                             Indian Nations, in developing harvest quotas

                                     ï¿½       Provisions to allow rapid in-season adjustments to
                                             fishing effort

                                     ï¿½       Including affected parties in the decision-making
                                             process.
                                                                                         ca@goa Is?
                                                                i one =NoYe-s
                                                               @A











                                                      The FMP has provided an extremely helpful vehicle for responding
                                                      to fluctuating salmon populations. For example, salmon landings                           0
                                                      north of Cape Falcon, Oregon, have remained at approximately
                                                      85% of the annual quotas since 1984. This stability was accom-
                                                      plished because of the FMP's ability to incorporate the most recent
                                                      harvest and distribution data; in any given year, therefore, quotas
                                                      may have ranged from as little as 9% to as much as 68% of the
                                                      previous year's quota.

                                                      These results confirm the need for timely, high-quality data in
                                                      making effective management decisions. Resource agencies must
                                                      be able to estimate conditions such as stock size, reproductive
                                                      capability, and juvenile escapement levels. The PFMC is specifi-
                                                      cally working to improve abilities to assess natural production of
                                                      salmon species as well as artificial propagation techniques.

                              Summary

                                                      Many aspects of Framework Amendment are applicable to National
                                                      Estuary Program (NEP) Comprehensive Conservation and Manage-
                                                      ment Plans (CCMP). Management by stock areas instead of by
                                                      political boundaries more accurately addresses the biological distri-
                                                      bution of species, and can be especially important for anadromous
                                                      and migratory species that inhabit several regulatory and jurisdic-
                                                      tional areas. The flexibility to adjust goals and objectives is another
                                                      positive component of PFMC planning that could be valuable to
                                                      NEPs, as is the use of both short- and long-term data. The Frame-
                                                      work Amendment has greatly reduced administrative costs, effort,
                                                      and wasteful associated paperwork. The Framework Amendment
                                                      permits changes in management strategies without issuing Sup-
                                                      plemental Environmental Impact Statements, the Regulatory Flexi-
                                                      bility Act (RFA), and Regulatory Impact Reviews (required by RFA
                                                      and Executive Order 12291). However, these requirements must be
                                                      met whenever major changes to the FMP Framework Amendment
                                                      are needed. Finally, the PFMC has also learned how to consider
                                                      the needs of user groups and resource managers in developing
                                                      FMPs. Other fishery management plans have been implemented
                                                      throughout the United States for species, including Atlantic mack-
                                                      erel, surf clams and quahogs, gulf shrimp, and groundfish.

                                                      For Additional Information


                                                          Pacific Fishery Management Council
                                                          Metro Center, #420
                                                          200 S.W. First Avenue
                                                          Portland, OR 97201
                                                          (503) 326-6352







                                                                                                       Case Study 2



                                                                                                   Cooperative
                                                                    Resource Management


                                                                                                 Puget Sound
                                                                                                 Geoduck Clam
                                                                                                 Fishery Management
                                                                                                 Plan


                     Geoduck clams, the largest burrowing clam in the world, range
                     from California to Alaska, with the largest populations being found
                     in Puget Sound. Originally a recreational fishery, the geoduck
                     fishery has become an important estuarine resource to the State of
                     Washington, providing revenue opportunities and serving as an
                     accurate indicator of water and habitat quality. This case study
                     presents a multiagency approach to shellfish management that
                     incorporates State regulatory, technical, and financial incentives to
                     ensure sustainable harvests.

                                                                                                 Management
                                                                                                 Strategies

                     Since the 1960s, geoduck clams have been a valuable commercial
                     fishery in Puget Sound. Because harvested populations may take
                     as many as 60 years to regenerate naturally, the State of
                     Washington has carefully managed the geoduck fishery to sustain
                     the resource and avoid population depletion.

                     The Puget Sound Geoduck Clam Fishery Management Plan is
                     comanaged by the Washington Department of Fisheries (WDF) and
                     Department of Natural Resources (DNR), with input from the
                     Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS). The objectives
                     of the plan are to

                                Protect the geoduck resource, associated organisms,
                                and the nearby marine environment

                                Provide a stable fishery based on optimum sustainable
                                yield




                                                                                                                               H1-7












                                                            Minimize social conflicts resulting from biological changes in
                                                            the clam industry.

                                                     To encourage interagency cooperation and long-term commitment,
                                                     WDF and DNR share in the revenue derived from clam bed leases,
                                                     as well as in the responsibility for implementing and enforcing the
                                                     plan.

                                                     In very general terms, WDF carries out licensing, regulatory, and
                                                     monitoring activities, whereas DNR values the resource and man-
                                                     ages the leasing of clam beds. Both -agencies are involved in
                                                     designating and marking geoduck harvest areas (tracts) and
                                                     enforcing policy. (See Table 1-11-1.)

                                                     The WDF maintains a list of all geoduck clam beds suitable for
                                                     commercial harvesting, based on estimates of optimum and maxi-
                                                     mum sustainable yields for given beds. Each site must meet spe-
                                                     cific legal, biological, and physical criteria for harvesting.
                                                     Harvesting is controlled by limiting the number of commercial
                                                     licenses and restricting types of harvesting gear. (See Table H 1 -2.)
                                                     Additionally, all harvesting must meet criteria stipulated under the
                                                     State Environmental Policy Act, including number of divers, hours
                                                     of operation, noise levels, and lease periods. WDF also enforces
                                                     regulations established under the geoduck plan; conducts studies
                                                     on geoduck biology, ecology, and population dynamics; and oper-
                                                     ates a geoduck hatchery.

                                                     The DNR is responsible for protecting the State's interest in State-
                                                     owned aquatic lands and for marking tracts with posts, buoys, and
                                                     electronic equipment. The deepwater boundary is delineated at 60
                                                     ft for the safety of divers and to protect deeper clam stocks. Other
                                                     responsibilities of the DNR include appraising the resource value
                                                     and managing the auction and lease of appropriate tracts.

                                                     Site designation and leasing is an open public process. All appro-
                                                     priate governmental officials and relevant Indian Nations are
                                                     involved in the review of potential lease sites, which are physically
                                                     surveyed by divers for their suitability.- No tracts are advertised for
                                                     lease auction until all concerns or environmental conflicts have
                                                     been satisfied at public hearings. In addition, the State strictly
                                                     enforces regulations covering permissible harvesting technologies
                                                     and other operating procedures. The unique aspect of this pro-
                                                     gram is that the lead State agencies receive a portion of the reve-
                                                     nue generated by the leases for programs such as hatcheries and
                                                     enforcement. The remainder of the collected funds are returned to
                                                     the State General Fund.
















                     Table H1-1. State Agency Responsibilities



                   Washington Department of Fisheries
                        Perform site surveys
                        Assess sustainable yield
                        Assess level of effort
                        Set seasons and gear
                        Monitor
                        License
                        Operate hatchery

                   Department of Natural Resources
                        Value resources
                        Auction/lease harvest tracts

                   Washington Department of Fisheries and
                   Department of Natural Resources
                        Designate tracts
                        Mark areas
                        Enforce policy

                   Department of Health and Social Services
                        Enforce shellfish sanitation standards
                        Lower potential pollution risks

                   Local Governments
                        Enforce Shoreline Management Act
























                                                                                                                    H1-9














                                                    Table H1-2.     Harvest Criteria for Tract Designation, Maintenance,
                                                                    and Harvest




                                                      ï¿½ The tract must be more than 200 yd from shore and between
                                                         18 and 60 ft deep.

                                                      ï¿½  The abundance and quality of the clams must be enough to
                                                         support a commercial harvest.

                                                      ï¿½  The substrate must be capable of permitting the use of water-
                                                         jet harvest equipment without causing significant environmen-
                                                         tal damage.

                                                      ï¿½  The tract must be free from pollution and be certified by DSHS.

                                                      ï¿½  All spatial or environmental conflicts pertaining to the tract
                                                         must be resolved prior to any harvest period.

                                                      ï¿½  There may be no long-term or adverse impacts on the sur-
                                                         rounding environment or other important habitats by the fish-
                                                         ing operation.

                                                      ï¿½  The harvest areas within the tract must be rotated and, if pos-
                                                         sible, clustered in a single discrete area to lessen the environ-
                                                         mental impact on any one area and to make enforcement
                                                         easier.


                                                      ï¿½  The harvest areas should have a variety of qualities and types
                                                         of geoducks available for harvest to meet current market
                                                         needs.


                                                      ï¿½  All landing areas for the tract must be located where inter-
                                                         ference with public use facilities will be minimal, and
                                                         convenient for enforcement.


                                                      ï¿½  The tract must be surveyed at the end of the harvest season to
                                                         assess the effect of the harvest, compliance with regulations,
                                                         and the suitability for reharvest.

                                                      ï¿½  Once a tract has been harvested, it cannot be rescheduled for
                                                         harvest for at least 30-50 years.










           Hl-10











                                                                                                 Results

                     A preliminary study by WDF has concluded that, through natural
                     repopulation, a properly harvested area may be successfully
                     reharvested as soon as 10 years after the first harvest. In addition,
                     WIDF's enhanced hatchery techniques produce 30 million seed
                     clams, of which 10% can be expected to reach harvestable size
                     within 4 to 10 years. Overall, the WDF estimates the maximum
                     sustainable yield at 2% of the harvestable stock.

                     Nevertheless, more information is needed. Geoduck clams have a
                     very slow recruitment rate, and natural repopulation to preharvest
                     levels may take as few as 10 and as many as 60 years. The State
                     wants to improve this time frame. In addition, geoducks are filter
                     feeders that can accumulate pathogenic bacteria, viruses, and
                     other toxics. As a precautionary measure, the IDSHS has closed
                     large portions of Puget Sound to harvesting. The WIDF and DNR
                     are currently studying the biology, population dynamics, and new
                     management techniques to protect the stock.           They are also
                     studying methods to reduce the input of toxics that pose a risk to
                     the geoduck fishery and the Puget Sound as a whole.

                                                                                                 Summary

                     The success of the geoduck management plan has depended on a
                     steady supply of high- quality data on the fishery and on the
                     cooperation of involved agencies. Together, the WIDIF and DNR
                     collect data, determine harvests, enforce regulations, and maintain
                     communication among all affected parties. The WIDF and IDNR are
                     also taking the initiative for the ensuring a stable clam fishery by
                     conducting basic research and developing a hatchery/spawning
                     program.

                     This approach is adaptable to other shellfisheries, and several
                     States with NEP sites have undertaken shellfish-tract management
                     programs. The geoduck model of interagency cooperation is also
                     helpful for managing interstate estuaries where different policies
                     and regulations can lead to conflict.

                     Management techniques that are kept uncomplicated and easy to
                     assess appear to have the highest likelihood of success. The
                     geoduck management plan, for example, has stressed

                        ï¿½ Constant data collection, surveying, and analysis

                        ï¿½ Comprehensive site selection process

                        ï¿½ Rotation of leased harvest areas






                                                                                                                             H1-11












                                                  ï¿½ Limited entry licensing

                                                  ï¿½ Strict enforcement of regulations.

                                                Its overall success can be attributed to efficient management,
                                                cooperation among different agencies and user groups, and the
                                                prospect of a steady revenue source for the regulatory participants.


                                                For Additional Information

                                                  Department of Natural Resources
                                                  Division of Aquatic Lands
                                                  Research and Development Center, EX-12
                                                  Olympia, WA 98504
                                                  (206) 586-0208
                                                  Department of Fisheries
                                                  115 General Administration Building
                                                  Olympia, WA 98504
                                                  (206) 545-6756







































          1-11-12







                                                                                                           Case Study 3




                                                                          Geographic Targeting
                                                                                       For Conservation


                                                                                                     Gulf Coast Joint
                                                                                                     Venture Plan of the
                                                                                                     North American
                                                                                                     Waterfowl Manage-
                                                                                                     ment Plan


                      Waterfowl are excellent indicators of the environmental health of
                      wetlands ecosystems. Changes in waterfowl population and diver-
                      sity represent changes in the quality of their habitat. Over the past
                      200 years, 50% of the wetlands available to waterfowl in North
                      America have been lost due to the impact of human activities such
                      as dredging, filling, agriculture, and development. Toxic contamina-
                      tion, disease, and natural and introduced predators are also con-
                      tributing to the decline of waterfowl in North America.

                      The United States and Canada have been managing migratory
                      species for most of this century.       More recently, treaties with
                      Mexico and other countries have strengthened the foundation of
                      international cooperation. Despite these tools, however, habitat
                      alterations by agriculture, urbanization, and industrial activities have
                      continued to reduce the distribution and abundance of many migra-
                      tory species. This case study presents a wetlands restoration plan
                      enacted by the United States and Canada in 1986 to slow and
                      reverse the decline of native waterfowl species.

                                                                                                     Management Strategies

                      The North American Waterfowl Management             Plan (NAWMP) is
                      administered through six Joint Ventures, which organizationally may
                      cross international, Province, State, or local jurisdictional boun-
                      daries. Each Joint Venture brings together the appropriate govern-
                      mental, private, and environmental interests to pool resources and
                      information. The goal of the NAWMP is to restore waterfowl popul-
                      ations to levels that were common throughout the 1970s. This goal          I
                                                                                                                                  Hl-13












                                                     is to be obtained through protection, enhancement, restoration, and
                                                     development of wetland habitat by coordinating management
                                                     activities on a wide scale.


                                                     The Gulf Coast Joint Venture (GCJV) encompasses the coastal
                                                     zones of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama and the coa-
                                                     stal plains of Texas and Louisiana. The GCJV is administered
                                                     through the Office of the Coordinator (Figure 1-111-3), which is respo-
                                                     nsible for disseminating information, coordinating activities, and
                                                     facilitating project implementation. To allow site-specific manage-
                                                     ment based on local wetlands characteristics and land uses, the
                                                     GCJV includes six geographic Initiative Areas: Mobile Bay, Coastal
                                                     Mississippi Wetlands, Mississippi River Coastal Wetlands, Chenier
                                                     Plain, Texas Mid-Coast, and Laguna Madre. Included in these
                                                     wetlands habitats are coastal wetlands, barrier islands, estuarine
                                                     bays, sounds, lakes and ponds, and wetlands in adjacent agricul-
                                                     tural or rangeland areas.

                                                     Key management actions have focused on habitat acquisition,
                                                     conservation, and restoration. Some of the actions undertaken
                                                     include


                                                       ï¿½ Introduction of silviculture programs on private lands

                                                       ï¿½  Use of dredged material to prevent coastal erosion and protect
                                                          saltmarsh areas


                                                       ï¿½  Cooperation among private organizations, businesses, and
                                                          landowners to restore, maintain, and create waterfowl habitats

                                                       ï¿½  Leverage of other Federal programs to induce landowners to
                                                          restore, maintain, and create waterfowl habitats.

                             Mobile Bay
                          Initiative Area

                                                     The management focus of the Mobile Bay Initiative Area is a com-
                                                     bination of wildlife, silviculture, and water-resource development
                                                     programs. A private-lands silviculture program has been developed
                                                     to minimize damage to waterfowl nesting and wintering habitat on
                                                     270,000 acres of swamp and bottomland hardwoods. The program
                                                     includes


                                                       ï¿½ Retaining buffer strips adjacent to streams that provide food
                                                          sources for waterfowl and brood habitat for wood ducks


                                                       ï¿½ Managing for habitat diversity through staggered cutting areas
                                                          and spread-out cuts






            HI-14























                                                  Implementation     PROJECT COORDINATOR        Development
                                                                         Coordinator
                                                                        Asst Coordinator




                                  STEERING COMMITTEE                                                        IPLANNING COMMITTEE
                                   FWS - Region 2                                                           Executive Director
                                   FWS - Region 4                                                           Central Flyway Rep
                                   Texas (TPWD)                                                             Miss. Flyway Rep
                                   Louisiana (LDWF)
                                   Mississippi (MDWC)
                                   Alabama (ADCNR)
                                   Ducks Unlimited                 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TEAM
                                   Private Sector
                                                        :VALUATION & RESE@RqH                COMMUNICATIONS

                                                                        INITIAT VE AREAS



                                Laguna Madre

                                                  ver Coastal Wetlands                         Coastal MissisAppi Wetlandsi

                                                                        F, 'NITIATIVE TEAMS]


                             Figure 1-11-3. Gulf Coast Joint Venture (GCJV) Administrative
                                                  Organization


                                  ï¿½  Retaining dead snag trees in areas slated for cutting

                                  ï¿½  Using aerial operations to remove cut trees and reduce
                                     ground disturbances

                                  ï¿½  Operating a wood duck nesting box program with the cooper-
                                     ation of State/Federal governments, private organizations, and
                                     landowners.


                             An agreement with a large paper manufacturing and processing
                             corporation has enabled the advancement of this program as has a
                             land-acquisition action used to increase the amount of waterfowl
                             habitat. Through a provision in the Water Resources Development
                             Act of 1986, the Secretary of the Army was authorized to acquire
                             88,000 acres of wildlife habitat in Mississippi and Alabama to com-
                             pensate for the loss of habitat resulting from the construction of the
                             Tennessee - Tombigee Waterway.
                                                             7
                                                             tTION & =RESEARCH              :IE
                                7Mi ff@ilsippi Ri













                                                                                                                                                                                  HI-15










                 Coastal Mississippi
           Wetlands Initiative Area


                                                   Habitat  protection, acquisition, enhancement, restoration, and
                                                   development are the primary focus of this Initiative Area. The U.S.
                                                   Army Corps of Engineers (COE) plans to use dredged material to
                                                   prevent both coastal erosion and the further loss and degradation
                                                   of waterfowl habitat on the Grand Batture Island Chain. This COE
                                                   project will use material dredged from the widening of Pascagoula
                                                   Harbor to reconstruct the eroded Grand Batture Island Chain. This
                                                   reconstruction will help to protect the saltmarsh behind the island
                                                   from wave erosion. In addition, the Mississippi Department of
                                                   Wildlife, Fisheries, and Parks, and the USFWS will conduct rotation
                                                   al burning, create potholes, and introduce freshwater to create and
                                                   maintain waterfowl habitat. - A silviculture management plan on
                                                   using private timber company lands ha's also been developed to
                                                   improve waterfowl habitat.

                    Mississippi River
                   Coastal Wetlands
                        Initiative Area


                                                   This Initiative Area stresses the use of waterfowl habitat conserva-
                                                   tion measures and land- acquisition mechanisms. A private-lands
                                                   restoration program is in place with an accelerated technical assis-
                                                   tance program aimed at preserving, restoring, and/or enhancing the
                                                   waterfowl habitat. Included is the restoration of 35,000 acres of
                                                   drained wetlands that are currently being.us,ed for grazing and -crop
                                                   production. Through the use of existing levees and pumps, these
                                                   farm areas may be restored to productive waterfowl brood areas by
                                                   flooding them on a seasonal basis. Annual payments and cost-
                                                   sharing  'incentives are provided by the Conservation Reserve
                                                   Program (CRP), administered by the'U.S. Department of Agricul-
                                                   ture. Under 10-year contracts, the CRP pays eligible landowners to
                                                   take highly erodible lands and farmed wetlands out of production,
                                                   establish vegetative cover, and install water control structures that
                                                   can restore shallow flooding. Ducks Unlimited, Inc., a private or-
                                                   ganization, is also helping to acquire about 4000 private acres and
                                                   enhance waterfowl habitat on 25,000 acres of public land. A num-
                                                   ber of public works projects will also reduce the loss of waterfowl
                                                   habitats and restore wetlands.


                         Chenier Plain
                        Initiative Area


                                                   Land acquisition and habitat restoration and enhancement are the
                                                   primary measures of waterfowl management in this Initiative Area.
                                                   The goal is to eventually acquire 109,000 acres of high-value water-
                                                   fowl habitat and to restore drained wetland areas. Landowners are




           Hl-16












                    eligible for payments to restore drained wetlands through the U.S.
                    Department of Agriculture Water Bank Program and possibly by
                    the implementation of a wetland-restoration easement program.

                    Other projects and programs in this Initiative Area include funding
                    through the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the USFWS to
                    help landowners to flood drained wetlands during the winter to
                    create waterfowl feeding areas. Public works projects by the
                    COE, State, and local governments, to help to reduce saltwater
                    intrusion are to be expanded and accelerated. Ducks Unlimited,
                    Inc., will also help to increase the value of 100,000 acres of water-
                    fowl habitat through the Matching Aid to Restore States' Habitat
                    (MARSH) Program. This program contributes funds, on a 50/50
                    matching basis, to State wildlife agencies, for acquisition and
                    development of waterfowl habitat projects.

                                                                                                 Texas Mid-Coast
                                                                                                 Initiative Area


                    The greatest potential for improved waterfowl management in this
                    Initiative Area is on privately owned wetlands and agricultural lands.
                    A planned private-wetlands restoration project includes

                       ï¿½ Supplying technical assistance to landowners

                       ï¿½  Supporting legislation to provide tax incentives to landowners

                       ï¿½  Coordinating acquisition, development, -and enhancement of
                          wetlands through conservation organizations

                       ï¿½  Expediting permitting procedures for wetland enhancement
                          projects

                       ï¿½  Assisting private landowners to secure more equitable water
                          rights for wildlife uses

                       ï¿½  Ensuring that programs under the Department of Agriculture
                          Federal Farm Program are beneficial to wildlife.

                    Also  under way is a research project that integrates winter water@
                    fowl management and ranching and farming practices on a demon-
                    stration area of the Texas A&M University farm. Other programs
                    within this Initiative Area include land acquisition, working with
                    regulatory agencies to solve saltwater intrusion problems, and
                    accelerating waterfowl habitat development on National wildlife
                    refuges and State wildlife. management areas.








                                                                                                                              Hl-17











                      Laguna Madre
                        Initiative Area

                                                   The protection of approximately 130,000 acres of wintering water-
                                                   fowl habitat has been identified as the priority of this Initiative Area.
                                                   Another goal is to increase waterfowl habitat on publicly owned
                                                   wetlands. Key management actions in this area include public-
                                                   works projects to control water on Laguna Atascosa National Wild-
                                                   life Refuge and the enhancement and restoration of the seagrass
                                                   beds in Laguna Madre. Other measures being taken to enhance
                                                   wintering waterfowl habitat include coordination with the Depart-
                                                   ment of Agriculture to

                                                    ï¿½ Ensure that farm programs benefit waterfowl

                                                    ï¿½ Provide increased technical assistance for wetland restoration
                                                       and enhancement


                                                    ï¿½  Encourage tax incentives for wetland restoration

                                                    ï¿½  Expedite permitting and water-rights processes

                                                    ï¿½  Develop a landowner demonstration project.

                                                   The restoration of former wetlands may be funded through the
                                                   Water Bank Program and habitat easement programs.

                            Summary

                                                   The goal of the NAWMP is to protect, restore, and enhance water-
                                                   fowl habitats. Many of the areas targeted for management action
                                                   within the NAWMP are also sites included in the NEP and they
                                                   therefore complement NEP objectives. Along with the importance
                                                   of estuaries to waterfowl, estuaries are important nursery areas for
                                                   marine and freshwater fish and provide a major economic contribu-
                                                   tion to the finfish and shellfish industries. Local communities also
                                                   depend on healthy estuaries for recreational and economic resour-
                                                   ces. The management strategies used for the NAWMP can be
                                                   adapted and refined for use with the NEP sites.

                                                   Cooperation among the agencies involved in habitat management
                                                   is essential to the success of the program. The NAWMP has dealt
                                                   with State or local jurisdictional conflicts on management strat-
                                                   egies, regulations, and other issues. Involvement by the State
                                                   personnel, local authorities, the business community, and con-
                                                   cerned citizens in the decision-making process promotes under-
                                                   standing, helps to lessen conflicts, and promotes management
                                                   solutions.




           H1-18












                   Interaction among Federal agencies also has proven to be of sub-
                   stantial help. Targeted incentive programs from the U.S. Depart-
                   ment of Agriculture and its Water Bank Program, the CRP, and
                   other habitat easement programs have resulted in larger areas of
                   land suitable for waterfowl. The use of public works projects, such
                   as the Grand Batture Island Restoration Project conducted by the
                   COE, can be incorporated into the CCMPs of the NEP sites at
                   minimal cost.


                   Community involvement in the NAWMP has contributed to the
                   success of the plan. Each Initiative Area has a public outreach
                   program to keep the local community informed of new programs
                   and incentives. Private programs, such as the Ducks Unlimited,
                   Inc., MARSH program, can also provide assistance to the NEP
                   sites. Community involvement and private organizations increase
                   public involvement and awareness of living resources problems and
                   provide support toward achieving solutions.



                   For Additional Information


                      U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
                      819 Taylor Street, Rm 9A33
                      Fort Worth, TX 76102
                      (817) 334-2961

































                                                                                                                        Hl-19






                                                                                                          Appendix H2


                                                                                 Catalog of Federal
                                                                                     Living Resources
                                                                     Management Programs


                    Appendix H2 is a catalog of Federal authorities and programs that
                    could support living- resources management and habitat-protection
                    goals and objectives of National Estuary Program (NEP)
                    management conferences. Key elements are outlined and the
                    relevant lead agency is identified.

                    It is important to recognize that this catalog has limitations,
                    however. The catalog does not cover State or local authorities and
                    programs, which in some cases could be highly significant. Nor
                    does it include all potentially relevant Federal authorities and
                    programs. To be totally comprehensive, it would be necessary to
                    list every Federal pollution control statute and program; every
                    Government or Federal agency-specific pronouncement of resource
                    conservation or environmental policy; every natural resource and
                    environmental research and monitoring program; and every habitat
                    and resource management, protection, and acquisition authority
                    and activity.

                    Instead, what has been done, is to identify the

                          1 -   Roles of the key Federal agencies, including some of
                                the major living-resources management and habitat-
                                protection programs that they administer
                          2.    Major resource-specific programs for managing and
                                protecting key categories of living resources (i.e., finfish,
                                shellfish, mammals, and waterfowl and other birds) and
                                coastal habitat (i.e., wetlands, estuaries, barrier islands,
                                and marine sanctuaries)
                          3.    Most relevant broader regulatory and resource
                                management statutes and programs (e.g., Clean Water
                                Act; Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act;
                                Coastal Zone Management Act; Submerged Lands Act;
                                Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act; Endangered Species
                                Act; Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act; and Federal
                                Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act).



                                                                                                                                  H2-1









                   Federal Agency
                            Roles and
                             Programs

                                                   Table 1-12-1 (Key Federal Agency Roles) identifies the major
                                                   living-resources management and habitat-protection programs that
                                                   are administered by the Environmental Protection Agency, the
                                                   National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (within the
                                                   Department of Commerce), the United States Fish and Wildlife
                                                   Service (within the Department of the Interior), the United States
                                                   Army Corps of Engineers (within the Department of the Army), the
                                                   Food and Drug Administration (within the Department of Health
                                                   and Human Services), the Department of Agriculture, the
                                                   Department of Transportation, and the Council on Environmental
                                                   Quality (within the Executive Office of the President). The table
                                                   indicates the nature and scope of the major relevant programs
                                                   administered by these agencies, along with the legislative
                                                   authorities under which they are carried out.

                Resource-Specific
                             Programs

                                                   Table H2-2 (Resource-Specific Programs) lists the major legislative
                                                   programs that are geared specifically to particular living-marine
                                                   resource and habitat-protection objectives. The accompanying
                                                   matrix indicates each program's major thrust: regulatory, funding,
                                                   acquisition, research and monitoring, or management, or a
                                                   combination of these.     Also specified is the lead agency (o     r
                                                   agencies) concerned with program administration.

                                                   The programs included in this table range from broad, national
                                                   programs (e.g., the Marine Mammal Protection Act) to
                                                   geographically limited programs (e.g., Atlantic Striped Bass
                                                   Conservation Act). Although the listing is not exhaustive, most
                                                   major programs have been identified.

                Broad Regulatory
                      and Resource
                        Management
                             Programs

                                                   Table H2-3 (Broad Regulatory and           Resource Management
                                                   Programs) identifies the miscellaneous national programs (e.g., the
                                                   Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act and the Submerged Lands Act)
                                                   that do not necessarily fit neatly into one of the other two
                                                   categories of programs (see Tables H2-1 and 1-12-2). Information is
                                             I     provided on the lead agency and program scope.
            H2-2











                                                                                             Conclusion

                  Appendix H2 is an overview of the more significant Federal
                  living-resource management or coastal habitat-protection programs
                  that have potential relevance to the development of management
                  plans for NEP estuaries. Tables H2-1 through H2-3 provide users
                  access to the information that they need in at least three different
                  ways: by affected resource, by lead agency, and by statutory
                  authority.

                  The CCMP must address living-resources management and habitat
                  protection as integral elements.     Knowledge of the applicable
                  Federal statutory and regulatory framework is, clearly, essential to
                  accomplishing this objective. Appendix H2 was designed to provide
                  users with a "road map" for identifying and acquiring the detailed
                  knowledge that they will need.













































                                                                                                                         H2-3








                                                                                                                       Table 1-12-1. Key Federal Agency Roles

                                                                                                                                                     SIVE OF UVING-
                                                                                                                                                     NES01111FICE MAJUGUAKIF/
                                                                                                                                                     MWAT-
                                                                                                                          FENK AGIEM                 PROTWICIR PlMONSUMM                      UGWTM AUTHORITY                               MAXIN PROGRAM

                                                                                                                          Eaviromental               Protect, maintain, restore, and          Clean Water Act (P.L. 92-500),                1 .National Estuary Program (ï¿½ 320)
                                                                                                                          11,1111ftual AIMT          enhance water quality                    33 U.S.C. 1251 at seq.                        2. Discharge permits (NPDES) program @ 402)
                                                                                                                          (EPA)                                                                                                             3. Oil and hazardous substance spills (ï¿½ 311)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            4. Toxic (priority) pollutant and pretreatment
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            program (ï¿½ 307)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            5. Ocean discharge program [ï¿½ï¿½ 301(h), 4031
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            6. Nonpoint source control program (ï¿½ 319)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            7. Chesapeake Bay Program (ï¿½ 117)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            8. Combined sewer overflows in estuaries (ï¿½ 205)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            9. Individual control strategies tot toxic pollutants
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            (ï¿½ 304)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            10. Iii-place pollutants (ï¿½ 115)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            11. Disposal of dredge and fill materials (ï¿½ 404)

                                                                                                                                                     Avoid unreasonable degradation           Marine ProWioi,, Research, and                1. Permits for ocean dumping of municipal and industrial
                                                                                                                                                     or endangerment of Via madne             Sanctuaries Act (P.L 92-532), 33              wastes (ï¿½ 102)
                                                                                                                                                     environment or public health             U.S.C. 1401 at s8q., as amended               2. Site designation of ocean dumpsites for wastes and
                                                                                                                                                                                              by the Ocean Dumping Ban Act of               dredged material Jï¿½ 102(c)]
                                                                                                                                                                                              1988 (P.L 100-688)                            3. Veto of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) permits
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            for dredged material ocean dumping (ï¿½ 103)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            4. Ban on ocean dumping of sewage sludge or industrial
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            waste after 1991 N 104B)
                                                                                                                                                     Regulate the introductibn into           Toxic Substances Control Ac.                  1 .Regulation of hazardous chemical substances and
                                                                                                                                                     commerce of row hazardous                (P.L 94-469),15 U.S.C. 2601                   mixtures (ï¿½ 6)
                                                                                                                                                     chemical substances and                                                                2Health and environmental data on toxic substances
                                                                                                                                                     mixtures; avoidance of                                                                 (ï¿½ 10)
                                                                                                                                                     unreasonable risk of injury to                                                         3. Regulation of PCBs [ï¿½ 6(e))
                                                                                                                                                     health or environment

                                                                                                                                                     Regulate pesticide chemicals             Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and           1 .Daniel or cancellation of registrations of pesticides
                                                                                                                                                                                              Rodenticide Act (P.L. 92-516),                whose use would/does cause fish contamination
                                                                                                                                                                                              7 U.S.C. 136 at sail.                         2. Collect data on pesticides that may be causing fish
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            contamination
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            3. Setting of action levels or tolerances for unavoidable
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            pesticide contaminants in fish and shellfish (Food,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Drug and Cosmetic Act, ï¿½ 408)

                                                                                                                                                     Protect coastal waters from litter       Shom Protection Act of 1988                   1 .Permitting of vessels that transport municipal or
                                                                                                                                                     and pollution                            (P.L 100-68B), 33 U.S.C. 1401 at              commercial waste in coastal waters (ï¿½ 4102)
                                                                                                                                                                                              sq.                                           2. Regulation of wasla-handling pratclices by waste
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            sources. vessels and receiving facilities to minimize
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            deposition of waste into coastal waster @ 4103)

                                                                                                                        0"aftent of                  Coriserve marine life                    Peels for Marine Life Conservation            Use of obsolete ships as artificial mets for the
                                                                                                                        7muporbildim                                                          (P.1-92402). National Fishing                 conservation of marine life
                                                                                                                                                                                              Enhancement Act of 1984 (P.L
                                                                                                                                                                                              98-623),16 U.S.C- 1220-1220d.
                                                                                                                                                     Protect coastal water from litter        Marine Plastic Pollution Research             Implements MARPOL Annex V
                                                                                                                                                     and pollution                            and Control Act of 1987 (P.L                  Prohibits overboard disposal of garbage in waste]
                                                                                                                                                                                              100420),33 U.S.C. 1901 at seq.                waters in violation of MARPOL restrictions
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Requires port reception facilities for shipboard
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            garbage

                                                                                                                                                     Enforcement of fisheries laws            (Magnuson) Fishery Conservation               Enforcement of restrictions on commercial fishing
                                                                                                                                                                                              and Management Act (P.L.                      within the fishery conservation zone (Exclusive
                                                                                                                                                                                              94-265).16 U.S.C. 1801 at seq.                Economic Zone) @ 311)






























                               H2-4









                  Table H2-1. Key Federal Agency Roles (continued)

								SCOPE OF LIVING-
								RESOURCE MANAGEMENT/
                                                HABITAT-
                   FEDERAL AGENCY			PROTECTION RESPONSIBILITY				LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY					MAJOR PROGRAMS   
                   ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
                   National oceanic             Natural resource trustee for. marine          CERCLA (P.L. W510),42 U.S.C.                  1. Natural Resources DamageAssessment
                   and atmospheric              fishery resources and supporting               9607(o.9601 (16)                                  Program (CERCLA, 107(f); CWA, 311(f))
                   Administration               ecosystems; anadromous fish;
                   (NOAA)                       certain endangered species and               Clean Water Act (P.L 92-500) 33              2.  Remedial Action Program (CERCLA, ï¿½ 104)
                                                marine mammals; National Marine              U.S.C. 1321 (fX5)
                                                Sanctuaries, and Estuarine
                                                Research Reserves

                                               Marine mammals                               Marine Mammal Protection Act of                  Prohibition at strict regulation of the direct or indirect
                                                                                            1972 (P.L. 92-52206 U.S.C. 1361                   taking or importation of marine mammals
                                                                                            at seq.
                                                                                            Fur Seal Act of 1966 (P.L B9-702),                Prohibition of the taking of fur seals on Inds or
                                                                                            16 US.C. 1151 at seq.                             waters under U.S. jurisdiction
                                                                                            Whale Conservation and Protection                 Comprehensive studios of whales in waters subject
                                                                                            Study Act (P.L. 9-532)                            to U.S. jurisdiction

                                               Anadromous fish                              Anadromous Fish Conservation Act                  Conservation, development and enhancement of
                                                                                            of 1965 (P.L 89-304),16 U.S.C.                    anadromous fishery resources
                                                                                            757a-757g

                                                                                            Salmon & Steelhead Conservation                   MarWoment and enhancement of salmon and
                                                                                            and Enhancenearil Act of 1980 (P.L                steelhead stocks
                                                                                            96-561).16 U.S.C. 3301-3345
                                               Threatened and endangered                   Endangered Species Act of 1 M                     Insurance that any action authorized, funded, or
                                               species and their critical habitats          (P.L. 93-205),16 U.S.C. 1531 el                   carried out by any Federal agency is not likely to
                                                                                            seq.)                                             jeopardize the continued existence of any
                                                                                                                                              endangered or threatened species or result in the
                                                                                                                                              destruction or adverse modification of habitat
                                                                                                                                              critical to such species (ï¿½ 7) (covers marine species)

                                               Marine fisheries                             Magnuson Fishery Conservation                     Conservation of fish stock throughout a 200 mile
                                                                                            And Management Act of 1976 (P.L                   U.S. Fishery Conservation Zone through the
                                                                                            94-265) 16 U.S.C. 1801 of seq.                    development Fishery Management Plans by eight
                                                                                                                                              regional Fishery Management Councils

                                                                                            Interjurisdiclional Fisheries Act (P.L.           Promote and encourage management of
                                                                                            99-659),16 U.S.C. 41014107                        interjurisdictional lishery resources throughout their
                                                                                                                                              range

                                                                                            North Pacific Fisheries Act of 1954               Enforcement of the International Convention for the
                                                                                            (P.L. 85-114),16 U.S.C. 1021-1032                 High Sew Fisheries of the North Pacif		ic Ocean

                                                                                            North Pacific Halibut Act of 1982,                enforement, of the Convention between the U.S.
                                                                                            16 U.S.C. 772-773k                                and Canada for the Preservation of be Halbut
                                                                                                                                              Fishery of the Northern Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea
                                               Marine sanctuaries                           Marine, Protection. Research and                  National Marine Sanctuaries Program
                                                                                            Sanctuaries Act (Title 111) (P.L.
                                                                                            92-532).16 U.S.C. 1431-1439



                                               Protection of coastal natural                Coastal Zone Management Act of                1 . Coastal zone management program grants (ï¿½ 3D5)
                                               resources, including wetlands,               1972 (P.L. 92-583); 16 U.S.C. 1451           2.  CZMP administrative grants (ï¿½ 306)
                                               floodplains, estuaries, beaches,             et seq.                                       1   Review and approval of Stab CZMPs (ï¿½ 306)
                                               dunes, barrier islands. coral reek                                                         4.  Resource Management Improvement Grants (ï¿½ 306A)
                                               and fish and wildlife and their                                                              5.  Federal Consistency Determination (ï¿½ 307)
                                               habitat                                                                                    6.  Coastal Energy Impact Program (ï¿½ 308)
                                                                                                                                          7.  Interstate grants (309)
                                                                                                                                          8.  Review of State pedonnance (ï¿½ 312)
                                                                                                                                         9.  Natural Esburine Reserve Program 0 315)























                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             H2-5








                                                                                                                        Table 1-12-1. Key Federal Agency Roles (continued)



                                                                                                                                                       MWAT-
                                                                                                                           FE1111111=1111111liff       11,11101wriamminam                         LEIIIIIIIIJITME IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINITI!         MLM PROWANS
                                                                                                                           U.S. Fkk and                Natural resource bustm for:                CERCLA (P.L. 96-510), 42 U.S.C.               1 - Natural Resources Damage Assessment progrur
                                                                                                                           W1111111111111 gwviw        migratorry birds; certain arladtomous      9607(0. 9601 (16)                             [CERCLA, ï¿½ 107(Q. CWA. ï¿½ 311 (Q]
                                                                                                                           own ad                      fish, endangered species, and
                                                                                                                           Doparbmd of                 marine mammals; and certain                Clean Water Act (P.L 92-500),33               2. Remedial Action Program [CERCLA, ï¿½ 104)
                                                                                                                           no Iffleerier               Federally managed water resDurces          U.S.C. 1321 (fX5)

                                                                                                                                                       Land andwater conservation                 Land and Water Conservation                   Establishment of fund to acquire land, waters,
                                                                                                                                                                                                  Fund Act (PJ . W578),16 U.S.C.                of interests in land or waters to promote
                                                                                                                                                                                                  4601-4-4601-11                                outdoor recreation opporbinities
                                                                                                                                                       CftWI barrier islands                      Coastal Barrier Resources Act of              1 .Establishment of coastal barrier resources system
                                                                                                                                                                                                  1982 (P.L. 97-348).16 U.S.C.
                                                                                                                                                                                                  W -3510                                       2. Coverage of undeveloped coastal barriers, including
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                associated aquatic habitats

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                3. Restriction of Federally subsidimd development of
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                underdeveloped coastal barriers along the Atlantic
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                and Gulf coasts
                                                                                                                                                       Threatened and endangered                  Endangered Species Act of 1973                Insurance that any action aubrorbred, funded, or
                                                                                                                                                       species and their critical habitat         (P.L 93-205),16 U.S.C. 1531-1543              carded out by any Federal Agency is not likeltr to
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                jeopardize the continued existence of any endangenad
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                or threatened species or result in the destruction or
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                adverse modification of habitat critical to such species
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                (ï¿½ 7) (covers norimadne species)
                                                                                                                                                       Estuarine arm                              Estuarine Areas Act (P.L.                     Conservation of estuarine areas
                                                                                                                                                                                                  90-454),16 U.S.C. 1221 of seq.
                                                                                                                                                       Fish and wildlife conservation             Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act            Consultation when Federal agency or Federal
                                                                                                                                                                                                  011958 (PL OW4),16 U.S.C.                     permittee proposes to modify a body of water
                                                                                                                                                                                                  661-M

                                                                                                                                                                                                  Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act            Conservation and promotion of nongame fish
                                                                                                                                                                                                  Of 1980 (P.L 96-366),16 U.S.C.                and wildlife arid their habillats, including grants
                                                                                                                                                                                                  2901 et seq.                                  to States
                                                                                                                                                                                                  Fish Restoration and Management               Funding of State programs for the restoration
                                                                                                                                                                                                  Pro*ts Act (PL 91 -503) 16 U.S.C,             and management of fishery resources
                                                                                                                                                                                                  7T7-Ml

                                                                                                                                                                                                  National Wildlife Refuge System               Resource management programs for fish and
                                                                                                                                                                                                  Administration Act (PL 91-135),16             wilifilife habitat
                                                                                                                                                                                                  U.S.C. 668dd


                                                                                                                                                       Migratory birds                            Migratory Biids Hunfing Stamp Act             Use of huriting stramp funds for acquisition of
                                                                                                                                                                                                  (P.L. 85-W. 16 U.S.C. 71841 8h                bird tefuges and watertowl production areas

                                                                                                                                                                                                  Migiatory Bird Conservation Act               Acquisition of areas for dw inariagarrient and
                                                                                                                                                                                                  (P.L 87-812),16 U.S.C. 715-715s               protection of migratory birds

                                                                                                                                                                                                  Migratory Bird Treaty Act [P.L.               Prohibitions against the taking of migratory
                                                                                                                                                                                                  86-732) 16 U.S.C. 701-711                     birds proba:*d under treaties with Great
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Britain, Mexico, and Japan


                                                                                                                                                       Wetlands conservation                      North American Wetlands                       I .Funding for purchase of critical wellands in ft U.S.,
                                                                                                                                                                                                  Conservation Act (P.L 101-233)                Canada and Mexico
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                2. Matching funds for wetlands conservation projects
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                in North America




























                               H2-6








                   Table 1-12-1. Key Federal Agency Roles (continued)


                                                    am W uvw_
                                                    IESMMNNRIUW/
                                                    MWAT-
                       FOMMM                                     WJPNBMM                       LEGUATNAvnww                               K%= PNORAM
                       oulws"wbwd                   Development of ouler continental           Outer Continental Shelf Lend$ Act          1. Enviroiffnental studies for easement and
                       of Illot 11111tedu           shah, subject to environmental             (P.L. 93-627),43 U.S.C. 1331 at               management of OCS oil development impacts @ 20)
                       mm                           s*guafds                                   sBq-                                       2. Consideration of available relevant environmental
                                                                                                                                             information in making decisions % 20)
                                                                                                                                          3. Preparation of environmental impact statements on
                                                                                                                                             major development and production plans (ï¿½ 25)

                                                    Rights of States over submerged            Submerged Lands Act (P.L.                     U.S. rights and interests in lands and national
                                                    land and natural resources                 99-272),43 U.S.C. 1301 at seq.                resources within the 3-Mile limit transferred to
                                                    beneath navigable waters within                                                          the States
                                                    State boundaries


                       Coanacif an                  Major Federal actions significantly        National Environmental Policy Act          1. Review environmental impact statements
                       &Mrs           .  I          affecting environmental quality            (P.L. 91-19D), 42 U.S.C. 4321 at           2. Promulgake regulations
                       *WRY (CEQ)                                                              seq.                                       3. Mediate inieragency disputes

































































                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              H2-7








                                                                                                            Table 1-12-1. Key Federal Agency Roles (continued)

                                                                                                                                         scm F LIVW-


                                                                                                                FEEMMEM                  NOTEMMNESPMMEM                         LECKIRTNE AUnWJrY                            VAMPROGRAM

                                                                                                                U.S. Amy Corps           Wetlanils protection                   Clean Water Act (ï¿½ 404)                      Dredge and fill permits
                                                                                                                911@111oom                                                      (P.L. 92-500),33 U.S.C. 1251 at
                                                                                                                (Can                                                            seq.

                                                                                                                                         Wetlands creation                      Water Resources Development Act              Authority to establish welland arm as pad of an
                                                                                                                                                                                of 1976 (ï¿½ 150) (P.L 94-587),                authorized water resources development project
                                                                                                                                                                                42 UiS.C. 1962d-50

                                                                                                                                         Beach nourishment                      Water Resources Development Ad               Authority to utilize suitable dredged material for
                                                                                                                                                                                of 1976 (ï¿½ 150) (P.L 94-587).                beach nourishment
                                                                                                                                                                                42 U.S.C. 1962d-St

                                                                                                                                         Avoiding obstructions to navigation    Rivers and Harbors Appropriation             Regulation of construction activities in and
                                                                                                                                                                                Act of 1899, 33 U.S.C. 4D1                   adjoining navigable waters which after the
                                                                                                                                                                                                                             couirse. condition, location, or capacity of such
                                                                                                                                                                                                                             waters

                                                                                                                                         Regulation of dredged material         Marine Protection Research and               1. Issuance of ocean dumping permits (ï¿½ 103)
                                                                                                                                         ocean dumping                          Sanctuaries Act @ 103) (P.L.                 2. Ocean durdosite selection @ 11M)
                                                                                                                                                                                92-5K), 33 U.S.C. 1401 at seq.

                                                                                                                                         Fish and wildlife mitigation           Water Resources Development Act              Mitigation of fish and wildlife I  associated
                                                                                                                                                                                of 1986 @ 906) (P.L gM22).33                 with authorized water resources projects,
                                                                                                                                                                                U.S.C. 22D1, 2283                            including the acquisition of lands or interests in
                                                                                                                                                                                                                             lands

                                                                                                                                                                                Fish and Wildlife Coordination Art of        Consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
                                                                                                                                                                                1958 (P.L 85-624),16 U.S.C.
                                                                                                                                                                                6M-666c
                                                                                                                Food oad Droll           Healthfulness of fish and shellfish    Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic              1. Setting standards of quality for loods, including
                                                                                                                Adoddafroffes            marketed in intersdatir commerce       Act, 21 U.S.C. 301-392                       seafood @ 401)
                                                                                                                (RA) nd                                                                                                      2Setting action levels and iclerances for
                                                                                                                Departmad of                                                                                                 unavoidable contaminants in looils, including
                                                                                                                HMM and-                                                                                                     seafood (ï¿½ 406)
                                                                                                                Wdm
                                                                                                                                                                                Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C.         1. Federal assistance to States in preventing the
                                                                                                                                                                                201 of seq.                                  interstate transorission of disease G 351)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                             2. Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Program

                                                                                                                                                                                P.L. 89-3D4,16 U.S.C. 7571                   Enforcement action to eliminate or reduce
                                                                                                                                                                                                                             polluting substances detrimental to fish and
                                                                                                                                                                                                                             wildlife in inlerstale or navigable waters


                                                                                                                D"artaseart of           Control of pollution of surface        Department of Agriculture Organic            1, Noripoint Source Contaminants Research
                                                                                                                Alliftaftear             waters owing to agricultural runoff    Act of 16 U.S.C. 50D eItseq.                 2: HIabitat Modification Program
                                                                                                                                                                                                                             (Mitigation of adverse effects of land
                                                                                                                                                                                                                             managementactivities)

                                                                                                                                                                                                                             3. Point source contaminants program
                                                                                                                                                                                                                             (investigation of chemicals in bottom sedirrients)

                                                                                                                                         Wetlands protection                    Water Bank Act (P.L gl'-559).16              Preserve, restore, and improve wetlands:
                                                                                                                                                                                U.S.C. 1301-1311.1501.1503                   conservation easements


                                                                                                                                                                                Food Security Act of 1985 (P.L               Wetlands conservation program
                                                                                                                                                                                99-198),16 U.S.C. 3801 st seq.                 313211-38M)




























                           H2-8








                    Table H2-2. Resource-Specific Programs


                                                                                                                                                                           11011011111row
                        11111111101111,11111         Loodative 111volp                       Lwd APM             I                    IF               AC"kM-              monluff"          Ussaipwait
                        Fish                         Anadiomous Fish                            NOM                                      at                 8                  x                   x
                                                     Conservation Act                           USFWS
                                                     Saknon & Steelhead
                                                     Conservation & Enhancement                 NOAA                                                        x                  x                   Is
                                                     Act
                                                     North Pacific Fisheries Act of             NOAA


                                                     North Pacific Halibut Ad of
                                                     ism                                        NOAA


                                                     Magnuson Fishery
                                                     Conservation and                           NOAA                  as                 Is                                                        at
                                                     Management Act
                                                     r-
                                                     National fting Enhancement
                                                     Acto[1984                                  DOT                                                                                                It

                                                     InteriurisdikliDnal Fisheries Act          NOAA                                     x


                                                     Fish Restoration and
                                                     ManagemnlPriijectAct                       USFWS

                                                     Atlantic Salmon Comervallon                NOM                   x
                                                     Act of 1982 (P.L 97-389),16
                                                     U.S.C. 3601-360B
                                                     Atlantic Striped Bass
                                                     Conservation Act (P.L                      USFWS
                                                     89-304),16 U.S.C. 757g
                                                     Atlantic Tunas ConsrMioA                Dept. of State.                                                                                       x
                                                     Act of 1975,16 U.S.C 971 -              NOAA
                                                     971

                                                     Tuna Conventions Act of 1950,           Dept. of State.                                                                                       x
                                                     16 U.S.C. 951 - 9M                      NOAA


                                                     Central. Western, and South
                                                     Pacific Fisheries Development              NOAA                                     x                                       x                 x
                                                     Act, 16 U.S.C. 7589 - 758a - 5
                                                     Commercial Fisheries Research
                                                     and Development Act of 1964.               NOAA
                                                     16 U.S.C. 742c, 779 - 7791
                                                     National Fish and Wildlife
                                                     Foundation Establishment Act,              USPAS
                                                     16 U.S.C. 3701-3709

                                                     Pacific Salmon Treaty Act of            Dept. of State,                                                                                       It
                                                     1985.16 U.S.C. 3631-3644                NOAA





























                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           H2-9








                                                                                                                 Table 1-12-2. Resource-Specific Programs (continued)


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 onsamb/
                                                                                                                     Resource                    Leslawn Prop"                        Lead AP-7          Neguls"             Funding          AMFWtlm            is"Isving       -I
                                                                                                                                                 National Shellfish Sanitation           FDA                   st                                                       x              x
                                                                                                                                                 Program
                                                                                                                     MWA=k                       Marine Mammal Protection                                                                                               39
                                                                                                                                                 Act                                     NOM


                                                                                                                                                 Fur Sea[ Act                            NOAA                  x                                                        Is

                                                                                                                                                 Whale Conswvation and                   NOAA                                                                           x
                                                                                                                                                 Piotection Stidy Act

                                                                                                                     Waterloo* and               Migratory Bird Conswation               USFWS                                                                                         x
                                                                                                                     0111,1111, Birds            Act


                                                                                                                                                 Migratory Bird Treaty Act               USFWS                 Is


                                                                                                                                                 Migratory Bird Hunting Stamp
                                                                                                                                                 Act                                     USFWS                                   x                 x                                   Is

                                                                                                                     watleads                    North American Wetlands                 USFWS                                   Is                It
                                                                                                                                                 ConswMion Act

                                                                                                                                                 Water Resources
                                                                                                                                                 Dwelopment Act (Wetlands                COE                                                       Is
                                                                                                                                                 Creation)


                                                                                                                                                 Water Bank Act                          USDA                                    x                 Is                                  Is


                                                                                                                                                 Food Sewrilyktot 1985                   USDA                                    v

                                                                                                                     Estuaries                   Clean water Act                         EPA                                     x                                      39             Is
                                                                                                                     Areas                       (National Esluafy Program)

                                                                                                                                                 Coastal Zone Management
                                                                                                                                                 Act (National Estuarine                 NCIAA                                   39                x                    Is             Is
                                                                                                                                                 Reserve Program)

                                                                                                                                                 Eskering Areas Act                      USFWS                                                                          x              x


                                                                                                                     Border klands               Coastal Barriers Pacurces               USFWS                 Is                                                                      Is
                                                                                                                     U.S.C.                      Act, 16 U.S.C. 3501-3510

                                                                                                                     Marine                      Marine Protection, Resmarch'            NOAA
                                                                                                                     Smoot                       and Sanctuaries Act































                             H2-1 0








                    Table 1-12-3. Broad Regulatory and Resource
                                                        Management Programs


                                                                                                                                                                     anomw
                         0                         L@&Wn Progi                              Lad Jkpwr        Illeptallurtr       Fundhilt         Actlideltion       1111MIlOft       Mm"o-d
                         surfacul watim
                         mrsdeaft, and             ClearifterAct                            EPA
                         squalla bleta                                                      COE (ï¿½ 404)
                         Dom                       Mar  .ne Protection, Research,           EPA
                                                        Mcluaries Act (Title 1)
                         and imarine
                         mots                      and                                      COE


                         Coastal
                         noomm                     Coastal Zone Managerrient                NOAA                   IN                x                                                       x
                                                   Act
                         am' it,                   Subrnerged Unds Act                      Minerals                                                                                         IN
                         lamb and                                                           Management
                         benthic Who                                                        Service
                         Water and                                                          Minerals
                         raw=      of              Outer Continental Shelf
                         the Outer                 Lands Act                                Management                                                                                       x
                         columew Shelf                                                      Service
                         Endangered species                                                 USFWS,
                         and their Critical        Endangered Species                       NOM                    Or                x                                    39                 x
                         tahm                      Act

                         Fish mad wlkfllls
                         11 Oak                    Fish and Wildlife                        USFWS
                         hwdw                      Coordination Art                                                30                                                     x                  x
                                                                                        I
                         sadetr Of                 Food, Drug & Cosinietic                  FDA                    fit                                                                       If
                         morke@w                   Act                                      EPA                    x
                         raw shid"mil paduch;      TSCA, FIFRA























































                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              H2-11




                                                                                                        Appendix I


                                                                      Tools to Manage Land
                                                                        and Water Resources



                  This appendix of A Primer for Establishing and Managing
                  Estuary Projects introduces some of the more common
                  management tools used to protect land and water resources.
                  The Primer, which describes the National Estuary Program's
                  origins, statutory provisions, and approach, is designed for
                  EPA's program and regional offices, coastal states, and other
                  interested parties. For more information, contact an EPA
                  regional office.

                                                                                            An Overview
                  In light of increasing pressure from population growth and
                  development, improved management of land and water
                  resources is critical to the health of estuarine ecosystems.
                  By the year 2000, it is expected that nearly 75 percent of the
                  nation's population will live within 50 miles of a coast.
                  Florida's coast, for example, is being settled at the rate of
                  3,000 to 4,000 people per week. Rapid population growth
                  and accompanying development place increasing and
                  substantial stress on land and water resources.            The
                  influence of these forces on the health of estuarine
                  ecosystems is now widely recognized. For instance, a recent
                  report to the Chesapeake Bay Executive Council, mPopulation
                  Growth and Development in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed
                  to the Year 2020,' emphasizes that efforts to address growth
                  and development in the Chesapeake Bay region are currently
                  inadequate to curb the harmful effects of pollution and
                  congestion on the estuary.

                  To effectively address problems associated with growth and
                  development, estuary conferences must become familiar with
                  the range of management tools used to confront and combat
                  threats to land and water resources. This Appendix provides
                  an overview of methods that may be employed to manage
                  the use of land and water in an estuarine watershed. The
                  particular tools or combinations of tools selected will vary
                  greatly from estuary to estuary. This Appendix does not
                  cover all tools and combinations. Rather, it is intended to
                  equip Estuary Conferences with a checklist of actions and
                  factors to consider when formulating Action Plans., Experts
                  and additional guidance documents should be consulted for
                  further information and advice on appropriate tools for a
                  particular estuary.





                                                       The discussion is organized into three major sections: (1) Best
                                                       Management Practices (BMPs) to combat nonpoint source
                                                       problems, (2) land use tools and conservation measures to
                                                       manage, reduce, and prevent harmful impacts of population
                                                       growth and development, and (3) regulatory programs and other
                                                       mechanisms to address point source pollutant loadings to
                                                       estuaries. These distinctions should be interpreted loosely,
                                                       however, since a particular tool may sometimes be used
                                                       effectively to address more than one type of problem. Where
                                                       available, examples are cited to illustrate a tool's application.
                                                       Some sources for further information are also listed.
                    Tools to Control
                    Nonpoint Source
                    Pollutant Loadings
                    to Estuaries
                                                       Nonpoint source (NPS) pollution occurs when runoff following
                                                       rainfall or snowmelt transports sediment and other pollutants to
                                                       a river, lake, or estuary. For many estuaries, NPS pollution poses
                                                       the fastest-growing and most pervasive threat to water quality
                                                       and the overall health of the ecosystem. Although background
                                                       sources contribute part of the problem, nonpoint pollution results
                                                       primarily from a variety of human activities. Major sources of
                                                       nonpoint pollution include:

                                                          ï¿½    Agricultural areas, including both cropland and
                                                               animal waste, feeding, and grazing areas;
                                                          ï¿½    Urban areas;
                                                          ï¿½    Construction sites;
                                                          ï¿½    Mining sites; and
                                                          ï¿½    Silviculture or forestry areas.

                                                       Although pollutants transported in runoff vary with both the
                                                       source and the terrain over which runoff travels, sediment
                                                       (comprised of sand, sift, clay and organic material) is the largest
                                                       constituent by volume.        Other common nonpoint source
                                                       pollutants include:

                                                          ï¿½    Nutrients, primarily phosphorus and nitrogen, from
                                                               septic systems and from fertilized lawns, parks, and
                                                               golf courses;

                                                          ï¿½    Bacteria, primarily from animal waste, sewage, and
                                                               septic systems;

                                                          ï¿½    Oil and grease from parking lots, roads, and service
                                                               stations; and

                                                          ï¿½    Trace metals, such as lead, copper, cadmium,
                                                               chromium, zinc, arsenic, iron, and mercury, from
                                                               worn pipes, roofing materials, paints, and numerous
                                                               other sources.


                                                       The impacts of nonpoint source pollution are particularly severe
                                                       in slower-flushing lakes, streams, and estuaries.         Pollutants
                                                       delivered to estuaries may build-up in bottom sediment and
                                                       remain for long periods of time. Excess nutrients cause algae


             12





                   blooms and accelerate eutrophication; oil, grease, and trace
                   metals can be poisonous to aquatic life and may
                   contaminate drinking water supplies; and chemicals in
                   fertilizers, pesticides, and household products pose threats
                   to human and aquatic health.

                   The 1987 amendments to the Clean Water Act recognized
                   that the control of NPS pollution requires flexible, site-
                   specific, and source-specific measures. For this reason, it
                   mandates a framework for action rather than a set of
                   required activities or standards. Under Section 319 of the
                   Act, this framework requires each state to assess and report
                   on the extent of its NPS problems and to develop an NPS
                   management program.         The assessment reports must
                   identify:

                       ï¿½   Navigable waters needing NPS control to attain
                           or maintain water quality standards or goals;

                       ï¿½   Categories and subcategories of NPS pollutants
                           affecting these waters;

                       ï¿½   Processes for identifying necessary NPS controls
                           and for reducing NPS pollution; and

                       ï¿½   State and local programs for implementing NPS
                           controls.


                   Based on these assessments, the states must then develop
                   NPS management programs that:

                       ï¿½   Identify appropriate BMPs for nonpoint sources
                           characterized in the assessment;

                       ï¿½   Develop programs to implement BMPs, including
                           schedules and milestones; and

                       ï¿½   Identify existing authorities to implement the
                           program(s), as well as federal, state, and local
                           funding sources for program implementation.

                   These requirements under Section 319 can be valuable in
                   helping NEP Management Conferences build on existing
                   state NPS activities.

                                                                                              Implementafion

                   NPS control activities generally include:

                       o   Targeting controls to priority areas in the
                           watershed that actively contribute to water quality
                           problems. Targeting pollution control to critical
                           areas within the watershed ensures greater
                           efficiency in abating pollution.





                                                                                                                               13






                                                                            ï¿½     Offering cost-sharing to defray part of the investment
                                                                                  and/or operating costs of implementing BMPs. This
                                                                                  is a critical component in most agricultural nonpoint
                                                                                  source control efforts. Cost-sharing provides added
                                                                                  incentive for farmers to install pollution control
                                                                                  equipment, particularly when controls benefit the
                                                                                  environment but are costly to the farmer.

                                                                            ï¿½     Providing technical assistance and training to ensure
                                                                                  the proper use and maintenance of BMPs.

                                                                            ï¿½     Educating the public about nonpoint source
                                                                                  problems, and about the impact of certain activities
                                                                                  or land uses on water quality.

                                                                            ï¿½     Supporting NPS efforts with regulatory and
                                                                                  enforcement backup. Although most NPS programs
                                                                                  are voluntary, some government entities, particularly
                                                                                  at the local level, have implemented regulatory
                                                                                  programs.          Activities at construction sites, for
                                                                                  example, are often regulated by local ordinances that
                                                                                  require BMP implementation and site planning.
                                                                                  Mining and forestry activities that can lead to NPS
                                                                                  pollution may also be regulated by laws or
                                                                                  ordinances.           The effectiveness of regulatory
                                                                                  programs, however, is influenced by how vigorously
                                                                                  the laws and ordinances are enforced.                            Weak
                                                                                  enforcement, due to staff or resource problems, can
                                                                                  reduce considerably the benefits of regulatory efforts.


                                                                                  States also may choose to use their general permit
                                                                                  authority through the NPDES program to control
													    certain similar nonpoint source permits into the existing			
                                                                                  State regulatory structure.  Florida, for example,
                                                                                  regulates surface water storage and attendant runoff                                                                                                                                                                                                           ..........-
													    problems in the South Florida Water Management
													    District.  Pennsylvania's Department of Environmental
													    Resources regulates earth distrubances involving
													    introduced erosion and sediment controls as
													    requirements for a variety of operating permits.
														
													    Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office
												          of Water.  Coastal Water Programs Handbook (Draft).
													    Washington, D.C.: February, 1990.			  	 		


		 
                                                                            o     Sponsoring demonstration projects to show the
                                                                                  benefits and operation of particular BMPs. The most
                                                                                  effective demonstration projects concentrate on
                                                                                  showing clear results, rather than simply showing


                 14







             how to implement a particular BMP.
             Demonstration projects may also evaluate
             existing management practices to determine the
             conditions under which each practice is most
             effective.


       Numerous projects to demonstrate new and
       innovative management practices have been
       implemented around the country, including the
       following:

           o  Indian Town Farm, along the Chester
              River in Maryland, was the location of
              a project to demonstrate the effect of
              agricultural BMPs on water quality.
              The project educated local farm
              communities about the costs of
              installing BMPs and their effects on
              farm income, and about the effects of
              BMPs on water quality.

           o  Also in Maryland, urban
              demonstration projects have included 
              several projects to demonstrate the 
              effectiveness of shallow marshes to
              improve infiltration and the control of
              stormwater pollutants.  In Queen
              Anne's County, state officials
              constructed an artificial marsh at a
              local high school.  Students and        
              teachers learned about NPS polution,
              and the natural cleaning ability of   
              wetlands, while doing part of the 
              actual planting.

           o  In virginia, demonstration projects for
              urban NPS control have included
              monitoring the effects of porous
              asphalt pavement and infiltration
              trenches on water quality; the use of
              porous pavement on parking lots; and
              a stream stabilization project using
              willow trees and other woody plants
              to bind soil and improve drainage.

            o Monitoring during and after the implementation of
              BMPs to ensure they are properly installed and
              adequately maintained, as well as to provide
              feedback about the effect of BMPs on water
              quality.

                                                                                                   15





                            Management
                            Practices

                                                        There are literally hundreds of BMPs and combinations of BMPs
                                                        used to address NPS problems. What follows is a brief overview
                                                        of more common 13MPs to address the most pervasive sources:
                                                        runoff from agricultural, urban, and construction areas.
                                                        Additional sources include runoff from abandoned mining areas
                                                        and from silviculture or forestry activities. Although nonpoint
                                                        pollution from these sources is generally not as pervasive as
                                                        agricultural and urban sources, it nonetheless may cause serious
                                                        water quality problems.


                            Urban NPS
                            Pollutfon                   Sources of urban runoff include rooftops, lawns, streets,
                                                        industrial sites, parking lots, and other pervious and impervious
                                                        surfaces. These contribute such pollutants as sediment from
                                                        construction sites; fertilizers and pesticides from lawns, gardens,
                                                        parks, and golf courses; salt and sand from winter de-icing
                                                        programs; and oils and heavy metals, primarily from automobiles.
                                                        In addition to degrading water quality, the sediment and debris
                                                        carried in urban runoff can clog sewers, stormwater control
                                                        systems, and waterways, increasing the chance of flooding.

                                                        The problems associated with urban NPS pollution can be
                                                        particularly acute in heavily populated, extensively developed
                                                        areas, where the high percentage of impervious surfaces
                                                        increases runoff volume. Managing runoff in heavily developed
                                                        areas, however, is often difficult and expensive. As a result, the
                                                        greatest progress is often made in newly developing or
                                                        undeveloped areas, where early planning and oversight can
                                                        control or avoid harmful impacts.

                                                        Management practices for urban nonpoint sources can include
                                                        both structural and nonstructural controls. Structural controls
                                                        generally require construction or installation of devices to capture
                                                        runoff, such as stormwater basins, porous pavement, and certain
                                                        sediment controls on construction sites. Nonstructural controls
                                                        typically emphasize good housekeeping practices and better
                                                        management of infrastructure and development, including rooftop
                                                        runoff controls and natural drainage systems.


                    Stormwater Basins
                                                        A variety of basins or ponds may be used to capture and hold
                                                        stormwater for varying lengths of time, thereby reducing or mini-
                                                        mizing runoff during heavy rainfall. These ponds or basins may
                                                        be retrofitted in established urban areas, but often space limit-
                                                        ations and the cost of siting and installation prohibit such efforts.
                                                        Installation of stormwater basins, therefore, is most feasible in
                                                        newly developing areas. Three types of basins commonly used
                                                        to manage stormwater runoff are described below.






             16








                                                                                                Detention Basins

                             Detention basins are 'dry' ponds designed to attenuate peak
                             runoff flow and reduce downstream flooding and erosion by
                             holding stormwater runoff until peak rainfall has subsided.




                                                                                                 Extended Detention
                             Extended detention basins are designed to retain a                  Basins
                             predetermined amount of stormwater for longer periods than
                             conventional detention ponds, and can be adjusted to allow
                             the slow release of water over a given time. Extended
                             detention ponds also allow sediment to settle, and may be
                             installed with aquatic vegetation to help filter pollutants from
                             runoff; however, detention ponds are not generally effective
                             in removal of soluble pollutants. Conventional detention
                             ponds can be converted to extended detention ponds at a
                             relatively small cost.



		The Dillon Reservoir provides more than half of 
		Denver's municipal water supply.  Population
		growth, particularly during the summer vacation
		season, and the accompanying intensified land
		used led to excess nutrient levels and related
		algae blooms.  Phosphorus was identified as the
		primary source of nutrient enrichment in the
		reservoir.  The Dillon Nonpoint Source Control
		Demonstration Project compatred nonpoint source
		controls with point source controls and
		determined that holding ponds and an infiltration
		pit would reduct phosphorus loadings much
		more cost-effectively than point source controls.

		Source:  Industrial Economics, Incorporated,
		"Dillon Reservoir Case Study," September, 1983.                  
                                                                    
                                         									       Wet Ponds/
                                                                                                 Retention Ponds

                            Wet ponds are designed to maintain a permanent pool of
                             water through controlled releases. If the basin is large
                             enough to allow the release of only a small amount of
                             overflow, these ponds can be extremely effective in
                             controlling sediment and other pollutants. Most contain
                             rooted vegetation, and the resulting biological processes are
                             very effective in the removal of dissolved nutrients.




                                                                                                    17





                                                      The amount of maintenance required increases with the
                                                      sophistication of the basin.         All require at least some
                                                      maintenance to remove sediments and other pollutants, and to
                                                      preserve the natural surroundings of the site. If runoff contains
                                                      harmful substances, infiltration may also lead to contamination of
                                                      soil and groundwater.

                                                      The success of all stormwater basins hinges on proper operation
                                                      and adequate maintenance. At a minimum, maintenance should
                                                      include:


                                                          ï¿½   Periodic inspections;
                                                          ï¿½   Removal of sediment and debris from basins and
                                                              channels;
                                                          ï¿½   Maintenance of pipes and pumps;
                                                          ï¿½   Mosquito control; and
                                                          ï¿½   Control of vegetation, if used.


                   Porous Pavement

                                                      Porous pavement is designed to increase infiltration of runoff
                                                      water into the soil, thereby decreasing the volume and rate of
                                                      runoff in addition to removing some pollutants. Water infiltrates
                                                      the pores of a special permeable asphalt layer and enters a
                                                      system of underground reservoirs. The reservoirs filter some
                                                      pollutants from the runoff as it passes through to the underlying
                                                      soil or to perforated drainage pipes. To ensure proper operation,
                                                      it is important to maintain the pavement and filtering devices
                                                      against build-up of oil, grease, dirt, and other pollutants.

                                                      A study by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments
                                                      found that porous pavement may remove as much or more
                                                      suspended sediment, phosphorus, nitrogen, and bacteria from
                                                      runoff as detention and retention basins.


                   Managing Rooftop
                   Runoff
                                                      Directing runoff from gutters and rooftop downspouts away from
                                                      streets to grassy areas is a relatively simple yet effective tool in
                                                      controlling urban runoff. Directing runoff to grassy areas has two
                                                      important benefits: (1) runoff is diverted away from impervious
                                                      surfaces where it could transport pollutants; and (2) diversion to
                                                      natural drainage areas reduces the volume of runoff flow, and
                                                      allows particulate pollutants to settle in the soil.













           18






                                                                                               Natural Drainage
                    Marshes, grasses, and other vegetation allow infiltration and              Systems
                    settling of sediments and potential pollutants. Installing
                    vegetative mounds along roadsides instead of curbs can
                    significantly impede the velocity and impact of stormwater
                    runoff, as can grass swales. Wetland areas can also serve
                    as natural detention ponds.
                                                                                               Measures to Control
                                                                                               Soil Erosion on
                                                                                               Constructfon Sites

                    Construction activities can result in substantial amounts of
                    sediment that can clog storm sewer and infiltration systems,
                    and cause numerous water quality and flood problems.
                    Examples of BMPs at construction sites include:

                        (1) Protective vegetation to cover disturbed soil
                            during and after construction, reducing exposure
                            to the erosive forces of water and wind;

                        (2) Filter fences or straw bales placed around the
                            perimeter or in other critical areas of the site to
                            contain runoff; and

                        (3) Settling basins to catch and detain runoff long
                            enough for sediment to settle.

                    Because these BMPs can be expensive to builders or
                    developers, they rarely are voluntarily implemented. As a
                    result, many areas have amended state and local zoning and
                    building ordinances to include performance standards and
                    BMP requirements at construction sites.

                    Even where sediment and erosion control laws are in place,
                    sediment from public construction projects can present
                    serious problems. Highways are the single largest source of
                    construction erosion.       Although highway construction
                    projects typically mandate the application of BMPs,
                    implementation varies from state to state and depends
                    largely on state enforcement mechanisms.
                                                                                               Good Housekeeping
                                                                                               Pfactfces
                    There are numerous ways that public and private actions can
                    reduce NPS pollution from stormwater runoff. Municipalities
                    can:


                        ï¿½   ILimit or reduce the amount of salt applied to
                            roads;
                        ï¿½   Increase and improve street cleaning;
                        ï¿½   Enforce litter controls;
                        ï¿½   Coordinate leaf removal; and
                        ï¿½   Promote public awareness of NPS problems.




                                                                                                                                19







                                                           Madison, Wisconsin has introduced a comprehensive
                                                           set of programs to reduce pollutants in stormwater
                                                           runoff. The initiative includes a street-sweeping and
                                                           leaf pickup program, an ordinance prohibiting rubbish
                                                           in city streets, and a street-saft reduction program.
                                                           Madison has reduced the amount of saft used for de-
                                                           icing city streets by 50 percent since the mid-1970S.
                                                           As a result, chlorine levels In the city's lakes are no
                                                           longer rising.






                                                        Private households can:


                                                        o    Resod or seed bare patches of lawn to limit soil erosion;

                                                        o    Plant shrubs or trees to increase infiltration;

                                                        o    Use wood decks, interlocking stones, or bricks
                                                             instead of cement for walkways and patios;

                                                        o    Reduce the use of pesticides and herbicides;

                                                        o    Ensure that pesticides and fertilizers are used
                                                             properly and disposed of appropriately;

                                                        o    Use phosphate-free detergents;

                                                        o    Properly manage and dispose of garden, yard, and
                                                             animal wastes; and

                                                        o    Properly handle and dispose of oil and other toxic
                                                             substances.


                                                     Households can be encouraged to implement these practices
                                                     through the use of educational pamphlets and advertisements
                                                     that highlight the effects of poor housekeeping practices on
                                                     water quality. In addition, households may need guidance on
                                                     how to implement alternative yard and waste management
                                                     practices. NEP Management Conferences may coordinate with
                                                     state and local nonpoint source programs to raise public
                                                     awareness of nonpoint source problems and solutions.













           110







                           The Citizens Program for the Chesapeake Bay's
                           Baybook: A Guide to Reducing Water Pollution at
                           Home is an excellent guide that shows
                           homeowners how they can improve urban
                           housekeeping practices to improve the quality of
                           urban runoff.      Copies of this publication are
                           available from the Citizens Program for the
                           Chesapeake Bay, Inc., 6600 York Road,
                           Baltimore, Maryland 21212.



                                                                                                    Agricultural
                                                                                                    NPS Pollution

                      Agricultural runoff carries sediment, nutrients, toxics, and
                      other pollutants to streams, rivers, lakes, and estuaries.
                      Major sources include: (1) eroding cropland, (2) animal
                      barnyards and grazing, feeding, or waste areas, and (3)
                      chemical and nutrient applications. The specific volume and
                      type of pollutants carried in runoff from agricultural areas
                      depends on a number of variables, including:

                          o   Local soil and hydrogeologic conditions;
                          o   The type of crop planted;
                          o   The method of planting used;
                          o   The type, quantity, and frequency of nutrient or
                              pesticide applications; and
                          o   The location and intensity of livestock activity.


                      Programs to address agricultural NPS problems have
                      generally been voluntary, emphasizing technical assistance,
                      training, and cost-sharing to promote the use of BMPs.
                      Agricultural BMPs vary widely in cost, relative effectiveness,
                      and degree of benefit to farmers. The success of a particular
                      BMP is not only measured by its absolute effectiveness in
                      controlling a particular pollutant, but also by its cost, its ease
                      of use, and its long-term impact on both crop yields and
                      water quality. The following factors are typically considered
                      when evaluating the effectiveness and appropriateness of
                      agricultural BMPs:

                          ï¿½   What is the likely impact of the BMP on both
                              surface water and groundwater?
                          ï¿½   How will the BMP affect sediment and nutrient
                              travel and loss?
                          ï¿½   What is the crop history: type, yield, pattern?
                              What effect will the BMP have on future crop
                              yields?
                          ï¿½   Is the BMP technically feasible?
                          ï¿½   Is it economically viable?







                                                   Below are some of the more common management practices
                                                   used to control pollutants from cropland and livestock areas.
                                                   The Soil Conservation Service, Agricultural Extension Service, or
                                                   other entities that help farmers implement BMPs can provide
                                                   detailed information that reflects local conditions on the cost,
                                                   effectiveness, and overall feasibility of agricultural BMPs.


  									Successful BMPs to control agricultural runoff
									address:

									o  The availability of pollutants.  Large volumes of
									   pollutants on the soil surface can be more
									   easily detatched and carried in runoff.  Better
								 	   nutrient and pesticide management are
    									   common BMPs to reduce the availability of
									   pollutants.

									o  The detachability of pollutants.  If the soil
									   surface is exposed, heavy rainfall can detatch
									   soil particles and other pollutants bound to the
									   soil.  BMPs to reduce detachability generally
									   involve covering the soil surace with crop
									   residue or plants.

									o  The solubility of pollutants. Water soluble
									   pollutants are easily transported in runoff.
									  BMPs that address pollutant solubility
									   encourage the use of fertilizers with a less
									   soluble or "slow release" form, which release
									   nitrogen or phophorus over an extended
									   period of time.

									o  The transportability of pollutants.  The volume
									   and type of pollutants that actually reach a
									   waterbody can be reduced by installing
									   devicees to capture or slow pollutants as they
									   travel across the land. 

									Source:  Adapted from U.S. EPA, Region 3,
									Chesapeake Bay Liaison Office, "Chesapeake Bay
									Nonpoint Source Programs," January 1988, p.76.

                    
                                                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                   
                    Livestock Areas

									Controlling polution from barnyards, feedlots, grazing areas, and
									waste storage areas can be as simple as covering the waste with
									a tarp or storing it until needed.  Other strategies include
									diverting runoff away from concentrated waste areas or limiting
									the access of livestock to critical areas

      112





                                                                                                 Streambank Fencing

                        Livestock grazing along streambanks can compact the soil,
                        destroy surface vegetation, increase the exposure of
                        streambanks to runoff, and introduce waste directly into the
                        stream. Constructing fences to prevent animals from grazing
                        along streambanks can reduce or eliminate problems.

			To protect the streambanks of Wisconsin's Sugar
			River watershed, the Dane County Conservation
			League has focused heavily on streambank
			fencing.  As a result, Mt. Vernon Creek and other
			streams in the watershed have been restored
			from martinal to Class 1 trout streams.  To
			provide public access, the League buys 20-year
			easements from landowners for $1.00.  In return,
			the League guarantees the landowner that it will
			maintain fences and the streambank area for the
			easement period.

			Source:  Anne Weinberg and Jim Arts.  Local
			Government Options for Controlling Nonpoint
			Source Polution.  Wisconsin Department of
			Natural Resources, 1981.


                                                                                                  Diversion Methods
                        More complex animal waste management methods divert
                        rainwater runoff away from concentrated waste areas,
                        commonly by channelling rainwater around barnyard areas
                        to ponds or lagoons where it can infiltrate the soil or be
                        applied to other land areas. The most common diversion
                        practice is known as the emenvironmental eye' and utilizes a
                        two-part diversion system: (1) water is prevented from
                        crossing through the waste area through the construction of
                        channels upstream from the barnyard, and (2) channels or
                        ditches are constructed downstream from the barnyard to
                        divert runoff away from the stream or receiving waterbody.




                                                                                                        113







                                                            Dairy livestock wastes in the Tillamook Bay, Oregon
                                                            drainage basin were creating severe bacterial
                                                            pollution, threatening to force closure of shellfish
                                                            beds. The cleanup plan organized for the bay relied
                                                            on two principles: (1) preventing rainwater and clean
                                                            surface water from coming into contact with manure,
                                                            and (2) preventing contaminated surface water from
                                                            reaching the streams or the bay. BMPs applied by
                                                            farmers included installing solid and liquid manure
                                                            storage facilities, roofing animal manure accumulation
                                                            areas, erecting streambank fencing, and managing
                                                            roofwater runoff. USDA's Rural Clean Water Program
                                                            provided over $4 million to the local Agricultural
                                                            Stabilization and Conservation Service to help dairy
                                                            owners implement these BMPs. Farmers from the
                                                            118 dairy farms themselves contributed over $3
                                                            million to support this effort. By 1985, sampling in
                                                            streams feeding Tillamook Bay showed that fecal
                                                            bacteria levels were down 15 to 30 percent.

                                                            Source: U.S. EPA, Office of Water, National Estuary
                                                            Program. "A Comprehensive Source Control Program
                                                            for Protecting Shellfish Waters: Citizen Action
                                                            Preserves Shellfish Resources.' In Saving Bays and
                                                            Estuaries: A Handbook of Tactics. Washington, DC:
                                                            June 1988.


                                                            For more information, contact the Oregon Department
                                                            of Environmental Quality, (503) 229-6035.




                      Cropland or
                      Farmland Efosion
                      Management                      BMPs to control erosion from cropland depend on the type of
                                                      soil, type of crops, and the hydrogeologic conditions surrounding
                                                      the eroding area.      There are four general categories of
                                                      agricultural BMPs:

                                                         o    Conservation tillage practices;
                                                         o    Modified cropping patterns;
                                                         o    Structural erosion control measures; and
                                                         o    Conversion of cropland to le@,s intensive uses.

                                                      Selection of the most appropriate and successful management
                                                      practice(s) will generally require local expertise. The optimal mix
                                                      may vary considerably from area to area.









            114






                                                                                                      Conservation Tillage

                      Erosion and sediment loss are closely associated with the
                      amount of exposed surface soil.            Conventional tillage
                      practices invert the top layer of soil prior to planting, turning
                      the vegetated cover and exposing the soil. Conservation
                      tillage helps reduce erosion by leaving at least 30 percent of
                      the previous year's crop residue untilled (uninverted),
                      promoting increased infiltration and thereby decreasing
                      runoff. Types of conservation tillage include:

                      o  No Till. The soil is undisturbed prior to planting, which
                         is done in a narrow seedbed approximately 1-3 inches
                         wide. Weeds are controlled primarily with herbicides.

                      o  Ridge Till. Approximately one-third of previously
                         undisturbed soil surface is tilled at planting with
                         sweeps or a row cleaner. Seeds are then planted on
                         ridges that are usually 4-6 inches higher than the row
                         middles. A combination of herbicides and cultivation
                         is used to control weeds. Cultivation is used to rebuild
                         the ridges.

                      o  Strip Till.   Approximately one-third of previously
                         undisturbed soil surface is tilled at planting time.
                         Rows or strips are then tilled using a rototiller, in-row
                         chisel, or similar tool. A combination of herbicides and
                         cultivation is used to control weeds.


                      o  Mulch Till. The soil surface is broken by tilling prior to
                         planting, but the top cover is not turned over. Tillage
                         tools such as chisels, field cultivators, discs, sweeps,
                         or blades are used. Weeds are controlled with a
                         combination of herbicides and cultivation.


                      o  Reduced Till. Any tillage and planting system that
                         leaves at least 30 percent of existing plant residue
                         uninverted.



                         Source:      Adapted from U.S. EPA, Region 3,
                         "Chesapeake Bay Nonpoint Source Programs,"
                         January 1988, pp. 80-81.


                      Conservation tillage practices, particularly no-till, may require
                      increased pesticide or herbicide applications to control
                      weeds and insects, which may lead to surface water and
                      groundwater pollution. No-till, however, clearly provides the
                      greatest amount of protection against sediment erosion. In
                      light of these concerns, local USDA or soil and water
                      conservation experts can provide advice on the most
                      appropriate conservation tillage practice for any given area.





                                                                                                                                         115







                                                              The EPA and USDA are studying the effects of
                                                              conservation tillage practices on groundwater and
                                                              surface water. The goal of this effort is to Identify the
                                                              mix of management practices that best promotes
                                                              agricultural conservation without contributing to
                                                              nonpoint source pollution problems. The mix of
                                                              practices -- conservation and nonpoint source -- may
                                                              involve modifications to existing pollution or erosion
                                                              control practices.



                       Modified Cropping
                       Patterns

                                                        In addition to changing tillage practices, farmers can modify
                                                        cropping patterns to reduce NPS pollution. Effective alternative
                                                        cropping procedures include:

                                                        o  Contour Farming. Tillage practices that follow the contour
                                                           of the field, perpendicular to the slope of the land, are
                                                           effective in reducing soil loss from stormwater runoff.
                                                           Tilling along the contour of the land increases infiltration
                                                           and decreases runoff velocity. Its effectiveness decreases
                                                           as the steepness of the slope increases; for longer slopes,
                                                           other methods such as diversion channels or terraces may
                                                           be needed. Crop yields will also vary depending on the
                                                           amount of rainfall and the period of time between rainfalls.

                                                        o  Contour Strip Cropping. Row crops typically leave a large
                                                           portion of the land uncovered and allow water to flow
                                                           easily down the rows and off the field. For fields normally
                                                           planted with row crops, alternative strips can be planted
                                                           with close-grown crops such as grasses or legumes. This
                                                           practice promotes greater filtration and reduces the overall
                                                           velocity of runoff across the tilled area. Close-grown crops
                                                           may also improve the organic content of the soil,
                                                           improving the soil's ability to absorb water.

                                                        o Cover Cropping. For seasonal harvests, close-growing
                                                           crops can be planted during the off-season to provide soil
                                                           protection, reduce erosion, and increase infiltration.


                       Structural Erosion
                       Control Measures
                                                        Farmers can also implement structural controls to reduce
                                                        nonpoint source pollution. Such controls include:

                                                        o Diversion and Terrace Systems. Runoff can be diverted
                                                           over long slopes in channels or a system of earthen ridges
                                                           or terraces. Terrace systems are most suited to areas with
                                                           a relatively even topography and a moderate slope angle.





            116






                    o  Grass Filter Strips. Filter strips are permanent strips of
                       grass or other vegetation planted along a stream or
                       around a pollution source to filter pollutants from
                       runoff. These strips may also protect the streambank
                       from structural damage. Filter strips are generally
                       more effective in controlling particulate pollutants than
                       soluble pollutants.    in general, their effectiveness
                       depends on the width of the filter, its slope, the type of
                       vegetation, the size of the sediment, the flow rate, the
                       initial concentration of pollutants, and the pattern of
                       flow across the filter.


                    o  Tree Plariting and Forest Buffer Strips. Tree planting
                       can increase infiltration, improve soil conditions, and
                       protect against erosion, typically on marginal cropland
                       with a high rate of erosion. Forest buffer strips are
                       generally placed along streambanks to provide
                       additional protection against the movement of
                       groundwater contaminants to a surface waterbody, but
                       also help reduce streambank erosion and provide
                       some filtration of overland water.

                                                                                                Conversion of Cropland
                                                                                                to Less Intensive Uses

                    An alternative to changed cropping practices or structural
                    BMPs is to remove cropland from active cultivation,
                    particularly in areas where erosion damage is severe or the
                    potential for such damage is high and a body of water is
                    near. Generally, this practice involves seeding, sodding, or
                    mulching land removed from active agricultural production.


                                                                                                Conservation            Reserve
                                                                                                Program
                    Several programs created by the Food Security Act of 1985
                    (The Farm Bill) and administered by USDA aim to protect
                    areas vulnerable to erosion damage. USDA's Conservation
                    Reserve Program (CRP) removes highly erodible cropland
                    from cultivation. Farmers enter into an agreement with USDA
                    to install vegetative cover over the eroding soil, and
                    participants receive 50 percent cost-sharing for the
                    installation. Enrolled cropland cannot be planted for 10
                    years. As of 1988, approximately 45 million acres of highly
                    erodible land were enrolled in CRP.

















                                                                                                                                 117








                                                                Virginia is now using a computer-based information
                                                                system to identify farmland with a high erosion
                                                                potential.     VIRGIS - the Virginia Geographic
                                                                Information System -- is used as a screening tool to
                                                                identify potential problem areas.            The system
                                                                integrates topographic, soil, watershed, and elevation
                                                                information with factors for rainfall, vegetative cover,
                                                                and land use practices. In the long term, staff expect
                                                                to use the system to assist with setting priorities and
                                                                with determining critical areas for programs such as
                                                                the Conservation Reserve.


                                                                For more information, contact the Virginia Division of
                                                                Soil and Water Conservation, (804) 786-8173.


                Conservation
                Compliance Program                        As part of its overall effort to protect highly erodible lands (HEL),
                                                          USDA also administers the Conservation Compliance Program.
                                                          There are an estimated 140 million acres of HEL in the U.S. The
                                                          program requires farmers who produce on highly erodible fields
                                                          but wish to remain eligible for most USDA farm support benefits
                                                          to prepare and have approved a plan to reduce or prevent
                                                          erosion. Plans must be fully implemented by 1995.


                                                                In addition to programs that address previously
                                                                cultivated cropland, USDA also administers the
                                                                'Sodbusterg program to discourage bringing highly
                                                                erodible lands into production. Like Conservation
                                                                Compliance, Sodbuster penalizes farmers who bring
                                                                new HEL into production by making them ineligible
                                                                for federal farm benefits.





                                                          USDA can help to identify highly erodible lands in the estuary's
                                                          watershed, and to encourage participation in the various erosion
                                                          control programs.
                Improved Management
                of Agricultural
                Chemicals
                                                          Over-use or improper application of fertilizers and pesticides can
                                                          lead to significant amounts of phosphorus, nitrogen, and
                                                          agricultural chemicals in surface runoff. Improved nutrient and
                                                          pesticide management involves controlling the rate, timing, and
                                                          method of application to reduce the potential for applied
                                                          nutrients and chemicals to be carried in runoff and infiltrated to
                                                          groundwater. Properly using and storing animal waste, applying
                                                          pesticides and nutrients based on specific crop requirements,
                                                          and testing soils for existing nutrient levels are effective BMPs.


              118








                               Sources of More Information on
                                   Nonpoint Source Control

                     U.S. EPA Regional Offices
                     Water Management Division

                     State Soll and Water
                     Conservation Divisions


                     U.S. EPA Headquarters
                     Office of Water Regulations and Standards
                     Nonpoint Source Control Branch
                     401 M Street, SW
                     Washington, DC 20460
                     (202) 382-7104


                     Citizens Program for the Chesapeake Bay, Baybook:
                        Guide to Reducing Water Pollution at Home,
                        Baltimore, Maryland.

                     Hansen, Nancy R., et al. Controlling Nonpoint-Source
                        Water Pollution:   A Citizen's Handbook.        The
                        Conservation Foundation and National Audubon
                        society: 1988.

                     Metrolpolitan Washington Council of Governments,
                        Controlling Urban Runoff: A Practical Manual for
                        Planning and Designing Urban BMPs, by Thomas R.
                        Schueler, Department of Environmental Programs,
                        Washington, DC: July 1987. For copies of report
                        write to: The Metropolitan Information Center,
                        MWCOG, 777 North Capitol St. NE, Suite 300,
                        Washington, DO 20002, or call (202) 962-3256.

                     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region Ill.
                        Chesapeake Bay Nonpoint Source Programs.
                        Annapolis, MD: January, 1988.

                     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Marine
                        and Estuarine Protection.       Saving Bays and
                        Estuaries: A Handbook of Tactics. Washington,
                        DC: June, 1988.

                     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Creating
                        Successful Nonpoint Source Programs: The
                        Innovative Touch, Washington, DC: September,
                        1988.


                     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Results of the
                        Nationwide Urban Runoff Program, Final Report.
                        Water Planning Division. Washington, DO: 1984.





                                                                                                                       119









                                                                        Sources of More Infornuition on
                                                                           Nonpoint Source Control

                                                          U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Creating Successful
                                                             Nongoint Source Programs: The Innovative Touch
                                                             Washington, DC: September, 1988.

                                                          U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Results of the
                                                             Nationwide Urban Runoff Program Final Report. Water
                                                             Planning Division. Washington, DC: 1984.

                                                          U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water
                                                             Regulations and Standards, Nonpoint Source Control
                                                             Branch, Guide for Community Planners, Washington,
                                                             DC: 1990.


                                                          U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water
                                                             Regulations and Standards, Nonpoint Source Control
                                                             Branch, Guide to Nonpoint Source Control, Washington,
                                                             DC: 1987.


                                                          U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water and
                                                             Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation. Share the
                                                             Costs -- Share the Benefits: A-gricultural Nonpoin
                                                             Source Cost Share Program . Washington, DC: March,
                                                             1990.


                                                          Weinberg, Anne and Jim Arts. Local Government Options
                                                             for Controlling Nonpoint Source Pollution. Wisconsin
                                                             Department of Natural Resources: 1981.



                  Land Use Tools
                  and Conservation
                  Measures
                                                       The measures discussed earlier can address or mitigate existing
                                                       pollution problems, but there are also many activities designed
                                                       to prevent problems from happening. Prevention alone will not
                                                       solve the problems facing degraded estuaries, but it can
                                                       compliment traditional remediation strategies to control or reduce
                                                       the magnitude of future point and nonpoint water pollution.

                                                       Unplanned or unguided growth and development in an estuarine
                                                       basin area can lead to numerous water quality and ecosystem
                                                       problems: sensitive areas and habitats destroyed or damaged;
                                                       floodplains altered (affecting both water quality and wetland
                                                       habitats); wetlands lost or polluted; fish and shellfish populations
                                                       reduced or impaired; and recreational activities curtailed.







            120






                   Unmanaged growth and development may also create
                   sewage treatment problems, waste storage and treatment
                   shortages, increased nonpoint source runoff, and other
                   potential threats to estuarine ecosystems. In most areas, the
                   solution to these problems will involve striking compromises
                   between competing land use claims, directing development
                   away from pristine areas and toward existing infrastructure,
                   and encouraging or requiring certain management practices
                   to be used with new development.

                   The following discussion focuses on management activities
                   used primarily by state and local governments to prohibit,
                   direct, or otherwise control land use practices. The tools
                   vary in the degree of control exercised, with their use guided
                   by cost, permanence, and the nature and extent of the
                   current or potential problem.
                                                                                             Local Zoning
                                                                                             Ordinances

                   Zoning ordinances, the basic tool by which communities
                   regulate and direct land use, designate zones or districts in
                   which various land uses are generally permitted, conditionally
                   permitted, or prohibited. Such ordinances may apply to
                   large tracts of land, and generally cost relatively little to
                   develop. They can be readily employed to manage future
                   growth so that development does not threaten estuarine
                   ecosystems. Their effectiveness depends on the quality of
                   their design and the rigor with which they are implemented
                   and enforced.


                   This section discusses three types of zoning ordinances:
                   those that restrict development; those that direct
                   development to certain areas; and those that modify the
                   structure of existing zoning ordinances.
                                                                                             Residding Development
                                                                                             to Protect Sensgive
                                                                                             Habitats



                                                                                             Sensitive Area
                                                                                             Ordinances

                   Habitats critical to the health of an estuarine ecosystem can
                   be protected directly by imposing strict zoning regulations on
                   the sensitive areas themselves. A sensitive area zoning
                   ordinance creates a special district within which potentially
                   damaging land-use practices are prohibited or special land-
                   use management practices are required. For example, local
                   governments can develop sensitive area ordinances for areas
                   such as wetlands and all upland areas within 1,000 feet of an
                   estuary's shore.     A sensitive area ordinance may be
                   incorporated into a community's comprehensive zoning
                   regulations, or may stand alone. Regardless of its context,
                   a sensitive area ordinance should, at minimum:




                                                                                                                            121







                                                                            o         State its purpose (e.g., estuarine protection);
                                                                            o         Map the area in which development will be regulated;
                                                                            o         Establish the types of use that will be prohibited and
                                                                                      permitted in the critical area; and
                                                                            o         Set penalties for violating the terms of the ordinance.

                                                                            For example, a sensitive area ordinance might limit permitted
                                                                            uses within the protected area to outdoor recreation and
                                                                            silviculture. It might conditionally permit other, more intensive
                                                                            activities, such as the building of roads or bridges, provided such
                                                                            activities are conducted in compliance with performance
                                                                            standards designed to minimize any adverse effects. Finally, the
                                                                            ordinance might prohibit harmful land uses, such as landfilling,
                                                                            dumping, or excavation; residential, commercial, or industrial
                                                                            construction; or discharge of lawn fertilizers or hazardous
                                                                            chemicals.



                                                                            The Chesapeake Bay is the largest estuarine system in
                                                                            North America, with 425,000 acres of marshland adjoining
                                                                            the Bay itself.  The watershed, stretching 64,000 square
                                                                            miles from New York to West Virginia, is subject to intense 
                                                                            development pressure that has severely degraded the
                                                                            quality of the Bay ecosystem.  To control the growth 
                                                                            pressure, Maryland adopted the Chesapeake Bay Critical 
                                                                            Areas Act in 1984, governing land use and development on 
                                                                            the land within 1,000 feet of mean high tide of the Bay or
                                                       			    the landward side of neighboring wetlands.

 												    The Act requires local jurisdictions to enact zoning
 												    ordinances to protect sensitive environments critical to
                                                                            estuarine water quality.  Each town maps critical areas 
                                                                            within its boundaries and classifies them as Intense
                                                                            Development, Limited Development, or Resource 
                                                                            Conservation areas, according to current housing density
                                                                            and use.  All new development must occur in previously
                                                                            developed areas, and regulations encourage conservation
                                                                            techniques such as clustered development and limited 
                                                                            imprevious surfaces.  In Resource Conservation Areas, new
                                                                            marinas are prohibited and only very low density
                                                                            development is permitted.

                                                                            Localities must also employ stringent forest management
                                                                            techniques, control livestock feeding and watering at the 
                                                                            water's edge, and set up 100-foot buffer zones around tidal
                                                                            waters.  These strategies, developed by local governments, 
                                                                            must be approved by the state Critical Areas Commission; 
                                                                            if not accepted, the Commission may design a plan for the 
                                                                            town.

                                                                            Source:  Environmental Law Institute, National Wetlands 
                                                                            Newsletter, various issues, 1986-1988.
                                                         






                                                                                                                        Conservation
                       Communities can also regulate development in and around                                          Districts
                       the estuarine ecosystem less directly by establishing
                       conservation districts to exclude certain potentially harmful
                       land uses. For example,

                            Floodplain districts protect estuaries by restricting
                            filling, dredging, drainage, and construction
                            activities in areas nearest the water;

                            Open space and conservation districts restrict
                            activity in relatively undeveloped areas; and

                            Buffer zone regulations restrict certain types of
                            land use in a particular area of an estuarine
                            watershed. The buffer zone criteria can apply to
                            either a static, specified buffer, referred to as a
                            "standard buffer", or to a "variable buffer," the
                            width of which changes depending on the slope
                            of the terrain, the vegetation, soil type, or other
                            environmental variables. Buffer zones are
                            sometimes used to ensure safe distances between
                            septic systems, for example, and wetlands,
                            surface waters, or other sensitive areas.


                            In Rhode Island, an ecologically important salt
                            pond region was threatened by population growth
                            and rapid development due to tourism.  Under
                            the auspices of Rhode Island's Coastal Zone
                            Management and Sea Grant programs, the 
                            Coastal Resources Center at the University of
                            Rhode Island convened an advisory panel to 
                            develop a comprehesive Special Area 
                            Management Plan for the ponds.
				
				    Land-use controls developed under the plan
				    include:
					
					limits on new public water/sewer
					service in undeveloped areas;
					buffer strips;
					restrictions on navigational dredging
					and disposal;
					fisheries management measures;and
					storm damage controls.
				    
				    Source: U.S. EPA, Office of Water, National
				    Estuary Program.  "Special Area Management
				    Plan for Salt Pond Protection," in Saving Bays and
				    Estuaries: A Handbook of Tactics.  Washington, 
				    DC: June 1988.




																	I23                                               




                Direciing Development
                Away From Estuarine
                Environments

                                                       The interests of developers and preservationists may sometimes
                                                       be accommodated with zoning techniques that shift development
                                                       activity to certain zones while keeping others pristine.

                        Set Asides

                                                       Set asides establish a formula to calculate the distribution of
                                                       developed and undeveloped land in a given area (e.g., an
                                                       estuarine coastal area) based on characteristics of the critical
                                                       area.


                        Large Lot Zoning

                                                       Large lot zoning limits the intensity of development by setting a
                                                       minimum lot size, such as five acres, that exceeds normal lot
                                                       requirements. It can be particularly effective in preserving open
                                                       space or reducing septic system leachate to an estuary.

                        Cluster Zoning

                                                       Cluster zoning and density requirements permit lots in one part
                                                       of a site to be smaller and more densely spaced in exchange for
                                                       less development and more open space in another part of the
                                                       site. These techniques can be used to preserve areas that serve
                                                       important functions in supporting the estuarine ecosystem, and
                                                       also reduce the degree to which infrastructure (such as roads
                                                       and utility lines) must be extended for new developments.


                        Planned Unit
                        Development
                                                       A planned unit development (PUD) is a carefully planned
                                                       development scheme for an entire site -- generally a large,
                                                       undeveloped tract of land. By employing clustering, open space
                                                       provisions, or other approaches, a PUD can allow for
                                                       preservation of ecologically vital areas from the outset of the
                                                       development process.


                        Subdivision
                        Controls                       Subdivision controls, like PUDs, can protect previously
                                                       undeveloped areas by imposing restrictive covenants on
                                                       development projects. Subdivision controls can be a method of
                                                       implementing other zoning techniques in specific areas; for
                                                       example, they may require open space set asides or prohibitions
                                                       on construction in areas with no sewer hook-ups. Subdivision
                                                       controls can easily be structured to accommodate and protect
                                                       sensitive areas, provided that they are designed with attention to
                                                       the potential negative impacts of subdivision development on the
                                                 I     estuary.
              124




                                                                                                                          Transfers of Development
                                                                                                                          Rights (TDR)
                         TDRs are detailed, carefully planned programs designed to
                         shift development from critical areas to targeted growth
                         areas. A TDR program provides an incentive to owners of
                         sensitive lands to sell their development rights, leaving the
                         land in a pristine state. Others with less ecologically valuable
                         land can then buy these rights if they wish to develop
                         beyond the ordinary limits of the local zoning ordinance.




				The city of Hollywood, Florida initiated a
				mandatory Transfer of Development Rights (TDR)
				for North Beach Park, a 1400-acre undisturbed
				dune-shoreline area.  The development company
				that owned the area sued the city of Hollywood
				on grounds that the TDR constituted the "taking
				of private property by the city.  The state Superior
				Court, however, upheld the TDR as constitutional,
				stating that the city's police powers allowed it to
				establish certain natural preserve areas.  The
				court added that the TDR did not constitute a
				"taking" because no development had taken
				place.

				Source:  "protecting the Coastal Zone Through
				Growth Management:  The Experience of Five
				Coastal States."  Kari Dolan and Heidi Bly
				Hendrickson.  Prepared for the National Network
				for Environmental Management Studies, U.S.
				Environmental Protection Agency.


														Modifying Existing
														Zones

				Existing zoning ordinances often serve purposes other than
environmental protection -- many towns, for example, zone
residential areas separately from commercial areas.  Local
governments can modify these current zoning regulations to
better protect the estuarine ecosystem.  This section
describes a number of modifications that may reduce threats 
to coastal environments.



																I25
                                                    






                           Overlay Zones

                                                       Overlay zones add an extra layer     of requirements to existing
                                                       zoning; they are especially effective in amending existing zoning
                                                       ordinances to impose environmentally protective measures.
                                                       Overlay zones can be applied to any existing zoning regulation.
                                                       Any proposed development must meet both zoning ordinances.


                                                                                                  ..............
                                                                                                  ....... .....
                                                                                 fi    oinas..::*d.6:asa Toe.
                                                                                         .......... ...
                                                                                        d
                                                                                       ing         activities
                                                                                          :an :ysq-a




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




                          Downzoning
                                                       Downzoning tightens the restrictions of existing zoning
                                                       regulations by specifying less intensive uses than designated.
                                                       It can be a valuable tool in communities where growth pressures
                                                       have intensified and is used primarily in areas previously zoned
                  Bonus and Incentive                  but not yet intensively developed.
                  Zoning


                                                       Bonus and incentive zoning award developers supplemental
                                                       development rights, including greater density or building height,
                                                       in exchange for public benefits, such as preservation of open
                                                       space in a critical area.
                Performance Standards


                                                       Performance standards may take the form of detailed criteria or
                                                       general guidelines, and may address such development issues
                                                       as:

                                                          o   The placement of fill or the incline of slopes;
                                                          o   The location and design of septic systems;
                                                          o   Possible disturbance of vegetation and wildlife;
                                                          o   Construction activities that may release sediments; or
                                                          o   The quantity and quality of wastewater released into
                                                              the estuary.

                                                       Such standards typically are embodied in building and sanitary
                                                       codes, or site plan and design review. They may include, for
                                                       example:

                                                          o Requirements that septic systems be designed with
                                                              sufficient capacity and be sited to minimize potential
                                                              adverse effects on estuary water quality;





             126






                    o    Regulations establishing minimum building set-
                         backs from the boundaries of sensitive areas;

                    o    Prohibitions on package sewage treatment
                         plants;

                    o    Requirements that developers employ best
                         management practices to minimize sediment
                         runoff during construction; or

                    o    Limits on the proportion of a development site
                         that may be surfaced with impervious materials.

                                                                                          Interim Development
                                                                                          Controls

                 Interim development controls can serve to temporarily slow
                 or haft development activity, protecting critical areas until
                 they can be covered by permanent controls. They can give
                 a community in transition time to reassess estuary protection
                 needs and goals and complete its planning process.
                 Examples of interim development controls include temporary
                 ordinances pending revision of the current plan, building
                 permit moratoria, and water and sewer moratoria.

                                                                                          State or Federal
                                                                                          Designation of
                                                                                          Protected Areas

                 The designation of protected areas by state or federal
                 organizations can be instrumental in preserving an estuarine
                 ecosystem. Under this approach, the estuary itself or certain
                 sensitive environments critical to its water quality may be
                 designated as protected areas.          Depending on the
                 administering body, the degree of control over a protected
                 area is likely to fall somewhere between that found with
                 zoning ordinances and that found with acquisition of the
                 property. Protective designations may prove easier and
                 cheaper to implement than acquisition; they may also prove
                 more permanent than locally-administered zoning since state
                 or federal agencies are likely to remain removed from local
                 development pressures.

                 There are numerous programs that designate areas as
                 protected, depending on the resources offered by the area.
                 At the federal level, these programs include:

                    o    The National Estuarine Research Reserves
                         Program (formerly known as the National
                         Estuarine Sanctuary       Program),    which     is
                         administered by the Office of Coastal Resources
                         Management. The program provides federal and
                         state funds for land acquisition, research, and






                                                                                                                         127






                                                                                   education. Typically, Advisory Councils are set up to
                                                                                   coordinate among local interests, state environmental
                                                                                   agencies, and the federal government.

                                                                             ï¿½     The Wild and Scenic Rivers Program, which protects
                                                                                   natural free-flowing rivers possessing remarkable
                                                                                   values from damming and other forms of development.
                                                                                   The National Park Service manages all designated
                                                                                   river segments, except those managed by states, the
                                                                                   Forest Service, or the Bureau of Land Management.

                                                                             ï¿½     The provisions of the Endangered Species Act, which
                                                                                   can protect estuarine ecosystems that are habitat for
                                                                                   endangered species. Among other provisions, the Act
                                                                                   requires federal agencies to ensure that any actions
                                                                                   they authorize, fund, or carry nut will not jeopardize
                                                                                   the continued existince of any listed species, or resul,
                                                                                   in the destruction or adverse modification of it-
                                                                                   designated critical habitat.

                                                                        State programs offer similar forms of designation for critical
                                                                        resources, though the specific statutes and procedures vary from
                                                                        state to state. Several states have programs that go beyond
                                                                        federal efforts to protect Wild and Scenic Rivers, historic areas,
                                                                        endangered species, and other resources.

												  States may designate ecologically unique or
												  significant waters as Outhstanding National Resource
												  Waters (ONRW).  This designation protects important,
												  unique, or sensitive waters -- such as those within
										   	        State or National Parks, certain swamps, or hot 
												  springs -- by adopting criteria that protect the
												  essential characteristics of the waterbody.

									Acquistion

												  Acquistion of estuarine environments and/or adjacent critical
												  areas offers maximum control over resource management in
												  these areas.  While local ordinances can change with a change
												  in administration or economic or political pressures, acquisition
												  is permanent.  Acquisition can benefit a community both
												  financially and aesthetically, and often gains broad public
												  support.  Because the land value of shorelines and coastal
												  wetlands is generally high, however, acquisition can be
												  expensive.

												  Several factors should be considered before committing time,
												  money, and energy to acquiring a parcel of land.  These include
												  deciding whether:

I28





                                                                                                               oThe land is critical to the ecological health of the
                                                                                                               estuary;

                                                                                                               oThe acquisition can later be extended to other
                                                                                                               holdings, to preserve the ecological relationship of
                                                                                                               the acquired area with its surroundings;

                                                                                                               oResponsibility for the protection and maintenance
                                                                                                               of the acquired area will later be transferred to
                                                                                                               another entity or organization; and

                                                                                                               oThere are sufficient financial and staff resources to
                                                                                                               monitor and protect the acquisition, both now and
                                                                                                               in the future.


                         Once the acquisition of a critical area is deemed necessary
                         and viable, there are several techniques that the acquiring
                         authority can employ. These include full acquisition and
                         various methods of partial acquisition, discussed below.


                                                                                                               ONCE THE ACQUISITION OF A CRITICAL AREA IS DEEMED NECESSARY
                                                                                                               AND VIABLE, THERE ARE SEVERAL TECHNIQUES THAT THE ACQUIRING
                                                                                                               AUTHORITY CAN EMPLOY.  THESE INCLUDE FULL ACQUISITION AND
                                                                                                               VARIOUS METHODS OF PARTIAL ACQUISITION, DISCUSSED BELOW.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                               THE APPLACHICOLA ESTUARY, LOCATED ON FLORIDA'S
                                                                                                               GULF COAST, IS A SHALLOW LAGOON AND BARRIER ISLAND
																	         SYSTEM COVERING APPROXIMATELY 210 SQAURE MILES. 		
                                                                                                               IN THE EARLY 1970'S THE ESTUARINE ECOSYSTEM FACED
                                                                                                               THREATS FROM NUMEROUS SOURCES; DISCHARGES FROM
                                                                                                               A SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT; PROPOSED DAM
                                                                                                               CONSTRUCTION THAT WOULD SUBSTANTIALLY MODIFY THE
                                                                                                               APPALACHICOLA RIVER'S HYDRODYNAMICS; PROPOSED
                                                                                                               FOREST CLEAR-CUTTING; AND OTHER DEVELOPMENT.
                                                                                                               
                                                                                                               
                                                                                                               PROTECTION OF THE ESTUARY FOCUSED ON THREE TYPES
                                                                                                               OF ACTIONS--ACQUISITION, PROTECTIVE DESIGNATIONS,
                                                                                                               AND BASIN MANAGEMENT.  PUBLIC LAND ACQUISITION
                                                                                                               PROVIDED THE CORNERSTONE OF THE EFFORT; OVER
                                                                                                               100,000 ACRES OF LAND ALONG THE RIVER FLOODPLAIN,
                                                                                                               LOWER PORTION OF THE RIVER, AND NEARBY ISLANDS
                                                                                                               WERE PURCHASED FOR A VARIETY OF PURPOSES.  TWO
                                                                                                               STATE ACQUISITION PROGRAMS ORCHESTRATED THE
                                                                                                               PURCHASES:  THE STATE CONSERVATION AND
                                                                                                               RECREATION LANDS PROGRAM (CARL) AND THE SAVE
                                                                                                               OUR RIVERS PROGRAM.
                                                                                                               
                                                                                                               
                                                                                                               MOST OF THE FLORIDA PORTION OF THE ESTUARY'S
                                                                                                               DRAINAGE BASIN HAS BEEN DESIGNATED AN
                                                                                                               OUTSTANDING FLORIDA WATER.  THIS DESIGNATION
                                                                                                               PREVENTS A PERMANENT POINT SOURCE DISCHARGE
                                                                                                               FROM DEGRADING THE RECEIVING WATER, IMPOSES
                                                                                                               REDUCED ALLOWANCES FOR WASTE DISPOSAL AND
                                                                                                               ASSIMILATION, AND RESTRICTS NEW LONG-TERM POLLUTANT
                                                                                                               DISCHARGES (SUCH AS SEWAGE, INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT,
																	         DREDGING, AND FILLING). 		                                                                                                               
																	          

                                                                                                               				129







                                                             The lower Appalachicola River and Bay is also a National
                                                             Estuarine Research Reserve. Under this program which is
                                                             administered by the Office of Coastal Resources
                                                             Management, basin-wide planning was required as a
                                                             condition for receiving funds. At 193,758 acres, the
                                                             Appalachicola Reserve is the largest in the country (twice
                                                             the size of the other 17 reserves combined). It Includes
                                                             floodplain, fresh and saltwater marshes, open water, and
                                                             barrier islands.


                                                             The estuary itself has been designated both an Area of
                                                             Critical State Concern and a state Aquatic Preserve; these
                                                             designations require the state to develop a management
                                                             plan to ensure the long-term protection of the aquatic
                                                             resource.


                                                             Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
                                                             Water, National Estuary Program.         nStrategies for the
                                                             Preservation of an Estuarine Watershed:             Preserving
                                                             Watersheds through Land Purchases and Protective
                                                             Designations,9 in Saving Bays and Estuaries: A Handbook
                                                             of Tactics. Washington, DC: June 1988.



                          Full Acquisidon                Full acquisition refers to outright purchase of a critical area and
                                                         assures complete control of and responsibility for the acquired
                                                         land. The process involves:

                                                             o   Determining those areas in the estuary watershed not
                                                                 sufficiently protected by regulations. These areas are
                                                                 candidates for acquisition.

                                                             o   Evaluating the area being considered for acquisition
                                                                 to assess the threat of development or degradation,
                                                                 the habitat value and the value it holds for the estuary,
                                                                 and the amount that should be acquired to provide
                                                                 adequate protection.

                                                             o   Negotiating with landowners to begin the acquisition
                                                                 process and appraise the value of the site.

                                                             o   Preparing environmental impact statements, which
                                                                 discuss the environmental effect of development, any
                                                                 practical alternatives, and any required mitigation. If
                                                                 federal resources will fund part or all of the acquisition
                                                                 or if state law requires, a determination must be made
                                                                 as to whether an EIS is necessary.





              130








                                                                                                     ï¿½Beginning the final negotiations with the
                                                                                                     landowner.


                                                                                                     ï¿½Closing the deal, including legal steps such as
                                                                                                     drawing and executing the deed, approving any
                                                                                                     exemptions to the title policy, and certifying the
                                                                                                     survey.

																     TO PROTECT WATER QUALITY AND PRESERVE OPEN	
                                                                                                     SPACE, THE CITY OF SHEBOYGAN, WISCONSIN CREATED
                                                                                                     THE PIGEON RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL CORRIDOR, AN AREA
                                                                                                     THAT PROVIDES A BUFFER BETWEEN DEVELOPMENT AND
                                                                                                     THE RIVER.  BY GRADUALLY ACQUIRING PROPERTY ALONG
																     THE RIVER OVER THE LAST 25 YEARS, THE CITY HAS 
																     ASSEMBLED A PUBLICLY-OWNED CORRIDOR OF SEVERAL 
																     HUNDRED ACRES.  LAND HAS BEEN ACQUIRED THROUGH
																     DIRECT CITY PURCHASE AND CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED 
                                                                                                     FROM PRIVATE LAND OWNERS AND DEVELOPERS.  ONE                   
																     SUCH DONATION LED TO THE CREATION OF A 135-ACRE	
                        												     ENVIRONMENTAL PARK. 	


				Because of the financial and administrative obstacles to full		      	
                        acquisition, partial acquisition of a critical area near an
                        estuary can also be a viable option, especially if land prices
                        are high or funding is limited. While not an absolute
                        guarantee of protection in perpetuity, partial acquisition may
                        adequately preserve the critical area from development and
                        degradation. Three techniques -- conservation easements,
                        deed restrictions, and post-acquisition disposal -- are briefly
                        outlined below.


                                                                                                     GREENWAYS ARE LINEAR PARKS AND OPEN SPACES,
                                                                                                     OFTEN ALONG RIVERS AND SHORES, THAT PRESERVE
                                                                                                     ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREAS FOR FLOOD
                                                                                                     MANAGEMENT, OPEN AND RECREATIONAL SPACE, WATER
                                                                                                     QUALITY PROTECTION, AND WILDLIFE HABITAT.  BY LIMITING
                                                                                                     DEVELOPMENT ALONG RIVERS AND SHORES, GREENWAYS
                                                                                                     MAY REDUCE NONPOINT SOURCE P0LLUTION AND
                                                                                                     PRESERVE VALUABLE WETLANDS, THEREBY ENHANCING
                                                                                                     ESTUARINE ECOSYSTEMS.
                                                                                                     .














                                                                                                                                                                  131





               Conservation Easements

                                                         A conservation easement is a legal agreement by a property
                                                         owner of a critical area to restrict the type and amount of
                                                         development that takes place on the property. The owner retains
                                                         basic ownership and use rights, but sells the development rights
                                                         -- the right to develop or alter the land -- to a public agency, land
                                                         trust, or historic organization. The easement can apply for a
                                                         specified amount of time or for perpetuity, and is recorded at the
                                                         town or county records office to inform any future owners of the
                                                         land of the easement restrictions. Easements usually cost less
                                                         than full acquisition, yet may accomplish the same purpose.
                                                         They also may be attractive to land owners, since the sale or
                                                         granting of an easement may make the property owner eligible
                                                         for a tax deduction.


                         Deed Restrictions

                                                         Much like conservation easements, deed restrictions are clauses
                                                         in a property deed that restrict development or uses by a new
                                                         owner that would damage, destroy, or after a critical area. Again,
                                                         they may protect these areas as effectively as full acquisition,
                                                         and offer tax advantages to the donor.
                        Post Acquisition
                        Disposal
                                                         Post-acquisition disposal involves the outright purchase of a tract
                                                         of land by a community or other organization, which then
                                                         disposes of some or all of the property rights by either leasing or
                                                         reselling the property. The lease or resale can be selective,
                                                         accompanied by restrictions that limit future development. This
                                                         allows the acquiring community to retain title to the land, while
                                                         leasing it to other entities under conditions that mesh with the
                                                         community's land management objectives. The community can
                                                         recoup some of its initial cost, but still must monitor the area to
                                                         ensure that the conditions of the disposal are met.

                   Financing Acquisition
                   MOM                                   Acquisition can be expensive. Several potential sources of funds
                                                         include:


                                                             ï¿½   General funds from state or local property or sales
                                                                 tax revenues.


                                                             ï¿½   Private funds from organizations such as the
                                                                 Nature Conservancy or the Trust for Public Lands,
                                                                 which are also expert at facilitating the acquisition
                                                                 process.

                                                             ï¿½   Donations of funds or property frun indiividuals or
                                                                 corporations, which may qualify the donors for tax
                                                                 breaks. Even when the property is donated,
                                                                 however, funds are required for management and
                                                                 upkeep.



              132






                      o    Federal funds, such as matching grants or
                           revenue-sharing from the U.S. Fish and
                           Wildlife Service, which are available for wildlife
                           area acquisition and management expenses.

                      o    Some state programs offer funds for
                           environmentally sensitive lands or lands that
                           can be used for public recreation. Examples
                           of such programs are Florida's Conservation
                           and Recreational Lands program and
                           California's Coastal Conservancy.            Many
                           states also have State Comprehensive
                           Outdoor Recreation Programs (SCORPs),
                           through which they purchase recreation lands
                           with funds provided by the National Park
                           Service.

                                                                                                  Cooperatb,.,@ Acqui@,;tiur,
                                                                                                  Programs

                    While local governments traditionally have jurisdiction over
                    land use policy, they often lack the means to use the
                    techniques of acquisition described above. To bridge this
                    gap, non-profit conservation and environmental organizations
                    often work with landowners, government, and the general
                    public to acquire, manage, and protect critical ecosystems.
                    Many such groups provide legal advice, technical expertise,
                    and/or financial support. In some cases, communities
                    organize or work directly with a non-profit land trust to
                    purchase critical areas.       In others, local governments
                    themselves may choose to organize land banks to finance
                    acquisitions. Both approaches are described briefly below.


                                                                                                  Land Trusts

                    A land trust is a non-profit, private organization formed solely
                    to acquire ecologically valuable lands. There are 775 local
                    land trusts in the United States, and national conservation
                    organizations such as the Nature Conservancy, the Trust for
                    Public Land, and the Izaak Walton League often contribute
                    funds and advice to their efforts. Trusts are also funded by
                    start-up grants and contributions from the public.


                                                                                                  Land Banks


                    A land bank operates similarly to a land trust, acquiring
                    critical areas to minimize or prevent development and
                    preserve them in their natural state. A land bank, however,
                    is a public agency, typically requiring approval by the state
                    legislature and receiving state or local funding.







                                                                                                                                    133







                                                           Land exchanges provide a way for public and private
                                                           organizations to combine efforts in acquisition. If a
                                                           critical area Is privately owned, it is exchanged for
                                                           economically productive land with little conservation
                                                           value that is owned by the state or federal
                                                           government. Exchanges work particularly well in
                                                           areas where the government owns much of the land.




               Resource Conservalion

                                                     Despite the best efforts of land use planners, population growth
                                                     and development will continue to increase stress on land and
                                                     water resources. Population growth will generally increase the
                                                     demand for waste management services, sewage, roads, water,
                                                     and infrastructure. This increased demand can both directly and
                                                     indirectly affect the health of an estuarine ecosystem. Some of
                                                     this stress can be minimized, however, by encouraging resource
                                                     conservation efforts. Doing so generally requires finding ways to
                                                     motivate businesses, households and individual consumers to
                                                     change behavior patterns. This is often a difficult challenge,
                                                     requiring leadership, education, and in some cases the use of
                                                     economic incentives.      More than any of the approaches
                                                     discussed thus far, resource conservation requires innovative
                                                     and flexible solutions or tools.


                                                     Addressing the behavior of individuals and households is critical
                                                     to the long-term survival of many estuarine ecosystems. In its
                                                     report to the Chesapeake Executive Council, the Year 2020 Panel
                                                     includes resource conservation efforts as one of six major
                                                     recommendations for the Chesapeake Bay area. As the council
                                                     states:


                                                         A great many decisions by individuals over decades
                                                         created incremental changes, imperceptible in their effects
                                                         as isolated actions, but devastating in sum. The solution
                                                         to the [Chesapeake] Bay's problems, and to other regional
                                                         environmental problems, will come about in the same way,
                                                         as the aggregate of thousands of daily decisions.

                                                         Source: Report of the Year 2020 Panel to the Chesapeake
                                                         Executive Council. Population Growth and Development in
                                                         the Chesapeake Bay Watershed to the Year 2020.
                                                         December 1988.
















            134





                                                                                              Tax IncenUves,
                                                                                              Subsidies and Fees
                                                                                              to Encourage
                                                                                              Environmentally
                                                                                              Sound Development
                    Tax policy can play a role in both the preservation and
                    destruction of sensitive areas by encouraging activities
                    and/or land uses with the lowest tax liability. Preservation of
                    sensitive areas can be encouraged through the use of
                    preferential tax policies that reward environmentally
                    advantageous land uses. There are a number of drawbacks,
                    however, to preferential tax policies.      State and local
                    governments may be reluctant to use subsidies to encourage
                    preservation and conservation because they often translate
                    into lower tax revenues for the community. Assessment and
                    bookkeeping costs can also be high, as can administrative
                    costs. Moreover, if the benefits of selling the land for
                    development exceed the benefits from tax reductions or
                    deferrals, landowners may decide to sell despite favorable
                    tax policies. When development pressures are high, it is
                    unlikely that tax incentives alone will preserve conservation
                    uses.


                    As an alternative to tax incentives, impact fees, which impose
                    some of the cost of environmental degradation on the
                    developer or land-user, can be used to discourage
                    destructive land-use practices. Designing, implementing,
                    and enforcing fee systems, however, can be complicated
                    and cumbersome. An important concern is the extent to
                    which fees serve as an incentive to change behavior, versus
                    simply as a source of revenue. Designing fee, subsidy, or
                    tax systems to change behavior generally requires a clear
                    understanding of both the factors affecting land use
                    decisions and the changes required to promote
                    environmental benefits.      In addition, effective systems
                    generally require a mechanism to adjust the fee imposed as
                    economic and/or environmental factors change.
                                                                                              Water Consumpfion


                    The inefficient use of water resources can lead to a number
                    of environmental problems, including:

                       o    The destruction of wetlands due to the
                            installment of new water supply projects;

                       o    Reductions in the capacity of rivers and streams
                            to assimilate pollutants;

                       o    Reductions in the flow of groundwater to surface
                            water, due to increased withdrawals from
                            aquifers; and

                       o    Excessive demands on wastewater treatment
                            facilities.



                                                                                                                              135






                                                                        In coastal areas, excessive withdrawals from groundwater
                                                                        aquifers can also lead to the intrusion of saltwater into the aquifer
                                                                        and decreased water levels in the estuary. Conservation efforts
                                                                        may involve educating consumers about the many ways that
                                                                        water use can be reduced or curtailed. Lawn watering and car-
                                                                        washing, for example, can be performed using less water or
                                                                        banned during dry spells. Consumers can be educated to install
                                                                        conservation faucets and showerheads that reduce the volume
                                                                        of waterflow, and to practice more conservative everyday water-
                                                                        use patterns.


                                                                         WATER USAGE IN NASSAU COUNTY IN LONG ISLAND, NEW
												 YORK IS REGULATED BY WITHDRAWALS CAPS THAT PREVENT
                                                                         OVERPUMPING AND PROTECT WATER SUPPLIES FROM
                                                                         SALTWATER INTRUSION.  THE COUNTY HAS ALSO PASSED A                                                                               
                                                                         WATER CONSERVATION ORDINANCE, AND INDIVIDUAL WATER                                                                                                                    ..........
                                                                         SUPPLIERS HAVE INSTITUTED RESTRICTIONS ON RESIDENTIAL
                                                                         AND COMMERCIAL USERS.  THESE RESTRICTIONS INCLUDE
                                                                         PERIDIC BANS ON CAR WASHING, THE FILLING OF SWIMMING
                                                                         POOLS, AND LAWN WATERING.  SEVERAL TOWNS IN THE
                                                                         COUNTY ARE DEVELOPING ORDINANCES TO BEGIN USING
                                                                         INDIVIDUAL WATER METERS TO REGULATE WATER USE BASED
                                                                         ON HOUSEHOLD SIZE.
                                                                         SOURCE: U.S. EPA, OFFICE OF WATER.  WELLHEAD
                                                                         PROTECTION PROGRAMS: TOOLS FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS,
												 WASHINGTON, D.C.: APRIL, 1989.




                                                                        On a larger scale, municipal              pricing systems for water can be
                                                                        adjusted to more accurately reflect the full cost of its
                                                                        consumption. Water pricing frequently does not reflect the full
                                                                        operating, capital, and replacement costs of providing water
                                                                        services. Billing practices that accurately reflect peak loads and
                                                                        that increase with increased consumption would encourage more
                                                                        efficient use of the resource, thereby reducing the environmental
                                                                        degradation that accompanies expanding water demand.

                        Solid and Hazardous
                        Waste Management

                                                                        Numerous potential water quality problems are associated
                                                                        directly or indirectly with the disposal of solid and hazardous
                                                                        waste, including:

                                                                                o The accidental or intentional dumping of waste
                                                                                  materials directly into surface waters;







                 136






                      ï¿½ Contamination of surface waters by landfill
                           leachate; and

                       ï¿½   Disruption of sensitive areas by waste
                           management facilities.


                    The nature of these problems and some means of
                    addressing them are described below.

                                                                                                 Marine Debris

                    A primary source of debris in oceans and estuaries is
                    believed to be the illegal dumping of waste from shore or at
                    sea. The problem was recognized formally in 1978 by Annex
                    V of the Protocol Relating to the International Convention of
                    Pollution from Ships (MARPOL), which bans dumping from
                    ships for signatory nations. Recent beach clean-ups across
                    the nation, however, have revealed staggering volumes of
                    washed-up debris in many coastal areas. A total of over 861
                    tons was collected during a week-long cleanup in the spring
                    of 1989. Plastics were far and away the most prevalent
                    items, due primarily to both their widespread availability and
                    persistence. Plastic rings, fishing nets, and plastic pellets
                    are particularly hazardous to many fish and wildlife species.
                    Fish and birds can become entangled in nets and plastic
                    beverage rings, leading to suffocation and injury. Plastic
                    pellets are often mistaken for food, and ingestion can
                    potentially lead to starvation. Debris washed ashore can also
                    damage property values and affect tourism.

                    To address the problem of plastic debris, Congress enacted
                    two pieces of legislation:       the Marine Plastic Pollution
                    Research and Control Act of 1987 (MPPRCA), and The
                    Degradable Plastic Ring Carrier Act of 1988. The latter
                    directs EPA to require through regulation that plastic ring
                    carriers be made of naturally degradable material, unless
                    byproducts from degradable rings are shown through current
                    studies to pose a greater threat to the environment.
                    MPPRCA requires EPA's Office of Solid Waste to conduct a
                    study to determine methods to reduce plastic pollution. The
                    study is to include:

                        ï¿½   A list of improper disposal practices;

                        ï¿½   A list of materials that may injure fish and wildlife
                            or degrade the economic value of coastal areas;

                        ï¿½   A description of EPA activities aimed at reducing
                            plastic in marine environments;

                        ï¿½   An evaluation of potential substitutes for plastic
                            materials; and

                        ï¿½   Recommendations for recycling incentives.



                                                                                                                                   137







                        Medical Wastes
                                                       In addition to plastic debris, the presence of medical wastes in
                                                       marine waters -- including syringes, bandages and dressings,
                                                       blood vials, and diseased body parts -- has generated serious
                                                       public concern. Based on public reaction to the medical waste
                                                       found in New York, Boston, North Carolina, and the Great Lakes,
                                                       Congress passed the Medical Waste Tracking Act of 1988,
                                                       restricting the release of medical waste to the environment. Its
                                                       provisions require a 24-month demonstration program for the
                                                       tracking of medical wastes in New York, New Jersey,
                                                       Connecticut, and the Great Lakes states. In addition, EPA efforts
                                                       are currently underway to address the role of Combined Sewer
                                                       Overflows (CSOs) as a source of medical waste in the marine
                                                       environment.


                            Solid Waste
                            Management                 Many of the problems associated with marine debris would be
                                                       alleviated by steps to decrease the quantity of solid and
                                                       hazardous waste generated, and to improve the management of
                                                       such wastes on land. According to EPA estimates, roughly 83
                                                       percent of municipal solid waste is currently landfilled, 6 percent
                                                       is incinerated, and 11 percent is recycled through material
                                                       recovery or energy programs. In contrast to current solid waste
                                                       management practices, EPA has established the following
                                                       preferred hierarchy:

                                                          (1)  Source Reduction activities that reduce the toxicity
                                                               and volume of materials used in products that are
                                                               ultimately disposed. Improved design and packaging
                                                               can prevent the need to manage some wastes.

                                                          (2)  Reuse of packaging and other disposable goods,
                                                               which can reduce demand for and consumption of
                                                               virgin materials.

                                                          (3)  Recycling and Composting, which can reduce the
                                                               amount of waste sent to landfills and incinerators.


                                                          (4)  Incineration or Landfilling, which as management
                                                               practices are preferred only after source reduction,
                                                               reuse, and recycling have been fully utilized.

                                                               Source: U.S. EPA, Office of Policy, Planning and
                                                               Evaluation, Regulatory Innovations Staff. Promoting
                                                               Source    Reduction     and     Recyclability   in    the
                                                               MarketiDlace: A Study of Consumer and IndustrV
                                                               Response to Promotion of Source Reduced, Recycled,
                                                               and Recyclable Products and Packaging.
                                                               Washington, DC: September 1989.







             138






                   Many believe that the volume of municipal waste generated
                   could be reduced substantially by correcting the pricing
                   mechanism used for waste disposal and management
                   services.   Current pricing practices for municipal waste
                   disposal often do not reflect the full cost of disposal. Many
                   communities currently charge a flat rate for disposal services.
                   As a result, consumers see no price difference between
                   decisions that generate more or less waste. Where tax
                   revenues fully or partially support collection and disposal
                   services, both the total and the marginal cost of these
                   services are invisible or highly discounted from the
                   perspective of individual residents.      By correcting price
                   structures to more accurately reflect the full cost of disposal,
                   consumers may react to reduce the amount of waste
                   generated.

                   Economic incentives, such as subsidies, rebates, and credits
                   for manufacturing or purchasing products and packaging
                   may also promote source reduction and reduce
                   environmental degradation.        Combined with consumer
                   education programs to improve awareness of the solid waste
                   problem and the environmental consequences of certain
                   purchase decisions, even modest economic incentives may
                   effectively influence consumers.

                   Numerous waste products can also be reused or recycled.
                   By establishing recycling programs to collect and process
                   these products, communities may reduce considerably tha
                   volume of waste disposed. If combined with more accurate
                   pricing structures for waste disposal, recycling programs may
                   provide communities with an effective mechanism to
                   influence individual decisions. Recycling, however, is often
                   more complex than the simple collection of recyclable
                   materials. There must also be demand for the recycled
                   product if the recycling effort is to be more than just an
                   alternative waste management system. Communities need
                   to investigate markets for recycled material to ensure that
                   demand exists for the recycled products. It may be that
                   factors such as packaging or labeling can influence demand
                   for recycled products. If so, marketing and advertising
                   professionals may need to be involved if the recycling effort
                   is to be successful.


                   Disposal of household hazardous waste is also a problem in
                   many areas. Illegal disposal in drains, sewers, and backyard
                   areas can lead to contaminated groundwater and surface
                   water, among other problems. Some areas have instituted
                   hazardous waste removal programs, either curbside or at a
                   central location. For some, education efforts may be enough
                   to motivate better management and disposal of hazardous
                   products.








                                                                                                                                139





              Regulatory Programs
              to Control Point
              Source Pollutant
              Loadings To Estuaries

                                                        Water pollution control efforts historically have focused on point
                                                        source discharges. These discharges, named for their localized
                                                        and direct OpointO of release to receiving waters, are amenable to
                                                        regulatory controls to a much greater extent than the more
                                                        dispersed and overlapping nonpoint source discharges.
                                                        Numerous provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
                                                        of 1972, also known as the Clean Water Act (CWA), and the
                                                        Water Quality Act (WQA) of 1987 govern discharges to inland
                                                        and coastal waters.        These statutes establish treatment
                                                        guidelines and water quality standards, and outline rigorous
                                                        monitoring and reporting requirements.

                                                        Collectively, provisions of the CWA and WQA provide a
                                                        comprehensive set of tools to protect against and to mitigate
                                                        effluent pollutants. NEP Management Conferences at a minimum
                                                        should ensure that these standards and controls are utilized,
                                                        coordinated, and enforced. Point source controls cannot solve
                                                        all an estuary's problems, but they do provide a vital baseline
                                                        upon which added progress can be made. Furthermore, point
                                                        source programs may also help to supplement or enhance non-
                                                        regulatory strategies by providing information necessary to
                                                        formulate and target effective control methods.
                Establishing Water
                Quality Standards
                Under the Clean
                Water Act


                                                        Water quality standards are rules or laws adopted by states to
                                                        protect public health and welfare, to enhance ambient water
                                                        quality, to protect aquatic ecosystems, and to advance the goals
                                                        of the Clean Water Act. In general, standards describe the
                                                        maximum allowable ambient pollutant levels in a particular
                                                        waterbody. Two major components of a water quality standard
                                                        are (1) the designated use(s) assigned to the waterbody, and (2)
                                                        water quality criteria that describe the quality of water that will
                                                        support a particular use.

                Sectfon 303
                State Designated
                Uses for Watetbodies

                                                        States are required to designate uses for all inter- and intrastate
                                                        bodies of water within state borders. Each state develops Its
                                                        own use classification system, based on the generic uses cited
                                                        in the Clean Water Act. These uses -- agriculture, industry,
                                                        navigation, drinking water, fish and wildlife management,
                                                        swimming, or boating -- are then protected and preserved by
                                                        appropriate standards. At minimum, states must provide for,
                                                        wherever attainable, the propagation of shellfish, finfish, wildlife


              140





                    and recreation in and on the water. If a waterbody cannot
                    be designated to include these uses, it must be reevaluated
                    by the state every three years. If at this time one of the
                    above uses has been attained, water quality standards must
                    then be revised to ensure protection and preservation of this
                    use. Existing uses -- those achieved on or after EPA
                    promulgated its original water quality regulations (November
                    28, 1975) -- cannot be modified or changed unless the
                    revised use requires more stringent criteria.

                    Unlike existing uses, designated uses can be modified or
                    changed if one or more of the following prevents attainment
                    of the designated use:

                       (1) Naturally occurring pollutant concentrations;

                       (2)  Natural, intermittent, or low-flow water levels;

                       (3)  Man-made conditions or pollution sources that
                            cannot be corrected or would, if corrected, result
                            in greater environmental degradation;

                       (4)  Dams,    diversions,    or    other     hydrologic
                            modifications;

                       (5)  Physical conditions associated with natural
                            features of the waterbody, unrelated to quality; or

                       (6)  Required controls that would result in substantial
                            and widespread social and economic impact.

                                                                                              Criteria and
                                                                                              Standards

                    Water quality criteria are specific numeric or narrative
                    pollutant limits used by EPA and states to establish legally
                    binding water quality standards. Section 304(a) of the CWA
                    directs EPA to develop and publish water quality criteria
                    based on the latest scientific information available on the
                    effect of a pollutant on human health and aquatic life.
                    Section 304(a) criteria provide guidance for EPA Regions
                    and the states in the development of state water quality
                    standards. Information contained in EPA's section 304(a)
                    guidance documents generally includes:

                       o    Scientific data on the effects of pollutants on
                            human health, aquatic life, and recreation; and

                       o    Quantitative (e.g., micrograms per liter) or
                            qualitative (e.g., 'free from" toxics in toxic
                            amounts) guidance on the general conditions
                            required to ensure a level of water quality
                            adequate to support a particular water use.





                                                                                                                              141





                                                                        When incorporated into state water quality standards, criteria
                                                                        provide a basis for enforcing the standard; otherwise, 304(a)
                                                                        criteria hold no force of law. States may choose to do one of the
                                                                        following when establishing standards to protect designated uses
                                                                        for state waters:


                                                                            (1) Adopt EPA's Section 304(a) criteria;

                                                                            (2) Modify the 304(a) criteria to reflect site-specific
                                                                                  factors; or

                                                                            (3) Use other scientifically defensible methods to develop
                                                                                  the criteria.




												SITE-SPECIFIC FACTORS THAT MAY NECESSITATE MODIFIED		
                                                                        CRITERIA INVOLVE, FOR EXAMPLE, THE PRESENCE OF CERTAIN            
                                                                        MORE SENSITIVE SPECIES OR HABITATS, OR WATER CHEMISTRY
                                                                        (E.G., PH, HARDNESS, TEMPERATURE, SUSPENDED SOLIDS,
                                                                        ETC.) THAT DIFFERS SIGNIFICANTLY FROM THE CONDITIONS USED
                                                                        IN DEVELOPING 304(A) CRITERIA.  EPA HAS DEVELOPED A 
                                                                        GUIDANCE DOCUMENT FOR STATES TO USE IN DERIVING SITE-
                                                                        SPECIFIC CRITERIA.  THE DOCUMENT, WATER QUALITY
                                                                        STANDARDS HANDBOOK, WAS PUBLISHED BY EPA'S OFFICE
                                                                        OF WATER REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS IN DECEMBER,
                                                                        1983, STATES CONSIDERING DEVELOPING SITE-SPECIFIC
                                                                        WATER QUALITY CRITERIA ARE URGED TO CONSULT FIRST WITH
                                                                        THEIR EPA REGIONAL OFFICE.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
                                                                        SOURCE: U.S. EPA, OFFICE OF WATER REGULATIONS AND
                                                                        STANDARDS, INTRODUCTION TO WATER QUALITY STANDARDS,                                                                                  
                                                                        WASHINGTON, D.C.: SEPTEMBER 1988.
                                                                                                                                    
                                                                        




                                                                        States are required to adopt as standards all EPA water quality
                                                                        criteria for toxic pollutants identified in Section 307(a) of the Act,
                                                                        provided the discharge or presence of the pollutant could
                                                                        reasonably be expected to hinder attainment of a waterbody's
                                                                        designated use. The Section 307(a) list of toxic pollutants
                                                                        contains 65 compounds and families of compounds, which the
                                                                        Agency has interpreted to include 126 propriority toxic pollutants.
                                                                        As  of 1988, EPA had published criteria for six of these pollutants.












                142





                                                                                                  Repoifing
                      Under Section 304 of the CWA, states were required to                       Requirements
                      report to EPA a list of all state waters that are impaired by
                      any pollutant due to either point or nonpoint sources. This
                      list was to have been accompanied by a shorter list of all
                      waters that do not meet the numeric or water quality
                      standards for the 126 priority toxic pollutants due to point
                      source pollution. The lists were submitted to EPA by June,
                      1989.


                      In addition to the lists of impaired waters, Section 305(b)
                      requires that states report on the ambient status of all their
                      waterbodies. This report provides information on all river
                      segments, lakes, and estuaries not meeting water quality
                      standards, including information on the pollutants of concern
                      and the causes or sources of any degradation.               NEP
                      programs may want to consult these reports to identify not
                      only direct sources of estuary pollutants, but also problem
                      waters that may feed into and contaminate the estuary.
                      Furthermore, NEP Management Conferences may find that
                      these reports support efforts to prohibit or restrict certain
                      activities in and around problem waterbodies.                               Controlling Point
                                                                                                  Source Discharges

                                                                                                  Sectfon 402 National
                                                                                                  Point Source Discharge
                                                                                                  Eliminatfon System
                      The NPDES point source discharge system requires permits                    (NPDES)
                      for all direct discharges to the nation's waters. It is the heart
                      of the Clean Water Act and its primary control mechanism.
                      Permits are issued by EPA or by states whose programs
                      have been approved by EPA. As of 1990, EPA had
                      delegated NPDES authority to 39 of the states.

                      NPDES permits, good for five years, are written to protect
                      designated uses by setting either chemical-specific and/or
                      whole-effluent limits, and must include the more stringent of
                      either technology-based or water-quality based control
                      requirements. The chemical-specific approach sets numeric
                      limits on the toxicity, concentration, or mass of each
                      conventional or toxic pollutant that may be discharged. In
                      cases where the effluent cannot be fully characterized or the
                      interaction of constituents assessed, limitations may be
                      placed on the effluent as a whole.

                      Discharges excluded from NPDES requirements, most
                      covered under afternative authorities, include:

                         ï¿½    Discharges from ships or vessels;

                         ï¿½ Discharges to POTWs that have a N P DES permit;

                         ï¿½    Discharges from certain diffuse sources;


                                                                                                                                   143





                                                         o   Irrigation return flows; and

                                                         o   Discharges authorized by a government authority in
                                                             connection with the cleanup of oil or other hazardous
                                                             waste under Superfund or Section 311 of the Clean
                                                             Water Act.


                                                     NPDES permit applicants are required to test their effluent for a
                                                     variety of toxics and other constituents and report any positive
                                                     findings in the application. Although specific permit conditions
                                                     will vary across outfalls and receiving waters, several basic
                                                     requirements are imposed on all permittees:

                                                         ï¿½   Discharge Monitoring Reports PMRs) that record the
                                                             pollutant content of effluent and provide proof both of
                                                             compliance and of violations. Reports are sent to the
                                                             permitting authority and entered into EPA's Permit
                                                             Compliance System (PCS) where they provide
                                                             valuable information for both the enforcement of
                                                             discharge requirements and the assessment of
                                                             pollutants in receiving waters.

                                                         ï¿½   Upsets and Bypasses @provisions that govern failures
                                                             of a wastewater treatment facility (upsets) and the
                                                             intentional directing of wastewater around the
                                                             treatment system during maintenance (bypasses).
                                                             The permittee is required to prove that such a
                                                             discharge was necessary.

                                                         ï¿½   Aritibacksliding Regulations under Section 402 of the
                                                             Clean Water Act that generally prohibit EPA from
                                                             reissuing an NPDES permit containing effluent
                                                             limitations, conditions, or standards that are less
                                                             stringent than those contained in the previous permit
                                                             except in certain specific circumstances.           The
                                                             requirement reinforces the antidegradation philosophy
                                                             intended to prevent water quality from failing below
                                                             existing levels.

               Effluent Limitations
               for Direct Dischargers

                                                     The most important regulatory tools for regulating point source
                                                     discharges are effluent limitations developed by EPA and
                                                     incorporated into NPDES permits for individual direct discharges.
                                                     These limitations include: (1) technology-based controls and (2)
                                                     water-quality based controls.











            144








                      At minimum, NPDES permit limits for discharges to
                      waterways must meet EPA's technology-based standards.
                      These standards reflect EPA's detailed assessment of the
                      reliability, performance, cost, and other characteristics of
                      existing pollution control technologies.            The 1977
                      amendments to the Clean Water Act established technology-
                      based treatment requirements based on the following
                      considerations:


                         (1) The class of pollutants involved: conventional,
                             nonconventional, or toxics; and

                         (2) Whether the source for the discharge is a new or
                             existing facility.

                      The minimum control standard for all facilities was set initially
                      at the Best Practicable Control Technology currently available
                      (BPT), with the following legislative guidance:

                         ï¿½   Effluent limitations must be uniform among
                             similar industries;

                         ï¿½   The degree of effluent reduction must be set
                             independent of water quality; and

                         ï¿½   The cost of applying a given technology in
                             relation to its effluent reduction benefits must be
                             considered.


                      Conventional pollutants -- biological oxygen demand, fecal
                      coliform, suspended solids, and pH -- from existing sources
                      are subject to the Best Conventional Pollutant Control
                      Technology (BCI). This standard essentially considers the
                      best available technology, moderated by a test of economic
                      reasonableness. Nonconventional and toxic pollutants from
                      existing sources are subject to the Best Available Control
                      Technology (BAT). Finally, all new sources -- facilities on
                      which construction commences after New Source
                      Performance Standards are proposed -- are generally subject
                      to BAT.


                      When technology-based discharge limits would fail to protect
                      adequately the quality of ambient waters, NPDES permits
                      may impose water-quality based limits. Unlike technology-
                      based controls, water-quality based limits are derived by
                      determining the degree of effluent control needed to meet
                      ambient water quality standards.          Water-quality based
                      controls are not uniformly placed on all direct discharges;
                      rather, they are used to provide an additional, more stringent
                      limitation when needed to protect water quality.







                                                                                                                                    145







                                                          From 1940 to the 1970s, population growth -in the Upper
                                                          Potomac estuary basin continually outstripped the capacity
                                                          of sewage treatment plants. As a result, raw or potentially
                                                          untreated sewage was regularly discharged into the
                                                          Potomac. In 1965, the jurisdictions of the Washington
                                                          metropolitan area agreed to adopt a fishablo-9wimmable,
                                                          standard for the upper estuary. Maryland, Virginia, and ft
                                                          District of Columbia imposed stringent controls on point
                                                          source discharges, based on the assimilative-capacity of
                                                          the upper estuary and the capabilities of current
                                                          wastewater treatment technology. These actions reduced
                                                          BOD and phosphorous discharges to the upper estuary by
                                                          95 percent. The current effluent phosphorous limit for
                                                          discharges to the upper estuary is 0. 18 milligrams per liter,
                                                          met by upgrading secondary treatment plants to advanced
                                                          waste treatment facilities that use added filtration, nutrient
                                                          removal processes, and chlorinatiom


                                                          Source:    U.S. EPA, Office of Water, National Estuary
                                                          Program. 'Point Source Controls: The Potomac River
                                                          Cleanup.a In Saving Bays and Estuaries: A Handbook of
                                                          Tactics. Washington, DC: June, 1988.



                      Section 303(d)
                       Total Maximum
                      Daily Load
                                                       Some waterbodies may not meet state water quality standards
                                                       given currently available treatment technologies.        For these
                                                       waterbodies, states are directed to develop a quantitative
                                                       estimate of the waterbodies' assimilative capacity and to account
                                                       for all pollution sources and background inputs. Using this
                                                       information, states estimate the Total Maximum Daily Load
                                                       (TMDL), or the maximum pollutant load the waterbody is capable
                                                       of assimilating. Based on this assessment, states are then
                                                       required to allocate the waterbodies' pollutant assimilation
                                                       capacity across permitted point sources (NPDES) and nonpoint
                                                       sources, allowing an added margin of safety. This allocation, a
                                                       Waste Load Allocation (WLA) for point sources and a Load
                                                       Allocation (LA) for nonpoint sources, should result in the
                                                       waterbody attaining its designated use status.














            146







                        To combat phosphorud'problems In the Great Lakes,
                        water-quality based point source controls -- particularly
                        on munici@ wastewater treatment plants -- were
                        essential. A treatment level of 1 milligram per liter of
                        effluent phosphorus 'was set for all treatment plants
                        handling more than I , n-dilion gallons per day. In
                        additioR the'1986 U.S. Phosphorus Management Plan
                        states that I the nonpoint source controls planned for
                        the Great Lakes do not result in the necessary
                        phosphorus reductions, municipal treatment plants will
                        be required to meet even more stringent phosphorus
                        requirements.

                        Following the  issuance   of new or updated NPIDES
                        permits, EPA tracked performance with a compliance
                        monitoring system, flagging frequent or large violations.
                        Combined with dedicated federal and state
                        enforcement efforts, as well as coordinated and
                        concerted efforts by the Canadian Government, the
                        Great Lakes Program successfully reduced phosphorus
                        levels from point source discharges. Most municipal
                        wastewater point sources handling over 1 million
                        gallons per day have now met or reduced phosphorus
                        discharges to below the I milligram per liter effluent
                        phosphorus limit.


                        Source: U.S. EPA, Office of Water, National Estuary
                        Program. 2A Phosphorus Strategy for the Great Lakes:
                        Improving Water Quality through Intergovernmental
                        Agreements.m     In Saving Bays and Estuaries: A
                        Handbook of Tactics. Washington, DC: June, 1988.



                                                                                               Section 304
                                                                                                Toxic Controls

                    Section 304 of the CWA requires states to:

                        ï¿½   Identify 'toxic hotspots,0 waters where existing
                            technology-based and water-quality based
                            controls are not adequate to meet water quality
                            standards due to the presence of toxic
                            constituents;

                        ï¿½   Identify the specific point sources believed to be
                            preventing the attainment of water quality
                            standards; and

                        ï¿½   Specify a toxic control strategy that will be used
                            to bring about attainment as soon as possible or
                            no later than three years after the control
                            strategy is introduced.




                                                                                                                                147






                                                         EPA is required to develop a toxic control strategy that meets
                                                         state requirements if the state fails to develop a strategy in a
                                                         timely manner.


                                                               In the 1980s Elliott Bay, on the eastern shore of
                                                               central Puget Sound, was receiving major discharges
                                                               of toxic substances, primarily from industrial facifties.
                                                               The Elliott Bay Toxic Action Program integrated
                                                               federal, state, and local activities involved with toxics;
                                                               control to devise solutions to the growing toxics
                                                               problem. The core of this program was the Elliott Bay
                                                               Action Team (EBAT), which carried out inspections of
                                                               the Bay to identify contaminated sediments, analyzed
                                                               these sediments to identify likely pollutant sources,
                                                               and revised discharge permits to reduce or eliminate
                                                               the entry of toxic pollutants into the Bay.

                                                               Source: U.S. EPA, Office of Water, National Estuary
                                                               Program.      RAn Action Plan for Containing and
                                                               Reducing.Pollutants: Controlling Toxic Contamination
                                                               in an Urban Bay through Special Enforcement Teams
                                                               and Interagency Coordination,5 In Saving Bays and
                                                               Estuaries: A Handbook of Tactics. Washington, DC:
                                                               June,1988.


                     Toxicity Reduction
                     Evaluations (TREs)

                                                         When toxicity testing of a particular effluent indicates
                                                         unacceptable levels of toxic pollutants, permittees are required
                                                         to reduce effluent toxicity to levels acceptable for applicable
                                                         water quality criteria and standards. One method used to help
                                                         dischargers identify the specific sources of toxic pollutants, and
                                                         to assess the level of reduction associated with a change in
                                                         process or ouff all, is the Toxicity Reduction Evaluation (TRE).
                                                         The TRE process generally uses toxicity tests, and physical and
                                                         chemical analysis of the effluent, to determine:

                                                            o    The toxic substances of concern;

                                                            o    Any manufacturing processes that produce toxics of
                                                                 concern;


                                                            o    Specific control options; and

                                                            o    Monitoring practices that will verify and demonstrate
                                                                 the effectiveness of chosen control options.

                                                         The evaluation is considered complete when the permittee
                                                         attains compliance with the effluent toxicity limitations specified
                                                         in the NPIDES permit.






             148







                          To summarize the NPDES review and permitting
                          process, permit writers:

                              (1) Consider the water quality standards
                                  and criteria that apply to the
                                  applicable receiving water;

                              (2) Determine      if the      appropriate
                                  technology-based limit will be
                                  adequate to protect and maintain the
                                  water quality standard and, if so,
                                  apply technology-based limits; or

                              (3) If a water-quarity based limit is
                                  needed, establish the Total Maximum
                                  Daily Load (TMDQ; then

                              (4) Translate this TMDL Into specific
                                  numeric limits (the Waste Load
                                  Allocation) and write these limits into
                                  the NPDES permit.



                                                                                                Discharges to
                                                                                                Marine Waters

                                                                                                Sectfon 301(b)
                                                                                                Waivers


                    Section 301 (b) (1) (B) of the CWA requires all Publicly Owned
                    Treatment Works (POTW's) to implement effluent limitations
                    that meet secondary treatment standards. This requirement,
                    however, may be waived for certain POTWs through
                    provisions of Section 301 (h). Specifically, POTWs that
                    discharge to marine waters, including estuaries, may be
                    issued a modified NPDES permit that waives secondary
                    treatment requirements If the following conditions are met:

                        o   The discharge of pollutants, alone or in
                            combination with pollutants from other sources,
                            will not interfere with attainment of water quality
                            sufficient to (1) protect public water supplies, (2)
                            protect the propagation of a balanced,
                            indigenous population of shellfish, fish and
                            wildlife, and (3) allow recreational activities in and
                            on the water;

                        o   A monitoring system is implemented to determine
                            the effect of the discharge on aquatic
                            ecosystems;





                                                                                                                                149





                                                          o    The effluent discharge will not necessitate more
                                                               stringent requirements for any other point or nonpoint
                                                               discharge;

                                                          o    The discharge meets at least the equivalent of
                                                               primary treatment standards (removal of at least 30
                                                               percent of BOD material and suspended solids, and
                                                               disinfection where appropriate), and the effluent
                                                               meets criteria established under 304(a) after initial
                                                               mixing in the waters adjacent to the point of
                                                               discharge.

                                                               Source: Section 301 (h) of the Clean Water Act.


                                                       The deadline for waiver applications has passed. Currently, 48
                                                       POTWs have been granted waivers, 15 decisions are pending,
                                                       and 145 applications have been denied. EPA's Office of Marine
                                                       and Estuarine Protection (OMEP) oversees the 301 (h) program
                                                       and maintains the database that holds 301 (h) monitoring
                                                       information -- the Ocean Data Evaluation System (ODES). This
                                                       information can be valuable to help NEP Management
                                                       Conferences consider the impacts of POTWs with 301 (h) waivers
                                                       on their estuary.

                        Secdon 403(c)
                        Ofteda

                                                       Section 403(c) of the CWA establishes additional criteria for point
                                                       source discharges outside the baseline of the territorial sea. It is
                                                       intended to ensure that discharges to marine waters do not
                                                       cause "unreasonable degradationo to the marine environment.

                                                       As part of its Ocean Discharge Criteria regulations (45 FR
                                                       65457), EPA has published a list of 10 factors or guidelines to be
                                                       used in 403(c) evaluations. The regulations require decisions be
                                                       made regarding the effects of the discharge on the marine
                                                       environment. First, based on an evaluation of the 10 factors, a
                                                       determination is made as to whether the discharge will lead to
                                                       'unreasonable degradation' of the marine environment.               if
                                                       information available is insufficient to make this determination,
                                                       then a decision is made as to whether the discharge will cause
                                                       ,irreparable harm." If the discharge will cause irreparable harm,
                                                       the permit to discharge is denied. If irreparable harm is not
                                                       shown, the permit will be granted with monitoring requirements.













            150








                       Section 403(c) of the CWA requires EPA to consider
                       the following factors when determining the likelihood of
                       unreasonable degradation:

                          ï¿½    The effect of disposal of pollutants on
                               human health or welfare, including but not
                               limited to plankton, fish,   shellfish, wildlife,
                               shorelines, and beaches;

                          ï¿½    The effect of disposal      of pollutants on
                               marine     life,  including    the     transfer,
                               concentration, and dispersal of pollutants or
                               their byproducts; changes in marine
                               ecosystem diversity, productivity, and
                               stability; and species and community
                               population changes;

                          ï¿½    The effect of disposal of pollutants on
                               aesthetic, recreation, and economic values;

                          ï¿½    The persistence and permanence of the
                               effects of disposal;

                          ï¿½    The effect of disposal at varying rates, and
                               of particular pollutant volumes             and
                               concentrations;

                          ï¿½    Other possible locations and methods of
                               disposal or recycling of pollutants, including
                               land based alternatives; and

                          ï¿½    The effect of disposal on alternate uses of
                               the oceans, such as mineral exploitation and
                               scientific study.

                       Source: Section 403(c), Clean Water Act.





                    The 403(c) process utilizes a fundamentally different
                    approach to evaluate the impact of discharges on the
                    environment.       In essence, 403(c) regulations require
                    consideration of virtually all major criteria -- with an emphasis
                    on biologic criteria -- in determining the potential impact of
                    the discharge; technology- or cost-based factors are not
                    formally considered in the evaluation. Although currently the
                    criteria apply only to discharges to the territorial sea, waters
                    of the contiguous zone, and the ocean, Congress is
                    considering whether or not to extend these requirements to
                    estuarine waters.






                                                                                                                                  151






                                                     To assist Congress, EPA's Office of Marine and Estuarine
                                                     Protection has completed a Draft Supplemental Report that will
                                                     identify the number, types, and potential environmental effects of
                                                     estuarine discharges by state and by waterbody. The Final
                                                     Report to Congress is expected to be completed in December,
                                                     1990.




                                                                                                              ..........
                                                                                                      X:
                                                         ..._.For. more minfor M@a:tio:n                      Ahe....,....
                                                           4
                                                             03(g)
                                                                   rograms,:@consL;li:,your@Regiona.
                                                                                                        d.
                                                         XXXX..                            ......            .................
                                                                                     .. ... ..........
                                                                                                  r
                                                         ......h@Off ie::f
                                                             e    c -o   Marine  and @Estuarlne: P
                                                                                 ... ... . ....  .........
                                                                quarters.:.@.
                                                                                     . . ... .... ..




                   Pretreatment for
                   Indired Discharges


                                                     Municipal sewage treatment systems, also known as publicly
                                                     owned treatment works (POTWs), are designed primarily to
                                                     manage and treat domestic waste. If pollutants from commercial,
                                                     industrial, and other non-domestic sources (indirect discharges)
                                                     enter the treatment plant, they may cause such problems as:

                                                         (1) Interference with POTW operations. Non-domestic
                                                             wastes may alter or inhibit the actual treatment
                                                             process. Toxic pollutants, for example, may destroy
                                                             or reduce the efficiency of the bacteria used in
                                                             activated sludge systems or digesters, causing the
                                                             discharge of untreated wastes into receiving waters.

                                                         (2) Pass-through of pollutants.       Toxic and certain
                                                             conventional pollutants may pass through the POTW
                                                             system without being removed because the treatment
                                                             system is not designed to remove them. Thus, even
                                                             if an industrial source is prohibited from discharging
                                                             these pollutants directly, pass-through can result in
                                                             their release to receiving waters.

                                                         (3) Sludge contamination. Successful removal of certain
                                                             non-domestic pollutants may result in contamination
                                                             of sewage sludge by these pollutants.              The
                                                             contaminated sludge must then be handled and
                                                             disposed of with more stringent and costly
                                                             management practices than the POTW would
                                                             otherwise incur.



                                                             Source: U.S. EPA, Office of Water Enforcement and
                                                             Permits. Guidance Manual for POTW Pretreatment
                                                             Development. Washington, DC: October, 1983.






           152





                    EPA's National Pretreatment Program aims to protect both
                    POTWs and the environment from the effects of these
                    problems. Through the General Pretreatment Regulations for
                    New and Existing Sources (40 FR 403), POTWs with a
                    design flow greater than 5 million gallons per day (mgd) are
                    required to establish a pretreatment program. In addition,
                    other POTWs may be required to establish a pretreatment
                    program if they are found to discharge nondomestic waste
                    that causes upsets, sludge contamination, or violations of
                    NPIDES permit conditions. The regulations (1) prohibit the
                    discharge of certain hazardous pollutants, regardless of the
                    source, and (2) outline categorical pretreatment standards to
                    control pollutant discharges to POTWs from specific
                    categories of industrial and commercial sources determined
                    to be the most significant sources of toxic pollutants. These
                    standards, published as separate regulations for each
                    industrial category, provide minimum control requirements for
                    all discharges within these categories. Each categorical
                    industry must comply with technology-based effluent
                    limitations and monitor discharges to achieve and maintain
                    compliance with the standards.

                    Although specific features of local pretreatment programs
                    may vary, each is required to complete an Industrial Waste
                    Survey of all non-domestic discharges to the treatment
                    system. This survey can provide valuable information to NEP
                    Management Conferences, as it includes:

                       o    A master list of all potential industrial and
                            commercial users located in the POTW service
                            area; and

                       o    An assessment of each source, to determine the
                            types,    quantities,   and     concentrations      of
                            pollutants discharged in wastewater.

                    Where POTW's are required to implement pretreatment
                    programs, the Industrial Waste Survey should provide
                    Estuary Management Conferences with comprehensive and
                    detailed information on potential pollutant sources.

                                                                                                  Stormwater
                                                                                                  Controls

                    Storm sewers and other urban stormwater discharges have
                    historically been regulated as nonpoint source discharges.
                    The Water Quality Act of 1987, however, brought many
                    stormwater discharges under the authority of NPIDES.
                    Section 405 of the Act establishes permit requirements and
                    deadlines for stormwater point sources. The amendment
                    states that no permit will be required prior to October 1, 1992
                    except in the following cases:







                                                                                                                                   153





                                                      (1) The discharge is already subject to permit
                                                           requirements;

                                                      (2)  The discharge is the result of industrial activity;

                                                      (3)  The discharge is from a municipal separate sewer
                                                           system serving a population of greater than 100,000
                                                           but less than 250,000;

                                                      (4)  The discharge is from a municipal separate sewer
                                                           system serving a population of greater than 250,000;
                                                           or

                                                      (5)  The discharge contributes to a violation of a water
                                                           quality standard or is a significant contributor of
                                                           pollutants to U.S. waters.

                                                   For groups two and four, EPA or the state must require permits
                                                   by February, 1990. For group three, EPA must begin a control
                                                   program by February, 1991. After October 1, 1992, all remaining
                                                   unpermitted stormwater point sources will be required to obtain
                                                   permits under the NPDES program.

                                                   Permits are required for all stormwater point source discharges
                                                   except where stormwater is diverted around mining operations or
                                                   oil and gas operations, and does not come into contact with
                                                   overburden, raw material, product, or process waters.
                                                   Agricultural stormwater discharges are also excluded from point
                                                   source control under the NPDES program.

                                                   EPA is currently developing the rule for industrial and large
                                                   municipal stormwater discharges, along with guidance
                                                   documents for permit writers, and a guidance manual to help
                                                   municipalities prepare stormwater permit applications. Both
                                                   documents are expected to be finished by the end of 1990.

                     Combined Sewer
                     Overflows

                                                   The primary objective of storm sewer systems is to mitigate the
                                                   impact of stormwater volume and flow by diverting it to a
                                                   waterbody with a minimum of erosion and pollutant runoff. Many
                                                   older urban areas operate storm sewer systems that carry urban
                                                   wastewater to a sewage treatment plant during dry weather and
                                                   carry stormwater mixed with wastewater when it rains. During
                                                   heavy rains, excess sewage-storm water bypasses the sewage
                                                   treatment plant and enters the receiving waters directly. This
                                                   'combined sewer overflowu (CSO) may introduce bacteria and
                                                   other pathogens, toxics, medical waste, and other debris to
                                                   receiving waters.

                                                   EPA recently developed a national strategy for controlling
                                                   combined sewer overflows. The strategy aims to:






           154






                          ï¿½  Ensure that all CSO discharges occur as a result
                             of wet weather;

                          ï¿½  Ensure that all wet weather discharge points are
                             in compliance with technology-based
                             requirements of the Clean Water Act and
                             applicable state water quality standards; and

                          ï¿½  Minimize the impacts to water quality, aquatic
                             biota, and human health from wet weather
                             overflows that do occur.


                     A guidance document to implement this strategy is currently
                     being developed. NEP Management Conferences may want
                     to investigate local strategies to address CSO problems, to
                     ensure that the objectives above are being met and to
                     influence decisions regarding long-term storm sewer
                     management plans.

                                                                                                Section 404
                                                                                                Regulatory Program

                     Section 404 of the CWA requires a permit from the Corps of
                     Engineers prior to the discharge of dredged or fill material
                     into waters of the U.S. Applicable waters include:

                          o All waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide;

                          o  The territorial sea;

                          o  Interstate waters and wetlands;

                          o  Intrastate lakes, rivers, streams, and wetlands
                             whose use, degradation, or destruction could
                             affect interstate or foreign commerce;

                          o  Tributaries of waters or wetlands identified above;
                             and

                          o  Wetlands adjacent to waters identified above.

                     Permits generally specify the type and amount of dredged or
                     fill material approved for discharge. EPA's responsibilities in
                     this program include developing environmental guidelines by
                     which permit applications are evaluated, reviewing proposed
                     permits, and prohibiting discharges with unacceptable
                     adverse impacts on specific aquatic resources. In general,
                     the Corps will not issue a permit if a practicable alternative
                     with less adverse impact on the aquatic environment exists.









                                                                                                                                155






                                                    An important provision of Section 404 allows for the issuance of
                                                    Onationwideu general permits for activities that will have only
                                                    minimal impacts on the environment. These general permits
                                                    often specify that activities planned under the permit follow
                                                    certain 'Best Management Practices,O but permittees are not-
                                                    generally required to notify the Corps of their activities, nor are
                                                    they required to obtain a site-specific permit. Nationwide Permit
                                                    26, in particular, authorizes most discharges of dredged or fill
                                                    material in isolated wetlands that affect fewer than 10 acres,
                                                    unless the Corps determines that the discharge would result in
                                                    more than minimal adverse environmental effects on the aquatic
                                                    environment.


                                                    Because the process for permit review and analysis of
                                                    alternatives can be quite time consuming, there are provisions'
                                                    that allow for early review of wetland areas.            Advanced
                                                    identification (ADID) is used to designate areas generally suitable
                                                    and unsuitable for the discharge of dredged and fill material.
                                                    This ADID process can help NEP management conferences to
                                                    protect critical or sensitive wetland areas.

                  Mitigating Impacts
                 to Wetlands Under
                 SeclJon 404
                                                    In the implementation of Section 404, EPA's Section 404(b)(1)
                                                    Guidelines call for projects to avoid and minimize potential
                                                    impacts on wetlands, according to the following set of priorities:

                                                       o    First, impacts should be avoided to the maximum
                                                            extent practicable;

                                                       o    Second, all unavoidable impacts should be minimized
                                                            to the maximum extext practicable; and

                                                       0    Third, appropriate and practicable compensatory
                                                            mitigation for impacts that cannot be avoided should
                                                            be provided.

                                                    Compensatory mitigation typically involves the creation or
                                                    restoration of other areas to replicate the functions of the lost
                                                    area. Under the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines, compensatory
                                                    mitigation should only be used for unavoidable impacts -- if there
                                                    are practicable alternatives to degrading the sensitive
                                                    environment (such as developing a less sensitive site), permits
                                                    for the development can be refused. Guidance on the type and
                                                    level of mitigation required under the Section 404(b)(1)
                                                    Guidelines is summarized in a recent Memorandum of Agreement
                                                    between EPA and the Department of the Army concerning
                                                    mitigation in the Section 404 regulatory program.








          156


0




                           By participating in wetlands protection efforts, NEP
                           Management Conferences can ensure that these efforts take
                           into account broader impacts an the estuarine ecosystem.
                           For example, Management Conferences might provide
                           comments to the Corps of Engineers as part of the Section
                           404 permit review process for development projects that
                           would have deleterious effects on the estuary, ensuring that
                           estuarine water quality is included as a consideration when
                           potential impacts are determined.  Second, Management
                           Conferences could encourage the use of compensatory
                           mitigation to enhance or create wetlands that will improve the
                           overall condition of the estuary.  For example, as
                           compensatory mitigation for development projects, a
                           Management Conference might encourage the creation of a
                           wetland that could filter pollutants or toxins that would
                           otherwise degrade the estuary.


                           Washington state's Puget Sound drains over 10 million
                           acres, supporting fisheries valued in 1984 at an
                           estimated $74 million.  The sound's estuarine wetlands,
                           which provide habitat for several important species,
                           occupy areas under severe pressure for development                                        
                           because of increasing population.  To relieve this              
                           stress, several mitigation projects have taken place,                                                  
                           chiefly around the cities of Seattle and Tacoma.  They                                                                   
                           have included plans to use four different techniques:                                              
                                                                           
                               .   Substrate modification, through the                              
                                   placement of boulders, cobble, gravel, or                                        
                                   fine sand;                                      
                                                                                               
                               .   Shoreline creation, through excavation of                                            
                                   upland areas or by filling areas of deeper            
                                   water;                                                               
                                                                           
                               .   Creation of eelgrass meadows through                                  
                                   transplantation; and                                           
                                                                                                                              
                               .    Creation of marsh habitat by planting
                                    emergent aquatic vegation or excavating                   
                                    channels into upland areas.                 
                           

				   Parties involved in the Puget Sound projects caution
                           that compensatory mitigation is not a panacea.  Strict              
                           one-to-one replacement of lost habitat is extremely
                           difficult to achieve, and most mitigation plans seek                                                                                                                            
                           simply to maintain fish and wildlife habitat, rather than                                                                             
                           to replace the full spectrum of wetlands values.                                                                                            
                                                                    
                                                               
                                                     
                           
                                                       
                                                       
                                                       
                                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                 


                                                                           
                                                                            
                                                                           
                                                                                                     
                                                                                             
                                                                           
                                         
                                         
                                         
                                         
                                         


                                                                                               
                                                       
                                                       
                                                      
                           
                                                       
                                                       
                                                       
                           
                           
                                         
                                         
                           
                                         
                                         
                           
                                                                                    
                                                                           
                                                            
                                                               
                                                            
                                                       
                                                                            
                                         
                                         
                                                                                        
                                         
                                                                           
                                                        















                                                                                         I57
 






                                                                                         Section 401
                                                                                         Certification

              Section 401 of the CWA provides each state with a
              comprehensive mechanism to review and approve, modify,
              or deny any permit or license granted by a federal agency or
              authority governing discharges to inter- or intrastate waters
              originating in that state. Applicants for a federal license or
              permit that will result in such discharge must provide the
              licensing or permitting authority with a certification from the
              state in which the discharge originates (or will originate) that
              the discharge will comply with all relevant state water quality
              provisions. This tool provides states an opportunity to
              oversee and Influence federal permitting and licensing
              programs. In particular, states can influence a facility's
              location and operation by carefully exercising their Section
              401 certification authority.


                                                                                         In Conclusion
              This Appendix has introduced a number of approaches to
              address threats to land and water resources.                NEP
              Management Conferences must individually evaluate these
              tools to determine what will likely work, what the public and
              political climate will bear, and what can be implemented
              within reasonable time and resource constraints.            The
              process of selecting and evaluating management practices
              will be challenging, and it will require that Conference
              members have a shared understanding of the types of
              actions available, in addition to the factors to consider in
              evaluating these actions. This Appendix was designed to
              provide a baseline of information for Conference Members to
              build on, a checklist of actions and factors to consider. The
              next step is to consult experts and additional sources for
              detailed information on the particular actions that seem most
              promising in addressing the estuary's most significant
              problems.























              158







                                                                                                                                                            CY)
                                                                                                                                                            0)
                                                                                                                                                     16@cy)
                                                                                                                                                      =C01
             41h EPA                                                                                                                                 a. @--- cc)
              CY                                                                                                                                      aza=-@p
              United States
              Environmental Protection
              Agency
              (wH-556F)
               Washington, DC 20460

               Otticial Business
               Penalty ior private Use
               $300