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

                  NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATIONS

                                          Recommendations
                                           and Final Reports

                               Aft

      j)

                                                                                     J. S. MATTSON 1983

                                                                              COASTAL ZONE
       Tj
      -2                                         June 7, 1983                   3 AT- 10 N C E IN T, fR-
                                                  prepared by
                                    CHELSEA INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION
                                                 1718 P St., NW
                                             Washington, DC 20036

                                                      for

                                  National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration
                                Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource'Management
                                           Sanctuary Programs Division
                                          dontract # NA-82-SAC-00647

                                           ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

                  This project was truly a joint effort of Chelsea International
                  Corporation staff, our scientific consultants and the Research
                  Planning Institute technical staff. Special thanks are in order
                  for their dedicated efforts.

                  In addition to the 30 Resource Evaluation scientists, the Project
                  Team was composed of the following             individuals.       Each
                  demonstrated special talents and expertise in completing his or
                  her responsibilities which are also presented below.

                  PROJECT TEAM                               RESPONSIBILITIES

                  CHELSEA INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION

                  Mr. Wayne C. Savage                        Project Manager
                  Mrs. Jean R. Packard                       Public Participation
                                                               Coordinator
                  Dr. James S. Mattson                       Program Manager -
                  (Consultant)                                 North and South
                                                               Atlantic, Gulf of
                                                              ..Mexico and the
                                                               Caribbean Regions
                  Mr. Craig H. Hooper                        Program Manager -
                  (Consultant)                                 Great Lakes, Eastern
                                                               and Western Pacific
                                                               and the Alaskan
                                                               Regions

                  RESEARCH PLANNING INSTITUTE, Columbia, South Carolina

                  Dr. Erich R. Gundlach                      Manager, Technical Site
                                                               Description Preparation
                  Mr. Steven A. Covell-                      Technical Site
                                                               Description Preparation
                  Dr. Robert J. Stein                        Technical Site
                                                               Description Preparation

                  Permission is granted to the United States to reproduce the cover
                  art in copies of this final report for unlimited distribution.

                                           U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
                                           COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
                                           2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
                                           CHARLESTON  SC 2940@-2413

            -4                            ftQV*XtY Of CSC Library

                                            TABLE OF CONTENTS

                       SUMMARY REPORT FOR THE NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY SITE
                       EVALUATION PROGRAM

                       The Designation Process
                       Scientific Resource Evaluation Teams
                       Resource Evaluation Process
                       Site Nomination Process
                             First Regional Team Meetings
                             Public Participation Process
                             Second Regional Team Meetings
                       Team  Recommendations
                       The Report

                       REGIONAL REPORTS

                       CARIBBEAN REGION

                       Management Overview
                       1.    Resource Evaluation Team
                       2.    Site Evaluation and Public Participation Process
                       3.    Recommendations

                       Site  Descriptions
                             Cordillera Reefs, Puerto Rico
                             East End, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands
                             Southeastern St. Thomas, Virgin Islands

                       EAST PACIFIC REGION,

                       Management Overview
                       1.    Resource Evaluation Team
                       2.    Site Evaluation and Public Participation Process
                       3.    Recommendations

                       Site  Descriptions
                             Washington State Nearshore
                             Cortez & Tanner Banks, off California
                             Morro Bay, California
                             Heceta-Stonewall Banks, Off Oregon
                             Western Washington Outer Coast

                        GREAT LAKES REGION

                        Management Overview
                        1.   Resource Evaluation Team
                        2.   Site Evaluation and Public Participation Process
                        3.   Recommendations

                        Site Descriptions
                             Western Lake Erie Islands & Sandusky Bay, Ohio
                             Green Bay (Lake Michigan), Wisconsin
                             Lake Superior (including Apostle Islands & Isle Royal)
                               Michigan and Wisconsin
                             Cape Vincent (Lake Ontario), New York
                             Thunder Bay (Lake Huron), Michigan

                        GULF OF MEXICO REGION

                        Management Overview
                        1.   Resource Evaluation Team
                        2.   Site Evaluation and Public Participation Process
                        3.   Site Selection Recommendations

                        Site Descriptions
                             Big Bend Seagrass Beds, off Florida
                             Florida Middle Ground, off Florida
                             Shoalwater Bay - Chandeleur Sound, Louisiana
                             Flower Garden Banks, off Texas
                             Baffin Bay, Texas

                        NORTH ATLANTIC REGION

                        Management Overview
                        1.   Resource Evaluation Team
                        2.   Site Evaluation and Public Participation Process
                        3.   Recommendations

                        Site Descriptions
                             Virginia - Maryland Nearshore Waters & Barrier Island
                                Bays
                             Narragansett Bay & Block Island Sound, Rhode Island
                             Nantucket Shelf, Massachusetts
                             Stellwagen Banks, Massachusetts
                             Frenchmen's Bay/Mid-coastal Maine

                       SOUTH ATLANTIC REGION

                       Management Overview
                       1.    Resource Evaluation Team
                       2.    Site Evaluation and Public Participation Process
                       3.    Recommendations

                       Site  Descriptions
                             Ten Fathom Ledge - Big Rock, North Carolina
                             White Oak River System, North Carolina
                             Santee Delta, South Carolina
                             Port Royal Sound, South Carolina
                             Florida Shelf Coral gounds

                       WEST  PACIFIC REGION

                       Management Overview
                       1.    Resource Evaluation Team
                       2.    Site Evaluation and Public Participation Process
                       3.    Recommendations

                       Site  Descriptions
                             Northern Mariana Islands
                             Cocos Lagoon, Guam
                             Papaloloa Point (Ofu Island), American Samoa
                             Southern Mariana Islands
                             Facpi Point, Guam.

                       ATTACHMENT A    National Marine Sanctuary Site Identification
                                       Criteria

                       ATTACHMENT B    List of Acronyms

                  APPENDIX 1.     Regional Public Participation Packages

                     I.   SUMMARY REPORT FOR THE NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY SITE

                                         EVALUATION PROGRAM

                                          SUMMARY REPORT FOR THE
                                     NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY PROGRAM

                   Concerned about mounting use and pressures on the marine
                   environment, Congress enacted legislation in the 1970s to manage
                   and protect our offshore areas. One such Congressional response
                       the Marine Protection, Research Sanctuaries Act of 1972 --
                   provides    a   comprehensive    and   balanced    approach    for the
                   preservation and multiple use of selected marine areas.             Title
                   III of the Act authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to designate
                   areas of ocean and the Great Lakes waters as marine sanctuaries
                   to   preserve     or   restore    them    "for   their     Conservation,
                   recreational, ecological, or esthetic values."            The National
                   Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) administers Title
                   III through its Office of Ocean Coastal Resource Management,
                   Sanctuary Programs Office (SPO).

                   Formation of the National Marine Sanctuaries Program resulted
                   from   this    1972   Congressional     initiative.       Focusing     on
                   comprehensive management and protection of diverse marine areas,
                   the National    Marine Sanctuaries Program identifies marine and
                   Great Lakes    sites of long-term resource benefit and public
                   enjoyment.     The program, not strictly regulatory in nature,
                   represents a management tool for national marine resource
                   development, conservation, and use.        Simply stated, the program
                   provides a balance among multiple uses of designated marine and
                   Great Lakes areas.

                   Under Title 15 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 922 --
                   Marine Sanctuaries, until the September 7, 19,82 publication of
                   proposed revised rules, any person could recommend a site for
                   consideration as a possible marine sanctuary.         Those regulations
                   set forth procedures and criteria to review sanctuary candidates
                   for possible Placement on a List of Recommended Areas (LRA).
                   Once determined by NOAA1, the LRA was published in the Federal
                   Register with no additional public input required.          As a result
                   of this process, NOAA received an extraordinary range of site
                   nominations, which varied substantially in size and technical
                   supporting data.        The nomination process became unwieldy;
                   occasionally sites were nominated to prevent certain uses from
                   occurring in a particular area.        This led to Congressional and
                   public concern over the nomination     -process.

                   In February 1982, the Chelsea          InternaCtional Corporation of
                   Washington, D.C.,, was awarded a       contract to recommend marine
                   areas for possible placement on a Site Evaluation List (SEL) .
                   The Program Development Plan (PDP) designed by NOAA for marine
                   sanctuaries specified that sites had to be selected and evaluated
                   not only on their scientific and resource merits but also on
                   their human use and management values. The objective of NOAA's

                  contract with Chelsea was to provide NOAA with sufficient
                  information to replace the LRAs through a new site nomination
                  procedure that focused on the area's natural resources. In this
                  procedure, sites would be identified by a scientific evaluation
                  process and would be presented to the public for comment before
                  nomination to NOAA for inclusion on its new Site Evaluation List.
                  This process was embodied in the September 7, 1982, NOAA proposed
                  rule.

                  THE DESIGNATION PROCESS

                  The designation process, from site identification to final
                  approval    to   actual   designation,    is   long   and    involved.
                  Consequently, the Secretary of Commerce has designated only six
                  areas since passage of the Act in 1972.

                  The site designation process outlined by NOAA is as follows:

                        1.   Sites are identified by the regional resource teams,

                        2.   Regional resource teams apply site identification
                             criteria to each site within that region.

                        3.   The initial list of site descriptions are approved by
                             the regional resource team and are mailed to previously
                             identified individuals and organizations, nationally
                             and    within the region.

                        4.   Public comment and additional nominations are received.

                        5.   Each regional resource team recommends no more than
                             five sites to NOAA following the close of the public
                             comment period.

                        6.   NOAA selects sites for placement on the SEL, which is
                             then published in the Federal Register for comment;
                             NOAA prepares a written analysis of how each site meets
                             the resource evaluation criteria for future reference.

                        7.   NOAA selects a candidate site from the SEL; in
                             compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act,
                             an environmental analysis is made.

                        8.   A notice of intent to prepare a draft environmental
                             impact statement (DEIS) is published in the Federal
                             Register.

                        9.   A draft site management plan describing objectives and
                             possible regulatory actions for the area is prepared.

                                               Page 2

                      10.   One or more regional meetings are held to solicit
                            government and public comment on the selected site and
                            its proposed management plan.     Appropriate revisions
                            are then completed and reviewed with interested
                            parties, and any additional meetings are held with
                            relevant Federal agencies.

                      11.   A public hearing is held on the DEIS and draft
                            management    plan no less than 30 days after notice in
                            the Federal Register; written comments are accepted for
                            45 days after date of notice.

                      12.   A final environmental impact statement (FEIS) is
                            prepared and distributed for final comment.

                      13.   Final consultation occurs with Federal agencies and
                            state officials.

                      14.   The Secretary of Commerce, upon approval of the
                            President, designates the area as a National Marine
                            Sanctuary.

                      15.   The designation is effective unless the Governor of a
                            State with waters lying within the boundary of the site
                            objects to its designation, or both Houses of Congress
                            adopt a concurrent resolution of disapproval within 60
                            days of continuous Congressional session.

                  SCIENTIFIC RESOURCE EVALUATION TEAMS

                  As contracted, Chelsea      International was     responsible    for
                  completing the resource evaluation efforts and for drafting the
                  recommendations to NOAA of areas worthy of sanctuary designation.
                  To carry out this charge,.Chelsea established teams of nationally
                  recognized marine scientists for eight regions whose boundaries
                  approximate those of the Regional Fishery Management Councils
                  specified in the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act
                  of 1976. For the SEL process, the boundary between the North and
                  South Atlantic regions was Cape Hatteras, North Carolina; the
                  boundary between the South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico regions
                  was U.S. Route 1 in the Florida Keys.

                  The scientific resource evaluation teams were comprised of the
                  following scientists:

                                             Page 3

                                             Caribbean Region

                   Dr. Manuel Hernandez-Avila                   Dr. John Ogden
                   Team Leader                                  Director, West Indies
                   Chairman, Department of Marine Sciences       Laboratory
                   University of Puerto Rico                    Fairleigh Dickinson
                   Mayaguez, Puerto Rico                        University
                   (Physical Oceanography)                      St. Croix,
                                                                U.S. Virgin Islands
                                                                (Marine Biology)

                                          Eastern Pacific Region

                   Dr. Paul Rudy, Team Leader                   Dr. P. Dee Boersma
                   Director, Institute of Marine Biology        Director, Institute of
                   University of Oregon                          Environmental Studies
                   Corvallis, Oregon                            University of Washington
                   (Marine Biology)                             Seattle, Washington
                                                                (zoology)

                   Dr. Joel W. Hedgpeth                         Dr. June Lindstedt-Siva
                   Marine Biologist                             Environmental Scientist
                   Oregon State University (retired)            Atlantic-Richfield Co.
                   Santa Rosa, California                       Los Angeles, Ca.lifornia
                   (Biological Oceanography)                    (Marine Biology)

                   Dr. Elizabeth Venrick
                   Scripps Institution of Oceanography
                   La Jollar California
                   (Marine Biology)

                                            Great Lakes Region

                   Dr. A. M. Beeton, Team Leader                Dr. Charles E. Herdendorf
                   Director, Great Lakes &                      Director, Sea Grant
                   Marine Water Center                          Program
                   University of Michigan                       Ohio State University
                   Ann Arbor, Michigan                          Columbus, Ohio
                   (zoology)                                    (Geology)

                   Dr. H. J. Harris
                   Coordinator, Green Bay Project
                   Sea Grant Program
                   University of Wisconsin
                   Green Bay, Wisconsin
                   (zoology)

                                                 Page 4

                                         Gulf of Mexico Region

                  Dr. Thomas Bright, Team Leader             Dr. David A. Gettleson
                  Department of Oceanography                 Continental Shelf
                  Texas A&M University                       Associates
                  College Station, Texas                     Tequesta, Florida
                  (Marine Biology)                           (Marine Biology)

                  Dr. William G. McIntire                    Dr. James P. Ray
                  Associate Dean, Center for                 Shell Oil Company
                    Wetland Resources (retired)              Houstonr Texas
                  Louisiana State University                 (Marine Biology)
                  Wofford Hts., CA
                  (Coastal Geology)

                                         North Atlantic Region

                  Dr. Maurice Lynch, Team Leader             Dr. Bostwick Ketchum
                  Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences      Professor Emeritus
                  College of William and Mary                Woods Hole Oceanographic
                  Gloucester Point, Virginia                  institute
                  (Marine Biology)                           Woods Hole, Massachusetts
                                                             (Marine Biology)

                  Dr. Jeffrey Levinton                       Dr. Walter Adey
                  Dept. of Ecology and  Evolution            Director, Marine Systems
                  State University of New York                Laboratory
                    at Stony Brook                           Smithsonian Institution
                  Stony Brook, New  York                     Washington, D.C.
                  (Marine Biology)                           (Marine Biology)

                  Dr. H. Perry Jeffries
                  (replaced Dr. Bostwick Ketchum)
                  Graduate School of Oceanography
                  University of Rhode Island
                  Kingston, Rhode Island
                  (Marine Biology)

                                         South Atlantic ReQion

                  Dr. Vernon J. Henry, Team Leader           Dr. F. John Vernberg
                  Chairman, Geology Department               Director, Belle Baruch
                  Georgia State University                    Institute for Marine
                  Atlanta, Georgia                           Biology
                  (Marine Geology)                           Universitv of South
                                                             Carolina
                                                             Columbia, South Carolina
                                                             (Marine Biology)

                                              Page 5

                  Dr. Dirk Frankenberg                       Dr. Harold Wanless
                  Director, Marine Sciences Program          Professor, Marine Geology
                  University of North Carolina               University of Miami
                  Chapel Hill, North Carolina                Miami, Florida
                  (Marine Biology)                           (Marine Geology)

                                        Western-Pacific Region ..

                  Dr. Roy Tsuda, Team Leader                 Dr. Richard C. Wass
                  Dean of Graduate School                    Office of Marine
                    and Research                             Resources
                  University of Guam                         Pago Pago, American Samoa
                  Mangilao, Guam                             (Marine Biology)
                  (Botany)

                  Dr. E. Alison Kay
                  Professor of Zoology
                  University of Hawaii
                  Honolulu, Hawaii
                  (Zoology)

                                              Alaska Region

                  Dr. Vera Alexander, Team Leader            Dr. Lewis J. Haldorson
                  Director, Institute of                     School of Fisheries
                    Marine Sciences                          University of Alaska at
                  Universitv of Alaska at Fairbanks           Juneau
                  Fairbanks, Alaska                          Juneau, Alaska
                  (Marine Biology)                           (Fisheries Biology)

                  Dr. Donald F. Keer?                        Dr. Robert Weeden
                  ARCO Alaska, Inc.                          Resource Management
                  Anchorage, Alaska                            School
                  (Marine Biology)                           Unive.rsity of Alaska at
                                                               Fairbanks
                                                             Fairbanks, Alaska
                                                             (Zoology)

                                               Page 6

                  The teams, comprised of independent scientists with 'knowledge of
                  the values and uses of coastal waters within their region, were
                  charged to:

                       0    Identify and recommend areas within their region, based
                            on    NOAA's    scientific    selection   criteria,     for
                            consideration as    potential sanctuary sites.

                       �    Acquaint   State and local governmental entities and
                            regional     interest groups with the site selection
                            process.

                       �    Recommend no more than five sites in the region to NOAA
                            following the public comment period.

                  To support these teams, Chelsea and the technical staff of the
                  Research Planning Institute, Inc. (RPI) coordinated the program
                  and complemented the efforts of the teams.        Chelsea's Project
                  Manager and two Program Managers were in frequent contact with
                  the team leaders, NOAA officials, and others concerned.           One
                  Program Manager was responsible for the North Atlantic, South
                  Atlantic, Gulf, and Caribbean teams; the other Program Manager
                  coordinated efforts with the Alaska, Great Lakes, East Pacific,
                  and West Pacific teams, Chelsea and RPI support included meeting
                  organization, distribution of materials, and technical expertise
                  for drafting of site descriptions and reports.

                  RESOURCE EVALUATION CRITERIA

                  As specified by NOAA's Program Development Plan (PDP), the teams
                  used NOAA's scientific criteria in their evaluations and
                  deliberations.    The criteria, which address characteristics of
                  particular significance to the National Marine Sanctuaries
                  Program, are grouped in the following four categories with
                  accompanying subheadings:

                                              Page 7

                   Natural Resource Values               Human Use Values

                   Regional representation                 Fishery resources of
                   Subregional representation                recreational importance
                   Community representation                Fishery resources of
                   Biological productivity                   commercial importance
                   Biotic character/species                Ecological/esthetic
                     representation                          resources of importance
                   Species maintenance                       for recreational
                   Ecosystem structure/                      activities other than
                     habitat features                        fishing
                                                           Research opportunity
                                                           Interpretive opportunity
                                                           Historical, archaeological,
                                                             or paleontological
                                                             importan-ce

                   Potential Activity Imipacts             Management Concerns

                   Activities that may arise               Relationship to other
                      in a specific area,                    programs
                      including:                           Management of a conservation
                                                             unit
                   Vessel traffic                          Surveillance and enforcement
                   Aircraft overflights                    Economic considerations
                   Commercial or recreational              Accessibility
                     fishing
                   Other recreational sports
                   Waste disposal
                   Research
                   Dredging
                   Anchoring
                   Salvage operations
                   Oil and gas activities

                   After  determining which criteria were met, the teams tabulated
                   their  results using a Site Evaluation Matrix.       A low, moderate,
                   high,  or unknown value was given to each individual criterion
                   met.   Those sites which consistently received low values were
                   given  a "low' priority" assessment- and eliminated; those which
                   consistently received high values were given a "high priority"
                   assessment and recommended for further consideration. Appendix A
                   provides the guidelines used in the priority value rating.

                                                Page 8

                  SITE NOMINATION PROCESS

                  The site nomination process began in March 1982 with two team
                  leader orientation meetings in Washington, D.C. NOAA's Sanctuary
                  Program Office (SPO) extensively briefed Chelsea staff and the
                  team leaders on program status, desired goals, and the site
                  evaluation criteria.    Chelsea was asked to present NOAA with a
                  revised plan on an accelerated schedule instead of the 15-month
                  plan called for in the initial Request for Proposal.             The
                  accelerated plan required two meetings in each region --         the
                  first to identify sites meeting the necessary criteria and       the
                  second to select and recommend final sites for NOAA following    the
                  public comment period.

                  To facilitate the delivery of recommendations to NOAA in         the
                  requested 12 months, meeting schedules were rigid. The regional
                  resource evaluation teams were provided NOAA's PDP and criteria
                  and briefed on the planned process by the Team Leader. The team
                  members were asked to nominate areas for possible consideration
                  at the first regional meeting.      These nominations were to be
                  based on personal knowledge, research, and contacts with
                  colleagues familiar with the resources of the region.        Members
                  were encouraged to discuss candidate sites with others interested
                  or knowledgeable of the area.       Detailed documentation of the
                  resources and values of a nominated area was mandated for the
                  meeting.

                  First Regional Team Meetings

                  Chelsea arranged two-day meetings for team members to discuss
                  potential sites. No limitation was place@d on the number of areas
                  for suggestion, but each team had    to consider the sites within
                  the region that were on the LRA and each member was aware of the
                  charge for final recommendation of five sites to NOAA for
                  inclusion on its SEL.

                  One team meeting per week was held from AiDril 15, 1982, to June
                  9, 1982.   At these first meetings, discussion centered on site
                  description,   resource  evaluation,   the   reason  for   sanctuary
                  nomination, and other pertinent information.        Following each
                  regional team meeting, the RPI technical staff prepared detailed
                  site descriptions, which presented the technical merits of each
                  site, identified resource or management issues, and provided a
                  list of references

                  Public Participation Process

                  Of critical concern to NOA-A and the team members was public
                  participation and comment in the sanctuary nomination process.
                  The public was encouraged to comment on the candidate sites
                  identified by the teams that met NOAA's scientific criteria.

                                              Page 9

                    This public participation was particularly important to the
                    success of the program because of certain constraints:

                         �     The large geographical area covered by each of the
                               eight regions.

                         �     The small number of team members for each region.

                         �     The lack of adequate resources to hold multiple public
                               hearings in each region.

                    Throughout the site identification and evaluation process,
                    continual    contact    with    individuals,     groups    (public     and
                    commercial), government agencies potentially interested in marine
                    sanctuaries was made.         Media and telephone interviews were
                    conducted with interest groups, such as fishermen's associations,
                    oil and gas associations, and government officials.             Moreover,
                    significant outreach activities were made in areas where
                    confusion or controversy surfaced over individual sites or the
                    process involved.

                    The packages of material provided for review and comment were
                    carefully structured to provide as much information as possible
                    and to ensure comparable comments among the various regions. The
                    packages contained a brief description of the marine sanctuary
                    program; a request for comments on any or all of the sites; and
                    details on the manner in which additional areas could be
                    recommended for consideration.

                    Mailing lists were solicited from myriad sources -- State coastal
                    zone offices, State Governors, environmental groups, industry,
                    Leagues of Women Voters, Chambers of Commerce, State agencies,
                    and others.    NOAA's Administrator wrote to the Governor of each
                   -coastal State requesting a liaison to coordinate responses from
                    State and local governmental units.        The regional mailing lists
                    were then sent for review to team members, State liaisons, State
                    coastal zone representatives, and NOAA personnel.

                    About 30 days after each initial team meeting, the regional site
                    descriptions were sent to each name on the respective mailing
                    lists and to 82 national organizations and agencies. A deadline
                    of 45 days was set for comment, with 30 days provided for
                    submission of new nominations. More than 3,600 site description
                    packagps were distributed, and over 1,000 responses and 27 site
                    nominations were received and sent to the team members.                (See
                    Table 1.)    Chelsea then prepared a matrix of responses for          each
                    site which was provided to the regional team members along            with
                    copies of all comments and nominations.

                    Team members gave serious consideration to the Public comments
                    and recommendations received in their evaluation of potential

                                                  Page 10

                 marine sanctuaries.     Each team read the comments, talked to
                 interested individuals, groups, or officials, and developed a
                 priority listing based on the sites previously identified and
                 those identified public.

                 Second Regional Team Meetings

                 Beginning in September 1982 and ending in October 1982, the
                 second team meetings followed the public comment and site
                 nomination period.   These meetings focused on ranking sites for
                 submission of the final five to NOAA.

                 A problem arose -- five teams (Great Lakes, Gulf of Mexico, North
                 Atlantic, South Atlantic, and West Pacific)          had received
                 nominations from the public which they believed worthy of full
                 consideration for nomination. In each case, the public nominator
                 provided comprehensive scientific and resource information, and,
                 in some cases, presented data not previously available to the
                 team members. Although each of these five teams took a slightly
                 different approach in the final selection, each conducted
                 additional discussions and evaluations of the sites considered
                 worthy of additional consideration.    in those regions where the
                 final list of five recommended sites included one of these
                 public-recommended nominees, NOAA agreed to another round of
                 comment on the new site descriptions. The revised packages were
                 sent to individuals on the original mailing list of each of the
                 five regions with a response request within 30 days. Because of
                 particular circumstances in the North Atlantic region, a third
                 mailing was conducted, which is described in the chapter on the
                 North Atlantic region.

                 Following this second round of public comment and evaluation, the
                 regional resource evaluation teams made their final selection of
                 33 sites to recommend to NOAA for inclusion on its SEL.

                 It must be noted that NOAA asked Chelsea to terminate its efforts
                 in the Alaska region on November 2, 1982.       During the public
                 comment period for Alaska, numerous concerns arose about the
                 concept of a sanctuary, possible restrictions, the size and
                 number of sites, and the perceived lack of public participation
                 raised by Alaskan fishermen* and public officials.         Although
                 Chelsea attempted, to address these concerns through extensive
                 outreach efforts, communication difficulties, timing, and Alaskan
                 Congressional requests halted the process. Therefore, the final
                 list or recommendations does not contain sites within the
                 boundaries of the Alaskan region.

                 Final regional reports reflect member sensitivity to the
                 conflicting interests of such a process and to the public
                 perceptions of such deliberations. Boundaries were particularly
                 controversial, and several teams stressed the need for NOAA,

                                             Page 11

                  state and local officials, and private interests to     evaluate the
                  boundary question once the sites reached active candidate status.
                  Teams    also   highlighted     management   issues   and     possible
                  recommendations.

                  Team Recommendations

                  The regional resource evaluation teams recommended the following
                  sites to NOAA for inclusion on its SEL:

                                              RECO14MENDED AREAS

                  Caribbean Region

                        Cordillera Reefs, Puerto Rico
                        East End, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands
                        Southeastern St. Thomas, Virgin Islands

                  East  Pacific Region

                        Washington State Nearshore
                        Cortez & Tanner Banks, off California
                        Morro Bay, California
                        Heceta-Stonewall Banks, Off Oregon
                        Western Washington Outer Coast

                  Great Lakes Region

                        Western Lake Erie Islands & Sandusky Bay, Ohio
                        Green Bay (Lake Michigan), Wisconsin
                        Lake Superior (including Apostle Islands     Isle Royal)
                          Michigan and Wisconsin
                        Cape Vincent (Lake Ontario), New York
                        Thunder Bay (Lake Huron), Michigan

                  Gulf  of Mexico Region

                        Big Bend Seagrass Beds, off Florida
                        Florida Middle Ground, off Florida
                        Shoalwater Bay - Chandeleur Sound, Louisiana
                        Flower Garden Banks, off Texas
                        Baffin Bay, Texas

                  North Atlantic Region

                        Virginia - Maryland Nearshore Waters & Barrier Island Bays
                        Narragansett Bay & Block Island Sound, Rhode Island
                        Nantucket Shelf, Massachusetts
                        Stellwagen Banks, Massachusetts
                        Frenchmen's Bay/Mid-coastal Maine

                                               Page 12

                  South Atlantic Region

                       Ten Fathom Ledge - Big Rock, North Carolina
                       White Oak River System, North Carolina
                       Santee Delta, South Carolina
                       Port Royal Sound, South Carolina
                       Florida Shelf Coral gounds

                  West Pacific Region

                       Northern Mariana Islands
                       Cocos Lagoon, Guam
                       Papaloloa Point (Ofu Island), American Samoa
                       Southern Mariana Islands
                       Facpi Point, Guam.

                  THE REPORT

                  The following chapters contain the individual regional reports
                  which   discuss    site   identification,    evaluation,    and    the
                  recommendation process for the region.      Issues addressed by the
                  team are presented ao well as methods and reasons for site
                  selections.     A final site description and map for each
                  recommended area also is included.

                                               Page 13

                                                                        TABLE I

                                                        PUBLIC PARTICIPATION MAILING SCHEDULE

                      Region                             45-Day          75--Day                          30-Day
                                          First          Comment         Nomination       Second          Comment         Third
                                          Mailing         Deadline        Deadline        Mailing         Deadline        Mailing

                                           18 sites

                 Alaska                    8/18/82        10/1/82         11/1/82

                                            6 sites

                 Caribbean                 8/3/82         9/20/82         10/18/82

                                            9 sites

                 East Pacific              7/12/82        8/27/82         9/27/82

                                           10 sites                                         1 site
                 Great Lakes               7/26/82        9/10/82         10/11/82          12/6/82        1/10/83

                                            7 sites                                         I site
                 Gulf of Mexico            6/14/82        7/29/82         8/24/82           10/19/82       11/22/82

                                            5 sites                                         4 sites                     2 sites
                 North Atlantic            6/28/82        8/13/82         9/13/82           10/18/82       11/22/82     12/14/82-3/17/83

                                            A sites                                         3 sites
                 South Atlantic            7/6/82         8/20/82         9/20/82           10/20/82       11/22/82

                                            7 sites                                         2 sites
                 West Pacific              7/19/82        9/3/82          10/4/82           12/7/82        1/10/83

                 'rOTAL SITES                 66                                              11                             2

                                      II. REGIONAL REPORTS

      I

                                         CARIBBEAN REGION

           i

                                MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION LIST
                                           CARIBBEAN REGION

                                         MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW

                  1. Resource Evaluation Team

                  The Caribbean resource evaluation team consisted of two marine
                  scientists from the region.       Dr. Manuel Hernandez-Avila, a
                  physical oceanographer and Chairman of the Department of Marine
                  Sciences, University of Puerto Rico, was the team leader.        Dr.
                  John Ogden, a marine biologist and Director of the West Indies
                  Laboratory, Fairleigh Dickenson University, St. Croix, USVI, was
                  the other team member.    Both Dr. Hernandez-Avila and Dr. Ogden
                  made numerous contacts with local government officials, marine
                  scientists, and fishing interests during the site evaluation
                  process.  The two team members met privately on two occasions
                  during the site evaluation process.

                  2. Site Evaluation and Public Participation Process

                  The team had two scheduled meetings, on June 1-2,, 1982, on St.
                  Thomas, USVI, and on November 2, 1982, at the West Indies Lab on
                  St. Croix.   Steve Covell of Research Planning Institute (RPI) ,
                  Columbia, SC, and Dr. Mattson were present at those two meetings.
                  Family health problems required Dr. Hernandez to telephone his
                  recommendations to Dr. Ogden and Dr. Mattson for the second
                  meeting. Drs. William McLean and Laverne Ragster of the College
                  of the Virgin Islands, St. Thomas, attended the first team
                  meeting and presented information on three potential Marine
                  Sanctuary sites around St. Thomas. Wayne Savage of Chelsea also
                  attended the first meeting.     William Tobias, USVI Division of
                  Fish and Wildlife    (St. Croix), Alan Putney of the Eastern
                  Caribbean Natural Areas Project, and Ms. Liz Wilson of St. Croix
                  were present at the second meeting.

                  At the first team meeting, the team considered nine potential
                  Sanctuary sites in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands,
                  including the sites that were on NOAA's List of Recommended Areas
                  (44 Fed. Reg. 62552, Oct. 31, 1979).       They agreed to solicit
                  public comments on six of the nine sites, based upon site
                  descriptions to be prepared by RPI. Those sites were:

                  C-1. Cordillera Reefs, PR. This site includes 62 sq mi of ocean'
                  surrounding a chain of islands at the northeastern tip of Puerto
                  Rico.

                  C-2. Southeastern St. Thomas, USVI. This 12.3 sq mi site was an
                  active candidate for Marine Sanctuary designation until NOAA
                  withdrew it on March 10, 1982.     It is a heavily used area with
                  several marinas, excellent diving spots, and a severely polluted
                  mangrove lagoon.

                                              C-1

                   C-3.  East End St. Croix, USVI.      This 54 sq mi site encompasses
                   the well-known Buck Island National Monument, the fishing areas
                   to the east of St. Croix in both Territorial and Federal waters,
                   and the southeastern coastal waters of St. Croix.

                   C-4. Salt River Submarine Canyon, St. Croix, USVI. This tiny (3
                   sq mi) site is on the north side of St. Croix, and is the site of
                   the West Indies Lab "Hydrolab" project.

                   C-5.   Saba Island/Perseverence Bay, St. Thomas, USVI.         This 5.5
                   sq mi site begins at the end of the runway at St. Thomas'
                   airport, and stretches out and around Saba Island.             It also
                   fronts on the campus of the College of the Virgin Islands,
                   located just west of the airport.

                   C-6.    Vieques Island, PR.       This site, located south of the
                   central portion of Vieques Island, includes two bioluminescent
                   bays on the island.     Access to the 18.5 sa mi site is severelv
                   restricted because of the U.S. Navy's activities on and aroun@
                   Vieques.

                   Descriptions of these six potential Marine Sanctuary sites were
                   mailed to 60 groups and individuals in Puerto Rico and the U.S.
                   Virgin Islands, and 82 national organizations and Federal
                   agencies.   Chelsea received only nine (9) responsive replies to
                   this mailing by the 45-day public comment deadline of September
                   20r 1982. The opportunity to submit public nominations for sites
                   not proposed by the team ended on October 18, 1982, with no
                   nominations submitted.     With the exception of local support for
                   the two Puerto Rico sites by the Puerto Rico Planning Board and
                   for all six sites by the Caribbean Fishery Management Council,
                   all of the substantive c-omments came either from Federal agencies
                   (EPA, NOAA, U.S. Navy, and the Fish & Wildlife Service, or from
                   one environmental group (Defenders of Wildlife).         The U.S. Navy
                   strongly opposed the Vieques site because of the potential
                   interference with its activities there. The team also considered
                   the   blanket   opposition    of   the   National   Ocean     Industries
                   Association and Chevron USA in their final analysis.

                   3. Recommendations

                   3.1. Fishing Interests

                   One of the user groups that did not respond to the request for
                   public comment was the commercial fishermen of Puerto Rico and
                   the Virgin Islands. In the team members' views, this is the area
                   in which most future conflicts with the Marine Sanctuary program
                   will lie.    The Caribbean Fisheries Management Council wrote a
                   supportive letter acknowledging that Dr. Hernandez had discussed
                   the sites with them.      The National Marine Fisheries Service of

                                                     C-2

                 NOAA raised a caution flag with respect to any restrictions on
                 commercial and recreational fishermen.
                 The East End St. Croix site extends eastward to an impor@ant
                 local fishing area, Lang Bank. The Territory currently has laws
                 on the books that control some fishing activities in that area,
                 but the team perceived that enforcement of Territorial fishing
                 laws is extremely lax.   Thus even the adoption of local fishing
                 laws and regulations could antagonize fishing interests, if one
                 were also proposing to enforce those laws.

                 3.2. Site Selection

                 The Caribbean resource evaluation team recommends the following
                 three sites for ;)lacement on the Marine Sanctuary Site Evaluation
                 List. Without prioritizing them, the sites are:

                 1. Cordillera Reefs, PR
                 2. Southeastern St. Thomas, USVI
                 3. East End St. Croix, USVI

                 As part of its final regional report, the team has approved a set
                 of brief site descriptions, including maps which show the
                 boundaries of the proposed sanctuaries.      This portion of the
                 revort contains highlights of the team's rationale for choosing
                 each of the three sites, as well as comments on management issues
                 that came to the team's attention during the site evaluation
                 process.

                 In anticipation of questions regarding the team's rationale for
                 not recommending the other sites, the team states that these
                 three are the best sites.      The other three sites that were
                 circulated for public comment probably meet the Marine Sanctuary
                 criteria, but they simply are not as good as the final three.
                 The three sites that were discussed at the first team meeting,
                 but not circulated for public comment, were not considered to
                 meet Marine Sanctuary criteria.

                 3.2.1. Cordillera Reefs, PR

                 This site is a heavily-used recreation area off the northeast
                 coast of Puerto Rico. It is less than three miles from the major
                 city of Fajardo, and is easily accessible by power and sailboats
                 alike. The area has been designated by the Puerto Rico.Planning
                 Board as a "Natural Reserve." It was-removed from NOAA's List of
                 Recommended Areas, for Marine Sanctuary consideration, on July
                 13r 1981, after substantial local opposition developed in
                 response to a NOAA proposal to include the waters around Culebra
                 and Culebrita Islands.   This proposal by the Caribbean resource
                 evaluation team does not include Culebra and Culebrita, although
                 the Fish and Wildlife Service expressed their concern at the

                                              C-3

                  omission of the "spectacularn Culebrita Reef. The team does not
                  believe that Culebra or Culebrita could be successfully brought
                  into the sanctuary program.

                  If the present Active Candidates in Puerto Rico, La Paguera and
                  Mona/Monita Islands, are designated as Marine Sanctuaries in the
                  near future, the Cordillera Reefs proposal should probably be set
                  aside until the program has thoroughly evaluated the St. Croix
                  and St. Thomas sites.

                  3.2.2. Southeastern St. Thomas, USVI

                  No commenter sDecifically opposed the Southeastern St. Thomas
                  site, and some were surprised to learn that it had regressed from
                  Active Candidate status. This site epitomizes the inappropriate
                  use of the word "sanctuary" in this program.           Much of the
                  program's opposition, in St. Thomas as well as nationwide, comes
                  from public perception of "sanctuary." The word is iDarticularly
                  inapt in this site, which might properly be calle@ a "marine
                  management" area.    The area encompassed by the team's proposal
                  (12.3 sq mi) contains thousands of sailboats, at least a dozen
                  heavily-used diving spots, and the sewage effluent outfall of the
                  main city on St. ThomasF Charlotte Amalie. The team is concerned
                  that some local and Federal officials expect to accomplish things
                  by Sanctuary designation that they have not been able to do by
                  way of other statutes, even though they have ample authority
                  under those statutes.

                  A slightly smaller version of this proposal was almost designated
                  a Marine Sanctuary in 1981, but an intramural battle between
                  Territorial Government agencies stalled the process so long that
                  NOAA decided to drop the site and see if it came up again as part
                  of this site evaluation process.     The team learned of the local
                  opposition to designation of this site during their visit to St.
                  Thomas.   Some of this opposition, they believe, was due to the
                  way in which NOAA published "draft" regulations in the Sanctuary
                  DEIS without first working with the many user groups to determine
                  what would work and what would not.

                  For examDle the draft regulations in the DEIS would have.
                  forbidden anchor-ing . on coral, with a civil penalty of up to
                  $50,000 per infraction. Local scuba trip operators felt directly
                  threatened by this rule, particularly where-there were dive spots
                  in which there were no non-coral anchorages.      The DEIS referred
                  to permanent moorings for such areas, but gave no hints as to who
                  would put them in, how they would be paid for, and who would
                  control access to them if there were fewer moorings than users.
                  A public meeting with this interest group, such as was done with
                  the Gray's Reef Sanctuary, might resolve most of these issues.

                                               C-4

                 3.2.3. East End St. Croix, USVI

                 This 54 sq mi proposal covers an area of ocean that is one-half
                 as large as the entire island of St. Croix, and it will be
                 perceived as very large.     Most of the adjoining land is in
                 Federal or local parkland, or agricultural or residential use,
                 and the nearshore area is not likely to be controversial. It is
                 in the management of resources on Lang Bank that fishing
                 interests will have to be carefully considered.         The team
                 increased the size of their original proposal by extending the
                 southwestern boundary westward to include Great Pond Bay.

                 This proposal surrounds the popular diving areas of Buck Island
                 National Monument, as well as Green Cay National Wildlife Refuge.
                 The East End is an area of high diversity, including coral reefs
                 and seagrass beds, as well as high biological productivity.     it
                 is clearly one of the best spots in the U.S. Caribbean for Marine
                 Sanctuary status. A total of six comments were received on this
                 site, three in support and none opposing.

                                                C-5

                                               PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                       MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                      1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                         A. SITE NAME: Cordillera Reefs, Puerto Rico

                         B. LOCATION:         (CARIBBEAN REGION)

                              1.  LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE: 180221 N, 650321 N

                              2.  DESCRIPTION-       The site covers approximately 62 Mi2 (160
                                  kM2) around the Cordillera Islands, totally lying within the
                                  waters of the northeast coastal sector of the Commonwealth of
                                  Puerto Rico (see map). The urban industrial center of Fajardo
                                  with its commercial port and marina is less than 3 mi (4.8 km)
                                  from the area.     Extensive, well-developed coral reef commu-
                                  nities occupy the Cordillera Reefs and attract numerous recre-
                                  ationists.  Divers are also attracted by several shipwrecks in
                                  the area.    These waters are affected by severe storms and
                                  water spouts.      Also, the region is seismically - active and
                                  tsunami waves historically have impacted the area.

                    11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                         A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                              1 . The site contains extensive, well-developed coral formations
                                  and associated fish and shellfish resources.

                              2.  The endangered hawksbill turtle and manatee utilize the area.

                              3.  The area receives a high degree of recreational use which has
                                  resulted in the depletion of some species.

                         B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                              1 . NATURAL RESOURCES

                                  The large coral reef communities are the outstanding biological
                                  feature of this area.    The area is inhabited by spiny lobster,
                                  octopus, queen conches, helmet shells, and fish including
                                  rays,   barracuda, grouper,       squirrelfish,   snapper, grunts,
                                  goatfish, jawfish, butterflyfish, angelfish, clamselfish, wrasse,
                                  trunkfish, doctorfish, and parrotfish.

                                  The endangered manatee (Trichechus manatus) and hawksbill
                                  turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata) utilize-tFe -area.

                                  Sooty terns, brown boobies, laughing gulls, bridled terns, and
                                  noddy terns are among the seabirds likely to be found in this
                                  area.

                                                         Cordillera Reefs, Puerto Rico - Page 2

                            2.  HUMAN USES

                                The Cordillera Reef system is one of the most visited, marine
                                recreational areas in Puerto Rico.     Thousands of boaters,
                                swimmers, skin divers, underwater photographers, and fisher-
                                men use its waters every month.     Spearfishing for sport has
                                depleted some of the large reef fish around lcacos and Palo-
                                minitos, and scuba divers remove shellfish and coral, but the
                                reefs are still diverse with respect to coral and fish species.
                                Exceptionally clear waters, calm seas during most of the year,
                                and easy accessibility from Fajardo make this area both extra-
                                ordinarily attractive and susceptible to damage without proper
                                management safeguards.

                                The Reefs have been designated as a Natural Reserve by the
                                Puerto Rico Planning Board.

                                The area was formerly used as a military ordnance testing
                                ground.

                   111. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                        Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, 1970, An island in transition Culebra
                            1970:  A Staff Report on the Environment to the Governor's Spe-
                            cial Committee on Culebra, Office of the Governor, Environmental
                            Quality Board, 104 pp. and bibliography.

                        U.S. Dept. of Commerce, 1978, Puerto Rico coastal management pro-
                            gram and final environmental impact statement:     Prepared by the
                            Office of Coastal Zone Management, NOAA, and the Department of
                            Natural Resources, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, 194 pp, maps
                            and four appendices.

                                                                                    Cordillera Reefs, Puerto Rico                   Page 3

                                                 CORDILLERA REEFS, PUERTO RICO

                                                                             ATLANTIC 0C6AV

                                                                                                     LOS GEMELOS

                                                        ALOMINOS Is.                                                     NORTH CAY
                                 Fajardo It                                                   LOBITA CAY
                                                                SU A R L L D EXCLU ED             @q!.OBO CAY
                                                                                                                   CIA

                                                                                                                                    CULEBRITA IS.
                                0                                                                LUIS PENA CA4
                                                                           vi9QUES Somo
                                M
                                0.            @'-YIINEROS IS.

                                                                                                                       ATLA-C QCEA1
                                                                                  10                               fP.@RT. I..
                                                                    0                           20
                                                                                                                                     VA.

                                                                                MILES
                                     APPROX. BOUNDARY- - -                                                                 SE.

                                                                         LOCATION MAP
                                                                                                                         NORT@@'

                                                                                                           'y

                                                   PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                       MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION (C-2)

                        1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                            A. SITE NAME: Southeastern St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands

                            B. LOCATION:         (CARIBBEAN REGION)

                                1.   LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE:              64148.5' W to 64154.11 W,
                                                                        18016.5' N to 18119.6' N

                                2.   DESCRIPTION:       The site consists of 12.3 Mi2 (32 kM2) of Vir-
                                     gin Islands' territorial waters immediately southeast of St.
                                     Thomas, including the entire mangrove lagoon, Jersey and
                                     Cowpet Bays, and the waters surrounding Great and Little St.
                                     James, Dog, Buck, and Capella Islands. This area encompass-
                                     es diverse tropical marine ecosystems including numerous habi-
                                     tat types and a wide variety of marine species.          Extensive ma-
                                     rine development has already occurred in the Benner Bay
                                     area.   The site is dominated by areas of fine-grained sand
                                     with transitional marine meadows of algae and turtle grass.
                                     Fifteen different biotic associations of calcareous algal plains
                                     and zones of rock and rubble and open ocean waters, as well
                                     as a series of shallow fore reefs, deep reefs, and back reefs,
                                     occur within the area.

                      11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                            A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                                1.   The diverse marine communities situated southeast of St.
                                     I homas form a highly productive and ecologically significant
                                     ecosystem whose preservation and management are important 'Fo-
                                     scientific research and to man's understanding of          the delica@_e
                                     interrelationsFi@pexisting between marine species,           particularly
                                     in regard to the local commercial fishery resources.

                                2.   The area's spectacular beauty and biotic diversity          sustain im-
                                     portant recreational boating, diving, and tourism wFi-ch are
                                     crucial to the economy of the Virgin Islands.

                            B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                                1.   NATURAL RESOURCES

                                     Mangrove Lagoon, which includes Bovoni Cay, Cas Cay, and
                                     Patricia Cay, is the most extensive red mangrove system re-
                                     maining in the Virgin Islands.         The area is a major nursery
                                     for several     species of reef fish        and    the   spiny    lobster
                                     (Panulirus argus).        The endangered        brown     pelican,    the
                                     tFr_e-at_e_n__e-7a green sea turtle, olive ridley turtle, loggerhead
                                     turtle, and the "endangered" hawksbill and leatherback sea

                                                                         Southeastern St. Thomas - Page 2

                                       turtles have been sighted within the area.               Numerous birds
                                       including ospreys and cattle egrets roost, feed, and nest in
                                       and around the mangroves.           Some rare reptiles, such as the
                                       local snake (Alsophis)        and the ground lizard, also find
                                       protection    within    th se    mangrove     cays.      Mangroves      are
                                       additionally   important as       sediment traps,        breaking     storm
                                       waves, and dampening tidal currents. Mangrove roots play an
                                       important role in mineral recycling necessary for maintaining
                                       the productivity exhibited by the mangrove community.

                                       I he site also contains large expanses of turtle grass flats
                                       which are habitats for many species of (juvenile) molluscs, fish
                                       (e.g., labinids, wrasses, and latjanids), and spiny lobsters.
                                       The area between Patricia and Cas Cays contains a back-reef
                                       community of Porites.       Coral reefs contain hard corals (e.g.,
                                       Siclastrea, AcFo-pora, Diploria, Millipora, and Reontastrea) in
                                       association      with      soft      corals       (e.g.,       Pterogonia,
                                       Pseciclopterogoria, Eunicia, and Plexamella, and         sponges.

                                       The ocean areas are pristine and contain coral           reefs and fine-
                                       grained sand areas dominated by the alga Halimeda, marine
                                       meadows of Thalassia and Syrinqodium, calcareous algal plains,
                                       and zones oT__r_o_cF-and rul-bTe-where over 300 species of fish
                                       have been observed.         The areas of low relief are frequented
                                       by a variety of crustaceans and include a recently discovered
                                       portunid crab resource exhibiting the potential for commercial
                                       exploitation and development.         Molluscs, including three spe-
                                       cies of conch, and a diversity of fish species dominated by
                                       porgies, pat snappers, and small grunts also inhabit this area.

                                       The algal plain covers most of the sea floor deeper than 50 ft
                                       (15.2 m).      The most obvious components are manatee grass
                                       (Halophila), green algae (e.g., Caulerpa, Halimeda, Udotera,
                                       Va-Fo-nia, and Penialus), and brown algae (e.g., Lobophora,
                                       U'ictyota, and Sargass m).        The faunal component is dominated
                                       Fy -sponges (of which There is a large and colorful variety),
                                       fighting conches, carrier shells, hermit crabs, and burrowing
                                       polychaete worms.

                                       More than 495 species of flora and fauna have been identified
                                       in the area.     More than 76 species of green, brown, and red
                                       algae; 46 species of molluscs; 15 species of sponges; 58 spe-
                                       cies of ech.inoderms, cniclarians, annelids, and crustaceans;
                                       243 species of fish; 2 "endangered" and 3 "threatened" species
                                       of marine turtles; 100 species of shorebirds; and the endan-
                                       gered humpback whale live, feed, spawn, breed, and/or nest
                                       within these waters southeast of St. Thomas, U.S.V.I.

                                  2.   HUMAN USES

                                       St. Thomas's economy is based on tourism, and most tourist
                                       attractions are water-related.        The waters of the site are the
                                       locus for as much as 20 percent of all Virgin Islands boating
                                       activities, including considerable use of the area for both

                                                                      Southeastern St. Thomas - Page 3

                                     private (recreational) and commercial snorkel and scuba diving
                                     tou rs.  Damage to coral crests by anchors and debilitation of
                                     sea turtles or migrating humpback whales by power boats tra-
                                     versing the area is of some concern.         The resources are such
                                     that the area provides spectacular coral reef diving experi-
                                     ences, particularly popular at the coral cave formations at Cow
                                     and Calf Rocks and the coral reefs at Buck Island, Capella
                                     Island, and Nazareth Bay.        The most notable diving attraction
                                     is the Royal Mail Steamship@ H.M.S. WYE, which sank on the
                                     south shore of Buck Island.          Other wrecks include a World
                                     War I freighter located in the West Bay of Buck Island, an un-
                                     identified  wreck at Whelk Rocks, and a Caribbean trading
                                     schooner.

                                     The area is also important to local commercial fishermen.
                                     Landings    average 1.7 million pounds of fish and 122,000
                                     pounds of   lobster.   This fishery is a small-scale artisanal fish-
                                     ery using   West Indian fish traps and boats that are generally
                                     less than 25 ft (8 m) in length.

                                     Of the more than 700 cruise ships which visit St. Thomas an-
                                     nually, only about 1 percent (7-10 smaller vessels) enter or
                                     leave through the passage between Buck Island/ Capella Island
                                     and St. Thomas.        The primary commercial vessel users are
                                     small,   interisland cargo vessels,       passenger-carrying ferry
                                     boats, barges, and houseboats.         Dredge and fill operations in
                                     the proposed sanctuary area have been allowed in the past.

                                     The rich variety of marine resources found within these wa-
                                     ters, their importance to the overall resource base of the Vir-
                                     gin Islands, and their close proximity to land have helped to
                                     establish this area as an important center for marine research.
                                     The first survey of the shoreline and water depths was per-
                                     formed in 1851.    Offshore reefs were charted in 1924, and sci-
                                     entific research interests increased in the late 1960s when sev-
                                     eral environmental impact studies were conducted to assess the
                                     impacts of a proposed jet port in Mangrove Lagoon.                 Since
                                     then, the Government of the Virgin Islands has sponsored a
                                     number of studies of the dynamics of the Mangrove Lagoon
                                     ecosystem, fisheries, lobsters, wildlife, and the flora and fau-
                                     na of offshore islands and cays.

                                     In addition, a number of research stations have been estab-
                                     lished along the perimeter of the site.          Dr. John Lilly con-
                                     ducted his first experiments in dolphin communication at a spe-
                                     cially constructed laboratory at Nazareth Bay.         This laboratory
                                     was later used for research on       ' sharks and turtles by staff
                                     members of the Caribbean Research Institute (CRI).            CRI also
                                     established a small field-station laboratory at Benner Bay, from
                                     which was conducted research on the Mangrove Lagoon, fisher-
                                     ies, lobsters, and ciguatera.       Currently, five research proj-
                                     ects are being conducted in the area.

                                                                 Southeastern St. Thomas - Page 4

                                  The area is also subject to moderate stresses resulting from
                                  rapid and unplanned shoreline development and consequent
                                  domestic sewage intrusion into the ecosystem since 1960.        Re-
                                  sort and residential development is centered at Nazareth Bay
                                  by Cabrite Point.     Commercial docks are concentrated east of
                                  the Mangrove Lagoon area near Benner Bay. Mangrove Lagoon
                                  receives leachate and eroded sediments from the adjacent
                                  Bovoni Landfall.    Both point and nonpoint source pollutants
                                  from future coastal development threaten the proposed marine
                                  sanctuary.

                     Ill. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                          Island Resources Foundation, 1977, Marine environments of the Virgin
                              Islands:   Tech. Suppl. No. 1, Prepared for Virgin Islands Plan-
                              ning Office, Coastal Zone Management Program.

                          Office of Coastal Zone Management, 1981, Draft environmental impact
                              statement:    proposed St.     Thomas National Marine Sanctuary:
                              NOAA/CZM, Wash., D.C.

                                     ST. THOMAS                                       STEVEN CAY

                                                                    ,--_--\,CAPR1TA PT

                                                      J psEY B14Y
                                                                           GREAT T JA S IS.
                                                                                      N

                                            LONG I?).                                  -A
                                                                             LITTLE TJAM S IS.
                                                     CARIBStAy_SEA

                                                                                      OG I

                              1 CAPE LA I LANDS
                                                                                 @0-

                            APPRGX.BOUND ARY- - -              MILES

                                                     LOCATION MAP

                                            PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                     MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                      1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                        A. SITE NAME: East End St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands

                         B. LOCATION:      (CARIBBEAN REGION)

                            1.   LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE: 17045' N, 640331 W

                            2.   DESCRIPTION:     The site covers approximately 54 Mi2 (137
                                 kM2) of territorial and Federal waters adjacent to the east end
                                 of St. Croix, including the waters around Green Cay U.S. Na-
                                 tional Wildlife Refuge, and Buck Island Reef National Monu-
                                 ment, and the area around Lang Bank out to the 60 ft (18 m)
                                 depth contour (see map).   The mainland shore consists largely
                                 of segments of sandy beach interspersed between low and
                                 steep rocky shore.    Volcanically-derived Cretaceous siltstone
                                 and sandstone basement rock is thought to underlie much of
                                 the proposed site.     Coral reef formations are distributed
                                 throughout the area with numerous reefs fringing the shore.
                                 Grazing sea urchins and parrotfish ingest pieces of coral and
                                 excrete calcareous sand, and bands of sand lie between the
                                 patch reefs.  Water turbulence and water clarity play major
                                 roles in determining biological zonation in this area.

                                 The water salinity in the proposed site is nearly always above
                                 34 ppt.  Offshore sea surface temperatures range from 250C
                                 (770F) in February to 280C (820F) in July; nearshore sea sur-
                                 face temperatures range from 230C (730F) to 301C (861F).
                                 Spring tides [1 ft (30 cm)] within the site are primarily diur-
                                 nal.  Neap tides are irregular and semidiurnal with a usual
                                 range up to 6 in (15 cm).    The majority of deep-water waves
                                 approaching this site are driven by the consistent northeast
                                 trade winds. These waves are mostly 1-3 ft (0.3-1 m) high,
                                 although they may occasionally attain heights of 12 ft (3.6 m).
                                 Waves up to 12 ft (3.6 m) high at the shore may also result
                                 from tropical storms or hurricanes passing to the south during
                                 the late summer and fall, or from long-period winter waves
                                 from the north which steepen as they approach shore.

                                 This region experiences shallow-focus seismic activity, and
                                 tsunami waves have been noted historically along these shores.

                   11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                        A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                            1 . A rich diversity o f tropical marine organisms depend upon the
                                 maintained integrity of the site.

                                                                           East End St. Croix - Page 2

                               2.   Lang Bank has been identified as a Critical Area of high bio-
                                    logical productivity.

                               3.   The area is an important field research site for scientific in-
                                    vestigation of tropical marine habitats and offers great poten-
                                    Ti-aT @asan interpretive center.

                               4.   This area supports a small artisanal fishery.

                           B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                               1.   NATURAL RESOURCES

                                    The site is inhabited by a rich diversity of marine organisms.
                                    Coral formations composed of live, dead, and dying staghorn,
                                    elkhorn, finger, brain, and boulder corals provide habitats for
                                    numerous other marine species, including encrusting coralline
                                    algae.   Submerged meadows of manatee, turtle, and shoal sea-
                                    grasses are found in the shallow lagoon areas in association
                                    with patch reefs.     Diverse species of hard corals, gorgonians,
                                    sponges, molluscs,    crustaceans, and other benthic and pelagic
                                    marine organisms      inhabit the area.     Long-spined black sea
                                    urchins take daytime refuge on patch reefs and graze upon the
                                    algal mats and surrounding seagrass beds at night.         Schools of
                                    grunts and copper sweepers leave the protection of the reefs
                                    at night using well-defined routes to reach seagrass-bed feed-
                                    ing grounds.    Juveniles of some surgeonfish and parrotfish as
                                    well as the spiny lobster live in seagrass beds until adulthood,
                                    at which time they migrate onto the reefs.           Dozens of fish
                                    species occur in the area including infrequently observed eels,
                                    brotulids, apogonicls, serranoids, blennies, and scorpaenids
                                    which are camouflaged or hide in the recesses of coral reefs.

                                    Sea birds utilizing this area include brown boobies, frigate
                                    birds, laughing gulls, terns, bluefaced boobies, tropic birds,
                                    and the endangered brown pelican.

                                    Both Buck Island and Green Cay Beach are important nesting
                                    sites for the endangered hawksbill sea turtle and possibly the
                                    threatened green sea turtle.      Endangered leatherback sea tur-
                                    tles nest at several locations on St. Croix and would be at
                                    least incidentally encountered within the proposed sanctuary
                                    site.

                               2.   HUMAN USES

                                    Artisanal fishermen harvest conch, whelk, and spiny lobster
                                    from these waters; however, as occurs throughout Caribbean
                                    waters, ciguatera fish poisoning poses a problem for finfish
                                    harvesting.

                                    The West Indies Lab of Fairleigh Dickinson University is locat-.
                                    ed at Tague Bay, and it is an important facility for research
                                    and education concerning tropical marine science.

                                                                         East End St. Croix - Page 3

                                   Buck Island Reef National Monument (operated by the National
                                   Park Service) and Green Cay National Wildlife Refuge (opera-
                                   ted by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) adjoin the site.        Cramer
                                   Park is a local park on the east end of Tague Bay.          The wa-
                                   ters around Buck Island are noted as a graveyard for sunken
                                   ships and attract large numbers of recreational divers each
                                   yea r.  The Lang Bank has been designated as a Critical Area
                                   of high biological productivity in the Virgin Islands Coastal
                                   Zone Management Program.

                     111. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                          Acley, W. H., 1975, The algal ridges and coral reefs of St. Croix:
                               their structure and Holocene development:         Atoll Research Bull.,
                               No. 187, Smithsonian Inst., 67 pp.

                          Acley, W. H. and R. Burke, 1976, Holocene bioherms (algal ridges and
                               bank-barrier reefs) of the eastern Caribbean:         Geol. Soc. Amer.
                               Bull., Vol. 87, pp. 95-109.

                          Glaclfelter, W. B., 1979, Twilight migrations and foraging of the cop-
                               per sweeper Pempheris schomburgki (Teleostei:              pempheridae):
                               Marine Biology, V7. 5-0, PP. 109-119.

                          Glaclfelter, W. B. and E. H. Glaclfelter, 1978, Fish community struc-
                               ture as-a function-6f habitat structure on West Indian patch reefs:
                               Rev. Biol. Trop., Vol. 26 (Suppl. 1), pp. 65-84.

                          Gladfelter, W. B., J. C. Ogden, and E. H. Glaclfelter, 1980, Similarity
                               and diversity among coral reef fish communities:           a comparison
                               between tropical western Atlantic (Virgin Islands) and tropical
                               central Pacific (Marshall Islands) patch reefs:           Ecology, Vol.
                               61(5), pp. 1156-1168.

                          Island Resources Foundation, 1977, Marine environments of the Virgin
                               I slands:  Tech. Suppl. No. 1 , Prepared for Virgin Islands Plan-
                               ning Office, Coastal Zone Management Program, 120 pp.

                          Ogden, J. C. , 1977, Carbonate-sediment production by parrottish and
                               sea urchins on Caribbean reefs:          Studies in Geology, No. 4,
                               Amer. Assoc. Petrol. Geol.

                          Ogden, J. C. , R. A. Brown, and N. Salesky, 1973, Grazing by the
                               echinoid Diadema antillarum philippi:       formation of halos around
                               West lndi;i-n -patch reefs: S ience, Vol. 182, pp'. 715-717.

                          Ogden, J. C. and P. R. Ehrlich, 1977, The behavior of heterotypic
                               resting   schools   of juvenile    grunts    (Pomadasyidae):       Marine
                               Biology, pp. 273-280.

                          Rogers, C. S. and N. H. Salesky, 1981, Productivity of Acropora
                               palmata (Lamark), macroscopic algae, and algal turf froiF--Tague
                               Bay reef, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands:       Jour. Expt. Mar. Biol.
                               Ecol., Vol. 49, pp. 179-187.

                                                                                                                                                  East End St. Croix - Page 4

                                                                                                             ATLANTIC OCcAIV

                                                                                               SALT RIVER
                                                                                        SUBMARINE CANYON
                                                                                                                    GREEN C                           13UCK 1!@.-               NG BANK
                                                                                                                                                    WE Y
                                                                                                                           CHRISTIANSTED                            EAST Pr.
                                                                                       ST. CROIX

                                                                     FREDERIKSTED                                                             N

                                                                                                                                     v

                                                                                                           CARIB EAN sc.A                                                                 F LA.
                                                                                                                                                                                                TL A"TIC

                                                                                                                                                                                                R
                                                                                                                   0-1.25 2.5              5                                             BBE@N
                                                                                                                            MILES

                                                                                                             LOCATION                 MAP

                                        EAST PACIFIC REGION

                                 MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION LIST
                                          EASTERN PACIFIC REGION

                                           MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW

                  1. Resource Evaluation Team

                  The Eastern Pacif ic resources evaluation team was comprised of
                  five marine scientists from the region. The team leader was Dr.
                  Paul Rudy, Director, Institute of Marine Biology, University of
                  Oregon.   The other team members were Dr. Dee Boersma, Director,
                  Institute of Environmental Studies, University of Washington; Dr.
                  Joel W. Hedgpeth, Marine Biologist, Santa Rosa, CA; Dr. June
                  Lindsedt-Siva,    Environmental    Scientist,    Atlantic     Richfield
                  Company, Los Angeles, CA; and Dr. Elizabeth Venrick, Scripps
                  Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, CA.

                  2. Site Evaluation and Public Participation Process

                  The team held their first meeting in San Francisco, California on
                  April 22-23, 1982.     Prior to this meeting the team members had
                  made numerous contacts with their colleagues in academic
                  institutions, state and local governments, Federal agencies,
                  environmental groups, and fishing and oil and gas interests to
                  solicit views on potential Marine Sanctuary sites.             At the
                  initial meeting, the team discussed each section of the coastal
                  waters of the Pacific Coast of the United States to identify
                  potential Marine.Sanctuary sites. They also reviewed all Eastern
                  Pacific sites that were contained in NOAA's List of Recommended
                  Areas (44 Fed. Reg. 62552, Oct. 31, 1979).           During the first
                  meeting, using the criteria contained in the        Sanctuary Program
                  PDP, the team identified nine preliminary           Marine Sanctuary
                  candidates:

                  EP-1.   Washington State Nearshore.       This is   a group of three
                  distinct areas in Puget Sound, entirely             in State water,
                  encompassing about 430 sq mi.

                  EP-2. Western Washington Outer Coast. This rocky coastline area
                  extends 90 miles south from the northwestern tip.          Entirely in
                  State waters, it is an important habitat for fish, raptors and
                  marine mammals.

                  EP-3.   Willapa Bay, WA.      This complex bay/estuarine ecosystem
                  encompasses approximately 100 sq mi of State water in the
                  southwest corner to the Columbia River.

                  EP-4.   Hec eta-Stonewall Banks, off OR.      This is a hard bottom
                  bank area, about 400 sq mi, lying off midcoastal Oregon near
                  Newport. Entirely in Federal water, the area supports important
                  fishery resources.

                                                EP-1

                  EP-5.    Trinidad Head Area, CA.       This is a small (4.5 sq mi)
                  stretch of shallow, gently sloping coast south of the
                  California-Oregon border. Characterized by high rocky scarps and
                  sandy pocket beaches, it is entirely in State water.

                  EP-6.   Morro Bay, CA.     This 2,000 acre embayment, south of the
                 .City of Morro Bay, supports three habitats - coastal salt marsh,
                  tidal mud flats and deepwater channels.         It lies within State
                  jurisdiction.

                  EP-7. Santa Barbara Basin, CA. This site        includes 260 sq mi of
                  flat bottomed anoxic submarine basin entirely in Federal water.
                  Its bottom sedimentary deposits makes it valuable for geological
                  research.

                  EP-8. San Nicolas and San Clemente Islands, CA.              This site
                  consists of two discrete areas surrounding two islands used by
                  the military.     Offshore from Santa Catalina Island, the site
                  contains important marine mammal habitat.

                  EP-9. Cortes and Tanner Banks, off CA. This site is comprised of
                  two rocky bottom areas, approximately 9,000 acres, west of San
                  Diego.   Located in Federal water, these banks are a major sport
                  and commercial fishing area.

                  Following the meeting, descriptions and maps of each of these
                  candidate sites were mailed to 290 groups and individuals              in
                  Washington,    Oregon    and    California    and   to    82    national
                  organizations and Federal agencies.            Chelsea received 141
                  responses by the end of the 45-day public comment period (August
                  27, 1982).    In addition, two sites were nominated by the public
                  prior to the September 27, 1982, nomination deadline.              These
                  sites were the Tacoma Narrows, WA, submitted by Ms. Nancy N.
                  Kroening of Seattle, WA, and Cape Arago, OR, nominated by the
                  Oregon Shores Conservation Coalition, Rockaway, OR.

                  The team held their second meeting in Half Moon Bay, California
                  on Oct. 23, 1982. During this meeting they reexamined their nine
                  original choices in light of the comments had received during the
                  public participation process, and they considered the two public
                  nominations.     The meeting began with the team recommending to
                  NOAA that Mugu Lagoon, CA be considered as an Estuarine Sanctuary
                  site.    They then discussed the two sites that had been nomin-
                  ated during the public participation process.         They decided not
                  to give further consideration to Tacoma Narrows            because the
                  habitat and natural resources it contained were represented in
                  areas within the Washington Nearshore Site already selected as a
                  candidate.      The team suggested, however, that should the
                  Washington Nearshore Site survive the site selection process and
                  achieve active candidate status, the group determining the
                  boundaries might wish to reconsider the Tacoma Narrows.

                                                 EP-2

                 Next the team reviewed the Cape Arago, OR nomination. Cape Arago
                 is a rocky, sedimentary headland dotted with caves and surge
                 channels located next to Coos Bay.         It was agreed that this
                 nomination had considerable merit and should be evaluated with
                 the nine other sites during the meeting.

                 3. Recommendations

                 The Eastern Pacific team, using the criteria outlined in the NOAA
                 PDP, recommends the following five sites in order of priority for
                 placement on the Marine Sanctuary Site Evaluation List.

                 1.  Washington Nearshore, WA
                 2.  Tanner-Cortes Banks, off CA
                 3.  Morro Bay, CA
                 4.  Heceta-Stonewall Banks, off OR
                 5.  Washington Outer Coast, WA

                 At  the time of the second team meeting there was uncertainty
                 whether the State of Washington would support the two sites
                 within their waters.      Consequently, the team recommended that
                 Trinidad   Head    and   Cape  Arago,    then   sixth   and    seventh
                 respectively, be added to the list if the two Washington sites
                 were- dropped.     As explained below, the State of Washington
                 subsequently decided to remain neutral on both Washington sites
                 and Trinidad Head and Cape Arago did not make the final list.

                 As part of its final regional report, the team approved a set of
                 brief site descriptions, including maps which defined recommended
                 boundaries for the proposed sanctuaries. The team believes,
                 however, that those boundaries should be considered tentative,
                 and when a proposed site is elevated to active candidate status,
                 the issue of the final boundaries should be reopened.

                 This portion of the final regional report contains highlights of
                 the team's rationale for selecting each of the five sites, a
                 summary of public comments received and management issues that
                 came to the team's attention.       The team believes these sites
                 represent an excellent cross-section of the marine ecosystems of
                 the Pacific Coast of the Utited States.

                 3.1 Washington Nearshore, WA

                 Initially discussion covered all the waters in Puget Sound and
                 the San Juan Islands, however because such a site would have
                 exceeded the size limitations recommended by NOAA, the team
                 decided to select certain areas that would represent each of the
                 more unique, major habitats within the Puget Sound - San Juan
                 Islands system.     As conceived during the first site selection
                 meeting in San Francisco, this potential site included three
                 areas:

                                               EP-3

                  Area A - The San Juan Islands          Skagit Bay complex but not
                  including the Estuarine Sanctuary in Padilla Bay.

                  Area B     The coastal waters adjacent to Dungeness Spit, within
                  Sequim Bay, and adjacent to Indian Island, including the waters
                  surrounding Protection Island.

                  Area C - The waters of the Nisqually Delta and the shallow waters
                  surrounding Anderson, McNeil and Gertrude Islands.

                  During the public comment period 37 comments were received on
                  this site, 30 in favor and 4 opposed. There was also a petition
                  signed by 291 local people strongly supporting the site.
                  Governmental comments were divided with 4 in support, 3 in
                  opposition, and 3 taking no position.          The Jefferson County
                  Planning Department, Port of Port Townsend, Bureau of Indian
                  Affairs (Olympic Penninsula Agency) and the Point No Point Treaty
                  Council supported the proposal, while the Washington Department
                  of Fisheries and the U.S. Navy opposed, both on the grounds that
                  existing regulations were adequate.          Fourteen environmental
                  groups expressed support with none opposed.         The Defenders of
                  Wildlife, while tentatively supporting the San Juan Islands
                  complex, expressed concern that the areas were all within State
                  waters and already well protected by the State.

                  This site came first in the team's rankings, but because of
                  possible State opposition it was questionable whether it would be
                  accepted by NOAA.    To clarify the State's position, explain the
                  Marine Sanctuary program, and evaluate public support for these
                  sites,   Wayne Savage of Chelsea and Dallas Miner of the Marine
                  Sanctuary Program Office spent a week in the area in December,
                  1982. At the invitation of the Washington Department of Ecology,
                  they held a series of meetings with local officials and
                  interested groups and individuals.      Following those meetings the
                  State agreed to withdraw its opposition if certain areas within
                  the proposed site were eliminated. These areas were:

                       1.    The harbor and port/industr'ial area of Anacortes;
                       2.    Sequim Bay and those areas generally easterly of
                             Protection Island; and
                       3.    The waters surrounding Anderson Island.

                  The team   agreed to the recommendations.    However, when this site
                  achieves   active candidate status, the team recommends that the
                  boundary   issue be reopened.   At that time NOAA, State and local
                  officials and local individuals and organizations will be in a
                  better position to define final sanctuary boundaries.

                                                EP-4

                  3.2. Tanner-Cortes Banks, California

                  The proposed sanctuary consists of two neighboring rocky bottom
                  sites, some 112 mi west of San Diego, California and is all in
                  Federal waters. The area is one of the most important commercial
                  fisheries within the southern California Bight and contains rare
                  and select lifeforms.

                  This site, which the team ranked second, received 12 comments; 10
                  in support of the nomination, and none opposed.       There were no
                  comments dealing solely with this site, all were part of multiple
                  site responses.

                  The Marin County Planning Department supported the proposal,
                  commenting on the unusual underwater plateaus found in the area.
                  Environmental support came from the Sierra Club (Loma Prieta
                  Chapter), Sport Fishing Institute, American Cetacean Society,
                  Defenders of Wildlife, and the Whale Center.      The U.S. Minerals
                  Management Service took no position, but called attention to the
                  active oil leases in the general vicinity of the site, though not
                  within the proposed boundaries.      The paucity of public comment
                  was no doubt due to the fact the site is entirely within Federal
                  waters and over 100 miles west of the California coastline.         it
                  was ranked high due to its Federal status and its exceptional
                  species   classification    and    population    dynamics     research
                  opportunities.

                  3.3. Morro Bay, California

                  The proposed 2,000 acre site is located south of the city of
                  Morro Bay. The embankment contains coastal salt marsh, tidal mud
                  flats and deep-water channel habitats.        The area, all within
                  State waters, is one of the largest bay wildlife habitats on the
                  California coast.

                  The Morro Bay site received by far the most public comments, 44%
                  of the total received, with 117 letters in support and only 4 in
                  opposition. 102 of the supporting comments came from individuals
                  who live in the area. Additional support came from the Morro Bay
                  City Council, which voted unanimously to support the proposal.
                  Environmental groups in general were enthusiastic with 11 in
                  favor  of   the  nomination.    . Only   the  California    Waterfowl
                  Association and the Defenders of Wildlife opposed, the former
                  because they feared all waterfowl hunting would be terminated if
                  the area were designated and the 1@tter because some of the area
                  is already a State park. (According to Park Authorities, almost
                  the entire spit and a small area south of Morro Bay are within
                  the State Park, however only about 1/6 of the water area of the
                  Bay is within the park boundaries.) The Sport Fishing Institute
                  named it their top priority site in the Eastern Pacific region.
                  The site elicited little comment from the oil and gas industry.

                                               EP-5

                  Many of the public comments expressed concern that none of the
                  local, State, or    Federal government agencies with jurisdiction
                  over parts of the area had been willing to accept authority for
                  the waters of the   bay.   As one writer stated, "much of the land
                  surrounding Morro   Bay is incorporated, and when decisions need to
                  be made concerning the area and the bay itself, a 'pass the buck'
                  attitude reigns supreme." Most of the commenters believed that a
                  coordinated management plan was needed and that the sanctuary
                  status could provide the mechanism..

                  A major issue for the site involves waterfowl hunting.               The
                  proposed site contains one of the two black brant hunting areas
                  in the State, and as the population has grown, so has the
                  pressure to eliminate hunting.       This issue must be dealt with
                  directly in any future efforts to achieve sanctuary status.

                  3.4. Heceta-Stonewall Banks, Oregon

                  The proposed site, approximately 400 square miles in area, is a
                  hard-bottom bank entirely within Federal waters. The area is an
                  important commercial and sport fishing area due to upwelling.

                  This site received relatively little public comment, a total of
                  13 letters (5% of the total) , 9 supporting and 3 opposing.          The
                  proposed area      is all in Federal waters and, like the
                  Tanner-Cortes site, this probably explains the lack of public
                  interest.      The Oregon Shores Conservation Coalition was
                  supportive, citing the highly productive fisheries of this area.
                  The northwest office of the Friends of Earth supported it as an
                  important research area.      The Whale Center recommended that the
                  boundaries be extended shoreward to the mean high water line to
                  include whale migration routes.       The Defenders of Wildlife were
                  not supportive even though the site is totaly in Federal waters,
                  citing their opinion that a site should not be designated on the
                  solely because of its valuable fishery resources.        Exxon       USA
                  also opposed the nomination.

                  Prior to the initial nomination of the site, Dr. Rudy discussed
                  it with Oregon State Land Conservation Development Commission
                  (LCDC) authorities. The LCDC people subsequently met with the
                  Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife to determine their
                  position.      While the area is outside State jurisdiction,
                  representatives of the above organizations saw a Heceta-Stonewall
                  Banks Marine Sanctuary as fitting into their overall coastal zone
                  management program.

                  While there was little r)ublic comment from fishing interests, the
                  team believes that a potential problem could arise between
                  commercial and sports fishermen and that a management plan
                  associated with Marine Sanctuary. status would prevent conflicts
                  between these groups.

                                                 EP-6

                 The team also expressed their belief that the Pacif ic Fishery
                 Management Council should play an important role in any future
                 sanctuary management plan. Though the Council manages fisheries
                 on a species by species basis, rather than an area basis, the
                 creation of a Marine Sanctuary on the Banks could serve as a
                 research and testing ground for innovative fisheries management
                 policies.

                 3.5 Washington Outer Coast

                 The proposed site extends from just north of Tattoos Island on
                 the northwestern tip of Washington State to Point Grenville,
                 about 90 mi to the south.        The site lies completely within
                 Washington State waters and is a unique breeding and          feeding
                 ground for migratory marine birds, mammals, and fish.

                 The Washington Outer Coast Marine Sanctuary Site, ranked fifth by
                 the team, drew 8% of the public responses or 23 letters.
                 Eighteen were in support and two opposed.       There was only one
                 comment dealing solely with this area, all others were part of
                 multiple site responses.

                 The Washington Department of Fisheries opposed, while a wildlife
                 biologist with the Washington Department of Game expressed
                 support for the nomination, noting the important harbor seal
                 habitat. Environmental organization support was unanimous, with
                 11 comments. Supporters included the Island Action Coalition,
                 Olympic Peninsula Audubon Society, Olympic Park Associates,
                 Friends of the Earth, Northwest Office, and the Mountaineers.
                 The Makah Tribal Council disputed the team's recommended boundary
                 (which extended to the high tide mark) stating that            tribal
                 territory, by treaty, extended to the mean low tide mark.        They
                 also exr)ressed concern about preserving their offshore fishing
                 rights. Following discussions with Chelsea project staff, the
                 tribal attorney indicated that if their rigl@ts were adequately
                 protected, they saw benefits associated with sanctuary status.
                 @he Makah tribe was the only Indian group that commented directly
                 on this proposal.      When this site achieves active candidat;
                 status the other tribes inhabiting the coast should be involved
                 in the site designation process.      The Whale Center and Pacific
                 Sea Bird Group recommended that the boundaries be extended 25
                 miles offshore to include Humpback Whale migration routes.        The
                 Defenders of Wildlife also expressed concern that the area was
                 entirely within State waters. It was the consensus of the team,
                 however, that when this site achieves active candidate status,
                 the issue of boundaries should also be reconsidered.

                                              EP-7

                 Compared with the Washington Nearshore site, this area aroused
                 relatively little public or governmental comment or controversy.
                 The team believes, however, it is one of the most scenic, wild
                 and rugged sections of the Pacific coastline and consequently is
                 an ideal candidate for Marine Sanctuary status.

                                             EP-8

                                                PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                        MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                       1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME

                          A. SITE NAME: Washington State Nearshore Marine Sanctuary

                          B. LOCATION:         (EASTERN PACIFIC REGION)

                               1. LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE: Three            primary    areas     encompassed
                                                               within:
                                                               East of 1231121 W; West of 1220121W;
                                                               South of 480451 N; North of 471051 N

                               2.  DESCRIPTION:        The proposed Washington         State Nearshore
                                   Marine Sanctuary includes a series of habitats      representing the
                                   extraordinary diversity of marine communities       found within the
                                   Puget Sound ecosystem.        The sites included within the pro-
                                   posed marine sanctuary are some of the most biologically pro-
                                   ductive areas within U.S. coastal waters and represent a di-
                                   verse and structurally complex interticial zone.      Food webs are
                                   complex and interactions between species are important in
                                   structuring the communities.       The proposed sanctuary would
                                   include roughly 370 Mi2 (950 kM2) within the coastal waters of
                                   the State of Washington, divided among three geographically
                                   distinct locations within Puget Sound (see maps):

                                   Area A. - The San Juan Islands-Skagit Bay Complex, the
                                   northernmost division of the proposed sanctuary, is located at
                                   the junction of the Strait of Juan de Fuca and the Strait of
                                   Georgia and encompasses approximately 325 Mi2 (840 kM2).            I t
                                   is representative of rocky-shore, deep-water, and shallow-
                                   embayment habitats.      The proposed site would not overlap the
                                   Estuarine Sanctuary located in Padilla Bay and would not
                                   include the harbor and port/industrial area of Anacortes.

                                   Area B. -   This middle area includes coastal waters adjacent to
                                   13-ungeness Spit, extending eastward to Protection Island.           It
                                   would not    include the waters of Sequim Bay.          This division
                                   represents    estuarine   habitats   important    internationally    as
                                   nursery, breeding, and feeding grounds for an enormous
                                   number    of ecologically and commercially important marine
                                   species.    The approximate 'area of the site is 45 Mi2 (114
                                   kM2).

                                   Area C.   - The southernmost division of the proposed sanctu-
                                   ary lies  70 miles (155 km) to the south of Port Townsend and
                                   includes  the estuarine waters of the Nisqually Delta and the
                                   shallow waters surrounding McNeil and Gertrude Islands.            The
                                   waters around Anderson Island are not included.            This divi-
                                   sion is similar to Area B in that it also represents an ex-
                                   tremely important nursery, breeding, and feeding ground.
                                   Approximately 10 Mi2 (25 kM2) of area is included in this site.

                                             Washington State Nearshore Marine Sanctuary - Page 2

                      11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                          A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                               1.   The area supports an unusually diverse array of marine habi-
                                    tats within a relatively small area.

                               2.   The area is critical to the maintenance of a large number of
                                    ecologically and commercially important fish, shellfish, bird,
                                    and marine mammal spe ies.

                               3.   Because of the unique association of marine organisms indige-
                                    nous to the area, the facilities of the Friday Harbor Marine
                                    Research Laboratory (on -San Juan Island), and the commitmeFt-
                                    to research                  protection fostered by the State of
                                    Washington and several Federal agencies, the area provides
                                    exceptional opportunities for marine research and resource
                                    ma agement programs.

                           B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                               1.   NATURAL RESOURCES

                                    Area A (San Juan Islands-Skagit Bay Complex)

                                    The San Juan Islands, a relatively pristine area, may be char-
                                    acterized as a rocky-shore environment, but the islands also
                                    exhibit   mud-    and   sand-flat,    sheltered-bay,    and     marsh
                                    habitats.   Biotic zonation    patterns typical     of   rocky-shore
                                    habitats are clearly evident as the 12 ft (3.7 m) tidal range
                                    exposes a rich diversity of marine flora and macroi nve rteb rate
                                    fauna.   Rockweed and a variety of smaller green, red, and
                                    brown macroalgae form the basis of the nearshore food web,
                                    which supports vast populations of isopods, amphipods, hermit
                                    crabs, shrimp, barnacles, sponges, anemones, starfish, sea
                                    urchins, chitons, abalone, scallops, octopus, and other marine
                                    organisms associated with rocky shore habitats.            Subtidally,
                                    rockfish, lingcod, cabezon, sculpins, Pacific herring, and
                                    salmon abound in large numbers.            The submerged rocky
                                    platforms below the islands drop off rather abruptly into deep
                                    channels.   The deeper waters serve as an important habitat
                                    for gray whales (federally-listed as an "endangered" species),
                                    killer whales, pilot whales, minke whales, harbor and dall
                                    porpoises, harbor seals, stellar, sea lions, and elephant seals.
                                    Harbor seals utilize offshore rocks and reefs for haul-out
                                    (resting) and pupping sites.        The largest single component
                                    (1000+ animals) of Puget Sound's harbor seal population resides
                                    in this area.      The waters at7ound the San Juan Islands
                                    represent an important breeding ground for river otters.          Bird
                                    nesting and feeding sites are interspersed throughout the San
                                    Juan Island complex, which supports the highest known con-
                                    centration of nesting oystercatchers in the United States.
                                    Bald eagles, Federally listed as a "threatened" species, are

                                               Washington State Nearshore Marine Sanctuary - Page 3

                                     commonly observed in the area and depend upon the marine
                                     environment for much of their food.

                                     Skagit Bay is situated just east of the San Juan Islands and
                                     contains one of the largest and least disturbed stands of eel-
                                     grass remaining on the West Coast of the United States.
                                     Skagit Bay is internationally important to migratory birds of
                                     the Pacific Flyway which feed in the Bay before making their
                                     nonstop flight to their Alaskan breeding grounds.              The Bay
                                     delta is a critical fall and spring migration feeding area for
                                     dabbling ducks (e.g., mallards, pintail, widgeon, and green-
                                     winged teal).     It is a prime wintering area for snow geese.
                                     Thousands of waterfowl and shorebirds, representing 165 spe-
                                     cies, colonize  these bays.     The area is home to 50,000 ducks,
                                     20,000 black    brant (one-half of all the brant of the Pacific
                                     Flyway), oystercatchers, trumpeter swans, auklets, cormo-
                                     rants,   pigeon guillemots,       glaucous-winged gulls,         puffins,
                                     osprey, peregrine falcons, golden eagles, bald eagles, great
                                     blue heron, and green heron.          The organically-rich and pro-
                                     ductive mud flats of Skagit Bay represent an extremely impor-
                                     tant feeding and spawning ground for herring, flatfish, bait-
                                     fish, and juvenile salmonids.      In addition to being commercially
                                     valuable, these fish species are important to raptorial birds
                                     and marine mammals (e.g., whales, porpoises, seals, sea lions,
                                     and river otters) that live and feed within the San Juan
                                     Islands-Skagit Bay complex.

                                     Area B    (Dungeness Bay-Sequim Bay-Protection Island-
                                               Indian Island Complex)

                                     Dungeness Spit is a relatively high-energy, unstable, mixed
                                     sand and gravel spit, behind which is supported uncommonly
                                     rich, nearshore, marine macroinverteb rate fauna (115 species).
                                     These serve as prey for 70 species of clemersal and neritic
                                     fishes and marine mammals.         Herring, smelt, walleye, pollock,
                                     and perch comprise 92 percent of all year-round fish species
                                     spawning and feeding in these waters. Feeding salmon popula-
                                     tions migrate through the Dungeness Bay area during the
                                     summer months.       Dungeness crab are abundant and harvested
                                     commercially.    The area is an important pupping ground for
                                     harbor seals.

                                     Protection Island National Wildlife Refuge is refuge to the
                                     greatest number of nesting sea birds anywhere on Puget
                                     Sound.     More than 40,000 birds (representing 170 species)
                                     breed and nest on the island; it is the last remaining nesting
                                     site on Puget Sound for the tufted puffin and burrowing
                                     auklet.   Protection Island has the largest colony of rhinoceros
                                     auklets in the continental United States.         Bald eagles nest on
                                     Protection Island, and young eaglets have been successfully
                                     reared on the island for a number of years.           The east end of
                                     the island is a major haul-out and pupping area for a colony of
                                     more   than    200    harbor    seals,   a   species    designated      as

                                           Washington State Nearshore Marine Sanctuary - Page 4

                                  11protected" by the State of Washington.      Pup production on
                                  Protection Island rates it as one of the top three sites in
                                  northern Puget Sound. The birds of Protection Island feed on
                                  organisms nurtured in the biologically productive muds of
                                  Sequim Bay.

                                  Area C (Nisqually Delta-McNeil Island-
                                           Gertrude Island Complex)

                                  The Nisqually estuary is the last unspoiled major estuary in
                                  Washington State.     It is an extremely important nursery
                                  ground for salmonids, other finfish, and shellfish, and is an
                                  important feeding area for waterfowl and migratory birds of
                                  the Pacific Flyway.    The area's 18-ft tidal extremes provide
                                  extensive littoral zones, yet there are many ecotones of differ-
                                  ent types.   Food webs are intricate, unusual, and varied.

                                  The harbor seal is the most abundant marine mammal found in
                                  Puget Sound.    Nisqually Delta and Gertrude Island are impor-
                                  tant breeding grounds, although since the 1940s, the Nisqually
                                  population has been reduced because of several factors includ-
                                  ing extensive bounty hunting, the impacts of industrial pollu-
                                  tants discharged into the nearby waters, and continuing en-
                                  croachment by Man.       The Nisqually is a biologically rich,
                                  deltaic mud flat supporting large numbers of waterfowl includ-
                                  ing whistling swans, western Canada geese, black brant,
                                  mallard, pintail, and the American widgeon.      The waters pro-
                                  vide an abundance of food for these species which consume
                                  aquatic vegetation and shellfish.   Much of the delta is part of
                                  Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge.
                                                          a
                                  The waters north of the Nisqually Delta, especially those sur-
                                  rounding McNeil and Gertrude Islands, are critical habitats for
                                  the birds of the Pacific Flyway and resident species.. More
                                  than 10,000 waterfowl (representing 100 species) winter in
                                  these waters.    The bald eagle maintains active nest sites on
                                  Gertrude Island.    Still Harbor, on Gertrude Island, is the
                                  most significant harbor seal pupping and haul-out site in
                                  southern Puget Sound.      Over 70 great blue heron nests are
                                  located on McNeil Island.    Other birds nesting on the island
                                  include hawks, kestrels, owls, pigeon guillemots, and many
                                  passerine species.     Brant feed on the eelgrass along the
                                  beaches, and over 10,000 American widgeon feed annually in
                                  the fields.

                              2.  HUMAN USES

                                  The area is predominantly utilized for aquatic recreation and
                                  commercial fishing.   Residents and visitors enjoy boating, fish-
                                  ing, clamming, crabbing, duck hunting, birdwatching, swim-
                                  ming, diving, and beachcombing activities because of the
                                  area's exceptional biotic richness and beauty.

                                               Washington State Nearshore Marine Sanctuary - Page 5

                                     Since 1904, the San Juan Islands have served as an area of
                                     intense scientific research.     Recognizing the unique character
                                     of the archipelago, the University of Washington established a
                                     marine biology research center at Friday Harbor on San Juan
                                     Island.   The laboratory is open to-the public during the sum-
                                     mer months, and its museum and educational programs add to
                                     the area's value as a unique educational resource.           The deep
                                     channels, shallow bays, lagoons, and marshes provide a diver-
                                     sity of habitats containing organisms used for biomedical
                                     experimentation    in fields such as developmental              biology,
                                     neurobiology, and muscle physiology.           Rocky-shore habitats
                                     have proved to be valuable field sites for ecological studies.
                                     The Audubon Society operates an educational Nature Center at
                                     Nisqually Reach.     Western Washington State University main-
                                     tains a biological     research station in Anacortes.           Battelle
                                     Northwest operates a major marine laboratory in Sequim Bay.

                                     Fine-grained sand and mud habitats, with their characteristi-
                                     cally high densities of infaunal species, have facilitated field
                                     experiments on interactions between species that help to eluci-
                                     date many important aspects of population dynamics.               Popu-
                                     lations of nearshore fishes and of bottom-dwelling invertebrates
                                     have been altered in some areas within Puget Sound.             A pro-
                                     gram of continuing research is needed to study the effects of
                                     fishing, competition between predators, and of alteration of
                                     resources on species and species interactions, in an effort to
                                     provide relevant data needed to improve management decisions
                                     for this and other coastal regions.

                                     Fossil Bay, off Sucia Island in the San Juan Archipelago, and
                                     Protection Island National Wildlife Refuge are important sites
                                     for fossil hunters.    The shoreline along Fossil Bay is rich in
                                     fossilized clams, snails, and ammonites 75 million years old.
                                     Protection Island is an established archaeological site where
                                     prehistoric mastaclon /mammoth and human bones have been un-
                                     earthed. Mastodon tusks have also been found in          the banks of
                                     Sequim Bay.      More than 30 relic hearths have been found
                                     buried beneath the beach on Indian Island, near an old Indian
                                     village believed to be about 500 years old.           Nearby, at the
                                     Manis Mastodon Site in Sequim, a spear point lies buried in a
                                     mastodon rib dated at 9500 years old.          Further west, at the
                                     mouth of the Hoko River, over 5500 artifacts have been found
                                     dating back to between 2500 and 2800 years ago.             With fluc-
                                     tuations in sea level ranging in the hundreds of feet during
                                     recent geologic time, it is reasonable to expect that additional
                                     historic treasures might be found in these offshore waters.

                                     The area is utilized by commercial aquaculturists and managed
                                     by the Washington Department of Fisheries.             The San Juan
                                     Islands-Skagit Bay Complex supports floating-pen fish culture
                                     and raft-and-long line cultures of oysters, scallops, and mus-
                                     sels.  Very high potential for future aquaculture of seaweed,
                                     abalone, and rock scallop exists in the San Juan Islands.           The
                                     protected bays and relatively clear water make this a prime

                                             Washington State Nearshore Marine Sanctuary           Page 6

                                    area for aquaculture.      In addition, the area receives consid-
                                    erable protection as a result of the State law controlling the
                                    taking of marine organisms (Shoreline Management Act) and of
                                    the large number of islands cooperatively managed by the State
                                    of Washington and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Dunge-
                                    ness Bay   and Sequim Bay contain the State's largest geoduck
                                    beds (20 million pounds) and important lease areas for oyster
                                    culture.   Dungeness Spit is managed as a National Wildlife
                                    Refuge.    The Dawley property in southeastern Sequim Bay is
                                    managed    by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and will
                                    eventually be used as an educational center.        Protection Island
                                    is federally managed as a bird sanctuary.             The Nisqually
                                    Delta-McNeil Island area is a vital part of the State's Fisheries
                                    Management Program for geoducks. Some 12 million pounds of
                                    prime-quality geoducks are contained in this area.           In addi-
                                    tion, the Federal government manages the Nisqually National
                                    Wildlife Refuge as a "research natural area." Protection of the
                                    McNeil Island (Gertrude Island) seal population is afforded by
                                    maintenance of McNeil Island as a Federal prison restricting
                                    public use, and other Federal laws protecting marine mammals.

                                    The area is also subject to increasing industrial and port de-
                                    velopment pressures.     The Puget Sound system, in general, is
                                    used extensively for commercial fishing and other marine
                                    transportation activities.     Anacortes, Port Angeles, Seattle,
                                    Olympia, Port Townsend, and Bellingham are major port cities
                                    situated adjacent to the proposed Marine Sanctuary site.
                                    Weyerhauser Paper Corporation proposes to expand its dock
                                    facilities at Dupont, Washington.      Scott Paper Company oper-
                                    ates a log rafting and storage facility at Simiik Bay and uses
                                    other facilities near the community           of LaConner       located
                                    adjacent to Skagit Bay.

                                    The U.S. Bureau of Mines reports that there are numerous
                                    mineral deposits within or near the boundaries of the site.
                                    Within the San Juan Islands-Skagit Bay complex, there are 61
                                    mineral deposits. Many of these deposits have produced in the
                                    past.   Most are of stone material, including sand and gravel,
                                    limestone, and sandstone.      Others were developed for olivine,
                                    chromite, and coal.     Three productive sand and gravel depos-
                                    its occur near shore at the Dungeness Spit-Sequim Bay site.
                                    In addition, 'productive sand and gravel deposits occur on
                                    McNeil Island and in the Nisqually Delta area.          Diatomite de-
                                    posits also occur on Anderson Island.

                                    The proposed Marine Sanctuary site is situated within North-
                                    western Indian Treaty Areas and encompasses the fishing
                                    grounds customarily used by Indian tribes living within the
                                    Puget Sound area.       The Point No Point Treaty Council, an
                                    intergovernmental fisheries management agency of the Indian
                                    signatories, is responsible for managing a major portion of the
                                    anadromous fisheries i.n the Strait of Juan de Fuca and Hood
                                    Canal.    The Council also manages certain rights to shellfish

                                             Washington State Nearshore Marine Sanctuary - Page 7

                                    and bottom-fish resources within the Dungeness-Sequim Bay
                                    area.

                                    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, maintains
                                    navigational channels at Anacortes Harbor and Oak Bay Water-
                                    way.    The marina at Friday Harbor on San Juan Island is
                                    planned for expansion.      The Port Authority of Port Angeles
                                    maintains a boat launch within the proposed site.       The channel
                                    leading to the launch facility requires annual dredging and
                                    spoil disposal.

                                    The U.S. 136partment of the Navy conducts operations vital to
                                    the nation's defense in close proximity to or within portions of
                                    the proposed site.    These include restricted areas in Admiralty
                                    Inlet and Bay and Carr Inlet and restricted airspace over
                                    waters near parts of Whidbey Island.

                     111. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                           Gardner, F., 1978, North Puget Sound baseline program, 1974-1977:
                               Dept. of Ecology, State of Washington, Olympia, Wash.

                           Gardner,    F.,   1981, Washington coastal areas of major biological
                               significance:    Dept. of Ecology, State of Washington, Olympia,
                               Wash.

                           Gundlach, E. R., C. D. Getter, and M. 0. Hayes, 1980, Sensitivity of
                               coastal environments to spilled oil in the Strait of Juan de Fuca
                               and northern Puget Sound:           RPI Rept. to NOAA/MESA, RPI,
                               Columbia, S.C., 78 pp. + 65 maps.

                           Kopenski, R. P. and E. R. Long, 1981, An environmental assessment
                               of northern Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan cle Fuca:                  a
                               summary: NOAA/OMPA, Seattle, Wash.

                           Mueller, M., 1979, The San Juan Islands:             afoot and afloat:      The
                               Mountaineers, Seattle, Wash., 224 pp.

                           Simenstad, C. A., B. S. Miller, J. N. Cross, K. L. Fresh, S. N.
                               Steinfort, and J. C. Fegley, 1977, Nearshore fish and macro-
                               invertebrate    assemblages    along   the   Strait  of Juan     de    Fuca
                               including food habits of nearshore fish:        NOAA Tech. Memo. ERL
                               MESA-20, Seattle, Wash.

                           U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, 1960, Important fish and wildlife habitats
                               of Washington: an in'ventory: USFWS, Wash., D.C., 85 pp.

                                               Washington State Nearshore Marine Sanctuary               Page 7.1

                                                   VANCOUVER                     SAN
                                                                                 JUAN
                                                     ISLAND                       Is.                    PADILLA
                                                                                                         BAY

                         CAPE FLATTERY

                                                                                                            SKAGIT
                                                                                                              BAY

                                                                  LES
                                                            PORT ANGELES

                                                                                .,UIM
                                                   is          0          is      SAY
                                                             MILES

                                                                              TACOMA
                                                          MCNEII
                                                            is.

                                                                cl
                                                                                        0       5        10

                                                                                               MILES

                                                               ANDERSON IS.

                                                         NISQUALLY DELTA

                                               OLYMPIA                        4m- tanker routes
                                               U                                                         rp!
                                                                              I -\- APPROX. BOUN13ARY

                                                           LOCATION MAP

                                              PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                      MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                      1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME

                         A. SITE NAME: Cortes and Tanner Banks off California

                         B. LOCATION:       (EASTERN PACIFIC REGION)

                             1.   LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE: Cortes Bank          320301 N, 1190201 W
                                                           Tanner Bank       320421 N, 1190101 W

                             2.   DESCRIPTION: The proposed marine       sanctuary consists of two
                                  neighboring rocky-bottom, terraced ledges situated in Federal
                                  waters 112 mi (180 km) west of San Diego, California.        The
                                  composite area of these two sites is approximately 14 Mi2 (36
                                  kM2) extending down to the 200 ft       (60 m) depth contour.
                                  This area is characterized by high wave energy and is subject
                                  to the full force of open-ocean storm waves which attain
                                  heights of 33 ft (11 m).   The location of the banks in relation
                                  to oceanic currents generates a mixture of both nearshore and
                                  offshore organisms.   The underwater visibility is normally in
                                  excess of 60 ft (20 m).

                     11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                         A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                             1.   This area is one of the most important offshore commercial
                                  fisheries within the southern California Bight.
                                                                              0
                             2.   This area contains accessible, rare, relict lifeforms and newly-
                                  discovered species which have been the subject of sc-le_nt-F-ic
                                  investigations. . This area is important for maintena-nce and
                                  continued survival of those species.

                             3.   Exceptional research opportunities are provided in the areas of
                                  classification, population dynamics, and species interactions.

                         B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                             1.   NATURAL RESOURCES

                                  The Southern California Bight represents one of the world's
                                  most productive ecosystems, exhibitirig the richest diversity of
                                  marine flora and fauna in northern temperate waters.         The
                                  Bight supports 33 species of marine mammals, 80 species of
                                  marine birds, and 485 species of California's 562 species of
                                  marine fish.   The Banks serve as an important refuge for
                                  many such species disappearing from more heavily impacted
                                  nearshore areas.

                                  Although species typically found nearer to the mainland also
                                  occur here, this area is unique due to the unusual relative
                                  abundances of the species.    Dense stands of southern sea palm

                                                                   Cortes and Tanner Banks        Page 2

                                    (Eisenia arborea) and smaller brown and red algae occur in
                                    sFa-Fo-w _@-ommunities.    Numerous    kinds of bottom-dwelling
                                    macro i nve rteb rates inhabit this area including anemones, bar-
                                    nacles, hydroids, pelecypods, sponges, spiny lobsters, crabs,
                                    sea urchins, abalones, tunicates, sea stars (sometimes ex-
                                    tremely abundant locally), and bryozoans.

                                    Tanner Bank contains unusually high concentrations of the
                                    chestnut cowrie and the California sheepshead, and is the last
                                    area in California with a significant-sized population of giant
                                    seabass.   Cortes Bank is a haven for large numbers of abalone
                                    and lobsters.

                                    The Banks are a major, year-round foraging ground for sever-
                                    al species of marine mammals, including whale species, which
                                    are Federally    listed as    "endangered") ,   and migrant and
                                    wintering seabirds.   Sea lions are observed in the area feeding
                                    on fish, despite the fact that the nearest sea lion haulout area
                                    is located a considerable distance away from the Banks.

                                    The Banks support one of the major commercial fisheries for
                                    jack mackerel, anchovies, and other species.          Demersal fish
                                    living in this area include rockfish, sheepshead, rock wrasse,
                                    blackeye goby, ocean whitefish, and numerous others.           Open-
                                    ocean fish found here include yellowtail, California flyingfish,
                                    the blue and thresher sharks, and billfish.           Culls, terns,
                                    shearwaters, and storm petrels are some of the seabirds noted
                                    in this area.

                                    Many new species of marine invertebrates have been identified
                                    from these waters.        Specimens of a group of mollusks
                                    (Monoplacophora) which were thought to have been extinct
                                    since Paleozoic time have been recovered from the Banks.
                                    Other unique species found here include Dimya sp. (only
                                    found on Tanner Bank), lampshells, pogonophorans, vestimen-
                                    tiferans (large, gutless worms), and purple coral (Allopora
                                    californica) .

                               2.   HUMAN USES

                                    The Banks are a major sport and high-yield commercial fishing
                                    resource of the southern California region.

                                    Researchers use the site for collecting and studying many
                                    newly-discovered and rare marine organisms.

                                    The clear visibility and shallowness of the water help facilitate
                                    specimen collections by scientific and recreational scuba div-
                                    ers, but strong currents and rough weather make diving diffi-
                                    cult.

                                    The  U.S. Department of the Navy conducts activities within
                                    portions of the proposed site which are essential to the na-
                                    tional defense.   These areas are restricted and fall under the
                                    jurisdiction and management of the Navy.       The restricted areas

                                                                Cortes and Tanner Banks - Page 3

                                  include Cortes Bank Carrier Operations Area, San Clemente
                                  and Western San Clemente Operations Areas, and Warning
                                  Areas 60, 289, 291.

                                  There are no active oil-and-gas leases contained within the
                                  boundaries of the proposed marine sanctuary.      However, there
                                  are active leases in the general vicinity of the site, and the
                                  entire area has a potential for containing hydrocarbon re-
                                  sources.

                    Ill. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                    Bureau of Land Management (Los Angeles), 1979, Proposed 1979 outer con-
                         tinental shelf oil and gas lease sale offshore southern California:     OCS
                         Sale No. 48 (Final Environmental Statement), 732 pp.

                    Bureau of Land Management (Los Angeles), 1981, Proposed 1982 outer           con-
                         tinental shelf oil and gas lease sale offshore southern California:     OCS
                         Sale No. 68 (Final Environmental Impact Statement), Vol. 1.

                    Lewbel, G. S., et al., 1981, Shallow-water benthic communities on Califor-
                         nia's outer continental shelf:   Marine Ecology - Progress Series, Vol.
                         4, pp. 159-168.

                    McLean, J. H., 1979, A new monoplacophoran limpet from the continental
                         shelf off southern California:    Contributions in Science, Natural His-
                         tory Museum of Los Angeles County, No. 307.

                                                                                                                                            Cortes and Tanner Banks                                         Page 4

                                                                                                                                                                                      7@
                                                                                                     CALIFORNIA

                                                                                      SANTA     BARBARA BASIN

                                               SAN MIGUEL I
                                                                                            Z:@@S2.TA CRUZ IS.
                                                                                   SANTA ROSA IS,

                                                                                                                 SANTA BARBARA IS                               '@@S AN TA- CA             TALINA IS.
                                                                                                             '@Z@SAN NICHOLAS IS.

                                                                    00                                            .600 FT.
                                                                                                TANNER BANK.;#"',X (ABOVE 200 FT. CONTOUPI                     '@@SAN CLEMENTE IS.

                                                                                                                                   CORTES
                                                                                                                                       BANK
                                                                                                                  600 FT-'.

                                                                                                                                        JASO VE 200 FT. CONTOURI            0                20
                                                                                                                                                                                   MILES

                                                                                                               LOCATION MAP

                                               PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                       MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                       1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                          A. SITE NAME: Morro Bay, California

                          B. LOCATION:        (EASTERN PACIFIC REGION)

                              1.   LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE: 1201501 W, 351201 N

                              2.   DESCRIPTION: Situated in a scenic, environmentally sensitive
                                   area between two major    metropolitan centers (west of a bur-
                                   geoning agri-urban area   and south of the city of Morro Bay in
                                   San Luis Obispo County) this 3.1 Mi2 (8.1 kM2) estuarine em-
                                   bayment supports three habitats:       coastal salt marsh, tidal
                                   mud flats, and deep-water channels.         Morro Bay, entirely
                                   within California State waters, is a heavily used fishing port.
                                   It represents the largest and most pristine bay/marsh, wildlife
                                   habitat on California's southern coast.     At low tide, 2.2 Mi2
                                   (5.7 kM2) of mud flats are exposed, providing a vast feeding
                                   ground for over 250 species of birds and access to an exten-
                                   sive clam shellfishery resource.

                      11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                          A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                              1.   The area is biologically significant as a rich feeding ground
                                   for resident and migratory birds of the Pacific Flyway.

                              2.   The area is rich in biological productivity and is already uti-
                                   lized by research scientists associated with California Polytic--h-
                                   nical Institute, San Luis Obisbo State, and Santa Barbara Col-
                                   lege.  Scientists as far away as the University of California at
                                   Los Angeles and the University of Southern California also use
                                   the area for marine science classes.    The area provides an ex-
                                   ceptional opportunity or marine research, educational program
                                   development,- and recreational resource management.

                          B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                              1.1  NATURAL RESOURCES

                                   The salt marsh and adjacent habitats of Morro Bay are rela-
                                   tively undisturbed and provide an extensive feeding area for
                                   225 species of shorebirds and waterfowl.     This is an important
                                   nesting area for egrets, herons, and the endangered American
                                   peregrine falcon.

                                   Eelgrass (Zostera marina) and various algae are found in the
                                   open-water 'marine zone, with some algae in the lower tidal

                                                                                 Morro Bay - Page 2

                                   flats. Some 32 species of algae have been identified in the vi-
                                   cinity. The upper edges of the extensive tidal mud flats are
                                   generally devoid of vegetation, but are rich in invertebrates.

                                   Morro Bay is one of the more important migratory coastal stops
                                   on the Pacific Flyway.   Upwards of 25,000 individual waterfowl
                                   have been counted on     a peak day.     Among the more exotic
                                   species that feed along the mud flats are the whistling       swan,
                                   snow goose, snowy plover, and the elegant tern.        Black brant
                                   are attracted by the eelgra  'ss and are, at times, very      abun-
                                   dant.  The rare black rail has been observed         in the Bay;
                                   however, the endangered California clapper rail, which form-
                                   erly bred here, has not been observed recently.

                                   A total of 66 species of fish have been collected in the Bay.
                                   Of the saltwater species, three (northern anchovy, shiner
                                   perch, and black perch) comprise 50 percent of the total indi-
                                   viduals collected.  At least 15 species appear to breed in the
                                   Bay.

                                   Four species of marine mammals have been sighted: the stellar
                                   sea lion, the California sea lion, the harbor sea[ (which occa-
                                   sionally pups in the Bay), and the sea otter.

                                   Some 120 species of invertebrates have been recorded in the
                                   Bay, including 19 species of clams (the Washington, the gaper,
                                   and the geoduck are the most common), 34 species of poly-
                                   chaete worms, and 20 species of amphipod crustaceans.

                              2.   HUMAN USE VALUE

                                   "[he Bay area is administered as a State Park.          More than
                                   700,000 persons visit the Park annually.     These and other vis-
                                   itors to the area make extensive use of recreational boating,
                                   hunting, and sportfishing opportunities.     The northern part of
                                   the Bay is protected by the bird sanctuary ordinance of the
                                   City of Morro Bay.    The use of motor vehicles on the beach is
                                   permitted; in addition, the use of firearms on the Bay is per-
                                   mitted seven days a week for more than four months of the
                                   year.  South of the Morro Bay city limits is a live-aboard boat
                                   anchorage.   Other portions of the Bay, outside of the Morro
                                   Bay city limits, are within county limits and fall under the ju-
                                   risdiction of the San Luis Obispo County Service Area No. 9
                                   Board of Supervisors.

                                   The surrounding lands adjacent to the Bay are largely unde-
                                   veloped.  That portion of the Bay south of the westerly exten-
                                   sion of Santa Ysabel Street in Baywood Park is privately
                                   owned. A marina has been proposed for development alonq the
                                   Bay's southern margin.

                                   There is a commercial oyster farm in addition to a very large
                                   recreational clam and ghost shrimp shellfishery within the
                                   proposed Marine Sanctuary site.

                                                                                 Morro Bay - Page 3

                                  The Museum of Natural History at White Point is an important
                                  educational resource, documenting, preserving, interpreting
                                  the wildlife, ecology, and Indian history of the Bay.        Univer-
                                  sity scientists and students, members of the National Audubon
                                  Society and the Sierra Club, and young school children use
                                  the Bay extensively for field trips and as a study area for re-
                                  search.

                                  The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers maintains navigational proj-
                                  ects (dredge and fill operations) within the proposed area.
                                  The port is used extensively by the commercial fishing fleet,
                                  sportfishing boats, large yachts, and U.S. Coast Guard cut-
                                  ters.

                                  The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines, reports
                                  that 13 mineral deposits lie along the periphery of the pro-
                                  posed site.   Six of these deposits are developed for chromite,
                                  three for stone, and four for sand and gravel.

                    Ill. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                    California Coastal Commission, 1981, California coastal access guide:        Univ.
                          of Calif. Press, Berkeley, Calif., 240 pp.

                    California Department of Fish and Game, 1979, The ecological resources of
                          California:  Wildlife Management Informat. Bull. No. 1, The Resources
                          Agency, Sacramento, Calif.

                    California Department of Fish and Came, 1980, Atlas of California coastal
                          marine resources: The Resources Agency, Sacramento, Calif.

                    Gerdes, G. L., 1974, Natural resources of Morro Bay, their status and
                          future:  Calif. Dept. of Fish and Game, Coast. Wet. Serv. No. 8, 103
                          PP.

                                                                        Morro Bay    Page 4

                                            MORRO BAY

                                                    MORRO BAY

                                MORRO BAY
                                STATE PARK

                                                            0                2.5

                                                                   MILES

                          rpi                               APPROX. BOUNDARY ----

                                               LOCATION MAP

                                                PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                        MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                       1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME

                          A.  SITE NAME: Heceta-Stonewall Banks, Oregon

                          B.  LOCATION:       (EASTERN PACIFIC REGION)

                              1.   LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE: 440301N, 1241251 W

                              2.   DESCRIPTION:      The proposed site is a hard-bottom bank ex-
                                   tending offshore from the vicinity of Newport to south of Flor-
                                   ence.   It encompasses an area of approximately 400 Mi2 (1,000
                                   kM2 ) entirely within Federal waters.      The outer boundary of
                                   the site lies along the 330 ft (100 m) depth contour. The sur-
                                   face waters of this area exhibit high biological productivity,
                                   especially during the summer when northerly winds drive sur-
                                   face water offshore and nutrient-rich water upwells into the
                                   area.   Bottom topography also causes turbulence bringing
                                   nutrient-rich waters to the surface.         The Columbia River
                                   influences the area, especially during the summer, by adding
                                   nutrients which increase biological productivity.

                      11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                          A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                              1.   The proposed area is highly productive and supports important
                                   commercial fisheries (which inc-l-u-c-Fes- harvesting by foreign
                                   f I eets) .

                              2.   The area has been, and remains, an important research site
                                   for nearby academic institutions.     Oregon State University at
                                   Corvalis and its marine institute at  Yaquina Bay study physical
                                   oceanography and marine food web      interactions.

                          B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                              1.   NATURAL RESOURCES

                                   The highly productive waters at this site provide a large food
                                   supply to fish populations.    Abundant zooplankton thrive upon
                                   the phytoplankton blooms and, in turn, are eaten by other ma-
                                   rine animals.    Migrating whales and     ' commercially important,
                                   rockfish feed upon the euphausid shrimp, small fish, squid,
                                   and various zooplankton that inhabit this area.      Fish caught in
                                   this area include:     various rockfish, hake, lingcod, ocean
                                   perch, flounder, sole, halibut, mackerel, salmon, sablefish,
                                   skate, sculpin, and ratfish.

                                   Unfortunately, detailed information is lacking concerning the
                                   bottom-dwelling organisms, primarily because of the difficulty
                                   in obtaining biological samples from the hard, rocky bottom.

                                                                   Heceta-Stonewall Banks - Page 2

                                  The seabird fauna of the Heceta-Stonewall Banks are also
                                  poorly known, but preliminary data indicate that relatively
                                  high numbers of birds occur in the area.

                              2.  HUMAN USES

                                  Vessels from the United States and foreign fleets fish in the
                                  general vicinity of the Heceta-Stonewall Banks.       Large quan-
                                  tities of coho and Chinook salmon, black cod, Pacific Ocean
                                  perch, Dover sole, Petrale sole, Pacific whiting, rockfish,
                                  sablefish, and tanner crab are harvested nearby annually.
                                  These activities are managed by the Pacific Fishery Manage-
                                  ment Council.*

                                  Close to educational and research facilities at Newport (Oregon
                                  State University Marine Science Center--a Sea Grant institu-
                                  tion), Heceta-Stonewall Banks is an outstanding area for the
                                  study of Pacific Ocean fisheries and provides exceptional op-
                                  portunities for morphological and biological investigations of
                                  bottom-dwelling organisms inhabiting hard-rock ocean bottoms.
                                  The physical oceanography and food-web dynamics of this are
                                  have been the subject of several scientific studies.

                                  Whale-watching is a popular sport in the area.         Boats leave
                                  from the port of Newport.

                                  The U.S. Department of the Navy conducts operations within a
                                  portion of the proposed site (Warning Area 570 off Newport)
                                  that area essential to the national defense.      Access into this
                                  are is restricted, and management of the natural resources of
                                  this area falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Depart-
                                  ment of the Navy.

                    Ill. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                    Carey, Jr., A. G., 1972, Ecological observations on the benthic inverte-
                          brates from the central Oregon continental shelf:      the Columbia River
                          Estuary and adjacent ocean waters:       Bioenvironmental Studies, Univ.
                          of Washington Press, pp. 422-443.

                    Demory, R. L. , et al. , 1976, Marine resource surveys on the continental
                          shelf off Oregon 1974-74:   Natl. Mar. Fisheries Serv., 49 pp.

                    Peterson, W. T. , C. B. Miller, and A. Hutchinson, 1979, Zonation and
                          maintenance of copepod populations in the Oregon upwelling zone:
                          Deep Sea Res., Vol. 26A, pp. 467-494.

                    Small, L. F. and D. W. Menzies, 1981, Patterns of primary productivity and
                          biomass in a coastal upwelling region:     Deep Sea Res., Vol. 28A, pp.
                          123-149.

                                                                                                  Heceta-Stonewall Banks                  Page 3

                                                H ECETA -STONEWALL BANK

                                               WASH.

                                              OREGON

                                                                                                                             .r

                                                                                                                               NEWPORT

                                                                                                           STONEWALL
                                                                                                                  NK

                                                                                                                              w

                                                                               HECETA BANK

                                        N

                                                                                                  0     5     10    is
                                                APPROX.BOUNDARY----             CONTOURS IN METERS        MILES-
                                                                                                                              rpi

                                                                            LOCATION MAP

                                              PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                       MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                      1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                         A. SITE NAME: Western Washington Outer Coast

                         B. LOCATION:        (EASTERN PACIFIC REGION)

                              1. LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE: The proposed sanctuary lies within:
                                                            East of 1240421 W; West of 1240251 W;
                                                            South of 481251 N; North of 470151 N

                              2.  DESCRIPTION:     The proposed marine sanctuary would extend
                                  from Duntz Rock (north of Tatoosh Island on the northwestern
                                  tip of Washington State), 90 mi (145 km) southward along the
                                  coast to Point Grenville encompassing an area of approximately
                                  225 Mi2 (576 kM2; see map). The site lies totally within Wash-
                                  ington State's jurisdiction, though it lies adjacent to Federal
                                  and Indian lands.     The inshore boundary would extend to
                                  mean high water adjacent to State- or Federally-owned lands,
                                  and to mean low water where such boundary is continguous to
                                  the Makah or Quinault Reservations.     The offshore boundary is
                                  contiguous with the boundary established for the area's
                                  Washington Islands National Wildlife Refuge, 2-3 mi (3.2-4.8
                                  km) offshore.     The area is representative of high wave-
                                  energy, rocky-shore ecosystems, but is unique as a breeding
                                  and feeding ground for migratory marine birds, mammals, and
                                  fish.  The area includes offshore kelp beds, numerous pocket
                                  beaches of fine- or coarse-grained sands, and richly produc-
                                  tive estuarine systems.   Isolated by mountainous terrain and a
                                  wide corridor of Federal ly-protected or Indian-owned lands,
                                  this portion of Washington's coast remains scenically beautiful,
                                  ecologically diverse, biologically productive, and relatively free
                                  from developmental pressures.

                     11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                         A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                              1 . The area is hi@hly productive and representative of pristine
                                  coastal environments.

                              2.  The area is of special significance as a habitat important to the
                                  continued survival of several ecologically and commercially im-
                                  portant species of fish, raptors, and marine mammals.

                              3.  The diversity and richness of marine organisms, and the con-
                                  tributions made by those organisms to the life histories of spe-
                                  cies migrating through the area suggests that the marine sanc-
                                  tuary designation would provide exceptional opportunities for
                                  scientific research in the areas of species interactions, popu-
                                  lation dynamiEs-,and physiological ecology.

                                                               Western Washington Outer Coast - Page 2

                            B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                                 1.  NATURAL RESOURCES

                                     The spectacular rocky coastline of the proposed site serves as
                                     a major habitat to the birds of the Pacific Flyway.                    The
                                     200,000 waterfowl (representing 15 species of birds) that mi-
                                     grate through or make their permanent residence along Wash-
                                     ington's Northwest Coast depend on the marine algal communi-
                                     ties, eelgrass beds, and infaunal and epibenthic invertebrate
                                     species living below mean high water.           More than.100 species
                                     of marine invertebrates and 61 species of red, brown, and
                                     green algae comprise the food web that supports Pacific her-
                                     ring, salmon, lingcod, sole, rockfish; 80 other species of fish,
                                     harbor seals, stellar sea lions, and sea otters; gray whales;
                                     and thousands of aquatic birds and raptors.

                                     Tatoosh Island, Destruction Rock, Quillayute Needles, and
                                     Point Grenville are vitally important bird nesting and breeding
                                     grounds.     The area represents the primary U.S. nesting area
                                     and highest continental U.S. density of the bald eagle, a spe-
                                     cies    Federally-listed    as   "threatened. 11     Cassin's     auklets,
                                     rhinoceros     auklets,    black   oystercatchers,       glaucous-winged
                                     gulls, pigeon guillemots, sooty shearwaters, three speLies of
                                     cormorants, common murres, forked-tail storm petrels, Leach's
                                     petrels, tufted puffins, peregrine falcons, and osprey nest
                                     and breed on these offshore islands.

                                     The large bird population is indicative of the area's enormous
                                     biological productivity.      Eelgrass forms the basis of the food
                                     web of these Pacific Northwest coastal waters.             It serves di-
                                     rectly as a food source for migrating and resident birds, and
                                     it provides substrate and sustenance for the more than 300
                                     marine species living below high tide.

                                     The proposed site is also very important in supporting several
                                     species of marine mammals.          Tatoosh Island is a significant
                                     habitat for northern and California sea lions.         Four hundred to
                                     five hundred individuals use the island as a haul-out area.
                                     The rocky islands of Quillayute Needles are also important
                                     haul-out areas for these species.        Destruction Island is notable
                                     as Washington's primary habitat for harbor seals.               In total,
                                     nearly 20 percent of Washington's harbor seal population
                                     resides within the proposed sanctuary.             Point Grenville, the
                                     sanctuary's southernmost boundary, is an important 5ea otter
                                     habitat.    The southern sea otter is a "threatened" species.            In
                                     1969, 59 sea otters were released at Point Grenville.           The cur-
                                     rent population numbers about 40 individuals, but has ex-
                                     tended as far north along the coast as Ozette.              It is antici-
                                     pated that this sea otter population will continue to expand
                                     under proper management.           Grey whales (Federally-listed as
                                     an "endangered" species) migrate through this area in large
                                     numbers.

                                     Bottom-dwelling fish (i.e., salmon, pacific herring) and shell-
                                     fish (i.e., oysters, Dungeness crab) form an important part of

                                                            Western Washington Outer Coast        Page 3

                                   the ecosystem.     They serve as food for marine mammals and
                                   birds, as well as being commercially and recreationally impor-
                                   tant.

                               2.  HUMAN USE VALUE

                                   The area is primarily used recreationally and by commercial
                                   fishermen. Wilderness camping is permitted along the shoreline
                                   of the Olympic National Park which borders the proposed site
                                   on the east.    Olympic National Park was recently dedicated as
                                   a World Heritage Site and as a Biosphere Reserve.              In his
                                   dedication address, Dr. Michael Batisse of UNESCO noted that
                                   his United Nations Committee also considered the area below
                                   mean high water and offshore areas of the Guillayute Needles
                                   and Flattery Rocks to have the qualifications for World Heri-
                                   tage Site status.    Accordingly, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser-
                                   vice and the Washington State Parks Commission has authorized
                                   the National Park Service to apply for World Heritage Site des-
                                   ignation of these areas.     The offshore rock islands within the
                                   proposed site are within the Washington Wildlife Refuge which
                                   is a part of the National Wilderness Preservation System as au-
                                   thorized by Congress.        The magnificent biota of Duntz and
                                   Duncan Rocks offer exceptional recreational and educational
                                   opportunities for scuba divers and marine biologists.

                                   The Makah Tribal Council has designated its          coastal area (at
                                   the northern extreme of the proposed site)           as a Wilderness
                                   Area under the laws of the Makah Tribe. The Quinault Indian
                                   Reservation has shown interest in maintaining        the high quality
                                   of its beaches.     The reservation boundaries       extend to mean
                                   low tide.   The right of the Makah to take up        to 50 percent of
                                   the harvestable anadromous fish that pass through the tribe's
                                   usual and accustomed fishing grounds has been affirmed and
                                   reaffirmed by the courts.      These fishing grounds extend from
                                   the Strait of Juan de Fuca out into the Pacific         Ocean to an
                                   area known as Swiftsure and then south along the         Pacific coast
                                   to an area intermediate to Ozette Village and           the Quileute
                                   Reservation, as well as the rivers along the Pacific shore.
                                   The Makah Indian Tribe also maintains a Fishery Management
                                   Department.     The Department is given the responsibility to
                                   propagate, enhance, and protect the tribe's fishery resources,
                                   which inhabit the waters of the proposed Marine Sanctuary.

                                   An equally important value is its potential contribution to the
                                   field of scientific research.        The complex assemblage of
                                   marine-related organisms representing various trophic levels,
                                   and the interrelationships *among those organisms needs to be
                                   examined in greater detail if resource management is to be ef-
                                   fective.   The community structure of the proposed site affords
                                   scientists and resource managers the opportunities needed to
                                   investigate species interactions, population dynamics, trophic
                                   requirements, and other significant questions.          In fact, the
                                   area already contributes to the goals of scientific research.

                                                        Western Washington Outer Coast - Page 4

                                  For the past 15 years, researchers at the University of Wash-
                                  ington- have utilized the area as a field research site gathering
                                  baseline data.  Several archaeological sites, adjacent to Lake
                                  Ozette and near the old Indian Village, add historical signifi-
                                  cance to the area.

                                  The U.S. Department of the Interior, Pacific Southwest Re-
                                  gion, indicates that there are numerous deposits of gold plac-
                                  ers, coal, gemstones, and sand and gravel extending from Ta-
                                  toosh Island to Point Grenville.    There are 16 deposits that
                                  have been identified; most are past-productive gold placer de-
                                  posits.

                                  The proposed site encompasses areas under the jurisdiction of
                                  the U.S. Department of the Navy. The Navy conducts opera-
                                  tions essential to the support of national defense and therefore
                                  restricts access to certain sites within the proposed sanctuary
                                  including Queets (Sea Lion Rock), Washington Coastal Warning
                                  Area, Submarine Test and Trial Areas 3 and 4, and Cape Flat-
                                  tery Warning Area.

                                  The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, maintains
                                  navigation (dredge and spoil disposal) projects in the Quil-
                                  layute River adjacent to the waters of the propose Marine
                                  Sanctuary in the area near La Push.

                    111. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                    Becassio, A. 0., J. S. Isakson, A. E. Redfield, W. M. Blanlock, H. C.
                         Finney, R. L. Fren, D. C. Lees, D. Petrula, and R. E. Godwin,
                         1981, Pacific coast ecological inventory:   user's guide and information
                         base:   U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS/OBS-81/30, 159 pp.

                    Garder, F., 1981, Washington coastal areas of major biological significance:
                         Dept. of Ecology, State of Washington.

                    Manuwal, D. A., T. R. Wahl, and S. M. Speich, 1979, The seasonal distri-
                         bution and abundance of marine bird populations in Strait of Juan de
                         Fuca and northern Puget Sound in 1978: NOAA Tech. Memo. ERL ME-
                         SA-44.

                    Proctor, C. M., J. C. Garcia, D. V. Galvin, G. B. Lewis, and 1- C.
                         Lochr, 1980, An ecological characterization of the Pacific Northwest
                         coastal region: 'U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS/OBS-79/13.

                    Simenstad, C. A. , B. S. Miller, J. N. Cross, K. L. Fresh, S. N. Stein-
                         fort, and J. C. Feagley, 1977, Nearshore fish and macroinverteb rate
                         assemblages along the Strait of Juan de Fuca including food habits of
                         nearshore fish: NOAA Tech. Memo. ERL MESA-20, Seattle, Wash.

                    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1980, Important fishland wildlife habitats of
                         Washington: an inventory: USFWS, Wash., D.C., 85 pp.

                                                                                 Western Washington Outer Coast                      Page 5

                                              WASHINGTON OUTER COAST

                                                      ,,RUNTZ ROCK               MATCH LINE
                                               TATOOSH,
                                                  Is.,
                                                                                                                     WASH.
                                                                           K   HOH  HEAP

                                                                                                                   OREGON

                                          WASHINGTON
                                               ISLANDS
                                              NATIONAL                                 DESTRUCTION Is.
                                              WILDLIFE
                                               REFUGE

                                                  CAPE ALAVA

                                                                            OZETTE LAKE
                                            0

                                              77-

                                             APPROX.BOUNDARY----
                                                                        LA PUSH

                                              0       2.5      5             \,
                                                                                                      PT GR@NVILI
                                                      MILES
                                                                                                                 @SH.

                                                  OLYMPIC NATIONAL
                                                  PARK
                                                  INDIAN                                                                     rpi
                                                  RESERVATION                                      MATCH LINE

                                                                         LOCATION MAP

                                         GREAT LAKES REGION

          I

     I

                                 MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION LIST
                                           GREAT LAKES REGION

                                          MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW

                 1. Resource Evaluation Team

                 The Great Lakes resource evaluation team was comprised of three
                 marine scientists from the region. The team leader was Dr. A. M.
                 Beeton, Director, Great Lakes and Marine Water Center, University
                 of Michigan.      The other team members were Dr. Charles E
                 Herdendorf, Directorr Ohio State University Sea Grant Program an@
                 Dr. H. J. Harrisp Coordinator of the Green Bay Project for the
                 University of Wisconsin Sea Grant Program.

                 2. Site Evaluation and Public Participation Process

                 The team held its first meeting in Ann Arbor, Michigan, on           May
                 18-19, 19 82.    Prior to this meeting the team members had made
                 numerous contacts with their associates in academic institutions,
                 state and local governments, Federal agencies, environmental
                 groups, and fishing and other commercial interests to solicit
                 their ideas for potential candidate sites. At the initial meet-
                 ing, the team made a systematic survey of the coastline of each
                 of the Great Lakes and evaluated each potential site using the
                 criteria set forth in the NOAA Program Development Plan.            This
                 survey included those Great Lakes sites that were on NOAA's exist-
                 ing List of Recommended Areas (44 Fed. Reg. 62552p Oct. 31,
                 1979).

                 During the first meeting the team selected ten potential Marine
                 Sanctuary sites from the 24 considered in          the survey.      They
                 were:

                 GL-1. Cape Vincent (Lake Ontario), NY. This site, at the gateway
                 of the St. Lawrence Seaway, is approximately 320 sq mi. It con-
                 tains biologically rich and diverse habitat critical to many
                 important fish species.

                 GL-2. Long Point-Erie.Morain (Lake Erie), PA.       The only nondepo-
                 sitional sandy bottom in Lake Erie, this 290 sq mi area is geolog-
                 ically unique. It borders Presque Isle State Park.

                 GL-3. Western Lake Erie Islands, including Sandusky Bay, OH.
                 North of Sandusky, this site' encompasses 440 scr mi of heavily
                 used recreational area.      The waters around the numerous islands
                 in the site are relatively uncontaminated, supporting many
                 species of fish and underwater plants.

                                                GL-l

                  GL-4. Maumee Bay (Lake Erie), MI and OH.              This site of
                  approximately 50 sq mi lies in Ohio and Michigan state waters at
                  the mouth of the Maumee River.

                  GL-5. St. Clair River Delta, MI.       This is a classic bird-foot
                  delta extending into northern Lake St. Clair, encompassing about
                  70 sq mi. It is the only natural delta in the Great Lakes.

                  GL-6. Thunder Bay (Lake Huron), MI. This site contains about 400
                  sq mi of varied lake bottom infested with submerged reefs, shoals
                  and wrecked ships.

                  GL-7, Straits of Mackinac, MI. These straits link Lakes Michigan
                  and Huron. Lying between Michigan's upper and lower peninsulas,
                  this 250 sq mi site contains steeply sloping channels, shoals,
                  shallow reefs and shipwrecks.

                  GL-8. Green Bay (Lake Michigan), WI. This site covers 1000 sq mi
                  of Michigan and Wisconsin waters in two units. The upper region
                  is unpolluted and supports a fishery resource; the lower is a
                  warm water estuarine.

                  GL-9. Southern Lake Michigan Reefs,, MI.        This site of three
                  separate areas, totalling only a few square miles, consists of
                  three reefs and the waters over them between Milwaukee and
                  Muskegon.

                  GL-10.   Apostle Islands (Lake Superior) , WI.    The initial site,
                  approximately 375 sq mi in Wisconsin waters, provides exceptional
                  research opportunities and excellent recreation.        The amended
                  site (renamed Lake Superior) encompasses two subunits totalling
                  1,031 sq mi; the additional 656 sq mi surrounding Isle Royal
                  National Park was added to the original proposal during the team
                  deliberations at the second meeting.

                  Descriptions and maps of each of these ten sites were prepared by
                  the Research Planning Institute.      After being approved by the
                  team, the descriptions were mailed to 220 groups and individuals
                  in all the states bordering the Great Lakes and to 82 national
                  organizations and Federal agencies.

                  Chelsea received 72 responses by the end of the 45-day public
                  comment period (September 1OF 1982). In addition, two sites were
                  nominated by the public by the October 11, 1982, nomination
                  deadline. One was the Rock Islands Lighthouse and Submerged 19th
                  Century Sailing Schooner site in the Thousand Islands region of
                  the St. Lawrence River, New York.     It was nominated by the Save
                  the River Organization of Clayton, New York.        The other was a
                  Mid-Lake Superior site nominated by the Michigan Technological
                  University, Houghton, Michigan.

                                               GL-2

                  The team held their second meeting at the Ohio State University
                  Sea Grant facilities on South Bass Island, Ohio, on October 29,
                  1982.    During this meeting, the team reexamined their original
                  ten ;)otential candidates in light of the comments               received
                  during the public participation process and considered the two
                  additional public nominations.

                  As their first order of business, the team discussed the criteria
                  and grading system they would use to reduce the list of ten
                  candidates to the final five sites that they would recommend to
                  NOAA.   They decided to evaluate each site in terms of both its
                  natural resource value and its human use value on a scale of high
                  (3 points) , medium (2 points) and low (1 point) .            Each team
                  member would rank each potential site and the sum of their
                  individual scores would indicate the joint team ranking.

                  The team then discussed the question of whether             non-pristine
                  sites should be considered because of their restorative
                  potential.     This issue arose during the public comment period
                  when the team received a number of letters critical of some of
                  the preliminary candidate sites (i.e., Green Bay and Maumee Bay).
                  The critics believed that because these areas had already been
                  degraded by man's activities, they were no longer in a pristine
                  state which the commenters        considered a requisite for, Marine
                  Sanctuary status.      After extended discussion, the team agreed------
                  unanimously that they should continue to consider sites that may
                  be degraded now, but have potential for restoration or
                  rehabilitation. They based this decision on the language of the
                  Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, which
                  states   that   sites   can   be  designated    "for   the   purpose    of
                  preserving    or   restoring    their    conservation,     recreational,
                  ecological or esthetic values.n

                  The team next examined the two new nominations that had been
                  submitted    during   the   public 'participation     process.       They
                  concluded that, due to its limited area, the waters around the
                  Rock Island Lighthouse did not merit being considered as a
                  separate Marine Sanctuary site, but that the boundaries of the
                  Cape Vincent, Lake Ontario, candidate site should be slightly
                  expanded to include this wreck.          The@ also decided that the
                  Mid-Lake Superior nomination was worthy of being considered as a
                  separate site in their final deliberations.

                  3. Site Selection Recommendations

                  The Great Lakes team recommends, in order of priority, the
                  following five sites for placement on the Marine Sanctuary Site
                  Evaluation List:

                                                  GL-3

                  1.   Western Lake Erie Islands-including Sandusky Bay, OH (Lake
                       Erie)
                  2.   Green Bay, WI (Lake Michigan)
                  3.   Lake Superior Marine Sanctuary, WI and MI (Lake Superior -
                       modified Apostle Islands.)
                  4.   Cape Vincent, NY (Lake Ontario)
                  5.   Thunder Bay, MI (Lake Huron)

                  Using the criteria and scoring system described.above, the team's
                  evaluation concluded with two sites tied for first place with 18
                  points each, the Lake Superior Island site, expanded to include
                  Isle Royale, third with 17 votes, and the other two sites tied
                  with 16 votes each.

                  As part of the final regional report, the team has approved a set
                  of brief descriptions of each site, including a map showing the
                  recommended boundaries.      The team believes, however, that these
                  boundaries should be considered tentative and that when a site on
                  this list achieves active candidate status, the issue of its
                  exact boundaries should be reopened. The balance of this part of
                  the final regional report discusses the evaluation team's
                  rationale for choosing each site, a summary of public comments
                  received, and specific         issues that arose during the site
                  selection process.

                  3.1.    Western Lake Erie Islands - including Sandusky Bay (Lake
                  Erie)

                  The site encompasses approximately 440 sq mi of Sandusky Bay,
                  open Lake Erie waters, lake and bay bed an@ wetlands, all within
                  state jurisdiction.        The site is a popular vacation and
                  recreation area due to its beautiful scenery and diverse aquatic
                  wildlife.

                  This proposed site received 24 written comments during the first
                  public response period, representing 12% of the total received.
                  Seventeen were in favor and three opposed.           All environmental
                  groups were in support as were the majority of governmental
                  agencie!s. Governmental support came from the Toledo Metropolitan
                  Area Council of Governments, Ohio EPA, Ohio Biological Survey,
                  National Park Service and the USEPA Environmental Research
                  Laboratory in Duluth.

                  The Ohio Department of Natural Resources opposed the nomination
                  in its Present form, but stated they were open to further eval-
                  uation of the site if it were amended to efiminate Sandusky Bay
                  and with assurance that the state would retain access to its
                  mineral resources in the area. They also expressed concern that
                  less restrictive public use guidelines of a Marine Sanctuary
                  might undermine the tight restrictions Placed on the public use
                  of the Old Woman Creek National Estuarine Sanctuary already

                                                 GL-4

                  located in their state.     They suggested limiting the Sanctuary
                  area to a subset of the archipelago such as the waters and reefs
                  adjacent to West Sister Island. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
                  expressed concern that the designation could restrict current
                  uses.   Atlantic Richfield opposition was the only comment from
                  the petroleum industry.

                  The team ranked the site high for both its natural resource and
                  human use value.      In discussing the Ohio DNR's concern over
                  Sandusky Bay, the team believes it should be included because it
                  is an even more productive fishery than the Islands region.
                  Furthermore, they recognized that Sandusky Bay has already
                  experienced a certain amount of degradation and that the
                  prominence associated with sanctuary status should enhance
                  efforts to restore the area.     Concerning the oil and gas issue,
                  it was noted that the Ohio DNR has recommended that gas
                  development not proceed in the western basin of Lake Erie.
                  Consequently, conferring sanctuary status on the area would have
                  no effect on gas development because such development has already
                  been prohibited.

                  3.2 Green Bay, Wisconsin (Lake Michigan)

                  The site covers an area of approximately 1,000 sq mi of Wisconsin
                  State waters in Green Bay and part of Lake Michigan. Twenty-nine
                  comments were received on this site; 17 in support and 9 opposed.
                  There was almost unanimous support from environmental groups
                  while the oil and gas industry opposed the nomination. The City
                  of Green Bay, the Brown County Planning Commission, the Green Bay
                  Economic Development Authoirity, the Bay-Lake Regional Planning
                  Commission and the USEPA Environmental Research Laboratory in
                  Dul-uth supported the nomination.     At the state level, however,
                  there were conflicting positions with the Wisconsin Department of
                  Natural Resources (DNR) in support and the Wisconsin Coastal
                  Management Council (WCMC) opposed.        The WCMC oPpostition was
                  based on concern that the proposed marine sanctuary would not
                  improve the state's management capabilities, and on the lack of
                  interest in the project from the State of Michigan. They stated,
                  however, that if the sanctuary included both the Wisconsin and
                  Michigan portions of the Bay and a joint interstate baywide
                  management effort could be developed, they would support further
                  study of the site.     In subsequent telephone conversations with
                  NOAA and Chelsea personnel, they agreed not to oppose placing the
                  site on the team's final list of five sites and to withhold final
                  judgement until such time as the site achieves active candidate
                  status.

                  Much of the public comment criticized the proposed boundaries of
                  the site which included both the lower and upper bay, but only on
                  the Wisconsin side.    Some commenters questioned why the proposed
                  site split the Bay down the middle and did not include the

                                                  GL-5

                  Michigan western shore.     Others stated that due to the degraded
                  condition of the lower Bay it did not merit sanctuary status.
                  The team discussed these boundary issues and decided that both
                  the upper and lower parts of the Bay should be included because
                  the cold water fishery in the northern end grades into a warm
                  water fishery in the southern end and both regimes need to be
                  included.    It was also felt that the southern end showed great
                  potential for rehabilitation and sanctuary status could provide
                  national attention and consequently enhance the effective
                  antipollution program now underway.     The team discussed the issue
                  of including waters on the Michigan side of the Bay and decided
                  to keep the proposed boundaries as      they were in order to stay
                  within NOAA's size limitations.          However agreeing with the
                  Wisconsin Coastal Management Council    suggestion, they recommended
                  that if the proposed Green Bay site     becomes an active candidate,
                  inclusion of Michigan State waters be considered.

                  3.3. Lake Superior, Wisconsin and Michigan

                  The site is composed of two important subunits and encompasses a
                  total of 1031 sq mi of Wisconsin and Michigan State waters in
                  Lake Superior.     The western unit, 375 sq mi, lies adjacent to
                  Apostle Islands National Lakeshore which extends 1/4 mile into
                  Lake Superior.      The eastern unit consists of 656 sq mi of
                  Michigan State waters surrounding Isle Royale National Park out
                  to a depth of 600 ft .

                  The Droposed Lake Superior Marine Sanctuary site began with the
                  teamis initial proposal for a site that included only the waters
                  surrounding the Apostle Islands. During the public comment
                  period, 16 responses were received on this site with most in
                  favor.     The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources gave
                  support, but warned that the sanctuary designation should not
                  jeopardize negotiations with local Indian tribes on fishing
                  rights.    The WCMC was initially opposed, stating their belief
                  that an additional management juris@iction was not needed. They
                  later agreed not to oppose putting the site on the SEL list.

                  Additional support came from the Ohio Department of Natural
                  Resourcest the USEPA Environmental Research Eaboratory in Duluth,
                  the Defenders of Wildlife, and the Great Lakes Cam-P and Trail
                  Association.     The Lake Carriers Association exT)ressed concern
                  that the area boundaries contained domestic an@ international
                  shipping lanes.

                  The team thinks  this site has exceDtional merit and uniqueness in
                  that it contains the only large grouping of islands in Lake
                  Superior, the largest freshwater lake in the world.         Also, the
                  isiands are already a part of the National Park System and
                  sanctuary status would protect the surrounding waters.              The
                  National Park Service Regional Office in Omaha, and park

                                                GL-6

                 personnel on the Apostle Islands, were very      supportive of this
                 proposal and provided ideas and information       in developing the
                 site description.

                 The team next discussed the Mid-Lake Superior    site nominated by
                 the Michigan Technological University.        It was decided that,
                 because of its pristine nature and unique deep    water habitat, not
                 found in the other areas of the Great Lakes, this area merited
                 further consideration.     After considerable discussionr it was
                 decided to reduce the size of this proposed sanctuary to include
                 the deeper waters around Isle Royale and combine it with the
                 proposed Apostle Islands site. Since this added significantly to
                 the area of the original Apostle Island nomination, it was
                 decided that a site description and map of the new area, now
                 designated the proposed Lake Superior Marine Sanctuary, be sent
                 out for public review.        Chelsea received 16 comments, all
                 generally favorable except the Michigan Department of Natural
                 Resources. They later agreed to modify their position and adopt
                 a wait-and-see attitude.

                 3.4. Cape Vincent, New York

                 Cape Vincent is located in the northeastern corner of Lake
                 Ontario at the gateway to New York State's Thousand Islands
                 resort area and the St. Lawrence Seaway.         The proposed site
                 includes an area of about 320 sq mi, extending from Carleton
                 Island north of Cape Vincent to Stony Point Light and out to the
                 Canadian border.      All of the proposed site is within the
                 jursidiction of New York State.

                 Sixteen comments were received concerning this site, ten in
                 support and four opposed.     Governmental support was strong with
                 the New York Department of State, the Governor's official point
                 of contact for the SEL process; the St. Lawrence - Eastern
                 Ontario Commission; the Ohio Department of National Resources and
                 the USEPA Environmental Resource Laboratory in Duluth approving
                 the recommendation.      The National Park Service suggested an
                 expansion of the proposed boundaries.      The St. Lawrence Seaway
                 Development Corporation expressed concern due to the busy
                 navigation channel Within the site and the Lake Carriers
                 Association recommended that the boundary be redrawn to exclude
                 the St. Lawrence River. There were no comments from the fishing
                 or oil and gas industries directly related to this proposal. The
                 Defenders    of   Wildlife   believed   the   area   was    -presently
                 well-managed by state authorities and that the team had not made
                 a good case for the area being designated a marine sanctuary.

                                                 GL-7

                  The team ranked the site fourth on their list and extended its
                  boundaries slightly to adopt the recommendations made by the Save
                  the River organization to include the submerged sailing schooner
                  off Rock Island Lighthouse and the National Park Service
                  suggestion that the boundaries be extended to include the area
                  around Grindstone Island.

                  In summary, the team believes that because of its great scenic
                  beauty, accessibility and abundance of fish and wildlife, the
                  site would afford excellent opportunities for fisheries research,
                  recreational enjoyment and educational experiences.

                  3.5. Thunder Bay, Michigan

                  The proposed Thunder Bay site includes Thunder Bay and vicinity
                  (up to Middle Island). The site has an area of approximately 400
                  sq mi and is entirely within State of Michigan waters.

                  The proposal to make Thunder Bay a Marine Sanctuary generated
                  more local support than any other site in the Great Lakes region.
                  The original proposal was drawn up by the local planning
                  commission and sent to the team prior to their first meeting.
                  The team decided that it merited public review and 36 letters
                  were received during the comment period.          Thirty of those
                  comments were in support and four--6@posed.

                  Both local and national environmental groups supported the
                  recommendation, as did 16 other individuals or groups.            The
                  Defenders of Wildlife qualified their support due to limited
                  knowledge of the area stating they did not believe it should be a
                  prime candidate.     However, there was strong state and local
                  governmental support from the Alpena City Council, Alpena County
                  Planning  Commission, . Thunder   Bay   River  Watershed    Council,
                  Northeast Michigan Council of Governments, Michigan Department of
                  Natural Resources and the Michigan State Travel Bureau.
                  Congressman Bill Davis also expressed his support, as did the
                  Alpena Chamber of Commerce.        Only the U.S. Army Corps of
                  Engineers was opposed.    The team was impressed by the amount of
                  enthusiastic local support for the proposal and believed
                  sanctuaiy status would help preserve the numerous shipwrecks in
                  the area from treasure hunters.

                                               GL-8

                                                  PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                         MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                        1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                           A. SITE NAME:          Western Lake Erie Islands including Sandusky Bay,
                                                  Ohio (Lake Erie)

                           B. LOCATION:         (GREAT LAKES REGION)

                               1.   LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE: 410301 N, 820401 W

                               2.   DESCRIPTION:       The site encompasses approximately 440 Mi2
                                    (1140 k M2)   of Sandusky Bay, open Lake Erie waters, lake and
                                    bay bed, and wetlands, all within Ohio State jurisdiction (see
                                    map).    Lake Erie and Sandusky Bay water surface level is ap-
                                    proximately 571 ft (174 m) above mean sea level. The associ-
                                    ated wetlands exist primarily between the 571 (174 m) and 575
                                    ft (175 m) elevation contours.        The bedrock of this area is
                                    mostly limestone and dolomite with shale occurring on some
                                    mainland locations.    This region has been subjected to massive
                                    continental   glaciation   during    Pleistocene times.        Unsorted
                                    glacial deposits as well as sediments from ancient glacial lakes
                                    cover much of the     bedrock.    Solution of the carbonate bedrock
                                    by dissolved weak     acids has produced numerous sinkholes and
                                    caves.

                                    The shores along      the site are composites of high rocky and
                                    glacial till bluffs, and discontinuous sand and gravel and
                                    cobble beaches, as well as segments of marshlands. The Mud-
                                    dy Creek Bay wetland on the western end of Sandusky Bay is
                                    the most extensive wetland in Ohio along the Lake Erie coast.
                                    Small sand and gravel pocket beaches occur on Middle and
                                    South Bass Islands.      Kelley's Island, the largest island within
                                    the U.S. portion of Lake Erie, contains the largest sand de-
                                    posit of the Ohio Islands.      An extensive sand deposit also ex-
                                    ists at the East Harbor area.          Wave and current action is
                                    sometimes energetic around the islands and forms pebble bars
                                    which jut from some island shores.

                                    Around the rock rubble and erosional remnants of dolomite and
                                    limestone which form islands and shoals, the bottom of Lake
                                    Erie is relatively level.    The deepest reported sounding is 62
                                    ft (19.5   m), just south of Starve Island; however, depths
                                    generally do not exceed 45 ft (14 m).           Sand, clay, gravel,
                                    and rock   bottoms are reported within the area.        In Lake Erie,
                                    soft mud   is the most common bottom type in the vicinity of the
                                    islands.   Sediment loading of Sandusky        Bay is predominantly
                                    clay and   silt from the Sandusky River.       The average depth of
                                    Sandusky Bay is approximately 5 ft (1.5 m).           The entire area
                                    is experiencing relative subsidence with respect to eastern
                                    Lake Erie at a rate of approximately 6 in (15 cm) per century.

                                                                  Western Lake Erie Islands - Page 2

                                    Slow erosion of the island and mainland shores due to scouring
                                    by waves and nearshore currents is accelerated during periods
                                    of high lake level.    Spring and fall storms and expansion of
                                    freezing water within rock joints contribute to shoreline re-
                                    cession.  The tidal range is only 0.1 ft (0.03 m); however,
                                    seiches (atmospherically induced displacements of     the lake sur-
                                    face) may attain maximum amplitudes of up to 6 ft (2 m) al-
                                    though they a.re usually less than 2 ft (0.6 m).      The computed
                                    maximum wave height in the site's open waters is       approximately
                                    12.5 ft (,3.8 m).   These large waves break in shallow depths
                                    while reformed waves of up to approximately 3.5 ft (1.1 m)
                                    break against, the shore.   Northeast storms produce flooding of
                                    the low-lying eastern shores of several islands.

                                    The climate     is classified  as   temperate     humid-continental.
                                    Weather patterns are complex and rapidly changing. The lake
                                    is usually ice covered from late December until late February.
                                    Fog occurs frequently.      Prevailing southwest winds drive a
                                    lake surface gyre clockwise around the islands and at depth a
                                    counterclockwise current circulates.       These water currents
                                    transport cleaner, cooler water from       the central Lake Erie
                                    basin into the vicinity of the islands.      Water clarity is typi-
                                    cally greatest at Kelley's and North Bass Islands where visi-
                                    bility may be up to 10 ft (3 m). The Lake Erie waters have a
                                    low level of heavy metal and pesticide contamination, but high
                                    phosphorous     concentrations    produce    eutrophic     conditions
                                    throughout much of the area.       Dense mats of the freshwater
                                    plant Cladophora attach to shallow, rocky island areas.            At
                                    Kelley's Island,  .during periods of low water, decomposing
                                    plants make the public beach periodically unfit for bathers.
                                    Summer thermal stratification of the water inhibits mixing and
                                    produces short periods of low oxygen concentrations in the
                                    bottom waters.   The shallow Johnson Island area has the poor-
                                    est water quality due to its proximity to large communities.
                                    Effluents from sewage disposal plants and industrial waste
                                    treatment centers, and seepage from domestic septic systems
                                    enters this area.

                           RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                           A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                               1.   The site is a very popular vacation/ recreation area for many
                                    urban dwellers in this region.

                               2.   Diverse aquatic wildlife and animals, including rare and endan-
                                    gered species, inhabit the site.      Ninety-five species of fish
                                    have been       erved in the area.

                               3.   The waters aro  *und the islands are relatively uncontaminated by
                                    pesticides   and   heavy    meta I s, but   are   characterized    as
                                    eutrophic.

                                                                    Western Lake Erie Islands - Page 3

                           B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                               1.   NATURAL RESOURCES

                                    Lake Erie is the smallest and shallowest of the five Great
                                    Lakes, but it is biologically the most diverse and productive
                                    because of its southernmost position, availability of nutrients,
                                    and diversity of habitats.      The greatest diversity of habitats
                                    and species is found among the Western Lake Erie Islands.
                                    The area is also the most important breeding area for fish,
                                    waterfowl, and shorebirds lakewide.

                                    I he rich fish life and plant life are the food base of this area,
                                    supporting nesting and migrating birds, shorebirds, waterfowl,
                                    and passerine (perching) birds.         Mallards, black ducks, and
                                    blue-winged teals breed in the marsh areas.          The endangered
                                    bald eagle and a variety of hawks, owls, herons, and egrets
                                    nest in this area.    Dense concentrations of great blue herons,
                                    great egrets, and black-crowned night herons nest within the
                                    West Sister Island U.S. National Wildlife Refuge.          Cormorants,
                                    gulls, and various waterfowl breed on other islands.                The
                                    common egret, least bittern, hooded merganser, king rail, and
                                    common tern are also found within the proposed site.

                                    Ninety-five species of fish have been reported from this area.
                                    The area's dominant fish species which breed within these
                                    waters are:     perch, bass, channel catfish, alewife, gizzard
                                    shad, carp, goldfish, freshwater drum, and emerald shiner.
                                    The eutrophic Sandusky Bay is the habitat for a large carp
                                    population.    Northern pike and muskellunge were once common
                                    in Sandusky Bay, but their numbers have declined possibly
                                    due to drainage of marshes and damming of tributaries.             Mus-
                                    kellunge is an endangered species in Ohio.          Other fish which
                                    spawn in the area include lake sturgeon, longnose gar, lake
                                    herring, lake whitefish, rainbow smelt, central mudminnow,
                                    northern pike, muskellunge, quillback, northern hog sucker,
                                    sunfish, bullhead, crappie, sauger, and walleye.             The San-
                                    dusky Bay area provides an exceptional freshwater fishing
                                    area with over three million walleye caught per year.         It is the
                                    major white bass commercial fishery in the nation.
                                                                          I

                                    The bottom-dwelling community is composed primarily of wide-
                                    spread and abundant chironomids and oligochaetes which are
                                    major food items for fish.      Also distributed on the bottom are
                                    polychaete worms, caddisflies, coelenterates, flatworms, mol-
                                    luscs, amphipods, isopods, and other crustaceans.           Two dozen
                                    species of freshwater mussel have been found on various sub-
                                    strates within the site.    Large gelatinous bryozoan colonies oc-
                                    cur at certain times and may wash onto the shore.           Cladophora
                                    and Bangia plants attach to the rocky,             shallow substrate
                                    aroun7EI -the islands and thrive on the high phosphorous con-
                                    centrations in the water.

                                                                      Western Lake Erie Islands - Page 4

                                     The zooplankton community is primarily copepods, but clacloce-
                                     rans and diverse rotifers are abundant, and ostracods are
                                     present.

                                     Diatoms are overwhelmingly the greatest component of the
                                     phytoplankton.      Diatom blooms occur in the spring and fall,
                                     and during winter the phytoplankton are nearly all diatoms.
                                     Green and blue-green phytoplankton species also are present
                                     and reach bloom proportions in the summer.

                                     Wetlands vegetation includes coontail, duckweeds, water-milfoil,
                                     water-smartweed, American lotus, white waterlily, spatterclock,
                                     bullhead lily, pond weed, and water-stargrass.                 Dredging,
                                     landfill, motorboating, dumping of wastes and domestic sewage,
                                     runoff from agricultural lands, and fluctuations in water levels
                                     have been cited as causes for declines in populations of float-
                                     ing vegetation and marsh grass.

                                     Salamanders, frogs, toads, newts, and turtles are common
                                     along the shores.       A rare population of triploid salamanders
                                     (Ambystoma texanum) lives on North Bass Island.               Green Is-
                                     land is the  .6-n_Fy__Fn__own habitat for the snail Anguispira kochi
                                     strontiana.    Mudpuppys, which burrow into muddy sed ents,
                                     are fairly common in open-water areas.         Muskrats and raccoons
                                     inhabit and feed around the site.

                                 2.  HUMAN USES

                                     This site is unique because it contains the only islands in Lake
                                     Erie.    Because of their close proximity to four major urban
                                     centers (Cleveland, Detroit, Lorain/Elyria, and Toledo) with a
                                     total population of approximately seven million people, recre-
                                     ational activities are diverse and well developed in the area.
                                     These activities include fishing, camping, day-hiking, picnick-
                                     ing, powerboating, waterskiing, sailing, swimming, and sight-
                                     seeing.    In the fall, hunting for waterfowl and pheasant is a
                                     popular pastime.      In winter, the area is used largely by day
                                     visitors for ice fishing, skating, ice boating, sledding, and,
                                     less commonly, snowmobiling.         Regularly scheduled ferry ser-
                                     vice from the first week in April through the third week in
                                     November provides access to some of the islands and delivers
                                     bulk freight.      Water taxi service is commercially available
                                     among the islands.         Commercial airplanes regularly fly to
                                     North, Middle, and South Bass Islands and to Kelley's Island
                                     in order to transport mail.        Flights to Rattlesnake Island are
                                     available by reservation.       The population of the islands adja-
                                     cent to the site fluctuates greatly with the seasons.           Most is-
                                     land housing consists of one or two family units, primarily
                                     summer cottages.       Historically, the area's economy has been
                                     based upon quarrying limestone, lumbering, commercial fish-
                                     ing, and peach growing. The present-day local economy expe-
                                     riences a surge from May through, September, a direct result
                                     of the amusement, recreation, and retail trade associated with
                                     the resort and vacation activities occurring here.             Commercial

                                                                   Western Lake Erie Islands - Page 5

                                    fishing has declined and most fishing is now recreational.
                                    Popular sport fish are perch, walleye, and bass.         Party boats
                                    from Port Clinton and Sandusky fish over reef areas.            I sland
                                    vineyards locally sell their wines and attract tourists.         Since
                                    four major urban areas are located within a 50-mile radius of
                                    the site, dredging, landfill, motorboating, domestic sewage and
                                    waste dumping, and agricultural runoff activities continue to
                                    impact on the system's resources.

                                    Kelley's Island is the location of a state park and the sandy
                                    beach on its north shore is a popular bathing area, as are
                                    other sandy beaches of the site.      Fossil collecting is an activi-
                                    ty in the old limestone quarries of Kelley's Island.               East
                                    Harbor State Park is a large and very popular state park on
                                    the mainland adjacent to the area.      Several youth groups main-
                                    tain camp facilities in the immediate vicinity.

                                    lhe site encompasses all channels to the heavily industrialized,
                                    commercial ports of Sandusky, Marblehead, and Port Clinton.
                                    Vessel traffic to or from Toledo or Monroe could also pass
                                    through the western boundaries of the site.         Over seven mil-
                                    lion tons of coal, limestone, and other commodities move
                                    through Sandusky and Marblehead.

                                    Active marinas operate within the area.       Five thousand power-
                                    boats are moored at the West Harbor/Catawba Island marinas in
                                    the summer season, mostly for fishing. The Gem Beach Chan-
                                    nel is extremely congested during the summer because it is the
                                    only channel into the West Harbor area from the lake.            Major
                                    sailing regattas are held annually at the islands.        Some other
                                    area attractions are the Johnson Island Civil War prison site
                                    and Perry's Victory and International Peace Memorial at Put-
                                    In-Bay on South Bass Island commemorating the Battle of Lake
                                    Erie in the War of 1812 and the lasting peace between Canada
                                    and the United Statej.
                                    Archaeological artifacts discovered in this vicinity indicate hu-
                                    man settlement occurred as early as 3000 B.C.            Evidence of
                                    Indian civilizations is found in this vicinity and Inscription
                                    Rock on Kelley's Island has been deciphered as the story of
                                    the Erie tribe.

                                    A restricted military test-firing range is situated along the
                                    site's western boundary.

                                    Educational and scientific opportunities within the site are
                                    greatly enhanced by the presence of Ohio State University's
                                    F. T.   Stone Laboratory (the oldest freshwater biological re-
                                    search  station in the United States) on South Bass Island and
                                    by the presence of a number of wildlife refuges, nature pre-
                                    serves, and parks within or bordering the site. These include
                                    Magee   Marsh State Reservation, Crane Creek State Park,
                                    Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge, Old Woman Creek National
                                    Estuarine    Sanctuary,     and   West    Sister    Island    National

                                                                  Western Lake Erie Islands - Page 6

                                   Wildlife Refuge which, in 1975, was designated as a wilderness
                                   area.   Public access is allowed only by special permit in order
                                   to protect the great blue and black-crowned night herons
                                   which nest there. The Ohio Division of Wildlife conducts tours
                                   of their fish hatchery on South Bass Island.       Audubon groups
                                   from Michigan visit the area each spring to view the abundant
                                   and varied bird species.       Sandusky Bay borders the Muddy
                                   Creek Bay wetland, the most extensive wetland on the Lake
                                   Erie shore in Ohio.      These adjunct sites have a long track
                                   record of providing excellent educational and research pro-
                                   grams and facilities relating to the natural resources of the
                                   lake and its coastal region.     The entire site was also included
                                   within the Institute of Ecology-National Science Foundation
                                   system of Experimental Ecological Reserves in 1981.        Such re-
                                   serves were set aside for the purpose of providing representa-
                                   tive terrestrial and aquatic sites for manipulative ecological
                                   research.    All such reserves have a long, continuous history
                                   of research and good potential for long-term future integrity
                                   and comprehensive management.

                                   Research has been conducted within the site by investigators
                                   from many institutions including Heidelberg College, Bowling
                                   Green State University, Ohio State University, Ohio Environ-
                                   mental Protection Agency, Ohio Department of Natural Re-
                                   sources, U.S. Geological Survey, and many others.                 The
                                   environmental impact study for a proposed, but never built,
                                   power plant within Sandusky Bay also represents an extensive
                                   data base.

                                   The Western Lake Erie Islands are located in an area that is
                                   on a trend with the Lima/Indiana oil field, and a small oil field
                                   is present on Pelee Island across the Canadian border.
                                   Therefore, it is believed that the area may contain petroleum
                                   resources.

                                                                0

                     111. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                           Scharf, W. C., 1978, Colonial birds nesting on man-made and natural
                               sites in the U.S. Great Lakes:       Tech. Rept. D-78-10, Rept. No.
                               FWS/OBS-78/15; Publ. by U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experi-
                               ment Station, Vicksburg, Miss., 328 pp.

                           Center for Lake Erie Area Research, 1974, Aquatic ecology qf a
                               proposed nuclear power plant site on Sandusky Bay, Ohio:            Prep.
                               for Ohio Power Co. and Amer. Elec, Power Serv.. Corp., CLEAR at
                               the Ohio State Univ., Columbus, Ohio.

                           Baker, D. B. , W. B. Jackson, and B. L. Prater (Eds. ), 1975, San-
                               dusky River Basin Symposium: Sponsored by Heidelberg Coll. and
                               Bowling Green State Univ., 475 pp.

                                                                                                         Western Lake Erie Islands                         Page 7

                                         Cooper, C. L., et al., 1977, Resources of the Lake Erie island region:
                                                Prep. for Ohio Dept. Nat. Res., Div. Water, Coastal Zone Manage-
                                                ment Section, 222 pp.

                                         Herdenclorf, C. E. and S. M. Hartley (Eds.), 1980, Fish and wildlife
                                                resources of the Great Lakes coastal wetlands within the United
                                                States, Vol. 3:               CLEAR Tech. Rept. No. 170:3, 505 pp.

                                         Center for Lake Erie Area Research, 1975, Aquatic ecology investiga-
                                                tions of a potential power plant site on Sandusky Bay--Final
                                                Report:          Prep. for Amer. Elec. Power Serv. Corp., CLEAR Tech.
                                                Rept. No. 38, 127 pp.

                                            .WEST SIST
                                                                                                      N. BASS IS.           PELEE IS@,

                                                                                                         M1                                         CANADA
                               N                                                  RATTLESNAKE IS.
                                                                                                                                                         -"   'K N,
                                                                                                                                                         S_

                                                                                     GREEN IS
                                                                                        IN:N                                                      N'.

                                                                                             WBA Is.

                                                                                                             JOHNSON I..

                             0            3           6

                                        MILES

                                APPROX. BOUNDARY
                               ISUBAERIAL LAND EXCLUDED1                                                                  SANDU KY

                                                                                      LOCATION MAP

                                                   PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                           MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                        1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                            A. SITE NAME: Green Bay (Lake Michigan), Wisconsin

                            B. LOCATION:          (GREAT LAKES REGION)

                                1.    LATITUDE/LONGITUDE: 441451 N, 871451 W

                                2.    DESCRIPTION: The site covers an           area of approximately 1,000
                                      Mi2 (2,570 kM2) of Wisconsin waters in Green Bay and part of
                                      Lake Michigan.      The site consists of upper and lower units.
                                      Ilhe upper region is unpolluted and supports an existing (and
                                      potentially greater) fishery and important nursery and spawn-
                                      ing grounds.      Sturgeon Bay is estuarine and contains warm
                                      water.   The mean depth of Green Bay is approximately 52 ft
                                      (15.8 m).    Green Bay is connected to Lake Michigan through
                                      naturally occurring passes at the north of the Bay and
                                      through the Sturgeon Bay ship canal traversing the Door
                                      Peninsula.    Numerous tributaries flow into Green Bay including
                                      14 rivers.    The Fox-Wolf river system transports the largest
                                      amount of river water into the Bay at an estimated mean               flow
                                      rate of 118 M3 /sec (31 000 gal/sec) .       The Fox-Wolf river       sys-
                                      tem also transports a large quantity of suspended and                 dis-
                                      solved contaminants including effluents from numerous                 pulp
                                      and paper mills located in the very heavily industrialized Fox
                                      River Valley.      Lower Green Bay is extremely polluted and
                                      highly eutrophic, although a concerted local, State, and              Fed-
                                      eral effort is continuing to improve water quality.           Phosphorus
                                      enters the Bay from, significant nonpoint as well as                  point
                                      sources.    The flushing rate of the lower Bay has been               esti-
                                      mated at between 29 and 160 days.

                                      The area's bedrock is primarily limestone, dolomite, and              shale
                                      shaped by the succession of Pleistocene glaciations which cov-
                                      ered this region.      Green Bay water surface levels have            been
                                      much lower than present and relict beach forms are found              sub-
                                      merged in the Bay.       The Bay substrate materials include          mud,
                                      sandy mud, sand, clay, and rock.             High sedimentation       rates
                                      occur in the southern and eastern portions of the Bay where
                                      polluted,muds include industrial and municipal wastes.              A few
                                      rocky patches occur along the northeast portion of the Bay.
                                      Sand, copper, and manganese are major mineral resources in
                                      the area, but they are not mined in Green Bay.

                                      Bay surface level has varied substantially during recent his-
                                      tory impacting wetlands particularly along the low-lying west-
                                      ern bay shore.      The proposed site adjoins a major portion of
                                      Wisconsin's Great Lake wetlands.           Seiches (i.e., atmospheri-
                                      cally driven displacements of the bay surface) cause reverse
                                      flow in the tributaries which connect to the Bay.               The Bay

                                                                Green Bay (Lake Michigan) - Page 2

                                    surface is commonly covered during December through April by
                                    ice which becomes as much as four feet thick.

                                    More than 200 shipwrecks lie in the waters surrounding the
                                    Door Peninsula.   The area supports a substantial sport diving
                                    industry.

                          RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                          A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                               1.   The site and adjacent areas are heavily used for recreation,
                                    lake front development, industrial purposes, and fishing.

                               2.   The site yields the largest fish harvest in the Lake Michigan
                                    region, even though past alteration of the habitat has changed
                                    the composition of the7ish population.

                               3.   Measures to improve water quality of the south end of Green
                                    Bay are having beneficial results.     Stresses to the Green Bay
                                    ecosystem include nutrient loading, suspended solids and sedi-
                                    ments, toxic substances, and-Ti-shing activities.        Exceptional
                                    Fe-search opportuFi'vies and ongoing activities are directed to-
                                    ward rehabilitation methodologies.

                           B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                               1.   NATURAL RESOURCES

                                    Over 37 species of fish spawn in the area.        Salmon and lake
                                    trout are stocked by both State and Federal programs.         Unfor-
                                    tunately, a drastic depletion of certain fish populations has
                                    occurred during recent times.       Cisco are greatly reduced in
                                    number and lake sturgeon, which were once common, are now
                                    endangered.    Introduction of exotic species, such as German
                                    carp, alewife, ocean smelt, and sea lamprey, have markedly
                                    affected fish species composition in the area.      Large numbers
                                    of carp increase turbidity, disrupt macrophyte communities,
                                    and thereby interfere with successful reproduction of other
                                    species.  Yellow perch are intolerant of low oxygen concentra-
                                    tions which carp and catfish can tolerate.         Improvements in
                                    lower Bay water quality have reduced occurrences of severe
                                    anoxic conditions and has benefited the area's fishery.            In
                                    fact, a substantial portion of the lake's perch harvest occurs
                                    in Green Bay.     Lower Green Bay is a major perch spawning
                                    area.

                                    Bottom-dwelling tubificid worms and midge larvae, generally
                                    recognized as indicators of poor environmental quality, are
                                    abundant near the middle and southern portions of the Bay.
                                    The pollution-intolerant "shrimp" Pontoporeia affinis inhabits
                                    the northern Bay bottom.       Other bay-bottom- dwellers include
                                    oligochaetes,   amphipods,    isopods,   leeches,   molluscs,     and

                                                                Green Bay (Lake Michigan) - Page 3

                                   mayfly nymphs.     Phytoplankton during the winter and early
                                   spring are predominantly diatoms.     Green and blue-green algae
                                   reach maximum population size during late summer.         Copepods,
                                   claclocerans, and rotifers are common types of zooplankton.

                                   Diverse species of waterfowl and shorebirds nest on the is-
                                   lands and wetlands, including several types of gulls, terns,
                                   herons, and egrets, as well as the sandhi[[ crane and double-
                                   breasted cormorant.    Among the other bird species that utilize
                                   the area are Canada goose, red-breasted merganser, black
                                   ducks, gadwalls, mallards, American widgeon, wood duck,
                                   blue-wing teal, green-wing teal, bufflehead, shoveler, coot,
                                   gallinule, American bittern, least bittern, Virginia rail, sora
                                   rail, semipalmated sandpiper, dunlin, sanderling, semipalmated
                                   plover, black-bellied plover, killdeer, and goldeneye.           The
                                   Bay serves as a major stopover point for migratory waterfowl.
                                   Quantities of diving ducks up to 20,000 are not uncommon in
                                   the area.   Recent high water levels, however, have reduced
                                   available wetlands and waterfowl populations which, in turn,
                                   have caused the decline in waterfowl hunting.

                              2.   HUMAN USES

                                   The site is used extensively for commercial fishing, marine
                                   transportation, mining, and recreation.       Extensive landfill of
                                   coastal marsh for agriculture and urbanization has permanently
                                   altered wildlife habitats around the area.     The sportfishery of
                                   the Bay has declined, and health warnings are issued concern-
                                   ing contamination of fish in certain locations.      Despite water
                                   quality problems, the Bay yields the largest commercial fish
                                   harvest in the Lake Michigan region.       Most of the commercial
                                   catch consists of perch caught in gill nets.         The northern
                                   portion of Green Bay is the location of most recreational and
                                   commercial fishing.    Whitefish, lake trout, Coho salmon, and
                                   king salmon are popular sport fish in the north along with
                                   walleye and smallmouth bass which are fished from rocky
                                   beaches.   Public access to the lower Bay is limited.

                                   Although recreation is a multimillion-dollar business in Green
                                   Bay, the Bay is not extensively used by recreational boaters,
                                   partly due to the scarcity of boat launching sites and facili-
                                   ties.  The eastern Bay is primarily a tourist/ vacation area,
                                   and Door County has a long history as a resort community.
                                   Trapping for muskrat and mink occurs along the western bay
                                   shore.   Duck hunting is a recreational pastime in the Bay
                                   area.   County and State wildlife refuges adjoin the site, in-
                                   cluding Wisconsin's Long Tail Point Migratory Waterfowl Ref-
                                   uge.

                                   The Bay, its adjacent wetlands, and rugged shorelines are
                                   used as field stations by graduate and professional researchers
                                   at the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay.

                                                                  Green Bay (Lake Michigan) - Page 4

                                    Fisheries in the area are managed by regulations concerning
                                    closed seasons, size limits, closed areas, gear restrictions, and
                                    quotas.   Carp adversely influence perch reproduction by dis-
                                    turbing vegetation used for perch spawning sites; however,
                                    carp are not harvested due to high concentrations of PCBs
                                    (poly-chlorinated biphenyls).

                                    Waste treatment facilities at the lower part of the Bay since
                                    about 1970 have been improving Bay water quality.

                                    The City of Green Bay and Brown County have development
                                    plans for maintaining and enlarging the harbor at Green Bay.

                                    Navigation channels in the Bay are maintained by dredging.
                                    Spoil disposal practices are scrutinized by agencies of both
                                    States and the Federal government.           Continued maintenance
                                    dredging requires identification of suitable spoil sites.       Devel-
                                    opment in and near State waters is controlled by the Depart-
                                    ment of Natural Resources' Water Regulation Program, Brown
                                    County's Shoreland Management Program, and the U.S. Army
                                    Corps of Engineers' Section 10 and Section 404 programs.

                                    Research and development dollars are continually being chan-
                                    neled into the lower Bay through the Wisconsin Department of
                                    Natural Resources, University of Wisconsin-Sea Grant, Univer-
                                    sity of Wisconsin-Green Bay, and Wisconsin Coastal Zone Man-
                                    agement Programs.      Other agencies studying the Bay include
                                    the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and
                                    Wildlife Service, and the Great Lakes Fishery Commission.
                                    The Bay-Lake Regional Planning Commission serves as coordi-
                                    nator of Green Bay data for the Future of the Bay Steering
                                    Committee in hopes of developing a comprehensive management
                                    plan.

                                    The Green Bay area contains important resources of historical
                                    and educational significance.      These include lighthouses and
                                    Indian pictographs.

                                    Two islands adjacent to the proposed site are owned and man-
                                    aged by the Michigan Nature Association.         These are Gull and
                                    1-ittle Gull Islands (known as the "Wilderness Islands") between
                                    Poverty and St. Martin Islands.

                      111. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                           Bertrand, G., J. Land, and J. Ross, 1976, Green Bay watershed:
                               past/ present/ future:   Univ. Wisconsin Sea Grant Tech. Rept. No.
                               229, 300 pp.

                           Coberly, C. E. and R. M. Horrall, 1980, Fish spawning grounds in
                               Wisconsin waters of the Great Lakes:         Univ. Wisconsin Sea Grant
                               I nst. , 43 pp.

                                                                Green Bay (Lake Michigan) - Page 5

                          Frederickson, A. C. and L. F. Frederickson, 1959, Frederickson's
                              chart of ships wrecked in the vicinity of Door County, Wisconsin:
                              Frederickson, Frankfort, Mich., Chart.

                          Harris, H. J. , et al. (eds. ) , 1981 , Green Bay in the future - a
                              rehabilitative   prospectus:     Subm.     to   G reat  Lakes     Fishery
                              Commission.

                          Harris, H. J. and V. Garsow, 1978, Research needs for Green Bay:
                              Proc. Green Bay Res. Workshop, Green Bay, Wis., Sept. 14-16,
                              1978.

                          Harris, H. J., et al., 1981, Recovery processes and habitat quality in
                              a freshwater coastal marsh following a natural disturbance:         Proc.
                              of the Midwest Conf. on Wetlands Values and Management, 17 June
                              1981.

                          Kraft, C., 1982, Green Bay's yellow perch fishery [draft]:              Univ.
                              Wisconsin Sea Grant Inst.

                          Michigan Sea Grant, 1980, Sea grant in the Great Lakes:          Booklet, 60
                              PP.

                          U.S. Department of the Interior, 1979, Nesting and migration areas of
                              birds of the U.S. Great Lakes:      Biol. Serv. Prog., U.S. Fish and
                              Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-77/2, 113 pp. with 4 Appendices.

                          U.S. Department of the Interior, Date Unknown, Green Bay estuary
                              study: Fish and Wildl. Serv., Region 3, 71 pp.

                                                                                            Green Bay (Lake Michigan) - Page 6

                                                                                                                      MICH.
                                                                                                                                             10

                                             0          10        20         30                                PENI SULA
                                                            MILES                                              p                P . ETOUR

                                                                                                                       WASHINGTON
                                                                          z                                               ISLAND

                                                             pFSH   0                                                   O\GVAIGAN
                                                                     73

                                        Wisc.

                                                                 STURGE N                                       APPROX.BOUNDARY- - -
                                                                                          00
                                                                       AY                IQ

                                                                                                                                   CANADA

                                                                                                                    -MIC

                                                                                                               wis

                                                                                                                          MICH              N Y
                                                                                                                                        -----------

                                                                                                               ILL      IND    OHIO        PENN
                                                         GREEN BAY                                                                     --------- - ----

                                                                            LOCATION MAP
                                                                                                                      SULAV
                                                                                                                                P . ETOUR

                                                                                                                            (3

                                              PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                       MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                      1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                         A. SITE NAME: Lake Superior, Wisconsin and Michigan

                         B. LOCATION:        (GREAT LAKES REGION)

                              1.  LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE:            47'00' N by 90'451 W;
                                                                  48'02' N by 880451 W

                              2.  DESCRIPTION: The candidate site, composed of two important
                                  subunits, encompasses a total of 1031     Mi2 (2670 kM2) Of WiS_
                                  consin and Michigan waters situated in the western half of
                                  Lake Superior.    One unit, roughly 375 Mi2 (970 kM2), lies ad-
                                  jacent to the federally owned Apostle      Islands National Lake-
                                  shore.   The boundaries of this federal   park extend J mile (0.4
                                  km) into Lake Superior. The proposed site would include sub-
                                  merged areas beyond this boundary owned by the State of Wis-
                                  consin.   The Apostle Islands section represents a glacio-
                                  lacustrine habitat characterized by a steeply sloping lake bed
                                  composed  predominantly of sand mixed with silt and clay. The
                                  depth of  the take bottom in this area ranges from 31-373 ft
                                  (9.5-114 m).

                                  The second unit consists of 656 Mi2 (1700 kM2) of Michigan
                                  State waters and submerged lands surrounding Isle Royale Na-
                                  tional Park to a depth of 600 ft (183 m).       Eastward of Blake
                                  Point, the site boundary extends offshore Isle Royale a maxi-
                                  mum distance of approximately 11.5 mi (18.5 km).          The lake
                                  bed is composed of glacial tills.    The bedrock in this area is
                                  composed of glacially-scoured, Precambrian metamorphic and
                                  igneous rock.    The area contains unique deposits of copper,
                                  iron, silver, and greenstone.     Due to the oligotrophic nature
                                  of Lake Superior, and the rocky character of its basin, recent
                                  sedimentation in the area has been minimal.

                    11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                        .A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                              1.  The site described provides an unusual opportunity for scien-
                                  tific research on a large, oligotrophic, freshwater system, and
                                  its diverse, associated animal and plant species.

                              2.  The cleepwater areas near Isle Royale are considered important
                                  to the life histories of several commercial, sport, and ecologi-
                                  cally valued species of fish.      Several rare and endangered
                                  species of fish-eating birds are also known to breed, feed,
                                  and migrate through this area.

                                                                          Lake Superior - Page 2

                             3.  Recreational and commercial boating are important in both sub-
                                 units on Lake Superior.    Recreational boaters search for fish-
                                 ing hot spots, scenic pleasures, and diving opportunities on
                                 the numerous historical ship and seaplane wrecks.

                             4.  Although Lake Superior is generally characterized as remote
                                 and vast, with few direct human influences, acid rain pre-
                                 cipitation and contamination by heavy metals and PCBs are now
                                 recognized as serious problems.      Lake Superior is currently
                                 being considered as a future water supply for the far west
                                 and as a disposal site for nuclear and thermal wastes.

                             5.  Many geologic formations are unique to this section of Lake
                                 Superior.   Glacial striations are a common sight on nearshore
                                 bedrock.   Greenstone is abundant near Isle Royale, and cop-
                                 per and silver veins, common on surrounding land masses, may
                                 be observed by divers in the area.

                             6.  The Isle Royale subunit offers recreational users and scientists
                                 access to a deepwater environment immediately proximate to
                                 shore support facilities. The precipitou's slopes of bottom con-
                                 tours near Isle Royale provide an opportunity for research and
                                 exploration unparalleled in the Great Lakes.

                         B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                             1.  NATURAL RESOURCES

                                 The waters surrounding the Apostle Islands and Isle Royale
                                 represent an important habitat, feeding, and breeding ground
                                 for commercially and recreationally important fish and wildlife.
                                 Twenty-one species of fish are known to spawn in these wa-
                                 ters. The adult slimy sculpin, white sucker, chubs, and rain-
                                 bow smelt prefer shallow waters less than 15 ft (5 m) deep;
                                 the ninespine stickleback nests only in shallow waters on
                                 rocky-sand substrates.    More than 46 species of fish live or
                                 migrate through the area, and include recreationally popular
                                 and abundant species such as lake, brown, rainbow, and
                                 splake trout, and coho and chinook salmon.          Two unusual
                                 forms of lake trout (the Sicowet and the "humper") have been
                                 found to inhabit the deeper waters of the candidate site. The
                                 pygmy- whitefish is known to occur only in Lake Superior.
                                 However, the ecology of these species is only poorly under-
                                 stood. The deeper waters of this region may also hold the re-
                                 mains of such coregonid populations as the shortnose cisco,
                                 once found throughout the Great Lakes system.        The natural
                                 fish stocks in Lake Superior have also been influenced by the
                                 introduction or accidental invasion of many exotic fish species
                                 including pink salmon, rainbow smelt, and sea lamprey.

                                 The waters in and around the islands in this region are used
                                 extensively as breeding, nursery, and feeding areas for more
                                 than 43 species of birds and ducks, including such fish-eating
                                 b,irds as the common loon, bald eagle, osprey, mergansers,

                                                                                 Lake Superior     Page 3

                                    and. endangered double-crested cormorants which are under-
                                    going a population explosion.        Several of these species are
                                    rare, and populations are carefully monitored by environmental
                                    groups.    Mallards, green-winged teal, blue-winged teal, buf-
                                    flehead, common loon, red-breasted merganser, horned grebe,
                                    belted kingfisher, great blue heron, American coot, herring
                                    gull, ring-billed gull, American widgeon, and scaups comprise
                                    the dominant species.      The candidate area is also within the
                                    migratory routes of several other waterfowl and large pred-
                                    atory birds such as hawks.

                                    Since Lake Superior is relatively unproductive and recent sedi-
                                    ments compose a small percentage of the substrate, the Isle
                                    Royale subunit has a low abundance and species diversity of
                                    benthic and planktonic fauna.        The most abundant inverte-
                                    brates include Pontoporeia, Mysis, and various species of
                                    calanoid copepods.     FloraF-com'munities are largely planktonic
                                    and are unique and diverse.          Approximately 285 species of
                                    planktonic algae are known from Lake Superior and over 300
                                    species of benthic algae were collected from a single rock at
                                    Superior Shoal, east of Isle Royale.       Nearshore populations of
                                    invertebrates in the Apostle Islands subunit may number as
                                    high as 700 organisms per square meter, dominated by insect
                                    larvae.    Pelecypods,     isopods   and    amphipod     crustaceans,
                                    oligochaete worms, leeches, and flatworms are also present in
                                    low-moderate abundance.

                               2.   HUMAN USES

                                    In no other place in the Great Lakes are there vestiges of
                                    geologic evolution as in Lake Superior.       Due to its large, un-
                                    perturbed nature, Lake Superior remains much as it was fol-
                                    lowing glacial retreat thousands of years ago.        Historical per-
                                    spectives can be developed by observing the history, geology,
                                    ecology, and biota of Lake Superior.

                                    Lake Superior is of unique value to the scientific community.
                                    The Isle Royale subunit contains some of the deepest, clean-
                                    est, and least perturbed water of Lake Superior.               Systems
                                    such as this are uncommon in the Great Lakes and rare world-
                                    wide;  the area described is unique in its relatively low
                                    productivity, deepwater flora and fauna, and ice and wave
                                    formations.

                                    Maintained as a national lakeshore and park, respectively, the
                                    Apostle Islands and Isle Royale are primarily used for recre-
                                    ational boating, fishing, hiking, and camping.          The Apostle
                                    Islands area also serves as a fishing ground for the native
                                    Indians.   More than 88,000 individuals visit these areas each
                                    year, transported by ferry boats and seaplanes.

                                    The proposed site includes one of the highest concentrations of
                                    shipwrecks in Lake Superior.         The wrecks include yachts,
                                    freighters, passenger steamers, fishing boats, seaplanes, and

                                                                               Lake Superior - Page 4

                                   jettisoned cargo.    Recreational boaters come from Minnesota,
                                   Michigan, Wisconsin, and Canada.

                                   The Apostle Islands subunit is heavily fished by both commer-
                                   cial and sport fishermen.      Rainbow smelt have also been an
                                   important commercial fish species.      In total, more than 21 li-
                                   censed commercial fishermen and several native Americans com-
                                   mercially operate within the Apostle Islands subunit.

                                   Management of the natural         resources associated with the
                                   Apostle Islands National Lakeshore and the Isle Royale National
                                   Park is currently carried out within a coordinated network in-
                                   volving the Wisconsin, Michigan, and Minnesota Departments of
                                   Natural Resources, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Na-
                                   tional Park Service, the Red Cliff Tribal Council, the Great
                                   Lakes Fishery Commission (an interstate-international orga-
                                   nization), the International Joint Commission, the Army Corps
                                   of Engineers, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and
                                   other federal, state, and provincial agencies.

                     Ill. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                           Decker, R. F., 1982, Nomination of mid-Lake Superior, Minnesota, and
                               Michigan as candidate for marine sanctuary designation:           Written
                               Communication (5 Oct. 1982), Mich. Tech. Univ., Houghton.

                           Eschmeyer, P. H. and A. M. Phillips, Jr., 1965, Fat content of the
                               flesh of Sicowets and lake trout from Lake Superior:              Trans.
                               Amer. Fish. Soc., Vol. 94(l), pp. 62-74.

                           Heberlein, T. A. and J. J. Vaske, 1979, The Apostle Islands            visitor
                               in 1975:   Working Paper No. 11, Center for Resource Policy Stud-
                               ies, School of Natural Resources, Univ. Wisconsin in Madison, 255
                               pp-

                           Herclenclorf, C. E., S. M. Hartley, and M. D. Barnes (eds.), 1981,
                               Fish and wildlife resources of the Great Lakes coastal wetlands
                               within the U.S.:      U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Wash., D.C.,
                               FWS/OBS-81/82, Vol. 1-6, 1288 pp.

                           Holden, T. R., 1974, Park interpretation as an environmental commu-
                               nication process with a sample interpretive booklet text on the
                               maritime disaster history of Siskiwit Bay,          Isle Royale,     Lake
                               Superior: M.S. Thesis, Univ. Wisconsin in Madison, 195 pp.

                           Munawar, M. and J. F. Munawar, 1978, Phytoplankton of Lake Supe-
                               rior 1973:  Jour. Great Lakes Res., Vol. 4(3-4), pp. 415-442.

                           National Park Service, 1981, Finding of no significant impact:        Apostle
                               Island National Lakeshore, WI: USDOI/NPS, Wis., 6 pp.

                                                                                                                                     Lake Superior - Page 5.

                                          Rahrer,           J.       F. ,     1965,         Age,        growth,            maturity and fecundity of
                                                  "humper" lake trout, Isle Royale, Lake Superior:                                                    Trans. Amer.
                                                  Fish. Soc., Vol. 94(l), pp. 75-83.

                                          Scharf, W. C., 1978, Colonial birds nesting on man-made and natural
                                                  sites in the U.S. Great Lakes:                                 U.S. Army Eng. Waterways Expt.
                                                  Sta., Vicksburg, Miss., Tech. Rept. No. D-78-10.

                                                                                                                      ONTARIO

                                                                CANADA                                                                  "I
                                                                                                                                                            KAKE

                                                                                                                                      .01

                                                                                                                                                                            48*

                                                                     ----------
                                                 ILL   fND   0.10-    PENN

                                              MINN.
                                                                               AND                                                                                          48'
                                                                     EAGLE 1.                    OCKTON)

                                                                                               DELINE
                                              DULUTH
                                                 W   r. @ICH. y
                                                                     ....... ..

                                                                     10                                                         MICH.
                                             Wisc.

                                                                                          LOCATION MAP

                                              PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                      MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                      1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                         A. SITE NAME: Cape Vincent (Lake Ontario), New York

                         B.  LOCATION:      (GREAT LAKES REGION)

                             1.   LATITUDE/LONGITUDE: 440041 N by 760251 W

                             2.   DESCRIPTION:     Cape Vincent, situated in the northeastern
                                  corner of Lake Ontario, is at the gateway to New York State's
                                  Thousand Islands resort area and the St. Lawrence Seaway.
                                  The lake bed is composed of fine- to very fine-grained
                                  calcareous deposits underlain by glacially scoured bedrock.
                                  Water depths range from 85 ft (26 m) to more than 161 ft (51
                                  m) in some channels.      Cape Vincent represents an area of
                                  approximately 320 Mi2 (830 kM2).        The site extends from
                                  Grindstone Island north of Cape Vincent down to Stony Point
                                  Light and out to the Canadian boundary.      It also includes the
                                  submerged sailing schooner off Rock Island Lighthouse.        This
                                  site lies wholly within the jurisdiction of New York State.

                    11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                         A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                             1.   The Cape Vincent area includes some of the most biologically
                                  rich and diverse habitats within the Great Lakes region, and
                                  represents an environment critical to the life histories of many
                                  commercially and recreationally important fisherie-s-o-T-the Great
                                  Lakes.

                             2.   Because of its scenic beauty, accessibility, and abundance of
                                  fish and wildlife, the area under consid@_r_ation affords excel-
                                  lent opportunities for fisheries research, recreational enjoy-
                                  ment, and educational experiences       ased on the Fn@igenous
                                  natural resources.

                         B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                             1.   NATURAL RESOURCES

                                  Cape Vincent (and its- environs) is an area of unparalleled
                                  scenic beauty and natural diversity.      Wilson's Bay and Mud
                                  Bay  (northeast of Grenadier Island)       represent major fish
                                  spawning habitats for 27 species of finfish.        Alewives and
                                  rainbow smelt (important food fish for Lake Ontario's rapidly
                                  growing Pacific salmon fishery), as well as northern pike,
                                  bullhead, yellow perch, smallmouth bass, brown trout, and.
                                  rainbow trout spawn in these bays.

                                                                Cape Vincent (Lake Ontario) - Page 2

                                    Grenadier Island, Little Galloo Island, and Gull Island are im-
                                    portant resting, feeding, and nesting habitats for more than
                                    75,000 breeding pairs of birds, representing 69 species of
                                    migrating and indigenous waterfowl.        Loons, grebes, petrels,
                                    ring-billed gulls, white pelicans, double-crested cormorants,
                                    great blue herons, cattle egrets,         bitterns, glossy ibises,
                                    whistler and mute swans, geese,          ducks, teals, widgeons,
                                    terns, and sandpipers feed and nest within the boundaries of
                                    the area.    Endangered species such      as peregrine falcons and
                                    bald eagles may also migrate through      the area.

                                    Bottom communities, critical links in the detritus-based food
                                    chain in the Cape Vincent area, exhibit the greatest diversity
                                    within Lake    Ontario.    Population estimates range from 1600
                                    organism/m2 during summer months to 2400 organisms/M2
                                    during the   spring.    Crustaceans, molluscs, chironomids (fly
                                    larvae), as well as flatworms and other freshwater worms,
                                    account for  97 percent of all organisms identified.

                               2.   HUMAN USES

                                    The Cape Vincent area is primarily used for recreational fish-
                                    ing and duck hunting.        Coho, Atlantic, and chinook salmon,
                                    brown trout, rainbow trout, and lake trout are the most
                                    popular gamefish.     The islands northeast of Cape Vincent are
                                    popular summer resorts and attract numerous recreational
                                    boaters during summer months.

                                    The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
                                    (DEC) operates a fisheries station at Cape Vincent and a sal-
                                    monid fish hatchery further south in Mexico Bay.           More than
                                    9,000,000 salmonid fry have been introduced into Lake Ontario
                                    under DEC's fish management programs.             DEC continues to
                                    monitor gamefish and foodfish population dynamics within Lake
                                    Ontario.   The area also supports a small commercial American
                                    eel fishery.

                                    The New York State Chapter of The Nature Conservancy owns
                                    marsh land adjacent to the site, and hopes to acquire property
                                    within Wilson's Bay, situated within the boundaries suggested
                                    for this area.

                                    The site includes the western portion of the St. Lawrence
                                    River and the vessel traffic lanes to Rochester and Oswego.
                                    All traffic entering or leaving the Great Lakes must pass
                                    through a portion of the proposed site.           The St. Lawrence
                                    Seaway Development Corporation, a government-owned enter-
                                    prise,  regulates vessel traffic and performs other safety-
                                    related marine activities in the seaway.

                                    Henderson Bay, within the proposed site, may be the repose
                                    of shipwrecks and, therefore, represents an area of cultural
                                    and historical significance.

                                                          Cape Vincent (Lake Ontario) - Page 3

                   111. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                        Haynes, J. M., J. C. Makarewicz, R. Dilcher, 1979, Aquatic biological
                            survey of Cape Vincent Harbor: N.Y. State Univ. of N.Y., Dept.
                            Biological Sciences, Brockport, N.Y., 145 pp.

                        Herdenclorf, C. E., S. M. Hartley, and M. D. Barnes (eds.), 1981,
                            Fish and wildlife resources of the Great Lakes coastal wetlands
                            within the United States:    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv., Wash.,
                            D.C., FWS/OBS-81/82, Vol. 1-6, 1288 pp.

                        NYS Department of Environmental Conservation, 1981, Final environ-
                            mental impact statement in Pacific salmon stocking in Lake Ontario:
                            NYS Div. of Fish and Wildlife, Albany, N.Y., 110 pp.

                        Payne, H. H. and R. W. Cochran, 1971, Ecological survey report of
                            the Cape Vincent area:     The Central New York Chapter of the
                            Nature Conservancy.

                        Scharf, W. C., 1978, Colonial birds nesting on man-made and natural
                            sites in the U.S. Great Lakes:    U.S. Army Eng. Waterways Expt.
                            Sta., Vicksburg, Miss., Tech. Rept. No. D-78-10.

                                                                                                                               Cape Vincent (Lake Ontario) - Page 4

                                                                                                                                                                                             4-
                                                                                                        E ENDS 5 Mi. N.E.TO GRINDSTONE ISL. WAT IRS

                                                                                                                 WOLFE (S.

                                                                                                                                                          NEW YORK

                                                                   APPROX. BOUNDARY- -    -
                                                                  fSUBAERIAL LAND EXCLUDED1                                             OIEA IS.                                  JAY

                                                                                                                                              FOX IS.

                                                                                                                                                                      POINT
                                                                                                                                                                      ENINSULA
                                                                                                   4-

                                                                                                                0

                                                                                            L

                                                                MAIN DUCK IS.

                                                                                                                      GALLOO IS.

                                                                                                                                             ONY is

                                                                                                                                                                  STON
                                                                                                                                                                     POINT

                                                                                                2          4

                                                                                                            LOCATION MAP

                                                   PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                           MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                        1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                            A. SITE NAME: Thunder Bay (Lake Huron), Michigan

                            B. LOCATION:         (GREAT LAKES REGION)

                                1.   LATITUDEMONGITUDE: 451001 N, 830201 W

                                2.   DESCRIPTION:         The proposed Thunder Bay, site includes
                                     Thunder Bay and vicinity (up.to Middle Island) extending out
                                     to 830 W.      Depths extend to over 300 ft (91 m) along the
                                     northeast section of the site.      Altogether, the site has an area
                                     of approximately 400 Mi2 (1035 kM2) and is entirely within
                                     State of Michigan waters.

                                     The lake bed geology in this area is interesting and varied,
                                     consisting of glacially deposited boulders and cobbles covered
                                     by gravel and coarse-grained sand.              The lake bottom is a
                                     steeply sloping series of narrow platforms undulating within
                                     and around the Bay and Michigan Islands, dropping from 30 to
                                     300 ft (9-91 m) within 10 mi (16 km) from shore.             The area is
                                     infested with submerged reefs, shoals, and wrecked ships.
                                     The Misery Bay Sinkhole [75 ft (23 m) deep, 300 ft (91 m) di-
                                     ameter] is an interesting formation formed by the collapse of a
                                     cavern within the limestone shelf that runs through Alpena
                                     County.     West of Middle Island's lighthouse are limestone for-
                                     mations and sink holes resembling underground rooms sub-
                                     merged in 40-70 feet of water.            One-quarter mile north of
                                     Rockport are offshore, underwater springs.            A 45 ft (13.7 m)
                                     submerged limestone wall running along the southeastern edge
                                     of Thunder Bay Island is another interesting geological feature
                                     of the lake bed in the Thunder Bay area.

                      11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                            A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                                1.   The underwater limestone sinkhole, the large concentration of
                                     historical shipwrecks, and the proximity 7 idyllic Michigan Is-
                                                            7e           establish this area as a particu-
                                     lands National WildTi      Refuge
                                     larly    valuable     historical,    educational,     and     recreational
                                     resource.

                            B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                                1. NATURAL RESOURCES

                                     The highly sculptured limestone bedrock, the undulatory pat-
                                     tern of the submerged terraces and scarps, and the extreme
                                     gradations in sediment size composition create a variety of

                                                            Thunder Bay (Lake Huron)       Page 2

                                 biological niches in the Thunder Bay area.      Water quality in
                                 the Bay is excellent, and the shoreline is rich in diverse
                                 flora.  The marsh vegetation along the edges of the Michigan
                                 Islands provides a habitat and breeding area for black ducks,
                                 black terns, rails, and coots, all of which nest in protected
                                 back-bay areas.     Nesting well above the marsh areas, on
                                 rocky substrate which is not flooded within a given nesting
                                 season, are thousands of colonial nesting birds such as ring-
                                 billed gulls, double-breasted cormorants, common terns, herr-
                                 ing gulls, and yellow-headed blackbirds, one of the few popu-
                                 lations of this species in the eastern United States.    Thunder
                                 Bay Island alone hosts 11,000 breeding pairs of ring-billed
                                 gulls.  A reasonable estimate of the bay area's gull and tern
                                 populations (1980-1982) would be approximately 52,000 breeding
                                 pairs.

                                 Scarecrow Island, part of the Michigan Islands National Wildlife
                                 Refuge, has the greatest variety of nesting birds in the Na-
                                 tional Wildlife Refuge. The gravel shoreline is heavily used by
                                 herring and ring-billed gulls, while many waterfowl (including
                                 mallard, black gadwall, blue-winged teal, dabbling ducks, the
                                 diving red-breasted merganser, great blue herons and cormo-
                                 rants) are observed nesting along the shores and within the
                                 bays. The American osprey and the American bald eagle, des-
                                 ignated by the Federal government and by the State of
                                 Michigan as "threatened," have also been observed within the
                                 area as well as the rare sandhill crane.   Numerous other duck
                                 species casually feed on various food sources located offshore
                                 Scarecrow Island.   These species include American merganser,
                                 golden-eye bufflehead, and Canada geese.       Further offshore,
                                 in the heart of the bay, many diving duck species (e.g., sco-
                                 ters, old squaws, American mergansers, red-breasted mergan-
                                 sers, and common golden-eye) can be observed. Green-winged
                                 teal, blue-winged teal, and many other dabbling duck species
                                 use the areas around the edge of the bay for feeding, resting,
                                 and nesting.

                                 Three heron species (e.g., great blue heron, black-crowned
                                 night heron, and green heron) have nested continuously on
                                 Scarecrow Island for many years.    Recently, some of the great
                                 blue herons have been displaced by double-crested cormorants
                                 (a "threatened" bird species as listed by the State of Michi-
                                 gan) , and in 1981 , at least 39 active nests were present in
                                 trees.  In addition to osprey and bald eagles cormorants and
                                 the Michigan-listed "endangered" common tern use Scarecrow
                                 Island regularly for nesting and roost sites.   Thunder Bay is
                                 also important as a resting     area for migratory shorebirds.
                                 Typically, in the last week of May and throughout August and
                                 September during migration to   and from the Arctic, very large
                                 flocks of migratory shorebirds (especially sandpipers and plo-
                                 vers) move through the bay.

                                 Thunder Bay is an important stopover for dunlins, sander-
                                 lings, ternstones, the peep sandpipers, and golden and black-

                                                                     Thunder Bay (Lake Huron) - Page 3

                                      bellied plovers; unusual species as the stilt sandpiper and
                                      Phalaropes may also appear.         In addition, at the northern end
                                      of Thunder Bay in the low sand dunes and windswept sandy
                                      shore is one of the last known nesting locations of piping plo-
                                      vers, an endangered species in Michigan which is now down to
                                      less than 20 nesting pairs.         Numerous other islands support
                                      bird species nesting in the bay.            The relatively high pro-
                                      ductivity of the waters in the bay, its semiestuarine character,
                                      and its position phytogeographically in the Great Lakes system
                                      mark Thunder Bay as an area where many stressed, rare
                                      species are able to reproduce successfully and consistently.

                                      The various geological sites, including the Misery Bay Sinkhole
                                      (sometimes referred to as El Cajon Bay Sinkhole) and the
                                      Thunder Bay Island Rock Wall, as well as the numerous ship-
                                      wreck sites, serve as a habitat for 20 species of gamefish.
                                      Alewives, carp, black bass, smallmouth bass, catfish, brown
                                      trout, steelhead, splake, northern pike, and yellow perch can
                                      be observed within and around these sites.             There have been
                                      several unconfirmed sightings of white cave fish at the bottom
                                      of the El Cajon Bay Sinkhole. Chinook salmon, rainbow trout,
                                      brown trout, splake, and steelhead are annually planted by
                                      the Michigan Department of Natural Resources in the inland
                                      rivers that feed Thunder Bay, thereby establishing this area
                                      as a valuable resource to the fishing industry and sportsmen
                                      alike.

                                 2.   HUMAN USES

                                      Situated in an area of medium population density, the area is
                                      primarily used for recreational boating, diving, and nature ap-
                                      preciation.     Three    interesting    underwater geological          sites
                                      (Rock Wall, Misery Bay Sinkhole, and the North Point Reef
                                      forming the northern boundary of Thunder Bay) and 83 iden-
                                      tified shipwrecks attract large numbers of gamefish, anglers,
                                      and recreational divers to the area, where the exceptional
                                      clarity of the water enhances the diving experience.                   The
                                      shipwrecks include wood-hulled schooners, steamers, barges,
                                      Great Lakes tugboats, a steel-hulled steamer, and an ocean-
                                      going freighter. The area also supports a shipwreck salvage
                                      industry that has reduced the recreational value          of some of the
                                      -wreck sites.   Much of the area is not easily accessible, though
                                      some is visited by the more serious naturalists and birdwatch-
                                      ers.

                                      The islands in this system are owned by a wide variety of in-
                                      dividuals and government agencies including the State of Mich-
                                      igan, the Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Coast Guard,
                                      the U.S. Department of Interior, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
                                      Service, and the Michigan Natural Association.             The State of
                                      Michigan owns the waters, lake bed, islands, and the shore
                                      adjacent to Thunder Bay.          The area is presently included in
                                      Michigan's Underwater Preserve System administered by the
                                      Michigan Department of Natural Resources in cooperation with

                                                            Thunder Bay (Lake Huron) - Page 4

                                 the Department of State (Division of History).      The area is
                                 one of only two such preserves along the 3200 miles of Michi-
                                 gan Great Lakes shoreline.     The Underwater Preserve System
                                 seeks to prevent damage to sunken ships due to improper sal-
                                 vage practices.

                                 Within this site, five islands are nature preserves.     Two is-
                                 lands are managed (primarily to protect migratory and nesting
                                 birds) as part of the Michigan Islands National Wildlife Refuge;
                                 three are owned by the Michigan Nature Association.           Ten
                                 other islands in the area are managed by the Bureau of Land
                                 Management.    The area provides potential for educational and
                                 ecological research opportunities.   The U.S. Army Corps of
                                 Engineers, North Central Division, is responsible for main-
                                 taining deepwater channels leading to Alpena and Black River
                                 Harbors.   These areas are considered, by the Corps, to be
                                 intensively-used commercial and industrial sites.

                    Ill. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                    Ecological Research Services, 1981, Ecological survey of the Michigan Is-
                         lands:  Bureau of Land Management, Duluth, Minn.

                    Horvath, F. J., J. H. Hartig, and K. Stockwell, 1981, Water quality of
                         Thunder Bay, Lake Huron (1957-1980): Michigan DNR Publ. No. 3730-
                         0036, December 1981, Lansing, Mich.

                    Herdenclorf, C. E., S. M. Hartley, and M. D. Barnes (eds.), 1981, Fish
                         and wildlife resources of the Great Lakes coastal wetlands within the
                         United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv., Wash., D.C., FWS/OBS-
                         81/82, Vol. 1-6, 1288 pp.

                    Odin, C. R., 1982, Letter to District Engineer, U.S. Army Corps of Engi-
                         neers, Detroit, Mich., April 5, 1.982:    Mich. Dept. Nat. Res., Lan-
                         sing, Mich.

                    Outdoor Recreation Work Group, 1975, Report of the Great Lakes basin
                         framework study: Great Lakes Basin Commission, Ann Arbor, Mich.
                                 Appendix 8: Fish
                                 Appendix 21: Outdoor Recreation
                                 Appendix 17: Wildlife

                    Porter, J. M., 1982, Draft proposal for potential Thunder Bay National Ma-
                         rine Sanctuary:    Coastal Zone Management Committee, Alpena County
                         Planning Commission, Alpena County, Mich., 3 pp.

                    U.S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, 1982, The Michigan Islands
                         wilderness study areas:    USDOI/FWS Shiawassee National Wildlife Ref-
                         uge, Sagmaw, Mich.

                    Warner, T. D., 1979, Michigan's underwater resources - a case study:         in
                         C. A. Hulse and D. F. Holecek (eds.), Underwater Parks SymF

                                                         Thunder Bay (Lake Huron) - Page 5

                        Proc., Mich. State Univ. Cooperative Extension Serv. Bull. E-1130/
                        MICHU-SG-79-902, 9 pp.

                   Warner, T. D. and D. F. Holecek, 1975, The Thunder Bay shipwreck sur-
                        vey study report:  Recreation Research and Planning Unit, Dept. Park
                        and Recreation Resources, Mich. State Univ., 37 pp.

                                                    MIDDLE
                                                    ISLAND

                                  ALPENA

                           MUD                                Zo @@'THUNDER BAY
                            'D
                          LAXE0                                        ISLAND

                                                           NORTH PT

                         DEVILS
                          LAKE
                                                                    0@koN
                                                             0@

                                                                               CANAOA

                                                                    WIS

                                                                           MICH      N-Y
                         0            5                                            ------

                                                                    ILL   IND OHIO PENN
                                                                               CANA,0A
                                                                    WS

                                                                           M
                                                                                     N_Y
                                                                                  ..... ....

                                                                                          J

                          APPROX.BOLINDARY----

                                                LOCATION MAP

                                       GULF OF MEXICO REGION

                                  MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION LIST
                                           GULF OF MEXICO REGION

                                            MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW

                  1. Resource Evaluation Team

                  The Gulf of Mexico resource evaluation team was comprised of four
                  marine scientists from the region. Three of the team members are
                  biologists; the fourth is a coastal geologist.           The team leader
                  was Dr. Thomas Bright of the Texas A & M University Department of
                  Oceanography.     The other team members were Dr. James P. Ray of
                  Shell Oil Company (Houston, TX) , Dr. David A. Gettleson of
                  Continental Shelf Associates, Inc. (Tequestar FL)r and Dr.
                  William G. McIntire, who retired in 108 from the post of
                  Associate Deanr Center for Wetland Resources,, Louisiana State
                  University (Baton Rouge, LA).         The team members made numerous
                  contacts with individuals in academic institutions, state and
                  local governments, Federal agencies, environmental groups,
                  fishing and oil and gas interests.

                  2. Site Evaluation and Public Participation Process

                  The team first met on April 14-15, 1982, in New Orleans. At that
                  meeting, the team considered 17 possible Marine Sanctuary sites
                  in the Gulf of Mexicor including the six Gulf sites that were on
                  NOAA's List of Recommended Areas (44 Fed. Reg. 62552, Oct. 31,
                  1979). At the first meeting the team identified seven areas they
                  considered     11potential"    Marine    Sanctuary     sites.        After
                  descriptions of these sites had been approved by the           team, they
                  were mailed to 268 groups and individuals in the states of Texas,
                  Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida, and to 82 national
                  organizations and Federal agencies. Those seven sites were:

                  GC-1.   Northern Harbor Island, TX.       This site incorporates about
                  8.3 sq mi of shallow seagrass beds and marsh/mangroves adjacent
                  to northern Harbor Island northwest of Port Aransas.                It is
                  entirely within state waters.

                  GC-2. South Bay, TX. A pristine shallow embayment at the south
                  end of Laguna Madre near Padre Island in state waters, this site
                  contains large seagrass beds.

                  GC-3.   Seven and One-half Fathom Reef, TX.         This is a 1,150x165
                  foot reef off Padre Island, rising about 18 feet from the
                  surrounding bottom.       In state water, it is one of the most
                  accessible reefs in Texas.

                  GC-4.    Flower Garden Banks, off TX.          Located some 100 miles
                  offshore in Federal water,. these are the most northern coral

                                                   G-1

                  reefs in western Gulf of Mexico. Banks consist of east and west
                  sections approximately 16 miles apart.

                  GC-5. Shoalwater Bay - Chandeleur Sound, LA. The proposed site,
                  approximately 80 sq mi entirely in state water, lies off
                  Louisiana's east coast.    It contains highly productive pristine
                  seagrass beds and mangroves.

                  GC-6. Big Bend Seagrass Beds, FL. These extensive shallow water
                  seagrass beds, in both state and Federal waters, extend up to 22
                  miles off the mid-Florida west coast.        Two alternatives were
                  proposed for this site, both incorporating West Indian manatee
                  habitat.

                  GC-7. Florida Middle Ground. This site of about 460 sq mi lies
                  in Federal water northwest of St. Petersburg. An extremely high
                  biologically productive area, its hard bottom contains numerous
                  steep limestone escarpments.

                  Chelsea received 70 responses by the end of a 45-day public
                  comment period (July 29, 1982).        Two additional sites were
                  nominated by the public by August 24, 1982, the nomination
                  deadline.   Those sites were Baffin Bay, Texas, and the strip of
                  Florida Bay between Everglades National Park and the northwestern
                  shore of the Florida Keys.

                  The team met for the second time on September 16, 1982, in Tampa,
                  FL, at which time they considered the public comments and the two
                  nominations.   The team members had received numerous informal
                  responses to their initial seven proposals, as well as to sites
                  that the team had not proposed.    At @he second meeting, the team
                  concluded that the Baffin Bay proposal met the Marine Sanctuary
                  criteria, while the Florida Bay proposal did not.            A site
                  description of the Baffin Bay proposal was mailed out to the same
                  groups and individuals who had received the first mailing.          A
                  30-day, comment period on the Baffin Bay proposal expired on
                  November 22, 1982, and 32 written responses were received by
                  then. After the end of the public comment period on Baffin Bay,
                  the team was polled by telephone to finalize their choice of five
                  sites to recommend to NOAA.

                  3. Recommendations

                  3.1. State-Federal relationships

                  The eight Gulf of Mexico sites for which public comment was
                  solicited are dominated by state water sites, with only two,
                  Flower Garden Banks and the Florida Middle Ground, in Federal
                  waters.  Of the nine other sites discussed by the team, but not
                  considered as possible recommendations to NOAA, only two, the
                  DeSoto Canyon area off the Florida Panhandle, and a deer) coral

                                                G-2

                  area west of the Dry Tortugas, lie beyond state jurisdiction.
                  Because of the predominance of state water sites in their
                  deliberationsr the Gulf team was concerned about the interactions
                  between state and Federal regulatory regimes.              Commercial
                  fishing, and sport fishing and hunting are activities which are
                  primarily regulated by state governments, and the resource
                  evaluation team was of the ovinion that these activities should
                  not be interfered with by the Federal government after sanctuary
                  designation.

                  There are problems, however, even in state waters where the
                  states should be able to exercise control.          For example, in
                  Baffin Bay, TX, the illegal poaching of wildlife - particularly
                  the taking of deer by hunters in boats - is a problem that
                  appears to need additional governmental attention.                The
                  Chandeleur Sound - Shoalwater Bay site is entirely in state
                  waters, and under control of the local (parish) government as
                  well.   Yet the substantial distance from the mainland to         the
                  Chandeleur site impedes local efforts to manage the area.           In
                  both of these areas Marine Sanctuary designation and              the
                  resources associated with sanctuary management could enhance      the
                  enforcement of existing state laws and regulations.

                  The State of Florida, which already has two Marine and            two
                  Estuarine Sanctuaries, sees the potential designation of the      Big
                  Bend Seagrass Beds in a light which is quite different from Texas
                  and Louisiana.   Florida natural resource managers, and even the
                  Governor   of   Florida,   actively    support   the   Seagrass Bed
                  designation because of, rather than in spite of, the accompanying
                  "federalization" of the site.       They see "national" sanctuary
                  designation as an asset in controlling the ultimate development
                  of Florida's west coast.     There is no doubt that the Big Bend
                  grass beds are vitally important to the maintenance of offshore
                  fisheries; the area is also a critical habitat for the endangered
                  West Indian manatee.    The state's objectives in having part of
                  the seagrass beds designated as a sanctuary are to preserve the
                  offshore fisheries, as well as protect the manatee.

                  3.2. Site Selection

                  NOAA directed each team to select no more than five sites per
                  region, and the Gulf of Mexico resource evaluation team
                  recommends the following five sites for placement on the Marine
                  Sanctuary Site Evaluation List.     Without intending to prioritize
                  them, the sites are:'

                  1.  Big Bend Seagrass Beds, FL
                  2.  Florida Middle Ground
                  3.  Shoalwater Bay - Chandeleur Sound, LA
                  4.  Flower Garden Banks
                  5.  Baffin Bay, TX

                                                 G-3

                   As part of the final regional report, the team has approved a set
                   of short descriptions of each site, including a map showing the
                   recommended boundaries of a Marine Sanctuary (except in the case
                   of the Big Bend site).     The balance of this part of the       report
                   contains highlights of the evaluation team's rationale for
                   choosing each site, and some comments regarding specific
                   management issues that came to light during the site evaluation
                   process.

                           Big Bend Seagrass Beds, FL

                   This was the site that drew the most public response on the first
                   round; 38 of the original 70 comments were concerned with the Big
                   Bend proposal.    Of those comments, 30 were in favor of placing
                   the site on the SEL and 7 were opposed.         Opposition came from
                   commercial fishermen (4 opposed; none in favor), the oil and gas
                   industry (2 opposed, 1 in favor, 1 neutral), and one governmental
                   organization (12 in favor,     1 opposed).    The lone opposing view
                   from government organizations came from the Gulf of Mexico
                   Fishery Management Council, which also expressed opposition to
                   Shoalwater Bay - Cbandeleur    Sound and the Florida Middle Ground.
                   The resource evaluation team   disagreed with the presumptions made
                   by the Fisheries Management    Council; i.e., that the "Coral Reef
                   Fisheries Management Plan"     provided adequate protection for the
                   Florida Middle Ground, and     that the two state water sites (Big
                   Bend  and   Chandeleur)     were  "not  presently    threatened"    and
                   therefore should not be considered as potential sanctuaries.
                   "Present threat" is but one of many considerations that the team
                   used in considering the merits of a potential sanctuary site, and
                   the absence of an imminent threat does not necessarily disqualify
                   a site from sanctuary designation.

                   The team had more difficulties with the size and boundaries of
                   the Big Bend site than it had with any of the other four
                   recommendations. The resource evaluation team is of the opinion
                   that a Big Bend Marine Sanctuary, if one is designated, should
                   not be larger than 100 square miles.            However, information
                   available to the team indicated that the seagrass beds cover
                   about 1,160 sq mi of the seabed off Florida's west coast.. In the
                   request for public comment, the team suggested two alternative
                   boundaries.    Alternative 1 (400 sq mi) ran from the mouth of the*
                   St. Marks River at the north, to Live Oak Point, 4 10-mile wide,
                   40-mile long area. Alternative 11 (1015 Sq mi) ran from south of
                   the Crystal River to the mouth of - the St. Marks River, an
                   145-mile long, 7-mile wide strip.       In both cases, the offshore
                   boundary was at approximately the 33ft depth contour.

                   A number of commenters strongly favored the larger proposal
                   (Alternative II) and even an expansion of those boundaries
                   farther south, to encompass the mouth of the Crystal River.

                                                     G-4

                 Defenders of Wildlife made this suggestion as a means of
                 protecting the habitat of the endangered West Indian manatee.
                 The manatee utilizes both the Suwanee River (within Alternative
                 II) and the Crystal River during the winter.           Defenders of
                 Wildlife also noted that the Big Bend sites were within the
                 ranges of the endangered green sea turtle and the threatened
                 loggerhead turtle.

                 The U.S. EPA, Region IV (Atlanta) , supported the designation of
                 both alternatives, in order to prevent overfishing of breeding
                 stocks of both recreational and commercial fisheries.             The
                 Governor of Florida, Hon. Bob Graham, supported a modification of
                 Alternative II; a six-mile wide strip from Cedar Key to the north
                 of the St. Marks River      (420 sq mi).      He noted that these
                 boundaries would provide three access points, at St. Marks
                 National Wildlife Refuge (NWR), Suwanee River NWR, and Cedar Key
                 NWR, and that any of these three land sites could be the location
                 of the Sanctuary's management facilities.        The U.S. Fish and
                 Wildlife Service (F&WS) gave its strong support to Alternative II
                 and pointed out that the area is also the feeding area for eight
                 pairs of bald eagle, and is the wintering area for the largest
                 concentration of redhead ducks in the southeast United States.
                 The F&WS stressed the importance of the area as habitat for the
                 West Indian manatee, the brown pelican, the Ridley, green,
                 leatherback and the loggerhead turtle and the American alligator.
                 One F&WS commenter recommended that: the Alternative II boundaries
                 be  extended   south   to  include   the  areas  off the     Crystal,
                 Homosassa, and Chassahowitzka Rivers, because of their importance
                 as manatee habitat.

                 The Marine Mammal Commission recommended expansion of the
                 boundaries of Alternative II south to the Chassahowitzka NWR, to
                 include most of the summer migratory habitat of the northwest
                 Florida manatee population.      The manatee issue is a difficult
                 one, as the team's primary reason for proposing the Big Bend
                 seagrass area was its high productivity of sport and commercial
                 fisheries.    To combine that reason for nomination with the
                 manatee issue may result in a sanctuary proposal far larger than
                 the resource evaluation team considered acceptable. The manatee
                 is listed as "depleted" under the Marine Mammal Protection Act
                 and "endangered" under the Endangered Species Act.            It is
                 Florida's State Marine Mammal and is afforded special protection
                 under state law.    Because of the manatee's sensitivity to cold
                 water, the state has designated 12 warm-water manatee refuges
                 throughout Florida, including the headwaters of the Crystal River
                 the northernmost winter- habitat.

                 Because of the two rationales for designating portions of the Big
                 Bend Seagrass Beds, the resource evaluation team could not reach
                 a decision on recommended boundaries.      The team recommends that
                 an area of the seagrass beds, not greater than 100 square miles

                                               G-5

                   in extent, which also accommodates significant portions of the
                   manatees' critical habitat, be considered in the event that this
                   site becomes an "active candidate" for sanctuary designation.

                   3.2.2. Florida Middle Ground

                   This is an area located about 95 miles off the northwest coast of
                   Florida.   Although the team circulated a 460 sq mi proposal for
                   public comment, they believe that a Marine Sanctuary at the
                   Middle Ground should be no larger than 100 sq mi.                   The
                   accompanying map shows the entire 460 sq mi area, as there does
                   not appear to be sufficient information available to select the
                   "best" 100 sq mi.       The Middle Ground is probably the most
                   productive coral and algal reef area in the northern Gulf of
                   Mexico.   Depths range from 24 to 42 m, with high relief on the
                   order of 10 to 15 m.     The regional Fisheries Management Council
                   has proposed the entire 460 sq mi area as a "Habitat Area of
                   Particular Concern," and the team understands that some form of
                   special protection is afforded by the Department of the Interior.
                   There are about 60 potential oil and gas lease tracts located
                   within the HAPC boundaries.

                   Public comment consisted of 13 favorable, 6 neutral, and 5
                   opposing responses.     The Tampa Port Authority and the Florida
                   League of Women Voters were among the supporters; opposition came
                   from commercial fishing and oil and gas interests. The distance
                   from shore is probably the dominant factor in the limited public
                   support for the site.      The resource evaluation team, however,
                   believes that the unique resources of the Middle Ground qualify
                   it as one of the five best sites in the Gulf of Mexico.

                   3.2.3. Shoalwater Bay - Chandeleur Sound, LA

                   This site, landward of the Chandeleur islands portion of the
                   Breton National Wildlife Refuge, received the strongest level of
                   local support of any site considered by the resource evaluation
                   team.   The St. Bernard Parish Police Jury unanimously nominated
                   the site for consideration as a Marine Sanctuary on June 1, 1982.
                   The Parish Coastal Zone Advisory Committee expressed their
                   support   in the form of a Resolution on May 24, 1982.         The St.
                   Bernard Parish Planning Commission added its voice in support of
                   the proposal on July 9, 1982.      Both Louisiana Senators, Russell
                   Long and J. Bennett Johnston, expressed strong support, and the
                   Governor of Louisiana, Eon. David Treen, supported placement of
                   the site on the SEL in his letter of October 8, 1982.
                   Congressman Robert Livingston, whose district includes St.
                   Bernard Parish, also supported placing the site on the SEL as a
                   potential Marine Sanctuary. Mayor of New Orleans, Ernest Moriel,
                   also expressed his support.

                                                 G-6

                  The principal opponent of the Chandeleur site was Ted Ford,
                  Assistant Secretary, Louisiana Department of Wildlife and
                  Fisheries.     Mr. Ford was joined in his opposition by Jack
                  Brawner, .  Southeast Regional Director of the National Marine
                  Fisheries Service.     Mr. Brawner said: "We concur that this site
                  requires management, but recommend it not be      -further considered
                  as a National Marine Sanctuary at -the present time since the area
                  is adequately managed by the Pari     -sh and'State."    His statement
                  contradicts   those   from   the   parish,   where   the    paucity   of
                  management was a major reason for their strong support of the
                  proposal.   The commercial fishing industry took the position of
                  blanket opposition to any Marine Sanctuary site in the Gulf of
                  Mexico, and their position was given appropriate consideration by
                  the Resource Evaluation Team.

                  Additional substantive comments' were received in supportive
                  letters from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Center
                  for Wetland Resources of Louisiana State University.          The Fish
                  and Wildlife Service "wholeheartedly" supported the Chandeleur
                  proposal, and recommended that its boundaries be expanded to
                  include the entire Chandeleur Island chain, from Chandeleur Light
                  at the north to Palos Island at the south.         They also proposed
                  that the sanctuary be extended seaward one mile on the Gulf side
                  of the Chandeleur Islands, as this area is extensively utilized
                  by nesting terns, skimmers, and gulls as a feeding area, and is
                  being used by the brown pelican colony on North Island. The F&WS
                  support is particularly noteworthy, in light of the fact that the
                  Chandeleur Islands are already part of a National Wildlife
                  Refuge, and in fact are designated as wilderness area.

                  One significant point made both by the LSU Center and Mr. Cy
                  Rhodes of Long Beach, MS,       is that the Chandeleur Islands      are
                  migrating westward at a rate of up to 5 meters/year, and            the
                  Islands are gradually disappearing due to erosion.          One of  the
                  parish's objectives, as it was expressed to the team, is to
                  employ beach stabilization techniques on islands other than         the
                  Chandeleurs.    Within the wilderness-designated islands, no such
                  efforts are allowed.

                  There is a strong interest within the St. Bernard Parish
                  government in managing a ChandeleUr Sound Marine Sanctuary if it
                  were designated.       The Parish Planning Commission suggested
                  setting   aside   part   of  a   three-story   school   building,   now
                  dedicated to-their Coastal Zone Management Program as a "coastal
                  complex," as offices and an interpretive center for the proposed
                  sanctuary.

                  One objection to the Shoalwater Bay - Chandeleur Sound proposal
                  was that it would interfere with, or even exclude, menhaden
                  fishing.    W. Borden Wallace of Wallace Menhaden Products, of
                  Metairie, LA, stated that his fishermen occasionally set their

                                                  G-7

                   nets within the proposed boundaries for the site. Depths within
                   the proposed area are as great as 23 feet, but are generally in
                   the 6 to 10 foot range.        Menhaden boats can operate in such
                   shallow waters, according to Mr. Wallace.         Edward Swindell of
                   Zapata Haynie Corporation (Houston) echoed Mr. Wallace's concern
                   with regard to the menhaden fishery. As it appears that there is
                   at least an occasional menhaden fishery in the area, this is an
                   issue that should be raised in any future proposal to move
                   forward on sanctuary status for this site.

                   3.2.4. Flower Garden Banks

                   This site, approximately 100 miles off the Texas coast, was the
                   focus of one of the Marine Sanctuary program's greatest
                   controversies. The Flower Garden Banks were withdrawn from
                   "active candidate" status by NOAA while this site evaluation
                   process was taking place.      The team's initial proposal for       the
                   site drew 30 comments, 22    of which were in favo   r of placing the
                   site on the SEL.        The only opposing views were those of
                   commercial fishermen     (4  responses)   and  2 of 6 oil and        gas
                   industry respondents.      The credibilitv     of the fishermen      was
                   undermined by their blanket opposition to all proposed Marine
                   Sanctuary sites in the Gulf of Mexico.

                   During the team's discussions, the Flower Garden Banks were held
                   in unanimous high regard as an ecologically important site. What
                   concerned the resource evaluation team was the question of what
                   sanctuary status could do, if anything, for the site.         The team
                   concluded that the only potential action that would benefit the
                   Flower Gardens would be to ban anchoring on the corals in the
                   site.   There was considerable concern over the capability of an
                   agency of the United States unilaterally to forbid anchoring at a
                   location over 100 miles offshore. At one time during the team's
                   deliberations, it appeared that the Gulf of Mexico Fisheries
                   Management Council was going to adopt anchoring regulations as
                   part of its Coral Reef Fisheries Management Plan.                   Such
                   regulations, even if promulgated, would have no application to
                   oil field service vessels or to oil tankers, both of which are
                   known occasionally to anchor on the Flower Gardens. Information
                   available to the resource evaluation team during its final
                   deliberations indicated that the proposed anchoring restrictions
                   were being withdrawn from the Coral Reef Management Plan; Later
                   communications from the Council indicated that the anchoring
                   restrictions had indeed been withdrawn.

                   The team's proposed boundaries for the Flower Gardens site
                   correspond to the Department of the Interior's "no activity"
                   zone, and encompass an area of 44 sq mi.           The team does not
                   believe that a iarger "buffer zone" is necessary to protect the
                   reefs.

                                                  G-8

                  Although the Flower Gardens site was actively considered by NOAA
                  from 1977 to 1982 as a Marine Sanctuary candidate, its
                  inaccessibility is a major factor working against sanctuary
                  status. Neither Texas nor Louisiana state agencies expressed any
                  interest in managing such a sanctuary; its distance from shore
                  would make enforcement and monitoring a costly enterprise.            At
                  one time, there were commercial dive shop operators ;ho offered
                  trips to the Flower Gardens.      The team was informed that all of
                  these ventures have since been terminated, and that there are
                  currently no such trips available.        This diminution in public
                  attention caused the team to give little weight to the public
                  enjoyment aspects of a Flower Gardens Marine Sanctuary.              The
                  resource evaluation team devoted a substantial portion of its
                  time to discussing the pros and cons of Marine Sanctuary status
                  for the Flower Gardens, and concluded that there was only one
                  reason for such a designation - to prevent anchoring on the coral
                  reefs of the Flower Garden Banks. If anchoring can be prevented
                  by some other avenuep perhaps through the Intergovernmental_
                  Maritime Organization, then that approach to protecting this
                  resource may be the preferred one.

                  3.2.5. Baffin Bay, TX

                  This is the only site recommended by the Gulf of Mexico resource
                  evaluation team that was not included in the team's first round
                  of proposals.     It is, however, a site for which strong local
                  support was voiced; much stronger than the support for the three
                  Texas sites that were eliminated during the team's final
                  deliberations.    No "official" state response to the Baffin Bay
                  proposal was received, but the nomination proposal itself came
                  from the Texas Coastal and Marine Council, with additional
                  nominating letters from the Lower Nueces River Water Supply
                  District and the Port of CorT)us Christi.

                  Numerous contacts were made between -team members Bright and Ray,
                  NOAA Sanctuary Program Office personnel, and representatives of
                  the major landowner adjacent to Baffin Bay (the King Ranch).
                  Even though John Cypher of the King Ranch wrote urging that the
                  sanctuary program hold off on Baffin Bay       for about five years,
                  the team was'of the opinion that-the site should go on the SEL
                  now.   The two reasons given by Mr. Cypher for postponing action
                  on Baffin Bay should be mentioned here.        The f irst of these is
                  that the sanctuary might "take" dry land (above the high tide
                  line) although no such authority exists in the present Federal
                  statute.    The second is that the program needs f ive years to
                  nmature," and gain experience managing sanctuaries that lie next
                  to private lands. Cypher does not see a "threat" to Baffin Bay,
                  so he believes there is plenty of time to wait.           The Gulf of
                  Mexico resource evaluation team believes that a current "threat"
                  is not a necessary precondition for sanctuary designation, but is
                  only one of many factors to be considered in evaluating ' a

                                                  G-9

                 potential site.    Baffin Bay is being recommended to NOAA for
                 placement on the SEL because of its unique biological and
                 paleontological characteristics, not because the team believes
                 that it is currently threatened by any particular activity.

                 Thirty-six comments were received on this area; 13 in favor, 14
                 opposed and 9 neutral.     Opposition to the Baffin Bay proposal
                 came primarily from a few commercial fishermen in the area, who
                 expressed their concern that their livelihood would be threatened
                 by sanctuary designation.    Since the entire area recommended by
                 .the team is in state waters, it is unlikely that Marine Sanctuary
                 status would do anything to the commercial fishermen that the
                 state does not already do, or that the state would oppose.         A
                 number of commenters mentioned that Baffin            Bay is     not
                 significantly threatened by man's activities, primarily because
                 most of its shoreline is in private ownership.        This was one
                 feature that made the site preferable to Harbor Island, which is
                 completely surrounded by development.       Very little potential
                 exists for development of the land around Baffin Bay, at least
                 for the forseeable future.     Since the Marine Sanctuary program
                 has no statutory authority to control land use, or even to
                 acquire land, the Baffin Bay situation is superior to Harbor
                 Island.

                 Two other issues surfaced- in the Baffin Bay deliberations; oil
                 and gas activities and illegal hunting and fishing (poaching) .
                 As the waters are entirely under state control, and the Governor
                 of Texas would have an absolute veto over any aspect of a
                 designation that he disagreed with, it is inconceivable that
                 Marine Sanctuary status would carry with it Federal preemption of
                 state oil and gas regulation. There is some limite@ oil and gas
                 activity in parts of Baffin Bay now, and that activity would
                 continue after designation unless the State of Texas desired to
                 stop it.    Poaching, both of fish and of deer (hunters shooting
                 from boats), was raised several times as one problem that might
                 be alleviated if Baffin Bay became a sanctuary.

                                               G-10

                                                PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                        MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                       1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME

                          A. SITE NAME: Big Bend Seagrass Beds, Florida

                          B. LOCATION:         (GULF COAST REGION)

                               1.  LATITUDE/ LONG I TUDE:        Southeast along Florida's west coast
                                                                 from 300051 N to 290101 N
                                                                        840201 W     830001 W

                               2.  DESCRIPTION:       The Big Bend area of Florida may be defined
                                   as a huge, open-water estuary.           This site is composed of
                                   extensive, shallow-water seagrass beds extending up to 22 mi
                                   (35 km) offshore in the "big bend" region of Florida.           T hese
                                   beds constitute a vastly productive habitat supporting          a rich
                                   diversity of marine organisms.      The geological structure    of the
                                   area is characterized by a thin veneer of quartz sand and
                                   organic    debris   overlying    the   limestone   plateau     of  the
                                   Ocala-Middle Ground Arch.           Occasional limestone outcrops
                                   protrude through this veneer to provide hard substrate.            The
                                   most distinctive topographic feature of this area is the Cedar
                                   Keys where there are beautiful sand beaches.           Offshore from
                                   the   beaches    are   seagrass    (e.g.,    Thalassia    testudinum,
                                   Syringodium filiforme, Halodule wrighffi@tid`al flats.             The
                                   islands are composed of-_5_ea_cF_sa_n_a_.__7he gradually sloping
                                   karst features of this area, the large expanse of undeveloped
                                   shoreline, and lack of intracoastal boat traffic are critical
                                   factors in maintaining the quality and           stability of these
                                   seagrass beds.    Within the 1,160 Mi2 (3,000 kM2) of productive
                                   sea bottom in this area, two alternative sites (see map) are
                                   proposed:

                                   Alternative I runs from the mouth of the St. Marks River to
                                   Live Oak Point encompassing a zone some 10 mi (16 km) wide
                                   and 40 mi (47 km) long for a total of 400 Mi2 (1,036 kM2).

                                  .Alternative 11 extends from south of the Crystal River to the
                                   mouth of the'St. Marks River as a band approximately 145 mi
                                   (232 km) long and 7 mi (11 km) wide for a total of approxi-
                                   mately 1,015 Mi2 (2,252 kM2).

                                   Within these two alternatives, the Site Evaluation Committee
                                   recommends that an appropriate area of 100 Mi3 (256 kM3) be
                                   selected.

                                   The inshore boundary of both areas is the intertidal zone,
                                   characterized by no wave energy and gently sloping, sandy to
                                   sandy-mud beaches fringed by oyster reefs.             The offshore
                                   boundary roughly follows the 33 ft (10 m) depth contour. The
                                   boundaries of the proposed site encompass both State and Fed-
                                   eral waters.

                                                                   Big Bend Seagrass Beds - Page 2

                      11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                          A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                               1.  The area under consideration is significant in relation to its
                                   level of primary and secondary productivity.

                               2.  The.area under consideration is of special interest because it
                                   supports a biological assemblage unique to its biogeographic
                                   region and subregion.

                               3.  The area under consideration is important to life history activ-
                                   ities of indigenous marine organisms.

                               4.  The area under consideration contains fish and shellfish spe-
                                   cies and fishery habitats which are important to the recre-
                                   ational and commercial fishing industries, and for which con-
                                   sideration and management is in the public interest.

                               5.  The area under consideration provides exceptional oppor-
                                   tunities for research in marine science and resource manage7
                                   ment.

                               6.  The area under consideration provides an excellent potential
                                   opportunity to interpret the meanings and special relationships
                                   OT marine resources.

                               7.  The area under consideration is threatened by a gradual dete-
                                   rioration of the water quality as a result of agricultural activ-
                                   ities, coastal community development, increased channel dredg-
                                   ing activities, and municipal and industrial waste disposal
                                   practices which alter water chemistry, water flow patterns,
                                   and nutritional characteristics of ambient water.

                           B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                               1.  NATURAL RESOURCES

                                   Florida's Gulf coast seagrass beds constitute a uniquely pro-
                                   ductive ecosystem and a nursery ground for juvenile and
                                   developing fish of the eastern Gulf of Mexico fisheries.        T hey
                                   represent the largest seagrass beds in the Gulf of Mexico.
                                   Seagrasses are extremely sensitive to increases in turbidity;
                                   the Big Bend Seagrass Beds are perhaps the most vulnerable
                                   to water-quality alterations generated within the adjacent river
                                   drainage systems.      The seagrass community greatly increases
                                   the surface area available for plants and animals and provides
                                   a suitable substrate for many organisms that would not be able
                                   to colonize bare sand.     In this way, the seagrass beds sustain
                                   the growth and proliferation of vast numbers of marine macro-
                                   invertebrates, sponges and algae which interact in a delicately
                                   balanced food web that supports several commercially important
                                   species such as oysters, scallops, blue crab, stone crab,
                                   shrimp, red drum, spotted sea trout, and mullet.

                                                                             Big Bend Seagrass Beds - Page 3

                                        In addition to supporting a rich diversity of food organisms
                                        for commercially important indigenous and migratory species of
                                        finfish, cletrital material derived from the seagrass beds may
                                        also provide an important source of nutrition supporting the
                                        adjacent oyster reef communities.

                                        The area from the Suwannee River to Chassahowitzka Bay is
                                        an important habitat for the rare and nearly extinct West
                                        Indian    Manatee      (Trichechus      manatus).        It   is   listed     as
                                        "depleted"      under      the    Marine      Mammal      Protection       Act.
                                        Approximately 120 manatees regularly use 'the headwaters of
                                        the Crystal and Homosassa Rivers as winter warm-water
                                        refuges.      During the summer, from March to October, the
                                        animals disperse along the coast from the Chassahowitzka River
                                        north to the Suwannee River.            Over 50 animals use the mouth
                                        of the Suwannee River and fewer use the Chassahowitzka,
                                        Homosassa, Crystal, and Withlacoochee Rivers.                  The seagrass
                                        beds around these rivers are an important food resource for
                                        the manatees, and the sheltered creeks and bayous are
                                        important calving areas.          According to studies performed by
                                        the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, this is the only manatee
                                        population in Florida which has shown a net increase in
                                        numbers over the            last   few    years.      The    proposed       site
                                        represents the northernmost range of the West Indian Manatee.
                                        The inshore waters of the Big Bend Seagrass Beds area are
                                        frequented by bottlenose dolphins.

                                        All four genera of thecophoran sea turtles (i.e., Ridley, lea-
                                        therback, green, and loggerhead) are in some degree associ-
                                        ated with these seagrass flats--thus the name "turtle grass"
                                        for Thalassia, one of the principal species in the habitat. The
                                              9-- -S'e-agrass Beds have historically been the principal
                                        Big    e n U
                                        migratory stopover station and feeding ground of both the
                                        very highly endangered Kemp's ridley turtle (a species on the
                                        very brink of extinction) and the green turtle (Federally listed
                                        as "endangered" in this portion of its range).              The loggerhead
                                        is Federally listed as "threatened."

                                        The American alligator (Alligator mississippiensis) has been ob-
                                        served in the general v-icinity of the proposed site.                 Alligator
                                        populations in southern portions of the proposed Sanctuary ap-
                                        pear to be increasing, although the species is still (Federally)
                                        considered "threatened" in Florida.

                                        At least eight pairs of American bald eagles                         (Haliaetus
                                        leucocephalus) winter and breed in the general area_,__w_hTFcF
                                        represents the northernmost concentration of active nests on
                                        the Florida Gult coast.         The bald eagle is Federally listed as
                                        an "endangered" species.

                                        More than 75 species of spectacular wading birds and other
                                        waterfowl utilize the area extensively during fall and winter.
                                        Species     include     gadwalls,      pintails,     American       widgeons,

                                                                      Big Bend Seagrass Beds - Page 4

                                     northern shovelers, mallards, blue-winged teals, ring-necked
                                     ducks, and lesser scaups.        This area is host to the largest
                                     Florida concentration of wintering redhead ducks.         Seasonal or
                                     year-round residents within the St. Marks and Cedar Keys Na-
                                     tional Wildlife Refuge complex generally include ospreys,
                                     Canadian geese, egrets, herons, white ibises, and endangered
                                     brown pelicans. Cedar Keys, in particular, is noted as one of
                                     the largest nesting colonies in the South.

                                     Cedar Keys is the northernmost rang          e of red, white, and
                                     black mangroves in Florida. The extensive seagrass commun,ity
                                     plays a vital role in maintaining a balanced ecosystem among all
                                     types of marine life which depend upon the waters of the Gulf
                                     of Mexico for their survival.

                                     Adjacent uplands are owned primarily by paper company/silva-
                                     culture interests and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
                                     Much of the paper company land is leased to the State for
                                     wildlife management, especially the northern portion.          Most of
                                     the area is considered "pristine" except for the Fenholloway
                                     River which drains effluent from a paper mill.          This effluen"t
                                     has influenced the health of seagrasses near the mouth of that
                                     river.   Water quality in the Fenholloway River has improved
                                     greatly during recent years.

                                     The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines, reports
                                     that undeveloped deposits of limestone and peat occur near-
                                     shore at many locations along the Big Bend, and there exists a
                                     potential for heavy mineral deposits.        Though efforts by the
                                     mining industry to control pollution have been highly success-
                                     ful, a small amount of pollution is sometimes uncontrollable.

                                     Those areas in Federal waters which lie in the Outer Conti-
                                     nental Shelf (OCS) are being considered for leasing as part of
                                     the proposed OCS oil and gas Lease Sale No. 79.           The magni-
                                     tude of resource potential is unquantified at this time.              If
                                     development occurs, it is likely that portions of the site may
                                     be needed as OCS oil and gas pipeline corridors.           Portions of
                                     the general area, however, have been designated as "no activ-
                                     ity zones" by the Bureau of Land Management.

                                2.   HUMAN USE VALUE

                                     The Big Bend coast currently supports recreational and com-
                                     mercial fishery activities which are vitally important to the
                                     economy of the Big Bend area.          Though population densities
                                     along the coast remain low, the growth of communities along
                                     the rivers has been accompanied by a tremendous growth in
                                     sportfishing.   In recent years, competition between commercial
                                     and sportfishing has accelerated, and problems have arisen be-
                                     tween various commercial fishing interests.          Competition for
                                     the oyster crop has developed as Apalachicola Bay shellfisher-
                                     men migrate down the Big Bend coast when the Bay is closed
                                     because of degraded water quality.        The St. Marks, Suwannee

                                                                Big Bend Seagrass Beds - Page 5

                                 River, and Cedar Key National Wildlife Refuges, bordering Al-
                                 ternative 11, provide access to this area through pristine
                                 corridors that enhance the value of the proposed site as a
                                 region of high interpretive value for school children, graduate
                                 students, naturalists, and professional research scientists.    In
                                 addition, the Cedar Keys (forming the southernmost boundary
                                 of Alternative 11) have long been utilized as a field research
                                 site by environmental scientists at the University of Florida
                                 (Gainesville), which operates the Florida Marine Laboratory at
                                 Seashore Key. The St. Marks, Econfina, and Fenholloway es-
                                 tuaries have similarly been utilized by research scientists asso-
                                 ciated with Florida State University (FSU) in Tallahassee and
                                 its Ball Marine Laboratory.    Each year several hundred stu-
                                 dents from Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, West Virginia,
                                 Pennsylvania, New York, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, and South
                                 Dakota visit the area for study.       Various Audubon, Sierra
                                 Club, and museum nature study groups have directed outings
                                 to the area.   Graduate student and faculty research programs
                                 have involved the natural history, behavior, physiology, re-
                                 productive biology, taxonomy, and ecology of the flora and
                                 fauna, as well as community-level studies.

                                 The proposed marine sanctuary would provide an excellent re-
                                 search opportunity because of the existing natural resource
                                 data base and its proximity to laboratory facilities, and be-
                                 cause the commitment to marine ecological research is well es-
                                 tablished in the area.    The FSU Ball Marine Laboratory, as
                                 well as its adjoining estuarine and coastal marine regions, has
                                 been designated an Experimental Ecological Reserve by the In-
                                 stitute of Ecology under a study sponsored by the National
                                 Science Foundation.   However, many of the ecological relation-
                                 ships unique to seagrass communities have not been suffi-
                                 ciently explored or mapped.     Seagrasses are highly sensitive
                                 to environmental perturbations.    Studies are needed to deter-
                                 mine the loss of seagrasses attributable to industrial waste,
                                 nonpoint-source pollution, domestic sewage disposal, and other
                                 water quality problems in the area.   Studies arealso needed to
                                 understand the relationship of the seagrass beds and the rich
                                 sponge-soft coral communities situated just seaward of most of
                                 the seagrass beds.

                                 Both Federal and State concerns are represented in the area.
                                 As mentioned before, the Federal government manages and op-
                                 erates (1) the St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge bordering
                                 Apalachee Bay, (2) Suwannee National Wildlife Refuge, and (3)
                                 Cedar Keys National Wildlife Refuge.     The State manages the
                                 Aucilla Wildlife Management Area (which extends south along
                                 the coast from the St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge) and the
                                 Cedar Key Scrub State Preserve (adjacent to the boundaries of
                                 the proposed site) and retains jurisdiction over the coastal wa-
                                 ters of the State to a distance of three leagues from shore.

                                 Lands bordering the Big Bend Seagrass Beds are open to pri-
                                 vate and port authority development.      Development plans are

                                                                        Big Bend Seagrass Beds - Page 6

                                      on the drawing boards in almost every county.                The area's
                                      population    is   expected     to   double    by    the    year     2000.
                                      Shore-based construction activities are likely to adversely im-
                                      pact these sensitive seagrass beds.         The Nature Conservancy
                                      currently has an option to purchase several islands which had
                                      previously been destined for residential development in the
                                      King's Bay section of the Crystal River.              If the necessary
                                      funds are obtained to buy the islands, The Nature Conser-
                                      vancy will lease them to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (at
                                      a cost of $1 .00 per year) so that the Service may manage the
                                      islands as part of the National Wildlife Refuge system.

                                      The waters around the Crystal River islands are designated as
                                      a manatee sanctuary by the State of Florida.            However, other
                                      waters within the migratory range of the Florida manatee are
                                      not afforded this same protective status.

                                      The Governor's Planning and Management Committee for the
                                      Suwannee River has written a comprehensive plan for the
                                      river, its tributaries, the Cedar Keys National Wildlife Refuge,
                                      Lower Suwannee National Wildlife Refuge, and the Cedar Key
                                      Scrub State Preserve, which provides for the coordination of
                                      management programs and protective measures at all levels of
                                      State government.      The River has been classified as an Out-
                                      standing Florida Water (OFW) and is therefore afforded the
                                      highest protection.       This classification     insures no further
                                      degradation from industrial or municipal waste-water dis-
                                      charges.    Waters within the National Wildlife Refuges and State
                                      Preserves are also classified OFW,        This includes the lower St.
                                      Marks, Aucilla, and Waccasassa Rivers.

                                      Still pending is a proposal to complete the Big Bend segment
                                      of the U.S. Intracoastal Waterway.

                                      Research indicates that these seagrass beds are important in
                                      damping storm waves.

                       111. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                             Barkuloo, J., 1977, Draft proposal for marine sanctuary:                Big Bend
                                 Seagrass Beds, Florida, 5 pp.

                             Bittaker, B. F., 1975, A comparative study of the phytoplankton and
                                 benthic macrophyte primary productivity in a polluted versus an
                                 unpolluted     coastal   area:     M.S.     Thesis,    Fla.    State   Univ. ,
                                 Tallahassee.

                             Bittaker, H. F., R. L. Iverson, in press, Seagrass distribution in the
                                 eastern Gulf of Mexico:       Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Sci.

                             Burrell, D. C. , J. R. Schubel, 1977, Seagrass Ecosystem Oceanog-
                                 raphy:     in C. P. McRoy and C. Helffevich (eds.), Seagrass

                                                                   Big Bend Seagrass Beds - Page 7

                              Ecosystems:     A Scientific Perspective, Marcel Dekker, N.Y., pp.
                              195-232.

                          Humm, H. J., 1973, Seagrasses:        in J. 1. Jones, R. E. Riorg, M. D.
                              Rinkel, and R. E. Smith (eds.), A Summary of Knowledge of the
                              Eastern Gulf of Mexico, State Univ. System of Fla., Inst. of
                              Oceanography, St. Petersburg, Fla., pp. III-C-1 to HIC-10.

                          Livingston, R. J., 1976, Diurnal and seasonal      fluctuations of organisms
                              in a north Florida estuary:      Est. Coast.   Mar. Sci., Vol. 4, pp.
                              373-400.

                          Livingston, R. J., 1980, Community structure       and trophic interactions
                              in a coastal seagrass system:       evaluation of short- and long-term
                              variability, water quality, and biological     response:    Final Rept. ,
                              Project R805288-01, USEPA, Newport, Ore.

                          Moore, D. R., 1963, Distribution of the sea grass, Thalassia, in the
                              United States:    Bull. Mar. Sci. Gulf and Carib. __V_oT._1 3 (2), pp.
                              329-342.

                          Thorhaug, A., 1981, Seagrasses in the Gulf of Mexico, Florida and
                              Caribbean including restoration and mitigation of seagrasses:           in
                              Proc. Coastal Ecosystems of Southeastern U.S., USDOI FWS/OBS_-
                              80/59, Wash., D.C., pp. 161-178.

                                                                   Big Bend Seagrass Beds        Page 8

                                        ST MARKS
                                               z,..E.COFINA
                                                   ..,..FENHOLLOWAY

                                                                         FLORIDA

                                    Alternative 1*
                                                                STEINHATCHEE

                                            Alternative ]I*
                                                                          SUWANNEE

                                                                  %

                                                                            WACCASASSA

                                      *Approx. Boundaries

                                                   MEXICO
                                        OULF OF                                     ".Z..

                                                  OUTER LIMIT OF
                                                  SEAGRASS BEDS

                                                                                  TARPON
                                                                                  SPRINGS
                                       BIG BEND
                                       SEAGRASS BEDS
                                       rp!

                                                       LOCATION MAP

                                               PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                       MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                       1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME

                          A. SITE NAME: Florida Middle Ground, Florida

                          B. LOCATION:       (GULF COAST REGION)

                              1.  LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE:        The five corners of this site (con-
                                  forming to a proposed Fishery Management Council habitat area
                                  of particular concern) are located at:

                                  a)  28042.51 N             84024.81 W
                                  b)  28042.51 N             84016.31 W
                                  c)  28111.01 N             84000.01 W
                                  d)  28011.01 N             84007.01 W
                                  e)  28126.61 N             84024.81 W

                              2.  DESCRIPTION: The Florida Middle        Ground is the most north-
                                  ern example of a highly productive coral and algae reef com-
                                  munity covering some 460 Mi2 (1200      kM2), approximately 95 mi
                                  (152 km) south of the northwest Floricla coast and 100 mi (160
                                  km) northwest of Tampa.        This rugged hard bottom, repre-
                                  senting drowned karst topography, has numerous steep lime-
                                  stone escarpments rising 33-49 ft (10-15 m) above the sur-
                                  rounding sand-shell bottom.     Depths range from approximately
                                  80 to 140 ft (24 to 42 m) .   The proximity of west Florida estu-
                                  arine waters, Florida bay waters, and the Gulf Loop Current
                                  makes this a hydrologically complex area.

                     11. RATIONALE FOR COWSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                          A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                              1.  This is an area of extremely high biological productivity and
                                  diversity and represents the northernmost extension @@_fCarib-
                                        F_
                                  bean eefal communities in the Gulf of Mexico.

                              2.  The proposed area is highly utilized for recreational fishing
                                  and diving.

                              3.  The area presents interacting resource management challenges,
                                  since oil and gas leases exist on or near proposed sanctuary.

                          B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                              1.  NATURAL RESOURCES

                                  Florida Middle Ground represents the northernmost extension
                                  of abundant Caribbean reefal communities in the Gulf of
                                  Mexico.   The primary productivity of this area is very high,
                                  and zooplankton standing stocks are seasonally large.       This is
                                  an area of great biological diversity; 170 fish species, 75

                                                                        Florida Middle Ground - Page 2

                                    molluscan species, 56 decapod-crustacean species, 41 poly-
                                    chaete species, several dozen species of sponges, and 91 algal
                                    species, including 6 algae newly reported for Florida and the
                                    eastern Gulf of Mexico, as well as numerous hard and soft
                                    coral species, are known to occur within the proposed sanc-
                                    tua ry.

                                    This site has a mixed temperate and tropical ecological compo-
                                    sition with a strong tropical affinity because of transportation
                                    by the impinging Gulf Loop Current of organisms northward to
                                    the site.

                               2.   HUMAN USES

                                    This area is fished extensively.        The commercial harvest of
                                    grouper and snapper from this area is large each year.            Rec-
                                    reational fishing boats from Clearwater, St. Petersburg, Pan-
                                    ama City, Tarpon Springs, Dunedin, and Sarasota frequently
                                    fish this area during multiple-day outings.         Fishery manage-
                                    ment in the area has been addressed by the Gulf of Mexico
                                    and South Atlantic Regional Fisheries Management Councils.
                                    The area has been designated as a Habitat Area of Particular
                                    Concern.

                                    This site has been the subject of research by scientific inves-
                                    tigators from many institutions, including Florida State Univer-
                                    sity, Dauphin Island Sea Lab, the Florida Department of Natu-
                                    ral Resources, and the National Marine Fisheries Service.
                                    This site presents excellent opportunities for future research.

                                    Coral collecting -by scuba divers,      and anchoring in this area
                                    may have some impact upon the site.

                                    The area includes approximately 60 OCS tracts and will again
                                    be considered for leasing as part of Lease Sale No. 79.           Cur-
                                    rently available information indicates that oil-and-gas resource
                                    potentials in this area are limited.    However, only one well has
                                    been drilled on the Florida Middle Grounds, and it is possible
                                    that significant resources could be discovered in an area of
                                    this site.  Portions of the Middle Ground have been designated
                                    "no activity zones" by the Bureau of Land Management.

                                    Reconnaissance offshore drilling has located deposits of heavy
                                    minerals and phosphate nodules.       No deposits of sufficient size
                                    or grade to be profitably mined have been located, but drilling
                                    has been very limited.

                      Ill. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                     Austin, H. M. and J. 1. Jones, 1974, Seasonal variation of physical ocean-
                           ographic parameters on the Florida Middle Ground and their relation to
                           zooplankton biomass on the west Florida shelf:         Florida Scientist,- Vol.
                           37, No. 1 , pp. 16-32.

                                                               I

                                                                Florida Middle Ground - Page 3

                   Hopkins, T. S., et al., 1977, A preliminary characterization of the biotic
                        components of composite strip transects on the Florida Middle Grounds,
                        northeastern Gulf of Mexico:   in Proc. Third Intl. Coral Reef Symp.,
                        Miami, pp. 31-37.

                   Smith, G. B., 1976, Ecology and distribution of eastern Gulf of Mexico reef
                        fishes:  Florida Dept. of Natural Resource-s, Mar. Res. Lab., Publ.
                        No. 19, 78 pp.

                   Smith, G. B. and L. H. Ogren, 1974, Comments on the nature of the Flor-
                        ida Middle Ground reef ichthyofauna:   in Proc. Mar. Environ. Implica-
                        tions of Offshore Drilling in the Easte-rn Gulf of Mexico, Conference/
                        Workshop, State Univ. Sys., Fla. Inst. Oceanogr., St. Petersburg.

                   Smith, G. B., et al., 1975, Fishes of the Florida Middle Ground with com-
                        ments on ecology and zoogeography:      Fior. Dept. Nat. Res., Mar.
                        Res. Lab., Publ. No. 9, 14 pp.

                                    APALACHICOLA

                                                      CEDAR KEY

                                    FLORIDA
                                    MIDDLE
                                   GROUNDS                  FLORIDA

                                             ST. PETERSBURG

                                     G614,c 0',

                                           FLORIDA
                               N     MIDDLE GROUNDS

                                                                                rpi

                                                 LOCATION MAP

                                                PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                        MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                       1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME

                          A. SITE NAME: Shoalwater Bay-Chandeleur Sound, Louisiana

                          B. LOCATION:        (GULF COAST REGION)

                              1.   LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE: 29'48' N, 88058- W

                              2.   DESCRIPTION:       This proposed sanctuary occupies approxi-
                                   mately 80 Mi2 (207 kM2) of pristine, shallow-water seagrass
                                   and algae beds located upon a subsiding remnant of abandoned
                                   Mississippi River delta (see map).       Geologically, the area is
                                   highly dynamic.    Unlike most barrier-island chains of the U.S.
                                   Atlantic and Culf coasts, the Chandeleur Island chain (a
                                   transgressive barrier island arc) has no outside sediment
                                   source.   It is the product of eroded and reworked deltaic de-
                                   posits and is expected to move westward and diminish in size.
                                   The triggering mechanism for migration and erosion is hurri-
                                   cane activity, and the island chain has a remaining life expec-
                                   tancy (in a subaerial state) of one to two centuries.            The
                                   sandy bottoms of the proposed marine sanctuary contrast with
                                   the turbid fine-grained bottoms in other portions of this del-
                                   taic region.   Water depths within the proposed sanctuary are
                                   generally less than 23 ft (7.1 m) below the Gulf coast low
                                   waterline.    Water   currents    are   driven    by   tidal   range
                                   differences at openings into Chandeleur Sound as well as by
                                   wind-generated surface stresses.

                      11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                          A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                              1.   The proposed marine sanctuary is composed of highly produc-
                                   tive, pristine seagrass beds and mangrove stands that       'p r Z@v_ i Tde
                                   a habitat for many species, including several bird species and
                                   s a turtTes on the endangered species list.

                              2.   The proposed area is significant in relation to its level of pri-
                                   mary and secondary productivity.

                              3.   The proposed site is an important spawning and nursery
                                   ground for commercial fishing, shellfishing, and crabbing in-
                                   dustries operating within of the Gulf of Mexico.

                              4.   The proposed area provides excellent opportunity for research
                                   in marine science and management practices.

                              5.   The conjunction of the proposed site with Breton National Wild-
                                   life Refuge would provide adequate protection for resident and

                                                             Shoalwater Bay-Chandeleur Sound           Page 2

                                      migrating wildlife, and would provide a research /educational
                                      To-cus to the region.

                            B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                                 1.   NATURAL RESOURCES

                                      The proposed site is different from most of the Mississippi del-
                                      taic plain nearshore waters.         Sandy shoals in proximity to
                                      deep, Gulf waters are an uncommon physiographic feature of
                                      the Louisiana coast in particular and of the northern Gulf
                                      coast in, general.      That feature, along with winter water
                                      temperatures moderated by the Florida current, and an excel-
                                      lent nekton foraging habitat (i.e., seagrass and marine algae
                                      beds), provides suitable conditions for the presence of several
                                      nekton species that are rare elsewhere in the northern Gulf.
                                      More than 80 percent of the nekton species collected by Lasca
                                      (1973) were juveniles or members of the subzero class, indicat-
                                      ing the importance of the area as a breeding/ nursery ground.
                                      Included were several species of commercial and recreational
                                      importance.

                                      The neighboring islands support the northern limit of black
                                      mangrove.     Investigators have -identified 21 species of tropical
                                      marine algae which are not found in nearby Mississippi Sound.
                                      Black mangrove stands, salt marsh, seagrass beds, benthic
                                      algae, and phytoplankton all contribute to the high primary
                                      productivity of this area.

                                      Dense stands of manatee grass (Syringodium), turtle grass
                                      (Thalassia) ,    shoalgrass    (Halodule) ,    and    widgeon      grass
                                      (R_u_p`p_-ia_F provide an   important shallow-water       habitat and
                                      spawning/ nursery ground for numerous finfish and shellfish of
                                      commercial value. All five species of marine turtles which in-
                                      habit the  'Gulf of Mexico historically have been known to forage
                                      in  this area.      These are the Atlantic          loggerhead     turtle
                                      (Caretta caretta), Federally listed as a threatened species, and
                                      f5L r endangered     turtles:  hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata),
                                      Atlantic ridley (Ledipochelys kempi), leatherback (D@e_rmochelys
                                      coriacea), and the Atlantic green (Chelonia mydas).             Evidenc-e
                                      indicates that the loggerhead turtl         nests in the area.        The
                                      bottlenose dolphin is commonly observed in the area.

                                      The island shores adjoining the proposed site support black
                                      mangrove (Avicennia germinans) and intertidal marsh grass
                                      communities  *  'Approximately 13,000 migratory waterfowl rely
                                      upon the shoals of this area for winter foraging, and seabirds
                                      have established breeding colonies on the islands.              Most of
                                      these birds are redhead ducks, but other species include
                                      bufflehead, ruddy duck, ring-necked duck, and lesser scaup.
                                      There are some 25,000 bird nests on Breton National Wildlife
                                      Refuge.    These include canvasback ducks, the rare reddish
                                      egret, caspian and royal terns, black skimmers, laughing
                                      gulls, ibises, herons, the rare oystercatcher, plovers, blue

                                                          Shoalwater Bay-Chandeleur Sound - Page 3

                                    geese, snow geese, frigate birds, white pelicans, peregrine
                                    falcons, hawks, ospreys, bitterns, and sandpipers.            Sandwich
                                    terns, sooty terns, and gull-billed terns are among the princi-
                                    pal nest builders at the refuge.       The endangered brown peli-
                                    can, once eradicated from this area, has been successfully re-
                                    introduced onto the North Islands; some 400 brown pelicans
                                    currently inhabit the area.

                               2.   HUMAN USES

                                    The area receives mode ra te-to- heavy recreational fishing use
                                    since the Chandeleur Islands are located within the Breton Na-
                                    tional Wildlife Refuge.    During 1980, approximately 2100 recre-
                                    ational visits were made to the refuge; most of these visits
                                    were for the excellent sportfishing, crabbing, shrimping, boat-
                                    ing, and waterfowl hunting which the area offers.            Picnickers
                                    and wildlife observers also use this area.       The Chandeleur Is-
                                    lands, within the refuge, have been designated a "wilderness
                                    area. if

                                    While the area is far removed from urban areas,                  it is
                                    accessible to the universities of three states:       Mississippi and
                                    Alabama (through Gulf Port or Biloxi), and of course,
                                    Louisiana (from launching sites in the southeastern portion of
                                    St.  Bernard Parish).        Professional   researchers of various
                                    marine    science    institutions    (including     Louisiana      State
                                    University,   University of Southwestern          Louisiana,     Tulane
                                    University, and the University of Texas)          conduct investiga-
                                    tions within the area proposed for marine sanctuary status.
                                    At least ten Louisiana schools could readily utilize the site as
                                    an interpretive area and as a focus for marine research or
                                    weekend field trips.     The St. Bernard Parish Planning Com-
                                    mission's Parish Coastal Zone Management Program owns a
                                    3-story school building on Delacroix Island which could be
                                    used as an interpretive center and/or base from which to con-
                                    duct field research.

                                    Federal, State, and Parish entities all have some authority
                                    over activities within the proposed area.         The proposed site
                                    encompasses a portion of the      *Breton Bird Refuge which pro-
                                    vides protective measures for migratory and resident species.
                                    Several other federal wildlife refuges are located in coastal
                                    Louisiana as well.     These include the Delta, Lacassine, and
                                    Sabine National Wildlife Refuges.        In addition, the State of
                                    Louisiana has several refuges and management areas in the
                                    coastal zone and maintains jurisdiction over activities conducted
                                    in the coastal zone.

                                    There is considerable fishing activity in the sea beds behind
                                    Freemason and North Islands.        The area provides safe harbor
                                    for Mississippi and Louisiana fishing vessels enroute to port
                                    from offshore fishing grounds.       The major commercial fisheries
                                    in this area of the Gulf include. pink shrimp, brown shrimp,
                                    white   shrimp,     mullet,    black   drum,     Spanish      mackerel,

                                                      Shoalwater Bay-Chandeleur Sound - Page 4

                                 menhaden, oysters, hard-shell clams, and blue crab.           The
                                 Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, in cooperation with
                                 the State of Louisiana, enforces a regional Gulf Coast Fishing
                                 Management Plan.

                                 Oil-and-gas activities already exist in the area, and it is be-
                                 lieved that the area contains significant potential for further
                                 commercial oil-and-gas development.

                    111. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                    Gould, E. and J. Ewan, 1975, Phytogeographic and ecologic relationships of
                         the flora of Breton Island, Louisiana:    Tulane Studies in Zoology and
                         Botany, Vol. 19(l and 2).

                    Hoese, H. Dickson, and J. M. Valentine, Jr., 1972, USL Studies on the
                         Chandeleur Islands: University of Southwestern Louisiana (USL).

                    Humm, H. J. and R. M. Darnell, 1959, A collection of marine algae from the
                         Chandeleur Islands:   Publ. Inst. Mar. 'Sci., Vol. 6, pp. 265-276.

                    Kahn, J. H., 1980, THe role of hurricanes in the long-term degradation of
                         a barrier island chain:   Chandeleur Islands, Louisiana:   Unpubl. M.S.
                         Thesis, Louisiana State Univ., Baton Rouge, 99 pp.

                    Lasca, A. L., 1973, Fishes of the Chandeleur Islands, Louisiana:       Unpubl.
                         Ph.D. Dissertation, Tulane Univ., New Orleans, La., 260 pp.

                    Lemaire, R. J., 1961, A preliminary annotated checklist of the vascular
                         plants of the Chandeleur and adjacent islands, St. Bernard and Pla-
                         quemines Parishes, Louisiana:   in Proc. Louisiana Acad. 24:116.

                    Lund, F., 1974, Marine turtle nesting in the United States:     Rept. to U.S.
                         Fish and Wildlife Service, Ofc. Endangered Species, Wash., D.C., 39
                         PP.

                    Murray, S. P., 1976, Currents and circulation in the coastal waters of Lou-
                          isiana:  Sea Grant Publ. No. LSU-T-76-003.

                    Soileau, David M. (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Lafayette, La.), 11
                         March- 1982, Letter to District Engineer, U.S. Army Corps of Engi-
                         neers, New Orleans, La.:     Regarding Block 62 (Chandeleur Area) Per-
                         mit for Petroleum Exploration and Production (cf.,         Public Notice
                         LMNOD-SP, Gulf of Mexico, 3070, Dated 4 February 1982).

                                                                                                         Shoalwater Bay-Chandeleur Sound                                            Page 5

                                                                    CHANDELEUR ISLANDS

                                                                                               LOUISIANA

                                                                                                                              - - - - - - - - - - -

                                                                                                         App
                                                                                                            rol
                                                                                                    San tuarI
                                                                                                  Boundary,,,     N0"ITH
                                                                                                                 ISL ANDS
                                                                                                                                                    CHANDELEUFI
                                                                                                                                                      ISLANDS

                                                                                                                        NEW HARBORU                    [BRETON
                                                                                                                         ISLANDS
                                                                                                                                                          NWR I

                                                                                               REEMASON
                                                                                                ISLAND

                                                                                                              D-pths are
                                                                                                            less than 23ft.
                                                                                                             below MLW

                                                                   L ---------

                                                                                                         2     1    0           2
                                                                                                                   MILES                                      rpi

                                                                                                  LOCATION MAP
                                                                                       (Subaerial Land Excluded)

                                               PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                       MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                      1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME

                         A. SITE NAME: Flower Garden Banks, Texas

                         B. LOCATION:        (GULF COAST REGION)

                              1. LATITUDEMONGITUDE: East Bank              2705413211N
                                                                           930361 W

                                                             West Bank"    2705212711N
                                                                           9304814711W

                              2.  DESCRIPTION:      The banks are located 123 mi (198 km) due
                                  south of Sabine Pass, Texas, on the outer edge of the conti-
                                  nental shelf.   They consist of east and west sections approxi-
                                  mately 16 mi (25 km) apart and represent the northernmost
                                  thriving, shallow-water, tropical coral reef community on the
                                  eastern coast of North America.     The formation of the banks is
                                  related to the upward intrusions of salt plugs from deeply
                                  buried deposits.   Both are surrounded by clear waters 325-390
                                  ft (100-120 m) deep.     The living reefs rise from a depth of
                                  148 ft (45 m) to a crest at 66 ft (20 m) .     The proposed bor-
                                  ders of the sanctuary conform to the Bureau of Land Manage-
                                  ment "no activity zone" and encompass a total of 44 Mi2 (114
                                  kM2).    Other hard-bottom banks occur in this part of the
                                  Gulf, but only the Flower Gardens are located far enough from
                                  shore to be away from the sediment-bea ring coastal water
                                  masses and have crests far enough off the bottom to be above
                                  the turbid water layer which directly overlies the continental
                                  shelf in much of the Gulf of Mexico.

                     11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS SANCTUARY

                         A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                              1.  The Flower Gardens' biological communities represent the
                                  northernmost extent of i7r@olca@lAtlantic coral reef communities
                                  in the western Gulf of Mexico.

                              2.  The Flower Gardens' coral reefs may serve as a regional "res-
                                  ervoir" of shallow-water Caribbean reef fishes and inverte-
                                  E-rates.

                              3.  The Flower Gardens off& opportunities for scientific research
                                  and represent an aesthetic and educational resource because of
                                  the rich diversity-o-f -tropical marine floral and faunal species
                                  which inhabit the reefs.

                                                                         Flower Garden Banks - Page 2

                            B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                                1.   NATURAL RESOURCES

                                     The Flower Gardens represent a unique and valuable tropical
                                     coral reef community.     The biotic character is of special inter-
                                     est, because it supports unique biological assemblages such as
                                     a hermatypic     (reef-building)    coral community,      leafy algal
                                     fields, algal nodule terraces, and cleep-wate@ benthic biota.
                                     Several hundred species of tropical Atlantic fishes and inverte-
                                     brates (many of which have not been recorded elsewhere in
                                     the northern Gulf of Mexico) thrive at the sites.         The warm,
                                     clear, oceanic Gulf waters favor Caribbean reef development.

                                     Encrusting coralline algae are the dominant plants on the
                                     banks, and leafy algae are abundant.         The faunal components
                                     are dominated by hermatypic corals (Montastrea annularis,
                                     Porites astreoides, M. cavernosa, and        Diploria st .rig-o-sa)and
                                                                                    T-heBeFn-ksexhibit a
                                     associated reef fishes and @invertebrates.
                                     strong vertical biotic zonation pattern characterized by corals
                                     on the higher elevations, by an algal-sponge zone lower down,
                                     followed by a crinoid-asteroid zone at depths from 240 to 280
                                     ft (73-85 m).    Macroi nverteb rates inhabiting the Banks include
                                     frame-building corals and fan corals, sponges, polychaete and
                                     sabellid worms, starfish, sea urchins, brittle stars, basket
                                     stars, gastropod snails, scaphopods, clams, mantis shrimp,
                                     snapping shrimp, amphipods, barnacles, a variety of crabs,
                                     bracheopods, and the rare cheilostome bryozoans.             Hundreds
                                     of thousands of fish feed and find shelter among the Banks.
                                     Genera include clamselfish, blue chroms, pufferfish, red and
                                     long   snout    butterflyfish,     parrotfish,    hogfish,     wrasses
                                     angelfish,    redlip   blennies,    gobies,     goatfish,    barjacks,
                                     amberjack, great barracuda, hawkfish, filefish, triggerfish,
                                     trumpetfish, trunkfish, squirrelfish, and groupers.

                                2.   HUMAN USES

                                     The beauty and diversity of any coral reef community are an
                                     attraction to scuba divers from within and outside Texas.          The
                                     Flower Gardens are relatively pristine and are isolated in the
                                     northern Gulf, making them quite rare and unique.             Commer-
                                     cial fishing is common along the edges of the banks.           Because
                                     of their distance from shore, the area does not attract many
                                     recreational divers.

                                     A great potential for scientific research exists.        The majority
                                     of research performed thus far has been conducted by Texas
                                     A&M University, the result of which is a great number of pre-
                                     served collections and on-site transects.        The first phase of
                                     studying the area (i.e., systematics, descriptive ecology, and
                                     quantitative ecology of corals) is nearing completion.            Major
                                     groups, such as sponges and seaweeds, remain to be identified
                                     to species.    In the wake of these initial studies, a great
                                     potential exists for further ecological, physiological, and other

                                                                     Flower Garden Banks - Page 3

                                  peripheral research.     The community-structure investigations
                                  completed thus far have revealed valuable data on biological
                                  zonation and indicate directions for future research.      The Na-
                                  tional Marine Fisheries Service, under a NOAA/EPA inter-
                                  agency agreement, is overseeing a study of the Flower Garden
                                  reef fish population.

                                  A final special feature is the evidence derived from Flower
                                  Garden sediments which supports the theory that the late
                                  Wisconsin sea level withdrew from -300 ft (-91 m) to -416 ft
                                  (-127 m), followed    by a rise to current sea level beginning
                                  about 18,000 years    ago.   A great potential for such research
                                  exists in the hard    bank, which provides greater insight into
                                  the formation of the land and the oceans.

                                  Of major concern to the integrity of the Flower Gardens is the
                                  mooring of ships directly on the banks.         Mechanical damage
                                  from anchors is evident today and is increasing.          This not
                                  only directly destroys coral, but also may cause the death of
                                  damaged coral through pathological infections of lacerated tis-
                                  sue.

                                  The U.S. Minerals Management Service and the U.S. Environ-
                                  mental Protection Agency currently regulate oil and gas activ-
                                  ities at the Flower Gardens.      Areas adjacent to the site are
                                  used as mooring locations for large crude oil tankers and other
                                  commercial vessels.    Since the prohibition of reef anchoring of
                                  vessels over 100 ft in length has been eliminated from the
                                  Coral Reef Fishery Management Plan adopted by the Gulf of
                                  Mexico and the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council,
                                  continued damage to the reef by heavy anchors and chains re-
                                  mains a major concern.       In addition, areas surrounding the
                                  site appear to offer potential for commercial oil and gas devel-
                                  opment.    Eleven tracts adjacent to the Banks have been ]eased
                                  to oil and gas companies.     Drilling platforms are situated near
                                  the Banks.     As commercial development advances, recreational
                                  use of the Banks may increase.

                                  Offshore incineration of PCBS and other toxic chemicals is
                                  conducted within 50 miles of the Banks.           Nearby offshore
                                  dumping and drilling are continuing practices authorized under
                                  NPDES-EPA permits.

                                  The Banks are believed to be an important nursery area for
                                  brown shrimp and, therefore, are important to the commercial
                                  shellfishing industry.

                                  The Gulf of Mexico and the South Atlantic Fishery Management
                                  Councils have developed a Coral Fishery Management Plan de-
                                  signed to preserve this and other coral habitats within the
                                  Gulf.

                                                                      Flower Garden Banks - Page 4

                     111. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                           Abbott, R. E., 1975, The faunal composition of the algal-sponge zone
                               of the Flower Garden Banks, northwest Gulf of Mexico:         Master of
                               Science Thesis, Texas A&M University, Dept. of Oceanography,
                               205 pp.

                           Bright, T. J. and L. H. Pecluegnat (eds.), 1974, Biota of the west
                               Flower Garden Bank:       Gulf Publishing Co., Houston, Tex., 435
                               PP.

                           Bright, T. J. and R. Rezak, 1976, A biological and geological recon-
                               naissance of selected topographical features on the Texas conti-
                               nental shelf:   Final Rept. to U.S. Dept. of Int., Bureau of Land
                               Management, 377 pp.

                           Bright, T. J. and R. Rezak, 1978a, South Texas topographic features
                               study:    Final Rept. to U.S. Dept. of Int., Bureau of Land
                               Management, 772 pp.

                           Bright, T. J. and R. Rezak, 1978b, Northwestern Gulf of Mexico
                               topographic features study:      Final Rept. to U.S. Dept. of Int. ,
                               Bureau of Land Management.

                           Edwards, G. S., 1971, Geology of the west Flower Garden Bank:
                               Texas A&M Sea Grant Publ., TAMU-SG-71-215, 199 pp.

                           Levert, C. F. and H. C. Ferguson, Jr., 1969, Geology of the Flower
                               Garden Banks, northwest Gulf of Mexico:            Trans. Gulf Coast
                               Assn. Geological Soc.    19:89-100.

                           Rezak, R., 1977, West Flower Garden Bank, Gulf of Mexico:            Studies
                               in Geology No. 4, pp. 27-35.

                                                                                      Flower Garden Banks             Page 5

                                                   FLOWER GARDEN BANKS

                                                                              95*           94*            930

                                         CONTOURS IN METERS

                                                                                   GALVESTON

                               26*

                               28*                                         6 10              East Flower Garden.-
                                                                                               0-
                                                                             West Flower Garden
                                                ORPUS CHRISTI

                                                                          50      0              100
                               27" -
                                                                                      KM                          rpi

                                                                             95*            94*            930

                                                                 LOCATION MAP

                                               PRELIMINARY     CANDIDATE
                                        MARINE SANCTUARY        SITE EVALUATION

                       1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                          A. SITE NAME: Baffin Bay System, Texas

                          B. LOCATION:        (GULF COAST REGION)

                              1.   LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE: 17"471 N, 64'45' W

                              2.   DESCRIPTION: Baffin Bay is a system of interconnecting bays
                                   forming a natural unit of about 61,000 acres at high tide.       The
                                   candidate site covers approximately 95 Mi2 (246 kM2), entirely
                                   within Texas State waters, and includes Baffin Bay, Salt
                                   Creek, Cayo Infernillo, Cayo del Grullo, and Alazan Bay. Ap-
                                   proximately 25 percent of the Bay system is composed of inter-
                                   tidal salt flat communities.  The waters of the Bay are conflu-
                                   ent with the upper Laguna Madre; however, the waters of the
                                   Bay system remain notably hypersaline.        Though the average
                                   salinity of the Bay system is determined to be 27 0/00, the sa-
                                   linity commonly ranges between 45              and 65 1/0,       With
                                   rainfall measured at 25 in/yr, and evaporation measured at 60
                                   in/yr, salinity extremes of 0 0/,0 and 100 0/,,, frequently oc-
                                   cur during periods of intense rainfall and drought, respective-
                                   ly. The pH of the Baffin Bay system varies between 8.3 and
                                   8.5 throughout the year.

                                   The Baffin Bay complex occupies a former river valley,
                                   drowned as the sea level rose after the last ice age 5,000-
                                   10,000 years ago.     Depths throughout this area are shallow,
                                   averaging less than 9 ft (3 m).      Extensive areas of soft black
                                   and grey mud, rich in hydrogen sulphide, cover the central
                                   bay bottoms.    Isolated reef rocks and reef fields, composed of
                                   masses of calcareous tubes of living and dead serpulid worms,
                                   are scattered over the bay bottom, notably across the mouths
                                   of Baffin Bay and Alazan Bay.        These reefs form hazards to
                                   navigation.

                                   Turbidity is often high in the site due to several factors.
                                   Persistent winds continuously resuspend bottom sediments.
                                   Predominantly sou"theasterly winds cause persistent wave agita-
                                   tion to be greatest in the vicinity of Kleberg Point.      In addi-
                                   tion, irregularly distributed cloudbursts inundate ephemeral
                                   streams within the surrounding watershed, causing erosion and
                                   migration of upland clays into the Baffin Bay system. Much of
                                   the shoreline of the Baffin- Bay complex is experiencing long-
                                   term erosion, but portions are accreting, notably in the upper
                                   reaches of the system.     Astronomical tidal range in the site is
                                   low, less than a foot; but fluctuations of water level, driven
                                   by the wind (i.e., "wind tides"), cause periodic inundation of
                                   flats around the margins of the site.          Hurricane tides at
                                   regular intervals flood the shorelines.      Shallow pools around
                                   the site contain algal mats and mineral salt deposits which

                                                                           Baffin Bay System - Page 2

                                    precipitate out of solution due to the high rates of evapora-
                                    tion.  Small marshes fringe portions of the system.             Baffin
                                    Bay beaches often contain oolitic sand and shell fragments.

                           RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                           A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                               1.   Baffin Bay is a relatively large hypersaline embayment, unique
                                    to U.S. and most world erLvironments.

                               2.   Nearby Bird Island, managed by the Texas Parks and Wildlife
                                    Department, and Padre Island National Seashore both support
                                    continuing study programs.      The area's high potential for fu-
                                    ture research is also enhanced by the proximity of the Univer-
                                    sity of Texa I Marine Science Institute at Port Aransas, Cor-
                                    pus Christi State University, and Texas A&I University at
                                    Kingsville.

                               3.  -Public access to the site, over land, is provided only along
                                    the western shoreline where a paved        highway leads to a site
                                    planned for a future research facility.      The site, near Riviera
                                    Beach (see map), is adjacent to Texas A&I University's marine
                                    station.

                               4.   The biological productivity of the area supports important com-
                                    mercial and recreational   fisheries, and waterfowl populations of
                                    significant recreational v-aTu-e.

                           B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                               1.   NATURAL RESOURCES

                                    The Baffin Bay system, because of its hypersalinity caused by
                                    its semiarid location and limited freshwater inflow, is an un-
                                    usual habitat, supporting a unique assemblage of marine orga-
                                    nisms.   It is one of only two such environments in the world
                                    (the other is the Sivash of the Crimea located west of the Sea
                                    of Azov).    Species diversity is low and population density is
                                    extremely variable.    Populations of a few benthic species may
                                    vary from 1-2 individuals per M2 to 2000-3000 per M2, de-
                                    pending upon the suddenness of the changes in temperature
                                    and salinity.

                                    Indian middens composed of oyster shells in the vicinity of
                                    Baffin Bay have been interpreted as evidence of lower salini-
                                    ties in the area during recent geologic time.        But only eury-
                                    haline species tolerant of extreme salinity fluctuations and
                                    desiccation are capable of surviving in the area today.

                                    Shoalgrass; widgeon grass, and detritus, blown into Baffin
                                    Bay from the Upper Laguna Madre, form a major component of

                                                                            Baffin Bay System - Page 3

                                    the diet of many waterfowl (i.e., pintail, American widgeon,
                                    and redhead) that feed and nest within the large expanse of
                                    mud flats adjacent to Baffin Bay.       An estimated 50-75 percent
                                    of the entire North American population of redhead ducks
                                    overwinter in the Laguna Madre area adjacent to Baffin Bay.
                                    The Bay's resources support rookeries of a wide spectrum of
                                    upland birds, shorebirds, and migratory waterfowl, including
                                    Wilson's plovers, ruddy turnstones,.. least and western sand-
                                    pipers, willets, American avocets, black skimmers, laughing
                                    gulls, snowy egrets, common egrets, great blue herons, and
                                    Louisiana herons.      Baffin Bay is the principal breeding and
                                    resting area of the only nesting colony of white pelicans in
                                    Texas.    It is an important feeding and resting area for brown
                                    pelicans and roseate spoonbills.

                                    The copepod known as Acartia tonsa is abundant in Baffin
                                    Bay, where it has been oFs-erved to occur in salinities of up to
                                    80 0/,,.    It has been suggested that this species in Baffin
                                    Bay may in fact be unique.        Floating red, brown, and green
                                    seaweeds, including calcareous forms, have been observed
                                    within the Baffin Bay complex; however, these algae originate
                                    from the Laguna Madre and are less salt-tolerant than the more
                                    prevalent microscopic algae, widgeon grass, and shoalgrass.
                                    Microscopic forms found within the site include many species of
                                    diatoms, flagellates, etc.     The green alga Claclophora is the
                                    only species of higher algae living in the Bay.

                                    Algal mats of nitrogen-fixing, filamentous blue-green algae
                                    (whose top surface areas are composed mostly of Lyngbya
                                    confervoides) occur in the interticial flats and in the shallow
                                    waters oT -the Bay.    The undersides of these algal mats contain
                                    purple bacteria, protozoans, diatoms, marine worms, and am-
                                    phipods.

                                    Baffin Bay is important to the production of finfish, shrimp,
                                    and crabs.    The area supports a diverse biotic community that
                                    includes   polychaetes,     amphipods,    grass    shrimp,     juvenile
                                    penaeid shrimp, pistol shrimp, crabs, bivalves, gastropods,
                                    killifish, pipefish, and pinfish.    Commercially important species
                                    such as red drum, spotted seatrout, croaker, and black drum
                                    have been observed feeding throughout the area, along with
                                    rays, catfish, and sand trout.

                                    Reefs formed from living and dead serpulid worm tubes are
                                    substrates for barnacles, amphipods, and mats of filamentous
                                    algae.   Salt cedar, cactus grasses, and many other plants
                                    grow in isolated clumps around the shore.

                               2.   HUMAN USES

                                    The Baffin Bay system is not intensively developed nor is de-
                                    velopment around the Bay anticipated,        Road access is limited.
                                    Riviera Beach and nearby Loyola Beach, with a total combined
                                    population of less than 1,000 persons, are the only communities

                                                                                Baffin Bay System - Page 4

                                      near the Bay. The Baffin Bay complex is surrounded by pri-
                                      vately owned ranch lands and the Laguna Madre.                Very little
                                      channelization, dredging, filling, and bulkheading have oc-
                                      curred along the shoreline.

                                      Recreational fishing, duck hunting, bird-watching, and ranch-
                                      ing are the major human uses of the Baffin Bay system. Com-
                                      mercial fishing in the proposed site is based at Riviera Beach.
                                      Major seafood species harvested in the vicinity of Baffin Bay
                                      include black drum, red drum (redfish), spotted seatrout, and
                                      brown shrimp.       The State has imposed a moratorium on the
                                      commercial harvesting of spotted seatrout and redfish and
                                      regulates other commercial fishing activities within the Bay.

                                      Recently, the Bay system was the site used to conduct a major
                                      project to assess the value of Baffin Bay as a nursery ground
                                      for black drum populations within the Gulf of Mexico.                  The
                                      study was conducted by researchers at Texas A&I University
                                      (Kingsville, Tex.) and was sponsored by the Caesar Kleberg
                                      Wildlife Foundation.     The investigations produced a data base
                                      that characterizes the hydrology, benthic structure and fauna,
                                      and fish populations.       Studies on the effects of hypersalinity
                                      on marine organisms and unique hypersaline algal flats on the
                                      Kleberg Point shoreline have been conducted by researchers at
                                      the University of Texas Marine Science Institute (Port Aran-
                                      sas, Tex.) for many years.         The area is of special interest to
                                      paleontologists because the area contains the only known ser-
                                      pulid worm reef in the United States.

                                      The Baffin Bay system is bordered on the east by the Padre
                                      Island National Seashore and on the north by the Audubon So-
                                      ciety's Bird Island, both of which support continuing coastal
                                      and ecological research programs.          Baffin Bay offers signifi-
                                      cant opportunities for scientific research which is not possible
                                      in any other bay in the United States.

                                      Since the 1940s, oil companies have disposed of a considerable
                                      volume of oil field brines into Alazan Bay.           Recently, oil and
                                      gas exploration and development activities have accelerated
                                      within the Bay system, but production remains low and no sig-
                                      nificant oil or gas reserves have been discovered in the area.
                                      A number of oil and gas pipelines traverse the Bay in some
                                      areas.

                       111. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                            Andrews, P. B., 1964, Serpulid reefs, Baffin Bay, southeast Texas:
                                 in Field Trip Guidebook for Depositional Environments South-
                                 Central Texas Coast, Gulf Coast Assoc. of Geological Societies,
                                 pp. 101-120.

                             Behrens, E. W., 1964, Oolite formation in Baffin Bay- and Laguna
                                 Mad re,    Texas:      i n  Field    Trip    Guidebook      for    Depositional

                                                                    Baffin Bay System - Page 5

                            Environments South-Central Texas Coast, Gulf Coast Assoc. of
                            Geological Societies, pp. 83-100.

                        Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies, 1964, Field trip guide-
                            book for depositional environments south-central Texas coast, 170
                            PP.

                        Hayes, M. 0., et al., 1980, Sensitivity of coastal environments to
                            spilled oil, south Texas coast (Rio Grande to Aransas Pass):     RPI
                            Rept. to NOAA/OMPA, 89 pp.

                        Hedgpeth, J. W., 1967, Ecological aspects of the Laguna Madre, a
                            hypersaline estuary:   in G. H. Lauff (ed.), Estuaries, Publ. No.
                            83, Amer. Assoc. Adv. Sci., pp. 408-419.

                        Ladd, H.S., J. W. Hedgpeth, and R. Post, 1957, Environments and
                            facies of existing bays on the central Texas coast:     Memoir 67,
                            Geol. Soc. Amer., pp. 599-639.

                        Land, L. S., E. W. Behrens, and S. A. Frishman, 1979, The ooids-'o-f
                            Baffin Bay, Texas:    Jour. Sedimentary Petrol., Vol. 49(4),' pp.
                            1269-1278.

                        Plomarity, H. G. (Port Director, Port of Corpus Christi Authority),
                            1982, Unpublished communication to NOAA in support of Baffin Bay
                            candidacy as marine sanctuary, 7 pp.

                        Pulich, Jr., W., 1980, Ecology of a hypersaline lagoon:     The Laguna
                            Madre:   in P. L. Fore and R. D. Peterson (eds.), Proc. Gulf of
                            Mexico C5-astal Ecosystems Workshop, FWS/OBS-80/30, pp. 103-122.

                        Texas Department of Water Resources, 1982, Draft Report Laguna
                            Madre Estuary: A Study of the Influence of Freshwater Inflows.

                                                                                                           Baffin Bay System                Page 6

                                                                                                                  BIRD ISLAND,

                                                                                                              4.

                                            KINGSVILLE
                                                                                                           z
                                                                                                                                    44/

                                                                                          VA     @7

                                                                                                 v

                                                                        .-KLEBERG PT
                                                                   @- R-1   ev

                                                              RIVIERA SEAC.                                                4

                                                                                                                         4,
                                                                                   BAFFIN BAY
                                        2f                   k;    @                     --
                                                           LAGUNA SALADO
                                        75,                                                                        y..
                                                                                                                             0@

                                                           APPROX.BOUNDARY---
                                                              5          10          is
                                                  0
                                          rpi                     MILES
                                                                                             97*130'

                                                                            LOCATION MAP

                                       NORTH ATLANTIC REGION

                                                                                  I

                                  MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION LIST
                                           NORTH ATLANTIC REGION

                                            MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW

                  1. Resource Evaluation Team

                  The North Atlantic resource evaluation team was initially com-
                  prised of four marine biological scientists, one each from
                  Massachusetts,     New    York,   Virginia,     and   the     Smithsonian
                  Institution in Washington, DC.       The team leader was Dr. Maurice
                  P. Lynch of the Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences, College of
                  William and Mary.       The other team members were Dr. Bostwick
                  ("Buck")     Ketchum,     Professor-Emeritus       from    Woods      Hole
                  Oceanographic Institute; Dr. Jeffrey Levinton of the Department
                  of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York at Stony
                  Brook, and Dr. Walter Adey, Director of the Marine Systems
                  Laboratory of the Smithsonian Insitution.

                  At untold loss to the marine science community, Buck Ketchum died
                  on Julv 15, 1982.       He was replaced on the resource evaluation
                  team by Dr. H. Perry Jeffries of the Graduate School of
                  Oceanography, University of Rhode Island. Dr. Jeffries is also a
                  biologist.    During the site evaluation process, both Drs. Lynch
                  and Jeffries made several contacts within their resoective states
                  with state government officials, environmental groups, and other
                  marine scientists.

                  2. Site Evaluation and Public Participation Process

                  The team met on April 26-27, 1982, in Stony Brook, NY, for its
                  initial consideration of potential North Atlantic sanctuary
                  sites.    Five potential sites were proposed after the team had
                  evaluated 27 possible Marine Sanctuary sites, including all of
                  the North Atlantic areas that were on NOAA's List of Recortimended
                  Areas (44 Fed. Reg. 62552, Oct. 31, 1979).          Descriptions of the
                  five sites were mailed to 250 individuals and groups, including
                  82 national organizations and Federal agencies, for comment. The
                  initial five sites were:

                  NA-1.    Isles of Shoals, ME and NH,        This site encompassed. the
                  waters within a 3-mile radius of the Isles of Shoals, which are
                  about 15 mi southeast of Portsmouth, NF, and lie astride the
                  Maine - New Hampshire border.

                  NA- 2.  Plymouth Bay, MA.      This 25 sq mi site included Plymouth
                  Bay and the adjacent nearshore waters out to about one mile from
                  shore.

                                                  NA- 1

                   NA-3. Barnstable Harbor, MA. This 18 sa mi Cape Cod site inclu-
                   ded Barnstable harbor and the adjacent waters out to about one
                   mile from, shore.

                   NA-4.  Nantucket Shelf, MA and offshore.       This was a 3-site pro-
                   posal, including the 10 scf mi Nantucket Harbor, 345 sq mi of
                   Nantucket Shoals, and 136 sq mi around Hydrographer Canyon.

                   NA-5. Virginia Barrier Island and Bays, VA. About 300 sq mi of
                   waters   surrounding    the   barrier   islands   of   Virginia,   f rom
                   Chincoteague Inlet south to Fisherman's Island, were included in
                   this proposal.

                   By the comment deadline of August 13, 1982, Chelsea had received
                   52 responses commenting on one or more of the five sites (75
                   responses were ultimately received).       By the September 13 nomin-
                   ation deadline, six sites had been        suggested   by   the Public.
                   Those sites were:

                   1.   All Submarine Canyons off Georges Bank
                   2.   The "hole in the Doughnut" area of Federal waters between
                        Cape Cod and Nantucket Island
                   3.   Stellwagen Bank, off PIA
                   4.   Narragansett Bay (3 sites), RI
                   5.   Great Bay, NJ
                   6.   Assateague Island, MD

                  -The  resource evaluation team met again on September 23, 1982, at
                   the UnivCrsity of Rhode Island.           At that meeting the team
                   reviewed the public comments on their first five proposals, as
                   well as the new nominations. The team concluded that two of the
                   new nominations (Stellwagen Bank and Narragansett Bay) rnet the
                   Marine Sanctuary criteria and that public comment should be soli-
                   cited on those two proposals.      They also reevaluated their orig-
                   inal Virginia Barrier Islands and Bays proposal in light of the
                   Assateague Island nomination, and determined that a new proposal
                   should be constructed from those two. The team also reconsidered
                   its original 3-site Nantucket Shelf Proposal and decided to re-
                   place Nantucket Harbor with the "Hofe-in-the-Doughnut" proposal
                   received from the State of Massachusetts, and to replace
                   Hydrographer Canyon with Oceanographer Cdnvon.        The team was not
                   of the opinion tEat Great Bay, NJ,-should i;e Proposed as a Marine
                   Sanctuary, and they did not believe that there was any reason to
                   include all three major submarine canyons rather than a single
                   one.   Four more site descriptions were then Prepared for Public
                   comment, which were mailed to the original list for comment by
                   November 22, 1982. The four new (or modified) sites were:

                                                  NA-2

                  NA-4  Nantucket Shelf (modified)
                  NA-5  Virginia - Maryland Nearshore Waters and Barrier Island
                        Bays (Modified)
                  NA-6  Stellwagen Bank
                  NA-7  Narragansett Bay and Block Island Sound, RI

                  In response to the second request for public comments, Chelsea
                  received 92 responses, most of which were comments in favor of
                  NA-5, the combined Assateague Island - Virginia Barrier Islands
                  proposal.

                  2.1. The   Maine Problem

                  At the beginning of the site evaluation process, Chelsea and the
                  North Atlantic team were instructed not to consider the State of
                  Maine because two contracts for Marine Sanctuarv site evaluation
                  were already underway in Maine. One contract had been let to the
                  Marine Systems Laboratory of the Smithsonian Institution, and
                  that project's principal investigator,--Dr. Walter Adey, had since'.
                  been named as a member of the resource evaluation team.              The
                  other contract had been let to the Maine Department of Marine
                  Resources, headed by Dr. Spencer Appolonio.       At an initial meet-
                  ing of team leaders and NOAA personnel, the team leader, Dr.
                  Maurice Lynch,* was told that both contracts would Droduce nomina-
                  tions for Maine sites by the time of the second team meeting.

                  Neither contractor produced a recommendation by the time of the
                  team's second meeting on September 23, 1982, and the entire coast
                  of Maine might have been left out of the site evaluation process.
                  Both contractors were then instructed by NOAA to submit site
                  nominations immediately, so that the resource evaluation team
                  could evaluate Maine sites along with the rest of the North
                  Atlantic region.      Those descriptions were received in early
                  December, and were mailed out to the North Atlantic mailing list
                  (except Virginia addressees) on December 17, 1982, with a 30-day
                  deadline for comment. The two sites were:

                  N1A_- 8. Frenchmen's Bay and the Gulf of Maine.      A 407 so mi site
                  is next to Acadia National Park and extends several miles off-
                  shore to surround Mt. Desert Rock.

                  NA-9.   Mid-coastal Maine.    This 430 so mi site lies to the west
                  of Frenchmen Bay and takes in the waters around several offshore
                  islands, three estuaries, and two bays.

                  The Maine public comment exercise turned out to be explosive. As
                  the January 17 deadline approached, N!OAA extended the cominnent
                  period another 30 days, to February 17, 1983.           Throughout the
                  60-day comment period, Chelsea periodticallv sent copies of all
                  correspondence to the team members, with the final batch going to
                  the team leader at the close of business on February 17.          On or

                                                 NA-3

                 about February 1, and again on February 18, 1983, Dr. Lynch
                 polled the other team members -- with the exception of Dr. Adey
                 -- by telephone to produce the final list of recommendations to
                 NOAA.

                 3. Recommendations

                 3.1. The North Atlantic Team's Avvroach

                 The North Atlantic region contains two distinct biogeographic
                 regimes; the Virginian and the Acadian.    These two regimes meet
                 in the area south of CaT)e Cod, and the transition area itself is
                 as important as the two major regimes.     The resource evaluation
                 team sought to identify sites which would represent the Acadian
                 and Virginian regimes, as well as the transftion zone.      At the
                 same time that they were evaluating "representative" sites, the
                 team tried to identify potential "unique" sites.         The team
                 believes that their final five recommendations meet both of those
                 objectives.

                 3.2. Site Selection

                 The North Atlantic resource evaluation team recommends the follow-
                 ing five sites to NOAA for placement on the Site Evaluation List.
                         attempting to prioritize them, they are:

                 1.  Virginia - Maryland Nearshore Waters and Barrier Island Bays,
                     VA and MD
                 2.  Narragansett Bay and Block Island Sound, RI
                 3.  Nantucket Shelf
                 4.  Stellwagen Bank
                 5.  Frenchmen's Bay, ME

                 As  oart of the final regional report, RPI has lDrepared a set of
                 short descriptions of each site, including a map showing the
                 recommended boundaries of each proposed Marine Sanctuary.       The
                 balance of this part of the report contains highlights of        the
                 team's rationale for choosing each site, and comments on specific
                 riianagement issues that came to the team's attention during the
                 process.

                                              NA-4

                   3.2.1 Virginia - Maryland Nearshore Waters and Barrier Island
                        Bays, VA and MD.

                   This is the recommended     Virginian site.    It includes 1200 so mi
                   off the coasts of Maryland and Virginia, and extends 10 mi off-
                   shore.    When the site was first put forward with only the
                   Virginia offshore area included, it elicited 31 comments, 16 in
                   favor, 8 opposed and 7 neutral.       The local units of government
                   opposed the proposal, but the State of Virginia officially adop-
                   ted a "wait-and-see" attitude. At the same time, another 9 com-
                   menters recommended inclusion of the waters around Assateague
                   Island (MD) .   It would be a mistake to take public support for
                   granted on this site but the resource evaluation team believes
                   that a Virginian biogeographic site should be on the final SEL.

                   When the Assateague nomination was added to the Virginia Barrier
                   Islands proposal, the public response was overwhelmingly favor-
                   able. 6i commented, with 52 in support, 4 opposed and 8 neutral.
                   The State of Maryland endorsed the new site, and Virginia was
                   still willing to give it fair consideration. Local Virginia gov-
                   ernments, however, are still opposed.

                   3.2.2. Narragansett Bay and Block Island Sound, RI

                   This site is the nearshore "anchor" in the biogeographic trans-
                   ition region between the Acadian and the Virginian regimes.
                   Strong local support for this proposal was evidenced at the
                   team's second meeting, where the nomination was defended by the
                   new team member, Dr. Perry Jeffries of the University of Rhode
                   Island.    Although the site is entirely in State waters, it
                   appears to have the support of the State of Rhode Island.

                   3.2.3. Nantucket Shelf

                   At the first team meeting, there was some interest in creating a
                   "swath" sanctuarv that would extend from CaiDe Cod to the south-
                   eastern edge of Georges Bank.        This would have encompassed a
                   large part of the biogeographical transition zone.        In an effort
                   to produce a manageable recommendation, the team proposed a near-
                   shore site (Nantucket Harbor) , a site on the shelf (Nantucket
                   Shoals) , and one of the canvons at the edge of the shelf
                   (Hydrogralpher).

                   Between the two team meetings, the State of Massachusetts -oro-
                   posed the Federal waters between Cape Cod 'and Nantucket Island
                   (the " Ho le- in-the -Doughnut") as welf as Great South Channel to
                   the east of Nantucket Shoals. Cape Cod fishermen also asked the
                   team leader to move the Nantucket Shoals boundarv eastward to
                   take in Great South Channel, which maintain is a major migratory
                   route for commercial sDecies.

                                                  NA-5

                  Both of these suggestions were positively received, and the team
                  made   the   appropriate    changes    at   their   second    meeting.
                  Massachusetts argues that their "Ocean Sanctuariesn under State
                  law provide all of the protection necessary for Nantucket Harbor,
                  and that only the Federal waters remain unprotected at this time.
                  The team accepts the premise that the State Ocean Sanctuary
                  statute   functions ' as   intended,   and  believes    it  would    be
                  presumptuous for the Federal Government to overlay that protec-
                  tion with yet another layer of regulation.

                  The rationale for initially picking Hydrographer Canyon rather
                  than the better-studied Oceanographer Canyon at the first team
                  meeting, was that it lay in a straight line drawn through the
                  other two pieces of the team's initial proposal.        At the second
                  meeting the team agreed that they had no reason for selecting one
                  over the other, but they did reconsider their earlier decision,
                  and concluded that the extra attention paid to Oceanographer over
                  the years may indicate that Oceanographer Canyon has more, or
                  more interesting, resources than Hydrographer.       Based upon this
                  reasoning, the team recommends Oceanographer Canyon as part of
                  the final Nantucket Shelf proposal.

                  The original proposal resulted in 22 comments, 14 supporting, 4
                  opposing and 4 neutral. The modified version elicited 17 respon-
                  ses, 10 in support, 1 opposing and 6 neutral.

                  3.2.4 Stellwagen Bank

                  This is a fairly large (480 sq mi) site, to the north of Cape
                  Cod, that is known for its summer population of humpback, fin,
                  minke, and northern right whales.       It is adjacent to U.S. Army
                  Corps of Engineers dredged material disposal site, which poses
                  the only real conflict for Marine Sanctuary designation.           Even
                  that conflict appears to be a small one, hopefully corrected by
                  trimming the northwest boundary of the proposed sanctuary.

                  Twenty-nine responded to the nomination, with 13 in support, 2
                  opposed and 11 neutral.      Most of the latter were uncertain how
                  the program worked or what the effect would be on commercial
                  fishing.    The Gloucester Fisheries Association and Gloucester
                  Fisheries Commission expressed opposition only if commercial
                  fishing would be affected..          The Massachusetts Office of
                  Environmental Affairs, the Maine Department of Marine Resources
                  and the Maine State Planning Office supported the proposal.

                  Some of the coastal communities are apprehensive about the poten-
                  tial designation of Stellwegen Bank as a Marine Sanctuary, but
                  that is probably a result of the usual concern that fishing could
                  be prohibited in a sanctuary. This site is the only one selected

                                                   NA-6

                  by the North Atlantic resource evaluation team       as a "special,"
                  rather than representative, site.

                  3.2.5. Frenchmen's Bay, ME

                  The resource evaluation team was of the opinion that an Acadian
                  site should be placed on the Marine Sanctuary. Site Evaluation
                  List. Of the two sites recommended to the team, the Frenchmen's
                  Bay-Gulf of Maine site was the preferred site based upon species
                  representation and overall representation of*the Acadian blo<j:eo-
                  graphic province.    (The resource evaluation team, notes that Dr.
                  Walter Adey was excluded from this decision, in light of the fact
                  that he was the Principal Investigator on the NOAA contract that
                  recommended Frenchmen's Bay.]

                  There was a tremendous response to this proposal - a total of
                  1,291 expressed their strong feelings, of which only 55 were
                  supportive and 3 neutral. Environmental groups were unanimous in
                  their support, while the fishing industry (with one exception)
                  was unanimously opposed.       Local governmental units were also
                  opposed, as were state representatives from the area.

                  Early responses to the Proposal were supportive.           However, a
                  substantial petition and post-card attack was organized in oppo-
                  sition to the proposal, which Produced approximately 150           pre-
                  printed post-cards and over 1,600 signatu-r-es on various peti-
                  tions.     Individual letters of opposition (other than the
                  post-cards) came from 8 fishermen and 16 others.        The towns of
                  Sullivan, Tremont and Bar Harbor officially opposed the desig-
                  nation, as did the Hancock County Planning Commission.              The
                  Mid-Atlantic Fisheries Development Foundation supported the pro-
                  posal, so long as commercial fishing activities continued.

                  The team, in spite of the opposition, recommends that NOAA place
                  Frenchmen's Bay and the Gulf of Maine on the SEL. In the likely
                  event that the site cannot garner the level of public support
                  that would be necessary in order to go forward, the North
                  Atlantic resource evaluation team recommends that the Mid-Coastal
                  Maine-site appear on the final Site Evaluation List. The domi-
                  nant consideration remains that of securing at least one Acadian
                  site on the final SEL.     For this reason, both site descriptions
                  were prepared by RPI and are made Part of the final report.

                                                NA-7

                                              PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                      MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                         SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                         A. SITE NAME:        Virginia-Maryland Nearshore Waters and Barrier
                                              Island Bays

                         B. LOCATIO'N:      (NORTH ATLANTIC REGION)

                             1.  LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE: 371301 N, 751401 W

                             2.  DESCRIPTION:      The candidate site would cover approximately
                                 1200 Mi2 (3100 kM2) and lies within both State (Virginia and
                                 Maryland) and Federal waters. The site would include the es-
                                 tuarine waters and wetlands adjacent to the barrier islands and
                                 mainland along the Atlantic coast of Virginia and Maryland from
                                 the northern end of Assateague Island southward to Fisher-
                                 mans Island out to 10 mi (16 km) from shore (see map). This
                                 coastal environment is rich in marine species forming an impor-
                                 tant integral part of this region's ecosystem.

                                 The bay waters of the proposed site are shallow and vertically
                                 well-mixed due to wind and tidal action; however, there is
                                 typically a horizontal gradient of water properties.     Rain and
                                 runoff cause the water temperature and salinity to vary most
                                 nearshore.   Typical salinities are from 25 to 34 o/oo.   The es-
                                 tuarine substrate consists of soft mud, shell, sand, clay, or
                                 mixtures of those materials.

                         RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                         A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                             1.  The wetlands of this proposed sanctuary support a large sec-
                                 tor of the shore economy including a large, important seafood
                                 industry.   Recreation     d commercial fishermen harvest large
                                 quantities of fish and shellfish which occupy or utilize these
                                 waters.

                             2.  The wetlands are biologically rich and diverse, support numer-
                                 ous marine orcanisms, and form a primary part of this region's
                                 ecosystem.

                             3.  Several coastal islands adjacent to this area, including Assa-
                                 teague,' Assawoman, Wreck, Mockhorn, and Fishermans Islands,
                                 are owned and protected by Federal or State agencies.         Pro-
                                 tected areas adjacent to the candidate site include ATsateague
                                 Island State Park, Assateague Island National Seashore, Chin-
                                 coteague National Wildlife Refuge, and E. A. Vaughn Wildlife
                                 Refuge.

                               Virg inia-Maryland Nearshore Waters and Barrier Island Bay - Page 2

                                 4.   A large portion of the barrier islands bordering this area is
                                      owned and maintained as a nature preserve by The Nature
                                      Conservancy (a nonprofit con          ation organization) .

                                 5.   The Wachapreague Laboratory and the Wallops Island Marine
                                      Science Center in this area are important marine science re-
                                      search facilities.

                            B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                                 1.   NATURAL RESOURCES

                                      Along the periphery of this fragile ecosystem are extensive,
                                      immensely productive salt marshes dominated by Spartina
                                      alterniflora.   These marshes mitigate flooding of the lYn-dand
                                      act as nutrient reservoirs releasing organic material into the
                                      estuarine waters.     The high biological productivity of the veg-
                                      etation is the basis of the complex food web in this area.            The
                                      Assateague Ecological Study lists 64 benthic species, including
                                      at least 18 species of decapod crustaceans.            Crabs, oysters,
                                      and clams feed upon the vegetation and microorganisms within
                                      these waters.     Scallops have recently returned to the area.
                                      More than 96 species of fish inhabit, spawn, or migrate
                                      through these waters including sharks, skates, rays, herring,
                                      shad, menhaden, anchovies, eels, mummichogs, killifish, pol-
                                      lock, hake, stickleback, seahorse, pipefish, squirrel fish, sea-
                                      bass, perch, striped bass, bluefish, weakfish, and tarpon.
                                      The seasonal abundance of many finfish varies greatly.               Seals
                                      and dolphins are occasionally reported in this area.          Tracts of
                                      widgeon and eelgrass cover bay bottoms, and scallops inhabit
                                      beds of seagrass.      A great diversity of waterfowl and shore-
                                      birds, including both migratory and resident species, are
                                      abundant.     In fact, 95 percent of the brant found in Maryland
                                      feed on eelgrass within Chincoteague Bay.              Active breeding
                                      colonies of birds exist on islands surrounded by these estu-
                                      arine and marine waters.        Eagles, ospreys, peregrine falcons,
                                      the endangered brown pelican, and the threatened Atlantic
                                      loggerhead and Atlantic green turtles utilize the habitat of the
                                      candidate areas.

                                 2.   HUMAN USES

                                      The area supports a multimillion-dollar s        eafood industry and
                                      includes vast areas of public shellfish grounds and private
                                      shellf ish leases.  The entire economies and social traditions of
                                      most harbor communities focus on the seafood business.                Ac-
                                      cess to the fishery resource is provided by navigational chan-
                                      nels which have been maintained by U.S. Army Corps of Engi-
                                      neers.    The area includes seven Federal navigation projects
                                      which require dredging and spoil disposal within the proposed
                                      s ite.

                               Virginia-Maryland Near.shore Waters and Barrier Island Bay - Page 3

                                     Protected by Federal and State agencies, the area is exten-
                                     sively used for diverse recreational activities such as swim-
                                     ming, picnicking, sunbathing, boating, hiking, wildlife obser-
                                     vation, photography, waterfowl hunting, and sportfishing.
                                     The complex of wildlife reTuges, public seashore, various asso-
                                     ciated research facilities, and the State Park (all of which
                                     have been 6stablished by the State of Virginia and the Nature
                                     Conservancy) supports these activities as well as extensive
                                     college and professional research programs and informal Fed-
                                     eral, State, and private outdoor education programs.                  The
                                     area affords many opportunities for scientific research analyz-
                                     ing the impacts of man's activities on the fishery resource.
                                     Johns Hopkins University, Salisbury State College, Wallops Ma-
                                     rine Science Center, and other institutions maintain active re-
                                     search programs utilizing the barrier islands and bays as an
                                     outdoor research laboratory . for nonconsumptive educational
                                     programs.

                                     The land adjacent to the proposed sanctuary area has been
                                     historically used for grazing, privateering, resort develop-
                                     ment,    waterfowl and shorebird hunting,            and homesteads.
                                     Storms have destroyed many of the early structures on the is-
                                     lands.   Waters adjacent to the barrier islands contain countless
                                     submerged cultural resources, many of which are of national
                                     significance.    Due to changes in sea level during the past
                                     12,000 years, many of-our -earliest sites of human habitation
                                     now lie in shallow waters off the eastern shore of Maryland
                                     and Virginia.     Ships lost during the days of the first Euro-
                                     pean explorations may still be buried in the silts off these
                                     barrier islands.     Submerged evidence preserved in these pro-
                                     tective silts may provide evidence of the fishing and coasting
                                     patterns of these early European settlements.

                                     Federal and State governments and The Nature Conservancy
                                     own 'practically all of the islands within the proposed site.
                                     Most of the islands are presently uninhabited, except for iso-
                                     lated residences and a lone Coast Guard station.                However,
                                     the attraction of Assateague Island National Seashore, the
                                     State Park, and Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge on Assa-
                                     teague Island has put great pressures for development on all
                                     adjacent lands.     Resort development has been proposed near
                                     Ocean City.

                                     There is some potential for oil-and-gas development within the
                                     area.    The eastern portion of the proposed site was considered
                                     for oil- 'and-gas leasing as part of Lease Sale No. 59.           Nu'mer-
                                     ous sand-and-gravel pits are active commercial enterprises
                                     along the coast, and there is potential for additional develop-
                                     ment.    It has been suggested that the area offers enormous
                                     potential for port-a nd- refinery development, and for energy
                                     and mining projects.

                                     The Baltimore District Corps of Engineers maintains naviga-
                                     tional channels within the proposed site's boundaries and is
                                     authorized to deepen to 16 feet the 14-mile-long channel from

                               Virginia-Maryland Nearshore Waters and Barrier Island Bay - Page 4

                                     Ocean City Inlet to Chincoteague Bay, and also operates a
                                     beach nourishment project on Assateague Island.                Material
                                     produced during channel maintenance is deposited in waters
                                     adjacent to the channel.

                                     The Commonwealth of Virginia, authorized by the revised Wet-
                                     lands Act (Virginia State Code 62.1-13.1 through 62.1-13.20),
                                     operates a protective regulatory framework.          Vegetated wet-
                                     lands are *protected by permit requirements for encroachment
                                     activities, while development of state-owned wetlands is pro-
                                     hibited.   Interticial flats come under protective state or local
                                     encroachment permit jurisdiction.      The Nature Conservancy, a
                                     private nonprofit organization, owns and protects 35,000 acres
                                     of the Virginia barrier islands.

                                     The barrier islands within the proposed sanctuary boundaries
                                     are geomorphically active.       The a  'rea is subject to sudden
                                     squalls and flooding, although the dunes and beaches of the
                                     barrier islands absorb the impact of major storms.          Navigation
                                     in the area is sometimes hampered by fog, rough seas, and
                                     strong tidal currents.      Shorelines of the islands have been
                                     displaced throughout historical time.

                      111. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                      Burrell, Jr., B. G., M. Castagna, and R. K. Dias (eds.), 1972, A study
                            of the commercial and recreational finfisheries of the eastern shore of
                            Virginia, Accomack and Northampton Counties:             history review and
                            recommendations for improvements: Special Rept. in Applied Mar. Sci.
                            and Ocean Engineering No. 20, Virginia Inst. of Mar. Sci., 187 pp.

                      Committee to Preserve Assateague Island, Inc., 1982, Marine sanctuary site
                            evaluation (site name:    all the coastal bays and marshes and the ocean
                            out to the 3-mile limit surrounding Assateague Island, Maryland/
                            Virginia): Unpublished Communication t.o NOAA, 3 pp.

                      MacLeod, B. and G. J. Hennessey, 1981, The islands, a special issue:
                            natural history guide to the Virginia Coast Reserve:              The Official
                            Newsletter of the Virginia Coast Reserve, 21 pp.

                      The   Nature Conservancy, 1976, The Virginia Coast Reserve study: Arling-
                            ton, Vir. , 4 Vols.

                      The   Nature Conservancy, 1980, The Atlanticis last frontier . . . the. Vir-
                            ginia barrier islands:    A Color-illustrated Pamphlet, Arlington, Vir.,
                            17 pp.

                      The   Nature Conservancy, 1982, Welcome to the Virginia Coast Reserve:               A
                            Descriptive Flyer, Arlington, Vir., Single Sheet.

                      Richards, C. E. and M. Castagna, 1970, Marine fishes of Virginia's eastern
                            shore (inlet and marsh, seaside waters):         Chesapeake Sci. , Vol. 11 ,
                            No. 4, pp. 235-248.

                                                      Virginia-Maryland Nearshore Waters and Barrier Island Bay - Page 5

                                     Silberhorn, G. M. and A. F. Harris, 1977, Accomack County tidal marsh
                                                inventory:               Special Rept. No. 138 in Applied Mar. Sci. and Ocean En-
                                                gineering, Virginia Inst. of Mar. Sci., 106 pp.

                                     Worcester Environmental Trust, Snow Hill, Maryland, 1982, Unpublished
                                                recommendation to NOAA.in support of establishing marine sanctuary:
                                                coastal bays and marshes and the ocean out to the three-mile limit,
                                                surrounding Assateague I.sland, Maryland/Virginia, 4 pp.

                                                                                                                                                         OCEAN CITY

                                                                                                                                            J

                                                                                                         MAR'4LANQ_ -

                                                                                                                                 SSATEAGIJ
                                                                                                                                     Is.

                                                                                                     PARRAMORE I

                                                                                  HOG IS.
                                                                                    BAY \ \
                                                                                                HoO I
                                                                                                    -X                    C)

                                                                                         COS

                                                                                   SHIP SHOAL IS..

                                                                                                                                       71@ T

                                                                                                                                1A
                                                                     'SHERMAN   IS
                                                                                                                                                                 rpi
                                                             L                                                  75-1 3@                                                  _j

                                                                                                     LOCATION MAP

                                               PRELIM11NARY CANDIDATE
                                       MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                       1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                          A. SITE NAME:        Narragansett Bay and Block Island Sound, Rhode
                                               Island

                          B. LOCATION:        (NORTH ATLANTIC REGION)

                              1.  LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE: 411201 N, 711421 W to
                                                             410281 N, 710201 W

                              2.  DESCRIPTION:       Narragansett Bay is a drowned river valley
                                  whose topography dominates the State of Rhode Island.             The
                                  candidate area site contains three core sites connected by a
                                  buffer zone (see map).      The core locations represent different
                                  ecological habitats and would require appropriately different
                                  management programs.       All locations are. wholly within     State
                                  waters.   These core sites are:

                                  a.   Fort Wetherill and Newport Neck            Representative  of a
                                       southern New England high-energy coast, this site          con-
                                       tains a rocky shoreline that descends rapidly into         deep
                                       100-130 ft (30-40 m) water, grading into sand or mud       sub-
                                       strate.  The area contains a wide variety of habitats, and
                                       is, in many parts, difficult to approach from land because
                                       of high rocky cliffs.    Heavy boat traffic is common.       The
                                       area of the candidate site is approximately 2 Mi2 (5.2
                                       kM2).

                                  b.   Charleston Pond (or Ninigret Pond) Area - Ninigret Pond
                                       is a microtidal, wave-dominated coastal lagoon system com-
                                       prised of a shallow estuarine embayment that lies parallel
                                       to the coast,- south of Charlestown (Rhode Island), and is
                                       separated from the open ocean by a barrier beach.            The
                                       lagoon is 0.2-1.25 mi (0.3-2.0 km) in width. The pond is
                                       permanently connected to Block Island Sound through a
                                       reinforced breachway, flushed by tides twice a day.
                                       Fresh water flows into the landward side of the pond from
                                       streams and groundwater springs, which results in a salin-
                                       ity lower than Block Island Sound.       Offshore of the pond
                                       lies the inner shelf beyond which lies a small, submerged
                                       reef as part of an outcrop of glacial sediments.       The site
                                       within the candidate area would comprise about 4 Mi2 (3      * .2
                                       kM2) and would include the coastal lagoon and adjacent
                                       nearshore waters approximately 0.5 mi (0.8 km) from
                                       shore.

                                  c.   Pettaquamscutt River - The Pettaquamscutt River passes
                                       through the towns of Narragansett, South Kingstown, and
                                       North Kingstown and represents a rich diversity of marine
                                       habitats, including deep, anoxic upper basins where the
                                       H2S environment is inhabited by rare microorganisms,

                                                Narragansett Bay and Block Island Sound - Page 2

                                       extensive and undisturbed salt marshes, and the largest
                                       alewife run in the State.     The tidal excursion is 6.5 mi
                                       (10.5 km) long and represents a salinity gradient ranging
                                       from 31.5 o/oo at the mouth of the river to 15 o/oo at the
                                       top of the upper pond.    The total area encompassed is ap-
                                       proximately 0.3 Mi2 (0.8 kM2).

                          RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                          A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                              1 .  The sites are highly diverse with species from both the Vir-
                                   ginian and Acadian biotic provinces. They are very represen-
                                   tative of the southern New England coastal environment.         The
                                   multiple core concept proposed here identifies three sites with-
                                   in the Narragansett Bay/Block Island Sound region that repre-
                                   sent a diversity of ecologically important habitat types.

                              2.   The area supports a number of active programs in scientific
                                   research and resource management.        A great deal is known
                                   about the area due to many years of intensive research by sci-
                                   entists at the University of Rhode         nd, the Rhode Island
                                   Department of Environmental Management (DEM), Brown Uni-
                                   versity, Roger Williams College, and other research organiza-
                                   tions.

                              3.   The site is heavily used for recreation, shipping, commercial
                                   fishing, SCUBA diving   ' and marine education.    It is an excel-
                                   lent example of a multiple-use area.

                              4.   A great deal of effort has been made recently directed toward
                                   rational management of the Rhode Island coastal area.     Much of
                                   the necessary framework for management is already present.

                              5.   The Fort Wetherill site is highly diverse and is an excellent
                                                            southern New England rocky
                                   representation of the                                          Vidal
                                   zone.

                              6.   The Ninigret Pond nomination represents an excellent example
                                   of a multiple-use coastal lagoon/barrier beach system, charac-
                                   terized by abundant fishery resources, mixed recreational de-
                                   mands, varied land-use patterns, a strong conservation ethic
                                   among local citizens, and high biotic diversity and productiv-
                                   ity.

                              7.   The Pettaquamscutt River represents an excellent example of a
                                   tidal river flowing into Narragansett Bay and is characterized
                                   by a wide diversity of marine habitats, including extensive,
                                   undisturbed salt marshes and, in particular, deep anoxic_7Ta_-
                                   sins with sulfide env-ironments.

                                                 Narragansett Bay and Block Island Sound - Page 3

                          B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                               1. NATURAL RESOURCES

                                   a.   Fort Wetherill and Newport Neck - The rocky subticlal zone
                                        of Narragansett Bay exhibits a diversity of species that is
                                        high for the New England area.        A recent survey of the
                                        Fort Wetherill area listed more than 60 species of macro-
                                        invertebrates, 30 species of chordates, and 15 species of
                                        algae.   Because the waters are rich in a diverse assem-
                                        blage of planktonic species, filter feeders which serve as
                                        forage for game fish are attracted to the area.         Approxi-
                                        mately 40 species of finfish have been captured in these or
                                        adjacent waters.      Migratory waterfowl such as Canada
                                        geese, black duck, mallards, eider, brant, scoter, and
                                        buffleheads use these waters at some time during their
                                        seasonal migrations.    Harbor seals are wintertime visitors.
                                        In late summer, tropical marine species appear, trans-
                                        ported northward in Gulf Stream eddies.

                                   b.   Ninigret Pond - Ninigret Pond is characterized by high di-
                                        versity, ranging from brackish-water species (e.g., oys-
                                        ters and blue crabs) to saltwater species (e.g., scallops,
                                        bluefish, and flounder). Because the pond is mainly shal-
                                        low and its waters are relatively free of turbidity, sunlight
                                        penetrates through to the bottom, supporting dense beds
                                        of eelgrass and algae.      These benthic plant communities,
                                        along with the phytoplankton in the water column, make
                                        the pond a very productive marine ecosystem. The waters
                                        of Ninigret Pond are well known to local fishermen as a
                                        rich fishing area, especially for striped bass.        The Ne-
                                        braska Shoal area, situated offshore nearby, is a particu-
                                        larly rich fishing area.

                                   c.   Pettaquamscutt River - This core site represents an estua-
                                        rine water area of about 740 acres with a watershed of
                                        about 8700 acres.      About 250 acres of undisturbed salt
                                        marshes are located in Pettaquamscutt Cove and the Nar-
                                        rows area.    The river, also called Narrow River, shows a
                                        wide range of salinity and oxygen regimes, and supports a
                                        wide diversity of marine and estuarine species, including
                                        benthic forms (e.g., mussels, clams, oysters, bay scal-
                                        lops, and blue crabs) and finfish species (e.g., alewife,
                                        winter flounder, bluefish, white perch, and striped bass).
                                        The river constitutes the largest alewife run in the State,
                                        a phenomenon which has been studied for many years. A
                                        high diversity of bird species is also present, including
                                        herons, swans, ducks, hawks, gulls, terns, kingfishers,
                                        swallows, and sparrows.       In addition, a wide variety of
                                        migratory fowl use the area.       There are extensive fresh-
                                        water wetlands and bog habitats at the northern end of
                                        the river above Carrs Pond and extensive mature wood-
                                        lands   in  upland    areas.    There are three Auclubon-
                                        designated Natural Areas within the watershed.         The deep

                                                   Narragansett Bay and Block Island Sound - Page 4

                                         [40-60 ft (12-18 m)] anoxic basins in the upper sections of
                                         the river provide a sulfide environment which supports a
                                         rich diversity of rare microorganisms.           Studies of this
                                         unique habitat have indicated its biotic richness, as well
                                         as unusual biochemical and ecological characteristics (salin-
                                         ity stratification with occasional turnover, long residence
                                         time, nutrient sinks, etc.).

                                2. HUMAN USES

                                    a.   Site-Specific Uses

                                         Fort Wetherill and Newport Neck - The area is used heavi-
                                         ly for recreation.    Three separate State Parks (Fort Weth-
                                         erill, Fort Adams, and Brenton Point) provide both shore
                                         access and buffer zones for much of the proposed sanctu-
                                         ary area.     The U.S. Coast Guard maintains a lighthouse
                                         and rescue station at Castle Hill.       Fort Wetherill is a fa-
                                         vored site for recreational SCUBA diving. On weekends in
                                         the summer, over 100 divers a day enter one of the two
                                         small coves.     Sportsmen fish from     the rocky points, and
                                         commercial fishing for lobsters and several finfish species
                                         is conducted extensively within the      proposed boundaries of
                                         the site.    Recreational boating is     of great importance to
                                         the residents and tourists in the        towns of Newport and
                                         Jamestown. All commercial shipping to Newport and Provi-
                                         dence (Rhode Island) and to Fall River (Massachusetts)
                                         pass through the waters of the proposed sanctuary.                A
                                         great deal of research has been conducted by marine ecol-
                                         ogists from the University of Rhode Island at the proposed
                                         site, and the research continues.         Additionally, the area
                                         has very high potential for marine education through the
                                         local schools and the Marine Advisory Service of the Uni-
                                         versity of Rhode Island.

                                         Ninigret Pond - Ninigret Pond, also called Charlestown
                                         Pond by local residents, is moderately developed in some
                                         sections.    Formerly a naval airfield, the northern shore,
                                         as well as a portion of the barrier beach on the south
                                         side, is managed as part of the Ninigret National Wildlife
                                         Refuge.    Large tracts of undeveloped land are found along
                                         the northwest periphery of the pond.         These natural areas
                                         comprise about 20 percent of the pond's shoreline.              The
                                         pond serves many public needs, including conservation,
                                         recreation, economic, and aesthetic needs.          Many impacts
                                         result    f rom  extensive     u se,   including     eutrophication
                                         threats,    sedimentation    buildup,    and   overfishing.      To
                                         better assess the extent of these and other problems, the
                                         URI Coastal Resources Center launched a broad-based
                                         study of Rhode Island coastal ponds, emphasizing in par-
                                         ticular the Ninigret Pond complex.

                                                Narragansett Bay and Block Island Sound         Page 5

                                       At present, the major fisheries in the southern Rhode Is-
                                       land coastal ponds include blackback flounder, eel, qua-
                                       hog, lobster, clams, and scallops, with some effort being
                                       directed toward oyster cultivation.     The tidal circulation,
                                       water quality, and hydrologic configuration of the estua-
                                       rine rivers make the area unique for mariculture.       I t rep-
                                       resents one of only three areas on the east coast that has
                                       these advantages occurring naturally.     This salt-pond hab-
                                       itat contains the only naturally reproducing oyster 'popu-
                                       lation in the New England area.     In the spring, perch and
                                       striped bass dominate the fishery.        Recreation-al fishing
                                       focuses on quahogs, flatfish, tautog, and bass.       An aver-
                                       age yield of 20,000 pounds of flounder are taken commer-
                                       cially from Ninigret Pond.       The 1979 fishery yield for
                                       Ninigret was 24,000 pounds of finfish, 1134 pounds of
                                       shellfish, and 2268 pounds yield from aquaculture.        Recre-
                                       ational fishing, according to a survey made during April to
                                       July 1979, was estimated to comprise 7000 trips to Ninigret
                                       and Green Hill Ponds with an estimated catch of 6000 win-
                                       ter flounder taken mostly from small boats.

                                       The pond and beaches provide a particularly good educa-
                                       tional medium.    Several years ago, a nuclear power plant
                                       was proposed for the area but was never built. Many vol-
                                       umes of baseline ecological information have been generated
                                       by the nuclear industry and government agencies.            Sub-
                                       stantial shore-land holdings are held by the U.S. Fish and
                                       Wildlife Service (USFWS), the State Department of Environ-
                                       mental Management (DEM), and the Town of Charlestown;
                                       all of which are held for nonconsumptive recreation, edu-
                                       cation, and preservation.      The entire barrier beach is
                                       owned by DEM (as the Ninigret Conservation Area) and
                                       USFWS.     At the center of the pond itself are over 500
                                       acres of land, owned by the town and USFWS, known as
                                       Ninigret Park and the Ninigret Wildlife Refuge.              The
                                       Frosty Drew Nature Center adjoins the USFSW refuge.
                                       This is a nature and environmental education center.

                                       Pettaquamscutt River - This river represents an excellent
                                       candidate   for  assessing    the  environmental    impacts    of
                                       multiple-use activities in a marine ecosystem.      About one-
                                       third of the watershed is residentially developed.      Most of
                                       the undeveloped areas are in mature woodland forests, al-
                                       though some open space is farmland or pasture.           Recrea-
                                       tional wilderness areas include Canonchet Park, a 175-acre
                                       park in Narragansett, and YMCA, Boys' Club, and Girl
                                       Scout camps situated in the upper basin.         The Audubon
                                       Society also has holdings in the area.      Boating and swim-
                                       ming are extensive along the river, and many private
                                       docks are in place, mostly in the mid section of the river.
                                       Finfishing is popular from the bridges, and shellfishing is
                                       extensive in the mid portions and Cove.

                                                  Narragansett Bay and Block Island Sound - Page 6

                                         Water quality is rated 11SA," although some independent
                                         coliform tests taken in Carrs Pond and Mettatuxet Creek
                                         indicated 11SB11 coliform levels.   The prime source of this
                                         water quality problem is thought to be from runoff in the
                                         mid portion and possibly failure of septic systems backing
                                         into storm drains.    The State Department of Environmental
                                         Management and the Narrow River Watershed Advisory
                                         Commission are coordinating additional tests to assess the
                                         extent of this problem in order to recommend abatement
                                         measures.

                               b.   General Uses

                                    The Narragansett Bay area is heavily used.         There is a great
                                    deal of shipping, commercial fishing, and recreational boating.
                                    Despite the extensive human use, environmental degradation of
                                    the lower bay area has been minimal.           The coastal lagoons
                                    have been under severe pressure from expanding human popu-
                                    lations.

                                    The Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Program en-
                                    forces protective regulations governing the alteration of the
                                    coastline and tidal waters, including dredginQ, filling, waste
                                    disposal, and construction.     The Rhode Island Marine Fisheries
                                    Council promulgates regulations specific to resource utilization
                                    (i.e., harvesting seasons, quotas, and size limits).

                                    In the heavily used Fort Wetherill and Newport Neck core
                                    areas, the prime concern is the environmental disturbance
                                    caused by divers.      At Ninigret Pond, management issues in-
                                    clude threats from overfishing within the lagoon, rapid sedi-
                                    mentation of the tidal inlet and pond due to the emplacement
                                    of a permanent breachway, growing eutrophication and bacte-
                                    rial loading resulting from increased suburbanization and con-
                                    sequent septic system leachates and surface runoff, and aes-
                                    thetic degradation that can result from dense development.           A
                                    management plan is currently being developed by CRMC to ad-
                                    dress siltation, tidal flushing, salinity changes, eutrophication,
                                    and boating needs.

                                    Identification of the Pettaquamscutt River for a marine sanctu-
                                    ary would provide an excellent opportunity to assemble data
                                    concerning multiple-use impacts on a tidal river.       Protection of
                                    the river's resources are provided by the Federal government
                                    (floodplain regulations, dredging, and con@truction require-
                                    ments of the Army Corps 'of Engineers and the Coastal Zone
                                    Management Program), the State of Rhode Island (Department
                                    of Environmental Management, Coastal Resources Management
                                    Council, and Department of Health), and by local town govern-
                                    ments.    Concerns expressed by the State and by the three
                                    towns along the river regarding land use, recreational policies,
                                    and water quality (especially as indicated by the enthusiastic
                                    formation of the Narrow River Watershed Council) provide a
                                    sound basis for developing an effective Sanctuary Management
                                    Plan.

                                                 Narragansett Bay and Block Island Sound - Page 7

                                   In addition, the Narrow River Preservation Association, an ac-
                                   tive community organization whose members have worked for
                                   many years to protect the river, has focused on long-term
                                   management of the watershed area.           The Coastal Resources
                                   Center at the University of Rhode Island is working with the
                                   Coastal Resources Management Council to develop Special Area
                                   Management Plans consistent with Rhode Island's coastal zone
                                   management policies.     The Coastal Resources Center has devel-
                                   oped an extensive citizen's network throughout the three
                                   towns.    There is also special interest by research scientists in
                                   the unique features of the deep anoxic basins in the upper re-
                                   gions of the river.       Better characterization of this habitat
                                   would provide valuable information for developing better man-
                                   agement techniques for    the nation's polluted harbors and bays.

                                   The Environmental Impact Statement prepared by the U.S. De-
                                   partment of the Interior for OCS Lease Sale No. 52 identifies
                                   this site as a potential pipeline corridor for tranporting pro-
                                   duced gas to shore.       However, little interest, at present is
                                   shown in OCS oil-and-gas development in this adjacent area.

                     Ill. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                     Belin, C. W., 1978, Productivity of benthic microalgal communities in a tem-
                           perate tidal ly-control led estuary:    Ph.D. Dissertation, Univ. Rhode
                           Island, 136 pp.

                     Boothroyd, J. C., N. E. Friedrich, S. R. McGinn, C. A. Schmidt, M. J.
                           Rosenberg, C. R. Peters, J. H. O'Brien, and L. A. Dunne, 1981, The
                           geology of selected microtidal lagoons, Rhode Island:         1.  Data Sum-
                           mary and Management Questions, Vol. 1; Tech. Rept. No. 2-SRG,
                           Dept. Geol., Univ. Rhode Island.

                     COMS, 1982, Nomination to U.S. Marine Sanctuary Program, Narragansett
                           Bay and Block Island Sound:        Center for Ocean Management Studies,
                           Univ. Rhode Island, 18 pp.

                     Gaines, Jr., A. G., 1975, Papers on the geomorphology, hydrography, and
                           geochemistry of the Pettaquamscutt River:        Ph.D. Dissertation, Univ.
                           Rhode Island, 278 pp.

                     Goggin, K. , A. Ganz, and R. Crawford, 1978, Shellfish survey of Ninigret
                           Pond: Rhode Island Fish and Wildlife Leaflet No. 52.

                     Horton, D. B., 1958, The occurrence and distribution of fish in upper Pet-
                           taqu'amscutt River as related to certain chemical and physical vari-
                           ables: M.S. Thesis, Univ. Rhode Island.

                     Lemieux, P. and R. MacFadden, 1981, Survey of Fort Wetherill marine sub-
                           tidal area:   Rept. to Rhode Island Division of Environmental Manage-
                           ment.

                                            Narragansett Bay and Block Island Sound - Page 8

                   Olsen, S., D. Robadue, and V. Lee, 1980, An interpretive atlas of Narra-
                        gansett Bay: Marine Publ. No. 40, Univ. Rhode Island.

                   Seavey, G. L., 1975, Rhode Island's coastal natural areas:     priorities for
                        protection and management:    Coastal Resources Center, Univ. Rhode
                        Island, Marine Bull. No. 40.

                   Sisson, R. T., T. Lynch, and B. Simon, 1980, Coastal fishery resource
                        assessment for the coastal waters of Rhode Island:   Completion Report
                        P.L. 88-309, Project 3-313-R-1.

                                                                          to!

                                u                                   a uJ
                                                                      >             We pr
                            N

                                 129

                                                                                FT WETHERILL-
                                                                                 BRENTON POINT

                                                                           Rhode Island
                                                                             Sound
                                       NINIGRET
                                                                     J.d;+K
                                       Powl)

                                                                              1 2 ;5 45

                                      BJ oc16

                                                  LOCATION MAP

                                             PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                      MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                      1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                         A. SITE NAME: Nantucket Shelf

                         B.  LOCATION:      (NORTH ATLANTIC REGION)

                             1.  LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE: 400 to 410301 N, 680 to 700301 W

                             2.  DESCRIPTION:      The proposed Nantucket Shelf sanctuary site,
                                 totaling 1805 Mi2 (4650 kM2), is a series of dissimilar, biologi-
                                 cally rich habitat types associated with and influenced by the
                                 circulation and migration patterns unique to the Georges Bank
                                 region--a biogeographic transition zone between the northern
                                 Acadian and southern Virginian provinces.       Habitats included
                                 are open bay (Nantucket Sound), nearshore open ocean and
                                 shoals (Nantucket Shoals), and shelf-edge submarine canyon
                                 (Oceanographer Canyon).       The Nantucket Sound site is in
                                 Federal waters between Nantucket Island and Cape Cod, Mas-
                                 sachusetts, and its boundaries are contiguous with the Massa-
                                 chusetts Ocean Sanctuaries.    The Nantucket Shoals and Ocean-
                                 ographer Canyon sites lie wholly within Federal waters off the
                                 coast of Massachusetts.    A major upwelling of cold, nutrient-
                                 rich water extending along the eastern---edge of the shoals
                                 serves as a temperature barrier for warm-water species to the
                                 south and is responsible for the notably high productivity ex-
                                 hibited by this area.    The Nantucket Shelf has been exten-
                                 sively influenced by glacial processes (i.e., forming Nantucket
                                 Island and adjacent features).     Tidal range is about 3 ft (1
                                 m).   Total area of each portion of the potential sanctuary is:
                                 Nantucket Sound 80 mi:f (200 kM2); Nantucket Shoals 1000 Mi2
                                 (2590 km2); and Oceanographer Canyon 100 mi2 (250 kM2).

                    H. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                         A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                             1.  The area contains distinctive ecological, recreational, historic,
                                 and aesthetic resources that form the basis of the predominant
                                 economic pursuits of the area:   fishing and tourism.

                             2.  The area supports the economically valuabte commercial and
                                 recreational fisheries. of the area which have traditionally been
                                 a social and economic mainstay for many Cape and Island com-
                                 munities.

                             3.  The area is of exceptional value for its contribution to the
                                 heritage of the United States, forming an integral part of the
                                 maritime tradition of this country.

                                                                             Nantucket Shelf - Page 2

                               4.  Proposed Marine Sanctuary designation would extend into Fed-
                                   eral waters the management/ protection activities already offered
                                   by the Massachusetts Ucean Sanctuary T-rtwithin State waters.

                               5.  The research opportunities within the proposed site are high,
                                   offering potential in biology, oceanography, geology, and me-
                                   teorology.

                           B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE
                               1. NATURAL RESOURC@ES

                                   a.   NANTUCKET SOUND: The richness of this transition zone
                                        ecology enhances the stability of plant life and the produc-
                                        tivity of the estuaries in bordering coastlands, that provide
                                        habitats for the many species that use the proposed Marine
                                        Sanctuary areas as nursery and feeding grounds.             More
                                        than 16 species of fish and shellfish are commercially har-
                                        vested in the area.     The most common species found are
                                        alewife, bluefish, cod, flounder, clams, whelks, scallops,
                                        and squid.     Scup, black sea bass, striped bass, and
                                        tautog are also popularly sought species.

                                   b.   NANTUCKET SHOALS:          Nantucket Shoals are a series of
                                        shifting sand shoals, derived from glacially deposited sedi-
                                        ments that have been winnowed by marine processes. Most
                                        of the shoals are found under water depths of only 25 ft
                                        (8 m).    Between many of the shallow areas are channels
                                        extending 60-120 ft (18-36 m) deep.      Because of the shal-
                                        low and ever-shifting nature of the area, as well as strong
                                        and erratic currents, Nantucket Shoals has been responsi-
                                        ble for numerous wrecks and loss of lives.        The site in-
                                        cludes Great South Channel.

                                        Long-finned squid and sea herring spawn in the vicinity of
                                        the shoals.   Fishes common to this area include flounders,
                                        bluefish, striped bass, pollock, tuna, Atlantic cod, and
                                        mackerel.   Clams, scallops, and quahogs are found in some
                                        of the shoals' areas.     These waters are well known for
                                        recreational fishing.  Swordfish and white marlin are occa-
                                        sionally seen in the vicinity of Asia Rip.       The proposed
                                        site also includes areas important to scallopers and ground
                                        fishermen, and may include some environmentally sensitive
                                        spawning areas as well.    The area is a major overwintering
                                        habitat for common eiders, white-winged scoters, and other
                                        migrating sea ducks which feed on blue mussels, sand
                                        lances, and other forage' fish.    Humpback whales occasion-
                                        ally feed within the area.      Marine turtles also use the
                                        area, but more research is needed to fully understand the
                                        niche they occupy.

                                   c. OCEANOGRAPHER CANYON: Submarine canyons, in gen-
                                        eral, provide a heterogeneous environment characterized

                                                                         Nantucket Shelf - Page 3

                                      by a variety of substrate types, and because they act as
                                      conduits for the transport of material from the shelf to the
                                      abyss, filter-feeding organisms are more common than
                                      those found on the shelf.    Within Oceanographer Canyon,
                                      the concentration of organisms per 100 M2 reaches peak
                                      values of 400-450 at depths of 1300 ft (400 m) and 6000 ft
                                      (1800 m).   Major faunal groups include corals (primarily
                                      alcyonarians), echinoderms,- fish, and crustaceans (partic-
                                      ularly shrimp).    Tilefish and an abundance of lobsters
                                      occur in this submarine canyon.      Oceanographer Canyon,
                                      in general, is one of the better studied, northeastern
                                      submarine canyons.

                             2.   HUMAN USES

                                  The Nantucket area is one of the most popular summer resorts
                                  on the East Coast.     The high quality of the coastal waters
                                  supports a multitude of recreational activities essential to a
                                  viable tourist industry.     Boating, swimming, fishing, and
                                  sightseeing enthusiasts have traditionally been lured by the
                                  area's aesthetic qualities.

                                  The area supports significant commercial and recreational fin-
                                  fishing and shellfishing industries which depend ' upon the
                                  maintained ecological integrity and water quality of the area.
                                  Nearly 80 species of commercially important fish and shellfish
                                  occur in these waters.    Black sea bass, striped bass, scup,
                                  flounder, squid, blackfish, quahog, and bay scallops are
                                  among those species which are commercially harvested locally.

                                  The Nantucket Shelf is of exceptional value for its contribution
                                  to the maritime heritage of the United States. Since the Revo-
                                  lutionary War period, the area has been the location of ship-
                                  yards and has served as a major shipping corridor and the
                                  home port for a large segment of America's fishing and trading
                                  industries situated along the coast.    The proposed area con-
                                  tains a number of shipwrecks that are of historical and educa-
                                  tional value in interpreting the maritime history of America.    I

                                  Portions of the site lie on an area of the outer continental
                                  shelf which is currently being considered for oil-and-gas leas-
                                  ing (Lease Sale No. 82) in February 1984.          Oceanographer
                                  Canyon is located in an area having high hydrocarbon poten-
                                  tial.

                                  The area supports a growing interest in biological and geologi-
                                  cal reasearch.  The limited research performed on the canyons
                                  east and south of Nantucket indicates subtle but real differ-
                                  ences among them in terms of current regime, habitat type,
                                  and biota.   Detailed scientific study of the Nantucket Shelf
                                  complex is lacking, and therefore, the area provides a wealth
                                  of opportunities for investigating the interrelationships among
                                  the various biogeographic components.    The University of Mas-
                                  sachusetts operates Nantucket Field Station which engages in

                                                                           Nantucket Shelf - Page 4

                                   research in all aspects of the marine and coastal environments
                                   surrounding Nantucket.      In addition, other educational and
                                   research institutions in the area are hosted for teaching and
                                   research purposes.

                                   Portions of the adjacent nearshore waters are already protected
                                   and managed by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.         Relevant
                                   State programs include the Ocean Sanctuary Act, the Areas of
                                   Critical  Environmental     Concern    Program,    the    Wetlands
                                   Protection Act, the Wetlands Restriction Act, and other coastal
                                   protection regulations.  The management of the area is of vital
                                   concern to the State Legislature, the Massachusetts Department
                                   of Environmental Management, and the local townships.         Fur-
                                   thermore, since the area is the object of intense commercial
                                   fishing activity, the New England Fisheries Management Council
                                   regulates fishing in the area through a coordinated fishery
                                   management plan.

                     111. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                     BLM, Final environmental impact statement, proposed 1982 OCS oil and gas
                          lease sale, offshore the north Atlantic states, OCS Sale No. 52:        Bu-
                          reau of Land Management, N.Y., 500+ pp.

                     Freeman, B. L. and L. A. Walford, 1974, Angler's Guide to the United
                          States Atlantic Coast, Section 11, Nantucket Shoals to Long Island
                          Sound: USGPO, Wash., D.C., 16 pp.

                     Hecker, B., G. Blechschmidt, and P. Gibson, Epifaunal zonation and com-
                          munity structure in three mid- and north Atlantic areas of the U.S.
                          outer continental shelf; final report for the canyon assessment study
                          in the mid- and north-Atlantic areas of the U.S. outer continental
                          shelf:   Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory, for Bureau of Land
                          Management, Wash., D.C., 400 pp.

                     MCZM, 1980, Nomination for a marine sanctuary in Nantucket Sound:          Exec.
                          Ofc. Environ. Affairs, Mass. Coastal Zone, Dept. Environ. Manage-
                          ment, Div. Mar. Fisheries, Ofc. Attorney General, 62 pp.

                     NOAA/NMFS, 8 December 1982, Letter to Chelsea International from Ruth
                          Rehfus, Branch Chief:      NMFS Serv. Div., Habitat Protection Branch,
                          Gloucester, Mass., 3 pp.

                     ORCA, 1980, Data atlas, eastern United States coastal and ocean zones:
                          Ofc. Coastal Zone Management, NOAA, Wash., D.C.

                                                                                                                Nantucket Shelf              Page 5

                                   BOS ON

                                      MASS.                RACE PT.                                                                            4Y-
                                                         7E         D
                                                              E3 Ay
                                                      r
                                                        CAPE  COD
                                                        c,

                                  R. 1.
                                                            zzvs I
                                               %A11
                                                       THA S
                                                    VINEYARD
                                                                                NANTUC
                                                             NANTUCKET 15.
                                                                                  SHOALS

                                                                                                                                               41@-

                                                                         OCEAN

                                                                                                                   RAPHER CANYON
                                                                                      40                   OCEANOC'

                                             MILES

                                                                                                                                                4or-
                                                                                          too

                                 CONTOURS IN FATHOMS

                                                                             LOCATION MAP
                                                                                   @40@

                                                 PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                         MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                       1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                           A.  SITE INAME: Stellwagen Bank

                           B.  LOCATION:       (NORTH ATLANTIC REGION)

                               1.   LATITUDE/LONGITUDE:          The approximate coordinates of the
                                    Gandiclate site are between 421101 and 420251 north latitude and
                                    70'05' and 70130' west longitude.

                               2.   DESCRIPTION:      The candidate site is approximately 32 mi (51
                                    km) by 15 mi (24 km) covering approximately 480 Mi2 (1230
                                    kM2).   The site is entirely in Federal waters situated over the
                                    submerged Stellwagen Bank which is 6.3 mi (10.2 km) north of
                                    Cape Cod, Massachusetts.         Stellwagen Bank is a glacially-
                                    deposited gravel feature, rising sharply above the surrounding
                                    sediments, approximately 16 mi (30 km) long and as wide as
                                    5.4 mi (10 km).    The Bank is arcuate in shape, and the water
                                    column over the Bank ranges from shallows of 61 ft (20 m)
                                    along the scarp on the broad southwest end and 78 ft (30 m)
                                    at the northwest end, downward toward a maximum of 120 ft
                                    (40 m) at the southeast end.          North of the Bank, bottom
                                    sediments reach a maximum depth of approximately 600 ft (183
                                    m).

                                    Scientific and educational interest has been drawn to Stell-
                                    wagen Banks due to the recurring seasonal abundance of sev-
                                    eral cetacean species, including the largest high-latitude popu-
                                    lation of humpback whales observed in the contiguous United
                                    States.   The biologically-productive waters of the Bank pro-
                                    vide important feeding and nursery grounds for the humpback,
                                    fin, minke, and northern right whales.        Commercially valuable
                                    fishery resources are also found in the area, including mack-
                                    erel, bluefin tuna, and bluefish.        The Bank is extensively
                                    used by commercial and recreational fisherman, whalewatchers,
                                    and cargo vessels.

                     11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                           A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                               1.   Stellwagen Bank is a seasonally important feeding *area to at
                                    least seven cetacean species and is of particular importance to
                                    a significant portion of t      western North Atlantic population
                                    of humpback whales.       Residency of humpback whales in the
                                    vicinity of tF_e-B-an_'R is from approximately mid-March or mid-
                                    April through mid-November, one of the longest such periods
                                    known anywhere in the world.

                                                                             Stellwagen Bank - Page 2

                               2.   High biological productivity at Stellwagen Bank results in an
                                    '@_bunclance of fishery resources important to both cetaceans
                                    and commercial fishing.

                               3.   The Bank is accessible to researchers and recreationists.         The
                                    site is used extensively for recreation, whalewatching, ship-
                                    ping, and commercial and sport fishing.        Boat traffic conges-
                                    tion is increasing.

                           B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                               1.   NATURAL RESOURCES

                                    Stellwagen Bank- is a rich fishery ground situated between
                                    Provincetown and Gloucester.      The high biological productivity
                                    of the Bank, which supports extensive fisheries resources, is
                                    believed to be a result of turbulent upwelling of nutrient-rich
                                    bottom waters.

                                    The Bank is seasonally inhabited by numerous fin- and shell-
                                    fish which are harvested commercially and recreationally.
                                    Mackerel, bluefin tuna, bluefish, spiny dogfish, Atlantic stur-
                                    geon, shortnosed sturgeon, American shad, Atlantic menhaden,
                                    Atlantic herring, striped bass, Atlantic cod, haddock, silver
                                    hake, yellowtail flounder, winter flounder, and ocean quahog,
                                    American lobster, and deep sea scallop are caught here.             A
                                    large population of sand lance feeds upon zooplankton and in
                                    turn is fed upon by balanopterid whales.       A great diversity of
                                    pelagic and shore birds seasonally migrate through the candi-
                                    date site, feeding and nesting on the Bank system.
                                                                          4
                                    Several species of sea turtles occasionally occur in the vicinity
                                    of Stellwagen Bank.     Most frequently sighted are the logger-
                                    head qnd the leatherback turtles, which feed in the general
                                    area.   Transient species include Kemp's ridley and the green
                                    sea turtles, which are sometimes seen stranded in the Cape
                                    Cod Bay area.

                                    At least seven cetacean species inhabit and feed within the
                                    Stellwagen Bank area.     Scientific attention has focused on the
                                    four species of "great whales" found at the Bank:         the hump-
                                    back, the fin, the minke, and the northern right.           With the
                                    exception of the minke (the smallest of rorqual whales), these
                                    species are all     federally listed as "endangered"         species.
                                    Smaller cetacean species include the Atlantic white-sided dol-
                                    phin, the white-beaked dolphin, and the harbor porpoise.            In
                                    addition to these frequently-observed cetacean species, killer
                                    whales and pilot whales have also been observed.

                                    Minke, fin, and northern right whales are observed in the vi-
                                    cinity of Stellwagen Bank year round.       It is estimated that no
                                    more than 150 northern right whales remain in the north
                                    Atlantic ocean, yet sightings of these animals continue to be
                                    made at Stellwagen Bank.

                                                                            Stellwagen Bank - Page 3

                                   Humpback whales are the subject of ongoing study it Stell-
                                   wagen Bank.      More than 100 humpback whales return each
                                   year to the area, an important summer feeding ground, with as
                                   many as 80 percent of previously known individuals returning.
                                   Some individuals have been observed to reappear 'during each
                                   of 5 to 6 consecutive years at the.- Bank.        These -,vha:es mi-
                                   grate along as yet undefined routes of approximately 2000 mi
                                   (3700 km) in length from mating and calving grounds in the
                                   east central Caribbean Sea to the nursery grounds provided
                                   by Stellwagen Bank.

                               2.  HUMAN USES

                                   The waters over and around Stellwagen Bank are used exten-
                                   sively for commercial and recreational fishing, whalewatching,
                                   and other recreational uses. The fishery resource is protected
                                   and managed under a plan adopted by the New England Fish-
                                   eries Management Council.       Shipping lanes for vessel traffic
                                   traveling in and out of Boston Harbor navigate directly across
                                   the Bank.     The area is also used extensively for scientific,
                                   educational, and recreational programs.       The increasing num-
                                   ber of whale watchers, and commercial and recreational fish-
                                   ermen in the area is causing growing boat traffic congestion in
                                   the area.

                                   The proximity of Stellwagen Bank to heavy populated and in-
                                   dustrialized coastal communities has recently brought a number
                                   of proposals for utilizing the bank in a manner incompatible
                                   with its natural resource values.    These proposals include con-
                                   struction of a mile-long waste-tire disposal site, dredging for
                                   sand and gravel, oil-and-gas exploration, and sewage sludge
                                   disposal.

                                   In the past, there has been some dumping of toxic chemicals
                                   near the Bank; however, not much is known about the exact
                                   composition and/or location of these activities.        Additionally,
                                   there have been discussions about possible gravel mining oper-
                                   ations in the area.   As yet, this activity has not occurred.

                                   The western boundary of the proposed site lies adjacent to the
                                   eastern edge of a 300-ft deep Foul Area Dump Ground main-
                                   tained by the New England District ArMy Corps of Engineers.
                                   The Foul Area is a disposal site for government and private
                                   dredging projects conducted within Massachusetts Bay.             The
                                   Corps also conducts biological monitoring within the Foul Area
                                   and is cooperating with the National Marine Fisheries Service
                                   in bioaccumulation studies at the sand lance in order to assess
                                   the impact of disposal activities on the local whale community.

                                   The southern boundary of the proposed site Cuts across the
                                   waters of the Commonwealth north of Provincetown.         These wa-
                                   ters are protected by the Massachusetts Ocean Sanctuary Act.

                                                                              Stellwagen Bank - Page 4

                                    The Environmental Impact Statement prepared by the U.S. De-
                                    partment of the Interior for Oil and Gas Lease Sale No. 42
                                    identifies part of the proposed site as a potential pipeline cor-
                                    ridor for transporting future North Atlantic OCS gas produc-
                                    tion to shore.

                                    During the last five years, the Provincetown Center for
                                    Coastal Studies     (a non-profit organization)      has conducted
                                    cetacean- related   research.    T hey   have compiled extensive
                                    collections of photograph and video recordings of cetaceans in
                                    the candidate site. Defenders of Wildlife is involved in a plan
                                    to study the interrelationship between pelagic bird species and
                                    the cetaceans of Stellwagen Bank.

                      Ill. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                      Council on Environmental Quality and Office of Coastal Zone Management,
                           1980, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Eastern United
                           States Coastal and Ocean Zones:       Data Atlas, August 1980, 143 pp.

                      Foster, S. C. and C. A. Mayo, 1982, Nomination of Potential National
                           Marine Sanctuary Candidate (Stellwagen Bank):           Submitted to NOAA,
                           Marine Sanctuaries Program Office, Unpubl., 10 pp.

                      Mayo, C. A., 1982, Observations of cetaceans:          Cape Cod Bay and south-
                           ern Stellwagen Bank Massachusetts 1975-1979:          Rept. No. MMC-80/07,
                           Prep. for U.S. Marine Mammal Commission.

                      University of Rhode Island, 1981, A characterization of marine mammals and
                           turtles in the mid- and north-Atlantic areas of the U.S. outer conti-
                           nental shelf:   Annual Rept. for 1979 for the Cetacean and Turtle As-
                           sessment Program, April 1981.

                      University of Rhode Island, Executive summary for 1979:          a characterization
                           of marine mammals and turtles in the mid- and north-Atlantic areas of
                           the U.S. outer continental shelf:      Annual Rept. for 1979 for the Ceta-
                           cean and Turtle Assessment Program, June 1981.

                      U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, 1982, Lease
                           status, potential hazards, petroleum-related facilities, transp@rtation
                           networks:    Final Environmental Impact Statement:       Proposed 1982- Outer
                           Continlental, Shelf Oil and Gas Lease Sale Offshore the North Atlantic
                           States, OCS Sale No. 52, Visual No. 1 , April 1982.

                                                                                 Stellwagen Bank      Page 5

                                                                                7011@

                                                   CAPE ANN

                                                                00

                             BO ON
                                                                    Of

                                                                                         loofm

                                                             20fm                   50fm        4Y
                                  MASS.

                                 0         10
                                       6-,@                 CAPE COD SAY
                                     MILES

                                                                   Cot)

                                                                                   0

                                                              APPROX. BOUNDARY - - -

                               rpi.

                                                        LOCATION MAP

                                               PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                       MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                       1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                          A. SITE NAME: Frenchman Bay and the Gulf of Maine

                          B. LOCATION:        (NORTH ATLANTIC REGION)

                              1.  LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE: 43155' to 440351N; 68021 to 681116'W

                              2.  DESCRIPTION:      The proposed Frenchman Bay sanctuary site
                                  and its off-lying waters [407 Mi2 (1070 kM2)] represent the
                                  entire range of coastal habitats existing within the Acadian
                                  biogeographic region of the North Atlantic.       Habitats include
                                  open Gulf of Maine shelf waters with a variety of sea floor
                                  types below the critical 35 fathom (65 m) contour; inshore wa-
                                  ters, including exposed rocky shore, shell, armored and deep-
                                  er mud bottoms; and a wide variety of coastal Maine Bay types
                                  including rocky and cobble shore, mud and sand beaches, and
                                  extensive mud flats and salt marshes.        The Frenchman Bay
                                  site includes both Federal and State waters and abuts the
                                  Acadia National Park on both eastern and western shores.
                                  The area has been heavily glaciated, and erosional and deposi-
                                  tional features, as well as the whole spectrum of late Pleisto-
                                  cene and Holocene marine sedimentation types, occur in abun-
                                  dance.   The tidal range is large [8-12 ft (2.5-3.7 m)] and is
                                  accompanied by rapid tidal currents and an extensive and
                                  richly productive interticlal zone.   Moderate water temperature
                                  range and abundant fog prevail.      The total area of the poten-
                                  tial site is 407 Mi2 (1070 kM2).

                     11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                          A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                              1.  The area contains distinctive ecological, recreational, and aes-
                                  thetic resources that form the basis of the predominant eco-
                                  nomic pursuifs-of the area:     fishing and tourism.   The coastal
                                  area abutting the site includes the highest point of land on the
                                  East Coast of the United States, has long been lauded for its
                                  great natural beauty, and includes the only coastal national
                                  park in the Acadian Region. -

                              2.  All of the major fisheries of  the coast, particularly lobstering,
                                  clamming, scalloping, and      herring fishing, are extensively'
                                  practiced in the area of the   sanctuary.   On the Maine coast as
                                  a whole, all of the fisheries have suffered heavily from over-
                                  fishing.  A broader scale of resource management is needed if
                                  the industry and its heritage are to be preserved.

                              3.  The area was one of the earliest settlements on the Maine coast
                                  and has a long maritime/ fishing history.

                                                                           Frenchman Bay - Page 2

                              4.  The proposed Marine Sanctuary designation would extend sea-
                                  ward the management/ protection activities now given to the ex-
                                  ceptional shore-based resources Fy -Acadia National P@_r_k.

                              5.  The Acadian Region of the United States has been little
                                  studied in a resource management context.      The research op-
                                  portunities within the proposed site are high, offering poten-
                                  tial in biology, oceanography, geology, and fisheries.         The
                                  College of the Atlantic (a college emphasizing a curriculum    and
                                  basic research in human ecology and conservation) and the
                                  Mount Desert Marine Biological Laboratory both lie on           the
                                  shore of Frenchman Bay.

                          B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                              1.  NATURAL RESOURCES

                                  The Maine coast, along with its sister Maritime Provinces to
                                  the north, forms the distinctive Acadian Biogeographic Region.
                                  Maine possesses all of the basic biotic characteristics of the
                                  region as a whole.     However, because of its large tides and
                                  consequent water climate moderation, particularly in eastern
                                  Maine and the Frenchman Bay area, many European boreal spe-
                                  cies are also included as elements of the flora and fauna.     The
                                  large percentage of shoreline per straight mile of coast, a con-
                                  dition resulting from a unique geological history, along with a
                                  large tidal range, gives rise to a rich macroalgal flora and an
                                  exceptionally high primary productivity.       The high benthic
                                  productivity, based on an algal-supplied cletrital food chain,
                                  supports the traditional lobster and clam fisheries and provides
                                  a nursing and feeding ground for a wide variety of finfish in-
                                  cluding many species of economic value.     Several seabird feed-
                                  ing and nesting sites, a large number of seal haul-outs, and
                                  an important whale feeding area (Mt. Desert Rock) are present
                                  within the area under consideration.

                              2.  HUMAN USES

                                  The Frenchman Bay and Mt. Desert area has long been one of
                                  the most visited resorts on the East Coast.       Because, of its
                                  great natural beauty and the presence of a carefully nurtured
                                  National Park, it is generally regarded as the archetype site
                                  for sightseeing, hiking, climbing, and boating on the rock-
                                  bound coast of Maine.    The yachting, boat repair, and build-
                                  ing facilities of Southwest and Northeast Harbors are among
                                  the most important on the entire coast.          An international
                                  ferry, the "Bluenose," has long made its U.S. landing at Bar
                                  Harbor in Frenchman Bay.

                                  The fishing practices of the region are characteristic for the
                                  coast as a whole.   An extensive lobster fishery is carried out,
                                  particularly from Winter and Southwest Harbors, and histori-
                                  cally, the large mud flats of the northern reaches of the. Bay
                                  provided abundant soft-shelled clam.    Scallops and herring are

                                                                             Frenchman Bay - Page 3

                                   taken   by   dragging    and   stop-seining,   respectively.     The
                                   fishing- and work-boat building and repair facilities are among
                                   the best on the coast.

                                   A major segment of the permanent coastal population of this
                                   area has traditionally made its living from the coastal fishery.
                                   In the past few years, increased fishing efforts have charac-
                                   teristically yielded diminishing returns.    The area is very rich
                                   in primary production and a modern, aquaculturally-based
                                   fishery could provide a much larger food and economic return
                                   while still supporting biological conse.rvation.

                     111. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                           Fefer, S. 1. and P. Schettig, 1980, An ecological characterization of
                               coastal Maine: U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Dept. Int., 5 vols.

                          Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company, 1978, Final report, environmental
                               surveillapce and studies, Augusta, Maine.,

                           Research Institute of the Gulf of Maine/Public Affairs Research Center
                               (TRIGOM/PARC), 1974, A socioeconomic and environmental invento-
                               ry of the North Atlantic region, Sandy Hook*to Bay of Fundy, 3
                               vols.

                                                                                                           Frenchman Bay - Page 4

                                                                                              FRENCHMAN BAY/GULF OF MAINE

                                                          Ellsworth

                                                                                                          SCHOODIC
                                                                                             4           PENINSULA
                                                                                           4
                                                             0

                                                                                                         Winter
                                                                     MOUNT                                    at
                                                                         OESERTI@    Her
                                                                           ISLANOO

                                                                outhwest
                                                                 Harbor

                                                  b

                                               C?

                                                                     >

                                                                                            -0 r              E,

                                        MEW! ACADIA NATIONAL PARK

                                         1  2  3 4    S Hauticsi Miles                              M  U T DESERt ROCK

                                                      10 KIlotet.

                                                                          LOCATION MAP

                                               PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                        MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                       1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                          A. SITE NAME: Mid-Coastal Maine

                          B. LOCATION:        (NORTH ATLANTIC REGION)

                               1.  LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE: 43135' to 43157' N, 69115' to 691501 W

                               2.  DESCRIPTION:      The site covers an area of 430 Mi2 (1114
                                   kM2), including both State and Federal waters adjacent to the
                                   coast of Maine.    Included in the site are the mouths of three
                                   major estuaries, two bays, several offshore islands (though no
                                   land is included in the proposed Marine Sanctuary site), and a
                                   large inshore region.     The site contains intertidal, shallow
                                   subticlal, and deep-water zones which vary greatly in bottom
                                   type, wave exposure, and biological components.         The three
                                   rivers are the Kennebec, Sheepscot, and the Damariscotta.
                                   The site includes Johns and Muscongus Bays; and Southport,
                                   Sequin, Damariscove, Fishermen's Inner Heron, Outer Heron,
                                   White, Squirrel, Georges, and Monhegan Islands.

                     11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                          A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                               1.  The site is representative of the entire coast of Maine, con-
                                   taining diverse habitats and biological populations.

                               2.  The area is highly productive, with intertidal and subtidal
                                   algae contributing substa__n-fla7Ty__to primary production.

                               3.  The area contains rocky interticlal, cobble, and sandy shores;
                                   mud flats; and salt marshes.       Subticlal habitats inc7ude rock
                                      ges, 1
                                      ..- -arge stones, gravel, sand, and mud bottoms.

                               4.  The site is the center for much of the marine research and
                                   educational activity in the State of Maine, with          ee insti-
                                   tutions located on its boundaries.

                          B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                               1.  NATURAL RESOURCES

                                   The area under consideration is known for its magnificent
                                   scenic splendor created by the juxtaposition of diverse, con-
                                   trasting geomorphic features.     These natural features include
                                   wetlands, lakes, ponds, rivers, estuaries, marshes, long in-
                                   terticlal mud flats, high rocky shores, wide sandy beaches,
                                   subtidal granite ledges, offshore rock islands, and deep-sea
                                   habitats.   The area is biotically rich and diverse in macro-
                                   fauna, phyto- and zooplankton, and the colorful red, green,

                                                                           Mid-Coastal Maine - Page 2

                                    and brown macroalgae (kelp).        The ecological complexity of
                                    these interrelated habitat types is observed in the character-
                                    istic biological zonation patterns apparent along much of the
                                    rocky coastline and is reflected in the magnitude of the local
                                    fishing industry landings.    The major fisheries dependent upon
                                    the Mid-Coastal Maine food web include alewife, eel, salmon,
                                    smelt, herring, cod, a variety of groundfish, lobster, shrimp,
                                    and soft-shelled clams.      Worms are also commercially har-
                                    vested.

                                    Several endangered or threatened species, such as the bald
                                    eagle, osprey, and shortnosed sturgeon, inhabit the area.
                                    Harbor seals, harbor porpoises, finback, and pilot whales are@
                                    occasionally observed in the site.     The Muscon"gus Bay area,
                                    the site of the National Audubon Society Study Camp, is the
                                    area where puffins (federally designated as an "endangered"
                                    species) have been successfully reintroduced.

                                    Thousands of shorebirds, including seagulls, eider ducks,
                                    etc., nest upon the rocky precipices of the mainland and off-
                                    shore rock islands and feed upon mussels and other food spe-
                                    cies.

                                    A unique feature of the area is a bubbling, freshwater spring
                                    sequestered in Damariscove Harbor.       The spring issues from a
                                    rock cleft three feet below the high watermark.

                               2.   HUMAN USES

                                    The proposed site is one of the most important recreational
                                    areas along the coast of Maine.     This pristine section of coast-
                                    line with its myriad of rivers, harbors, coves, and islands
                                    provides exceptional opportunities for sailing and boating.
                                    The high intensity of these activities, together with the tour-
                                    ism they support, causes great seasonal fluctuations in popu-
                                    lation densities and constitutes an important and unique facet
                                    associated with this region.

                                    Adjacent land regions support residential housing, but the
                                    population density generally is very low.        The discharge of
                                    domestic sewage from houses has been one of the largest pol.-
                                    lution sources, but is decreasing due to laws which require
                                    sewage treatment.    Because of the low number of people, large
                                    area, and strong tidal currents, effluents are rapidly dis-
                                    persed.   The low level of agricultural development in the area
                                    is also expected to contribute no significant amounts of soil
                                    and pesticide runoff.

                                    Maine's first permanent European settlement was on Damaris-
                                    cove Island in 1622.    The island is on the National Register of
                                    Historic Places.  Monhegan Island contains an archeological site
                                    which is believed to have been used for swordfish hunting
                                    4000 years ago.    There are also mainland sites adjacent to the
                                    proposed Sanctuary that were settled in the 1620s and 1630s.
                                    There is some evidence that prehistoric Indian settlements,

                                                                              Mid-Coastal Maine - Page 3

                                    now underwater, exist within the site's boundaries. There are
                                    also at least 55 shipwrecks, dating from 1635 to 1941 , thought
                                    to be located within the proposed site.

                                    Fishing and recreation are the major uses of these waters.
                                    Commercial fishing is particularly active and of vital importance
                                    to the local economy and the region, producing nearly 10 per-
                                    cent of the total of Maine's fishery landings.              Lobstering,
                                    clamming, worming; aquaculture, seining, otter trawling, and
                                    other types of finfishing provide major sources of revenue and
                                    contribute significantly toward the support of the tourist in-
                                    dustry which is highly developed in this region. Sportfishing,
                                    pleasure boating, and swimming are similarly important to resi-
                                    dents and      tourists alike.      While low water temperatures
                                    throughout much of the year and the absence of large sandy
                                    beaches discourage heavy beach use for swimming, both sailing
                                    and motorboating are very popular activities and represent im-
                                    portant uses.

                                    Many educational and research institutions are convenient to
                                    the region.     The Maine Department of Marine Resources Re-
                                    search Laboratory, the Maine Aquarium, and the Bigelow Labo-
                                    ratory for Ocean Sciences are located in Boothbay Harbor.
                                    The University of Maine operates the University of Maine Dar-
                                    ling Center in Walpole.

                                    The Nature Conservancy owns a number of islands within the
                                    proposed site.

                                    The major industry is shipbuilding, but it does not produce
                                    large    pollutant   loads.    Other     industries   such    as    fish-
                                    processing plants, machine shops, and lumbering activities also
                                    have negligible pollutant impacts in this marine area.

                                    Encompassed within the proposed sanctuary is a portion of the
                                    Maine Metamorphic Belt, an area known to contain near-
                                    economic deposits of nickel and copper.           However, there has
                                    been little prospecting in this region.

                      Ill. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                           State of Maine Department of Marine Resources, 1982, To develop a
                                nomination for a Marine Sanctuary:        Final Rept., NOAA/OCZM Co-
                                operative Agreement No. NA81AA-H-CZ129.

                           Perkins, L. F. and P. F. Larsen, 1975, A preliminary checklist of the
                                marine and estuarine invertebrates of Maine:           TIGOM, Publ. No.
                                10, 37 pp.

                           Stickney, A. P. , 1959, Ecology of the Sheepscot River estuary:              U.S.
                                Fish and Wfldl. Serv. , Spec. Sci. Rept. Fish. 309, 21 pp.

                                                                                                                                          Mid-Coastal Maine - Page 4

                                                                               70  o                          69'                           Be                             67*
                                              45@                                                                                                                       T-3     450
                                                                                                                                                           Machias     T-,

                                                                                                                                                                                N

                                                                                                Rockland.'

                                              44*                                                                                                                               44*

                                                            Portland;'      11 P
                                                                                                                           MID-COASTAL MAINE
                                                                                                                          MARINE SANCTUARY
                                                                                                                         430.1 square nautical miles

                                                                                                                                   0                25

                                                                                                                                       N. MILES

                                              4e                                                                                                                                43*

                                                                              70'                            6T                             68                    W       67

                                                                                                                                                                                        4e57'
                                                           X                      Boothbov
                                                                                                                                MUSCONGUS BAY                            Georges
                                                                                                                                                                            ids.
                                                                                                                     Kmaquid Neck
                                                                                                          Damoriscotto R
                                                                                                      Linekin Neck

                                                                         Southport 1.

                                                                   Georgetown 1.
                                                                                             I                         , ,
                                                                                           Damariscove 1.                                                              Monhegan 1.

                                                          Kennebec R.

                                          CapeSmall

                                                            Seguin 1.                                      tp

                                                                                                                 MID-COASTAL MAINE
                                                                                                               MARINE SANCTUARY
                                                                                                              430.1 square nautical miles

                                                                                                                                                  5
                                                                                                            0

                                                                                                                      NAUTICAL MILES

                                                                                                                                                                                        4e45'
                                                                                                                                                                                        15,
                                      69@, 50,

                                                                                                 LOCATION MAP

                                        SOUTH ATLANTIC REGION

                                  MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION LIST
                                           SOUTH ATLANTIC REGION

                                            MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW

                  1. Resource Evaluation Team

                  The South Atlantic resource evaluation team was comprised of four
                  marine scientists, one each from North Carolina, South Carolina,
                  Georgia, and Florida. The team leader was Dr. Vernon J. Henrv, a
                  Professor of Marine Geology who moved from Skidaway Institute of
                  Oceanography to Chairman of the Geology De        'loartment at Georgia
                  State University during 1982. The other team members were Dr. F.
                  John Vernberg, Director of the Belle Baruch Institute for Marine
                  Biology and Coastal Research, University of South Carolina; Dr.
                  Dirk Frankenberg, Director, Marine Sciences Program, Universitv
                  of North Carolina; and Dr. Harold Wanless, Associate Professor oi
                  Marine Geology, Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric
                  Science, University of Miami, Florida.         'The team members made
                  contacts with State agencies, local interest groups, and other
                  marine scientists in their areas.

                  2. Site Evaluation and Public Partici-oation Process

                  The team met on two occasions; on May 11-12, 1982, in Raleigh,
                  NC, and on September 27, 1982, in Columbia, SC.           At the f irst
                  meeting, the team considered more than 20 discrete sites as
                  potential    Marine   Sanctuary    candidates,    ranging    from    Cape
                  Hatteras, NC, to the east side of Key West, FL, including t@e
                  sites that were on NOAA's List of Recommended Areas (44 Fed. Reg.
                  62552, Oct. 31, 1979) .     At the f irst meeting, the team selected
                  four sites, or groups of sites, that they considered potential
                  Marine Sanctuaries:

                  SA-1.   Beaufort Inlet, NC.      This is    a group of three distinct
                  areas near Beaufort, NC.       A total of about 33 sa mi, entirely
                  located within State waters, would have been encompassed bv this
                  proposal.

                  SA-2.   CaDe Fear Inlet, NC.      This is    a two-site proposal near
                  Wilmington, NC, also in State waters.         This small (8. 8 scr mi)
                  site received little public support and was later dropped from
                  consideration.

                  SA-3.   Santee  Delta, SC.     This lar-ge delta system (75 sa mi in
                  this proposal) is unique on the Atlantic coast.          Just south of
                  Georgetown, SC, the Santee Delta has a number of interesting
                  features, not the least of which is the rediversion of the Santee
                  River.

                                                  SA-1

                   SA- 4.  South Atlantic Coral Grounds.      The only offshore proposal
                   initially made by the team, this system encompassed five ais-crete
                   sites between Beaufort, NC, and St. Lucie, FL.         Onlv two of the
                   five sites, the St. Lucie Nearshore Reef and the Oculina Reefs
                   off Florida, are part of the team's final five recommendations.

                   The writeups on these four potential Marine Sanctuaries were
                   mailed to 195 groups and individuals in the states of North and
                   South   Carolina,    Georgia,     and  Florida,    plus   82    national
                   organizations and Federal agencies.             Chelsea received 37
                   resioonses to this mailing by the end of a 45-day comment period
                   (August 20, 1982). In addition to commenting on the team's four
                   Proposals, the public was invited to submit nominations for other
                   potential sanctuary candidates.      Four such areas were nominated
                   prior  to the September 20, 1982, deadline.          Those four areas
                   were:

                   SA-5.  Ten Fathom Ledge - Big Rock,     off NC
                   SA-6.  White Oak River System, NC
                   SA-7.  Port Royal Sound, SC
                   SA-8.  Sombrero Key Reef, Sambo Reefs and Content Keys, FL

                   Of the four public nominations, only the last one, off the
                   southeast coast of Florida, did not meet the team's initial
                   criteria. Descriptions of the other three proposals were mailed
                   out, to the individuals and groups that received the first
                   mailing,   on  October    22,   1982.     Fifty-five   responses    were
                   received,  and  most of those were in favor of Port Royal Sound.
                   Following  the  expiration of   the public comment Period (November
                   22, 1982), the resource         evaluation team made their final
                   decisions by telephone.

                   3. Recommendations

                   3.1. State-Federal Relationshivs

                   Most Dotential sanctuary sites in the South Atlantic region are
                   in State waters.     In a number of instance, sites could also be
                   considered for estuarine sanctuary status.          Port Roval Sound,
                   Santee Delta, White Oak River, Winyah Bay, Beaufort Infet (2 of 3
                   sites) , St. Helena Sound, and other locations considered by the
                   team, are all State water, estuarine sites.        The South Atlantic
                   offshore area is characterized by relatively shallow and
                   nutrient-rich waters. It does not contain features as dramatic
                   as the Flower Garden Banks off Texas, or the coral reefs of
                   southeast Florida and the Caribbean.       ExceiDt for low to moderate
                   relief live-bottom areas, alreadv exemplified bv Gray's Reef
                   National Marine Sanctuary, the oftshore area from Ca-pe Hatteras
                   to the Florida-Georgia border is relatively barren.          The team's
                   South Atlantic Coral Grounds DroDosal (SA-A-) attemiDted to link
                   several of the known live-bott-om -areas, both on the- continental

                                                   SA-2

                 shelf and at the shelf break, into a single unit for research and
                 preservation purposes.   Some of the shelf break sites, however,
                 are so deep that the only way one could see them is with a
                 submarine.

                 The productivity of the South Atlantic coastal ocean is directly
                 related to the large estuarine areas along the coast.          Those
                 areas were considered by the team to be of high ecological value.
                 The protection of those estuaries is extremely important, and
                 their educational and recreational values cannot be overstated.
                 The questions have been asked: "Why Port Royal Sound rather than
                 St. Helena Sound?" and "Why not Winvah Bay-?" There are no good
                 answers to these auestions.      The purpose of the team was to
                 select South Atlantic sites that would be representative of the
                 ecosystems that are found there.    The resource evaluation team,
                 in making its recommendations to NOAA, is saying that these five
                 sites, properly managed, will help to preserve an excellent
                 cross-secti-on o@f the ecosystems of the South Atlantic coast.

                 3.2. @ite Selection

                 The South Atlantic resource evaluation team recommends the
                 following five sites for placement on the Marine Sanctuary Site
                 Evaluation List. Without prioritizing them, the sites are:

                 1.  Ten Fathom Ledge - Big Rock, NC
                 2.  White Oak River, NC
                 3.  Santee Deltar SC
                 4.  Port Royal Sound, SC
                 5.  Florida Coral Grounds, FL

                 As part of its final regional report, the team has approved a set
                 of brief site descriptions, including maps in each case which
                 define the boundaries of the proposed sanctuaries.- This portion
                 of the report contains highlights of the team's rationale for
                 choosing each of the five sites, as well as comments on specific
                 management issues that came to the team's attention.

                 3.2.1. Ten Fathom Ledge - Big Rock, NC

                 This is a two-site proposal that was discussed by the North
                 Carolina Marine Sciences Council.       In the first request for
                 public comment, the team solicited comments on seven discrete
                 sites off the coast of North Carolina.    Three sites made up the
                 "Beaufort Inlet" complex; two went under the heading "Cape Fear
                 Inlet;" and two more were offshore as part of the "South Atlantic
                 Coral Grounds" proposal.    Dr. Dirk Frankenberg, the team member
                 from North Carolina, received several negative comments on the
                 inshore sites (Cape Fear and Beaufort) , as well as suggestions
                 from State government scientists that the offshore sites were not
                 the best choices.    There was some concern over the benefits of

                                               SA-3

                  Marine Sanctuary status for some of the inshore areas, with the
                  feeling expressed that they were adequately protected by State
                  authoritv.   Only eleven comments were received on this proposal,
                  five in iavor, six neutral, and none opposed.

                  The Ten Fathom Ledge - Big Rock proposal would be two distinct
                  sites off the coast of North Carolina.           This recommendation
                  replaces the two sites off North Carolina originally proposed in
                  the "South Atlantic Coral Grounds," while maintaining the same
                  ecological approach as that earlier proposal.        The inner shelf
                  site (Ten Fathom Ledge) is a 135 sq mi rectangle with its center
                  located about 17 miles south of Cape Lookout, NC.           The outer
                  shelf site, "Big Rock," is located on the shelf break about 36
                  miles offshore, and is a 36 sq mi square.        These are both hard
                  bottom areas, with high productivity and assemblages of tropical
                  marine organisms at the northern extreme of their range.            The
                  inner site includes four popular recreational diving spots; one
                  of which is a World War If German submarine.          Both -areas   are
                  popular with sport fishermen and "head-boats."

                  The site evaluation team felt that the two            site proposal,
                  encompassing only about 170 sq mi, was sufficient to protect the
                  hard bottom resources contained within them. In the inner shelf
                  site, the areas of high recreational, cultural, and sportfishing
                  value are small, discrete areas. This should enhance @he ability
                  of NOAA to manage the proposed sanctuary.

                  3.2.2. White Oak River, NC

                  Even though the team dropped the inshore sites at Beaufort Inlet
                  and Cape Fear, NC, it is recommending the White Oak River estuary
                  in its entirety.      This river system was proposed as a Marine
                  Sanctuarv bv the local (White Oak River) chapter of the Izaak
                  Walton Leaaue.    It is a small estuary and, in Dr. Frankenberg's
                  words, is "an absolutely wonderful place."        It is already well
                  protected on the land side by the Croatan National and Hoffman
                  Forests.   The entire area suggested for sanctuary consideration
                  is only about 30 sq mi and would run from the upriver extreme of
                  tidal influence out to the ocean. Much of the estuary bottom is
                  subject to State oyster leases. Eleven comments were received on
                  this proposal; four in favor, five neutral, and two opposed.

                  The principal objection to the White Oak River System is based on
                  the premise that the area should be cons        idered instead as an
                  Estuarine Sanctuary.     However, present State of North Carolina
                  policv, the team was told, is to require a gift of fee simple
                  land before the State will consider an Estuarine Sanctuarv
                  proposal.    In the case of the White Oak River, too much of the
                  land is alreadv in Federal or State hands, and an Estuarine
                  Sanctuary    Proposal    would    not     receive   favorable     State
                  consideration.

                                                 SA- 4

                  3.2.3. Santee Delta, SC

                  The Santee River Delta is the largest delta on the southeast U.S.
                  coast. Some 75 sq mi of delta and Atlantic Ocean waters would be
                  included in the proposed Marine Sanctuary.          It is unusual in
                  another asDect.    Over 40 years ago, the State of South Carolina
                  and the U.S. Public Works Administration diverted most of the
                  flow of the Santee River to the Cooper River.         Since diversion,
                  the biological character of the marshes in the Santee Delta has
                  changed significantly due to the reduction in freshwater flow.
                  In 1983, this man-made change is scheduled to be reversed, with
                  the Santee River flow to be rediverted down the Santee by the
                  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.      The imDact of the rediversion is
                  likely to be as dramatic as the original diversion, and the
                  process has attracted considerable attention in the scientific
                  community.

                  There were only nine public comments on the Santee Delta
                  proposal.     Both the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the
                  American Petroleum Institute recommended that the area be
                  considered as an Estuarine, rather than Marine, Sanctuary.           The
                  South Carolina Coastal Council came out in opposition to the
                  site.   While there are a number of equally important estuarine
                  sites on the South Atlantic coast, the deltaic feature, plus the
                  value of the scientific        information to be gained f-rom the
                  rediversion, gave Santee Delta a place on the team's final list
                  of recommended Marine Sanctuarv sites.

                  3.2.4. Port Royal Sound, SC

                  There is a lot of enthusiastic public support for this proposal.
                  Although Port Royal Sound had received considerable attention as
                  a potential Marine Sanctuary several years ago, the resource
                  evaluation team did not place it on the initial list of sites for
                  public comment. A strong, well-drafted nomination was submitted
                  jointly by L.P. Maggioni & Co., a South Carolina oyster
                  processor, the Hilton Head Fishing Co-op (commercial shrimpers) ,
                  the local Sierra Club chapter, and the regional vice-president of
                  the Audubon Society.      During the second public comment Period
                  r)etitions containing 199 signatures of local residents, and 40
                  additional comments, were received on Port Royal Sound - with
                  only one dissenting comment. The sole voice in'opposition to the
                  proposal came from the Defenders of Wildlife, stating that the
                  area should be considered as a candidate for the Estuarine
                  Sanctuary program.

                  Port Roval Sound is South Carolina's largest deelowater sound.
                  Freshwater input is low, and the Sound is one of the f inest
                  saltwater fishing areas on the South Carolina coast.           The salt
                  marshes bordering the Sound are extremely productive and vital to
                  the fisheries of the area. Water based recreation and commercial

                                                  SA-5

                  fishing are the primary uses of the Sound.            The team was
                  impressed by the fact that the Port Royal Sound sanctuary
                  nomination came from commercial fishermen, while many of their
                  colleagues in the rest of the country were nearly uniformly
                  opposed to any kind of sanctuary proposal.

                  Many of the Port Royal Sound commenters objected to the drawing
                  of an arbitrary eastern boundary that excluded the principal
                  navigational channel and the port of Beaufort, SC. The team was
                  aware that any boundaries they drew would be thrown wide open for
                  debate at subsequent stages of the sanctuary designation process.
                  Thus they chose not to expand the proposed boundaries. There is
                  a lot of development around Port Royal Sound; varticularly up the
                  channel and in the Beaufort area.        The portion of the Sound
                  included in the team's recommendation   fronts areas of relatively
                  less development, with the possible exception of Hilton Head
                  Island. This was considered beneficial by the team, in terms of
                  maintaining strong local support for the proposal.

                  3.2.5. Florida Coral Groundsp FL

                  The fifth site recommended by the resource evaluation team
                  consists of the two southernmost sites originally proposed as
                  part of the "South Atlantic Coral Grounds." These two areas are
                  the 4.5 sq mi "worm," or "bathtub," reef at St. Lucie, FL, and
                  106 sq  mi of the the Oculina Reefs located 17 miles off the
                  Florida coast in 70 to 100m of water.     These two sites received
                  several comments during the first public comment period.         They
                  were both received better than the other three sites in the
                  team's earlier multiple-site proposal.

                  Local support for the "worm reef" was surprisingly strong.        The
                  Florida Department of Natural Resources (DNR) praised the reef Is
                  "outstanding . . . biological and recreational significance." The
                  Martin County Board of Commissioners supported Marine Sanctuary
                  status for the reef by a resolution passed July 27, 1982.         The
                  County is actively engaged in acquiring land at the north end of
                  the reef for -a potential park, with $5 million of County tax
                  dollars.   The Florida DNR has indicated a willingness to manage
                  this site in the event that it is designated.       Only one of the
                  eight specific comments received on the St. Lucie site was
                  negative; that of a private individual who noted that land use
                  management was a more pressing concern than ocean use in that
                  area,

                  The Oculina Reefs are unusual formations of a single type of
                  coral that forms delicatelv -branched structures of high relief.
                  Of all shelf edge sites considered by the team, the Oculina Reef
                  tracts are the most sensitive to damage by certain fishing
                  techniques; e.g., roller trawling. While it may be difficult for
                  the average person to view the corals in place, they are so

                                                 SA-6

                 unique that they warrant the protection afforded by Marine
                 Sanctuary designation.

                 The offshore site, the Oculina Reef, attracted few comments,
                 probably due to its distance offshore and extreme depths.       Only
                 six resDondants commented on this site siDecifically, with the
                 Defenders of Wildlife, Florida Natural Areas Inventory, and the
                 Florida League of Women voters in favor, and the Fiorida DNR
                 taking a neutral stand.     Two oil and gas industry commenters,
                 Exxon and the American Petroleum Tnstitute, opposed sanctuary
                 status for the reef.

                                               SA-7

                                                  PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                          MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                        1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                            A. SITE NAME: Ten Fathom Ledge/Big Rock

                            B. LOCATION:         (SOUTH ATLANTIC REGION)

                                1. LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE:

                                     Ten Fathom Ledge       340261  N 76'371  W
                                                            340131  N 760371  W
                                                            340261  N 760291  W
                                                            340131  N 760291  W

                                     Big Rock Area          340121  N 760151  W
                                                            340071  N 760151  W
                                                            340121  N 760101  W
                                                            340071  N 760101  W

                                2.   DESCRIPTION: The proposed Ten            Fathom Ledge/Big Rock site
                                     includes six separate hard ground ledges of varying relief,
                                     displaying similar tropical algal and coral communities repre-
                                     senting the northernmost extension of hard ground habitats
                                     that occur off Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina. Two sep-
                                     arate areas are included.       The inner shelf site called the Ten
                                     Fathom Ledge area includes such features as Ten Fathom
                                     Ledge, West Rock area, Thirty-Mile Rock area, and a World
                                     War 11 submarine wreck (total area:           135 Mi2 or 350 kM2).
                                     The outer shelf site, some 36 mi (58 km) offshore, includes
                                     the Big Rock area encompassing 36 Mi2 (90 kM2).              Both sites
                                     lie entirely within Federal waters, offshore of North Carolina.

                      11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                            A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                                1.   These hard-bottom communities represent highly productive
                                     tropical biotic assemblages uncommon to the temperate geo-
                                     graphic region in which they are found.

                                2.   The biological productivity of the benthic algal communities pe-
                                     culiar to these hard-bottom reefs is significantly high in com-
                                     parison to productivity in the overlying water column or in the
                                     surrounding sedimentary bottoms.

                                3.   Several of the sites are special diving areas for recreational
                                     purposes.

                                                                   Ten Fathom Ledge/Big Rock - Page 2

                            B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                                 1.  NATURAL RESOURCES

                                     A wide variety of unique habitats are included in the proposed
                                     preliminary candidate site.       The nearshore live-bottom areas
                                     harbor shallow-water subtropical populitions.          Due to the in-
                                     fluence of seasonal temperatures, subtropical communities are
                                     not permanently established.        The offshore sites, whose ben-
                                     thic communities are not as influenced by seasonal water tem-
                                     perature changes, offer permanent residence to subtropical
                                     species.   These permanent offshore communities, as well as the
                                     "Gulf Stream transport," - supply recruits to the nearshore
                                     areas.    Water temperature is the main factor influencing the
                                     distribution of the subtropical biota; depth is of secondary im-
                                     portance.    Many of these subtropical flora and fauna in the
                                     Cape Lookout area are at the northern extension of their
                                     range.

                                     The algae, invertebrates, and fishes of Ten Fathom Ledge, a
                                     nearshore high-relief area (3-16 ft; 1-5 m), have been inten-
                                     sively studied.     Nearly 100 species of fishes have been iden-
                                     tified from the ledge; most have southern affinities.         The area
                                     harbors commercially and recreationally sought species such as
                                     black sea bass, gag, scamp, longspine porgy, whitebone
                                     porgy, tautog, sheepshead, and gray triggerfish.            At least 40
                                     algal species, dominated by brown algae, have been recorded
                                     from the ledge.       The algae are seasonal in occurrence and
                                     abundance with fluctuations in red algae species most notice-
                                     able.   Ten Fathom Ledge is used recreationally by fishermen
                                     and scuba divers; commercial use is predominantly harvesting
                                     of black sea bass.

                                     Live-bottom areas in the transitional depths of 100-130 ft
                                     (30-40 m), such as West Rock and Thirty-Mile Rock, show an
                                     increase in the dominance of subtropical biota which is less in-
                                     fluenced by seasons than the nearshore areas.            The fauna in-
                                     cludes deep-water components, rare in the shallower depths.
                                     Purple reef fish, yellowtail reef fish, spotfin hogfish, Spanish
                                     hogfish, hogfish, bank butterflyfish, red snapper, vermilion
                                     snapper, red porgy, and knobbed porgy are examples of spe-
                                     cies occurring on habitats of these depths.          Scuba, hook and
                                     line, and submersible data have indicated the presence of at
                                     least 100 species of fishes at the two mentioned locations.
                                     Diving and commercial and recreational fishing occur on live-
                                     bottom sites   of these depths.

                                     Diversity of fishes peaks on offshore live-bottom areas in the
                                     depth range of 130-246 ft (40-75 m).           These areas are typi-
                                     cally low in   profile (less than 6 ft; 2 m) and offer stable tem-
                                     peratures.     Epinepheline groupers, lutjanids, and red porgy
                                     dominate the recreational and commercial catches of these
                                     areas.   Species such as reef butterflyfish, bigeye, and tattler,
                                     rare in shallower environments, have been collected in depths

                                                                 Ten Fathom Ledge/Big Rock - Page 3

                                    of this range.    These sites are fished recreationally and com-
                                    mercially; research trawl data are available for some of the
                                    areas.

                                    The Big Rock area marks the seaward boundary of the pro-
                                    posed sanctuary.     The Big Rock is a large area on the conti-
                                    nental shelf break, ranging in depth from 200-400 ft (60-120
                                    m).   The deepest areas, though decreased in diversity due to
                                    cold-water upwelling from the continental            slope,    maintain
                                    several fish populations of commercial importance.        Trolling for
                                    billfish is a frequent activity in the areal.

                                    Nearby Beaufort Inlet provides easy access for fishermen, div-
                                    ers, and researchers. The proposed area receives high recre-
                                    ational and commercial use. The predominant commercial activ-
                                    ity is hook and line fishing, but some trapping for sea bass
                                    occurs; trawling activities are negligible.      Adjacent (within 30
                                    mi; 50 km) to the proposed site are calico scallop beds which
                                    are periodically dredged.

                               2.   HUMAN USES

                                    The major human use of the Ten Fathom Ledge/Big Rock com-
                                    plex is recreational.       Scuba-diving clubs and recreational
                                    fishermen visit the reefs.       Commercial trawling occurs over
                                          low-relief hard grounds.      A significant commercial head-
                                    boat (i.e., commercial boats which take private rod-and-reel
                                    fishermen out for a day of recreational fishing) fishery makes
                                    use of the hard grounds.

                                    Scientific research has been conducted to varying degrees at
                                    the different live bottoms since 1920, and increased research
                                    emphasis on these habitats is anticipated.

                                    There are few activities currently undertaken that would be
                                    incompatible with designation of these coral reefs as a marine
                                    sanctuary.    Commercial and recreational fishing, using hand
                                    and long lures, probably does not harm the reef habitat.
                                    However, there is an increasing utilization of potentially de-
                                    structive fishing gear (i.e., roller trawls) designed to fish
                                    reef habitats for grouper and snapper.        Although the trawlers
                                    may avoid high-relief are-as, some of the coral colonies occur
                                    on relatively flat bottom away from the pinnacles.          Anchoring
                                    may also have a potential impact.

                                    The U.S. Department of 'the Interior, Bure8u of Mines, indi-
                                    cates that the Ten Fathom Ledge/Big Rock areas may have
                                    potential for mineral resources including oil and gas, phos-
                                    phate, and possibly uranium associated with phosphate.

                                    Recent OCS oil and gas exploration activities present a poten-
                                    tial management concern.       Both Ten Fathom Ledge and Big
                                    Rock were considered for oil and gas leasing as part of OCS
                                    Lease Sales Nos. 56 and 78.       The entire area from Virginia to

                                                                Ten Fathom Ledge/Big Rock - Page 4

                                    the Florida Keys is now open for oil and gas leasing.          T hese
                                    shelf-edge reefs occur in areas of major interest to oil com-
                                    panies.

                      Ill. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                           Duke University Marine Laboratory, 1981, South Atlan-tic OCS area liv-
                                ing marine resources study: Vol. 2.

                           Grimes, C. B., C. S. Manooch, and G. R. Huntsman, 1982, Reef and
                                rock outcropping fishes of the outer continental shelf of North
                                Carolina and South Carolina, and ecological notes on the red porgy
                                and vermilion snapper: Bull. Mar. Sci, Vol. 32(l), pp. 277-289.

                           Huntsman, G. R., 1976, Offshore headboat fishing in North Carolina
                                and South Carolina: Mar. Fish. Rev., Vol. 30(3), pp. 13-23.

                           Huntsman, G. R. and 1. G. Macintyre, 1971, Tropical coral patches in
                                Onslow Bay:    Underwater Naturalist, Vol. 7(2), pp. 32-34.

                           Miller, G. C. and W. J. Richards, 1979, Reef fish habitat, faunal
                                assemblages, and factors determining distributions in the South
                                Atlantic Bight:   in Proc. Gulf Caribb. Fish. Inst., 32d Session.

                           Parker, R. 0. and S. W. Ross, Observations from submersibles of the
                                reef ichthyofauna of offshore North Carolina:      Manuscript in prep-
                                aration.

                           Peckol, R., 1980, Seasonal and spatial organization and development of
                                a Carolina continental shelf community:      Ph.D. Thesis, Duke Uni-
                                versity, Durham,'N.C., 229 pp.

                           Peckol, P., 1982, Seasonal occurrence and reproduction of some marine
                                algae of the continental shelf, North Carolina: - Botanica Marina,
                                Vol. 25, pp. 185-190.

                           Peckol, P. and R. B. Searles, 1983, The effects of seasonality and.
                                disturbance on population development in a Carolina continental
                                shelf community:    Bull. Mar. Sci., Vol. 33 (in press).

                           Peckol, P. and R. B. Searles, Temporal and spatial patterns of growth
                                and survival of invertebrate and algal populations of a North
                                Carolina continental shelf community:      Estuarine Coastal and Shelf
                                Sci. (accepted for publication).

                           Schneider, C. W., 1976, Spatial and temporal distribution of benthic
                                marine algae on the continental shelf of the Carolinas:       Bull. Mar.
                                Sci., Vol. 26, pp. 133-151.

                           Searles, R. B. and C. W. Schneider, 1980, Biogeographic affinities of
                                the shallow and deep water benthic marine algae of North Carolina:
                                Bull. Mar. Sci. Gulf and Caribb., Vol. 30, pp. 732-736.

                                                                                                                               Ten Fathom Ledge/Big Rock - Page 5

                                                                                            NC                      v
                                                                                                                                                                                VA

                                                                                                                                                                            ------------

                                                                                                                                                                               NC

                                                                                                                                                                            SC

                                                                                                CAPE LOOKOUT

                                                                                                                                                                                                    34*
                                                                                                                                                        r                                            57
                                                                                                                                                                                                    3
                                                                                                                                                      0

                                                                               TO FATHOM LEDGE

                                                                                                          A

                                                                                 1! EST ROC

                                                                                                          A
                                                                               RO..

                                                                                                                                                        F
                                                                                                                                                        f7                     BIG ROCK
                                                                                                                                                         17-7,

                                                                     0                 5                10

                                                                                    MILES

                                                       rpi                                         7e130'
                                                                                                                                                                                VA)
                                                                                                                                                                            --- --------

                                                                                                                                                                                 C
                                                                                                                                                                            @N
                                                                                                                                                                            SC

                                                                                                            LOCATION MAP

                                               PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                        MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                       1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                          A. SITE NAME: White Oak River System, North Carolina

                          B. LOCATION:        (SOUTH ATLANTIC REGION)

                              1.   LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE        34045' N, 77'081 W

                              2.   DESCRIPTION: The candidate site covers approximately 30 mi2
                                   (78 kM2) entirely within State jurisdiction.    The site contains
                                   Bogue Inlet, the waters surrounding Bear Island and several
                                   nearby islands, the White Oak River Bay, and approximately
                                   10 mi (16 km) of the White Oak River above the Bay (see
                                   map). The White Oak River system is situated on the Atlantic
                                   Coastal Plain.  The Pee Dee formation is the basement rock in
                                   this locality, and it is overlain by limestone formations.
                                   Southwar@d_ from U.S. Highway 17, the river. flows through
                                   seven distinct lakes which were formed between 1940 and 1960
                                   by limestone quarrying activities.    This river system extends
                                   further southward discharging into the Onslow Bay area of the
                                   Atlantic Ocean.   The major tributaries of the White Oak River
                                   system are:    Hunter Creek, Grant Creek, Pettiford Creek,
                                   Starkey Creek, Black    Swamp, and Holston Creek. All of these
                                   tributaries are small   and densely vegetated.     The bottom of
                                   the White Oak River     system is primarily sand and mud with
                                   sand shoals along the margins.      Diverse habitats occur along
                                   and in the candidate site.    Forests, including Hoffman Forest
                                   and Croatan National Forest, line a substantial amount of the
                                   White Oak River system shore.      Marshes also rim the area and
                                   extensive seagrass beds cover portions of the bottom.           The
                                   area has not been intensively developed.

                                   The White Oak River, north of the bay up to U.S. Highway
                                   17, ranges in depth from 5 to 14 ft (1.5 to 4.3 m) and in
                                   width from 490 ft (150 m) to 20 ft (6.1 m).      The river mean-
                                   ders between fresh and brackish hardwood swamp and grassy
                                   marshes.

                                   Bear Island is the site of Hammocks Beach State Park and has
                                   no permanent inhabitants.     There is extensive vegetation and
                                   approximately 4 mi (6.4 km) of beach on this island, including
                                   sand dunes 60 ft (20 m) high.

                                   The Bogue Inlet area has several large islands including Hug-
                                   gins Island.   Huggins Island has rather well-preserved Civil
                                   War earth fortifications.  A number of these islands have bird
                                   rookeries, oyster rocks, sand and mud flats, and seagrass
                                   beds associated with them.

                                   Historically, this area has been repeatedly impacted by hurri-
                                   canes.   These storms have affected the area by cutting new

                                                                    White Oak River System - Page 2

                                   inlets, closing old inlets, and shifting submerged sediments.
                                   Northeast storms occurring primarily during winter and fall do
                                   not severely impact this area due to the east-west alignment of
                                   the shoreline; however, these storms do generate heavy rain,
                                   high tides, and episodes of coastal erosion.

                           RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                          A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                               1.  The candidate site is an estuarine system whose high biological
                                   productivity supports a rich variety of commercially and recre-
                                   ationally important species.

                               2.  Several major centers of scientific research are within 35 mi
                                   (40 km) of the candidate site and the research pote-n-ti-aTis
                                   high for this area.      Past studies, including studies of Bear
                                   Island, have documented baseline data for future investigators.

                           B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                               1.  NATURAL RESOURCES

                                   There is a large diversity of wildlife and plants directly asso-
                                   ciated with this complex estuarine system.         Surrounding the
                                   White Oak River system are tracts of marsh and beach dune--
                                   scrub thickets including giant cord grass, smooth cord grass,
                                   needle rush, sedges, sea ox-eye, sea oats,              sea myrtle,
                                   groundsel, marsh elder, and other plants.       Migratory and res-
                                   ident shorebirds, wading birds, and waterfowl including her-
                                   ons, egrets, ducks, warblers, vultures, hawks, rails, gulls,
                                   sandpipers, terns, ospreys, cormorants, and skimmers utilize
                                   the White Oak River system habitat for feeding and rookery
                                   grounds.     Also closely associated with this estuary are many
                                   reptiles, amphibians, mammals, and abundant estuarine inver-
                                   tebrates.    Bear Island is an important nesting area for the
                                   threatened loggerhead sea turtle.

                                   Numerous     species of freshwater fish reside in the upper
                                   reaches of   the White Oak River system.       Among the saltwater
                                   species found in the lower waters are:          Atlantic menhaden,
                                   bluefish, spotted seatrout, spot, Atlantic croaker, black drum,
                                   red drum, striped mullet, summer flounder, and southern
                                   flounder.    Anadromous runs of blueback herring, alewife,
                                   American shad, and hickory shad occur also.

                               2.  HUMAN USES

                                   The White Oak River system remains in a relatively undis-
                                   turbed condition.    The estuary and its associated watershed is
                                   mainly free of the massive impacts of agricultural drainage and
                                   land clearing that are affecting nearly all of North Carolina's
                                   estuaries.   The White Oak estuary is protected because it is

                                                                    White Oak River System - Page 3

                                   nearly surrounded by lands designated. for forest production,
                                   particularly the Croatan National Forest and Hoffman State
                                   Forest.    There is little urban development in the watershed
                                   with Swansboro (population just under 1,000) being the largest
                                   town. The proposed area is easily accessible from Highway 17
                                   on the north, Highway 58 on the east, and Highway 24 on the
                                   south between the river bay and Bogue Inlet. The University
                                   of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Institute of Marine Science,
                                   Duke University Marine Laboratory and the National Oceanic
                                   and Atmospheric Administration Southeastern Fisheries Center
                                   Beaufort Laboratory, the North Carolina Division of Marine
                                   Fisheries, Morehead City, and the North Carolina Marine Re-
                                   sources Center, Bogue Banks, are scientific institutions all
                                   within 25 miles of the river.    Baseline data for future research
                                   is available from past studies of the area.

                                   The Cedar Point Campground maintained by the National Forest
                                   Service provides extensive camping facilities and boating ac-
                                   cess to the river bay approximately 1 mi (1.6 km) above
                                   Swansboro.     An excellent nature walk over the marshes and
                                   bird observation towers are also provided. The North Carolina
                                   Wildlife Service provides boat ramps at several locations. Hay-
                                   wood's Landing facility several miles north of Stella and the
                                   bay area allows access to approximately 6 mi (9.6 km) of unin-
                                   habited river canopied by hardwood trees and cypress.

                                   The point sources of pollution, including a tertiary sewage
                                   treatment plant, along the candidate site have been in compli-
                                   ance with State regulations,     Nonpoint sources of pollution in-
                                   clude stormwater runoff, silvicultural and agricultural runoff,
                                   and septic tank seepage.       Portions of the site are closed to
                                   shellfishing.

                                   Commercial and recreational finfishing, clamming, oystering,
                                   and shrimping are activities in the site.        Transplantation of
                                   oysters.among areas has been undertaken.           Fishing pressure
                                   in the area is considered to be at a low intensity.

                                   Boating, hiking, camping, and hunting in and around the can-
                                   didate site are popularly enjoyed.      Ferry boats provide access
                                   to Bear Island and Hammocks Beach State Park during the
                                   summer.

                                   The Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, which crosses the eastern
                                   extremity of the proposed site, is maintained by the Wilmington
                                   District of the U.S.- Army Corps of Engineers. Dredged mate-
                                   rial disposal sites are associated with the maintenance of
                                   navigational channels.

                                   The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines, indi-
                                   cates that the area may have potential as a commercial source
                                   of clay, peat, sand, gravel, and heavy minerals.

                                                             White Oak River System - Page 4

                   111. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                   Henry Von Oesen and Associates, Inc. (Wilmington, N.C.), 1981, Final re-
                        port, White Oak River system study (a plan of action for the White
                        Oak 'River):  Prep. for the White Oak River Advisory Council and
                        Town of Cape Carteret, Town of Swansboro, Carteret County, Onslow
                        County.

                   Izaak Walton League of America, Inc. (White Oak River Chapter, Swans-
                        boro, N.C.), 1982, Candidate marine sanctuary site evaluation:    Un-
                        publ. Communication to NOAA, 4 pp.

                                                                      N. C.
                                                         J

                               HOFFMAN FOREST

                                                             CROATON NATIONAL FOREST

                              APPROX. BOUNDARY--

                                                    WANSS A0

                                                                        *BOGUE SOUND

                                                                    BOGUE BANKS
                                               130GUE INLET

                                    5          0          5
                                                                Af L-ANTIC
                             rpi              MILES

                                                LOCATION MAP

                                                 PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                         MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                        1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                           A. SITE NAME: Santee Delta, South Carolina

                           B. LOCATION:        (SOUTH ATLANTIC REGION)

                               1.   LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE: 791161 W, 330101 N

                               2.   DESCRIPTION: The Santee River delta system includes 75 Mi2
                                    (194 kM2) of salt marshes, brackish marshes, and freshwater
                                    wetlands.   The delta extending out into the Atlantic Ocean as
                                    a geomorphic feature is entirely unique to the Atlantic Coast.
                                    Bottom sediments are primarily sand and clay, supporting lush
                                    growths of marsh corclgrass (Spartina alterniflora) and other
                                    brackish marsh vegetation.     The tidal range varies from 0-4 ft
                                    (0-1.2 m), exposing 60 percent of the total area at low tide.
                                    The proposed area, located entirely within the State boundary,
                                    extends from a point 6 mi (9.6 km) west of the divergence of
                                    the North and South Santee Rivers, eastward to the Atlantic
                                    Ocean to a distance 3 mi (4.8 km) from shore.           It would in-
                                    clude the waters of the Santee River and tidal inflows coursing
                                    through the North and South Santee Rivers as well as the nu-
                                    merous channels and creeks of the adjacent coastal wetlands.

                     11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                           A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                               1.   The Santee River delta as a geologic feature is entirely unique
                                    to the U.S. East Coast.       It also represents one of the mosi
                                    biologically producti     rackish marshes along the south Atlan-
                                    tic Coast of the United States

                               2.   The Santee River estuary is an important spawning ground and
                                    nursery for a variety of commercially important migratory fin-
                                    Ti-s-F-a-Fa shellfish species.

                               3.   The proposed sanctuary has been the subject of detailed scien-
                                    tific research investigations and lies adjacent to a number of
                                    scientific research facilities and wildlife management areas.

                           B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                               1.   NATURAL RESOURCES

                                    Characteristic of South Atlantic salt marshes, the Santee River
                                    delta supports a rich diversity and abundance of marine orga-
                                    nisms, components of water-related food webs necessary to the
                                    growth and survival of other ecologically important predators
                                    and   commercially     and    recreationally   important     species.

                                                                             Santee Delta - Page 2

                                  Hundreds of species of algae, microfauna, and macrobenthic
                                  invertebrates inhabit the sandy-mud sediments of the marsh.
                                  Oyster reef communities are prominent throughout the area.
                                  The reefs, Spartina marshes, and sand and mud flats support
                                  a rich diver@-sityof marine invertebrates including tube-dwelling
                                  and burrowing annelid worms, snapping shrimp, grass shrimp,
                                  stomatopod shrimp, white and brown shrimp, blue crabs, stone
                                  crabs, clams, mussels, mud snails, and a great variety of mi-
                                  croscopic organisms.   The area supports an almost homogenous
                                  marsh of giant corclgrass, Spartina cynosuroides, which is
                                  unique to the two Carolinas.

                                  The productivity of these waters is reflected in the abundance
                                  and variety of higher predators utilizing the area as a habitat,
                                  feeding, spawning, and nursery ground.        Great blue herons,
                                  little blue herons, osprey,     ibises, egrets, oystercatchers,
                                  brown pelicans, wood storks, anhingas, and the rare swallow-
                                  tailed kite nest in the area, along with numerous shorebirds
                                  and migrating seabirds.     Pairs of porpoises migrate through
                                  the channels.   Several endangered species, such as the south-
                                  ern bald eagle and the red-cockaded woodpecker, nest and
                                  feed within the boundaries of this proposed sanctuary.        More
                                  than 40 species of fish feed and spawn in the waters of the
                                  lower Santee Delta.     Several commercially important species
                                  may depend upon the lower Santee as a nursery ground.
                                  These species include sturgeon,       blueback herring,      silver
                                  perch, shad, American eel, Atlantic menhaden, sea bass, sea
                                  trout, weakfish, Atlantic croaker, star drum, red drum, mul-
                                  let, and spot.   Blue crab, oysters, hard clams, white shrimp,
                                  and brown shrimp are also present in great abundance.

                                  The Santee River is an important habitat for several        endan-
                                  gered species, including the southern bald eagle, red-cockaded
                                  woodpecker, American alligator, loggerhead sea turtle, Ridley
                                  sea turtle, hawksbill turtle, and the short-nosed sturgeon.

                              2.  HUMAN USES

                                  The area retains much of its pristine character and primarily
                                  supports South Carolina's recreational and commercial finfishing
                                  and shellfishing industries.   Though some tracts are closed to
                                  shellfishing because of domestic pollution, the area contains a
                                  number of large and historically important shellfish leases.
                                  South Carolina's shellfishing fleet is located in McClellanville,
                                  just 8 mi (12.8 km) to the south.     The Cape Romain National
                                  Wildlife Refuge is adjacent to McClellanville and, to the pro-
                                  posed marine sanctuary.     North Inlet estuary, the site of in-
                                  tensive marine research conducted by the Belle W. Baruch In-
                                  stitute for Marine Biology and Coastal Research, lies just north
                                  of the proposed marine sanctuary.       The South Carolina De-
                                  partment of Wildlife and Marine Resources owns and manages
                                  24,000 acres of the Santee Coastal Reserve, the 13,000-acre
                                  Yawkey Wildlife Center, and the Santee Delta Game Management
                                  Area.   The Santee Delta contains several plantations.         The

                                                                                 Santee Delta - Page 3

                                    riparian owners manage their lands as excellent habitat for
                                    waterfowl, other game, and fish, and have repaired and main-
                                    tained the former rice field banks and water control struc-
                                    tures.

                                    Considering the pristine nature of the site, the extensive-re-
                                    search investigations conducted within and adjacent to the
                                    area, the State's commitment to wildlife management as evi-
                                    denced by the establishment of five Game Management Areas
                                    surrounding the delta, and the proximity of the Federally reg-
                                    ulated Cape Romain National Wildlife Refuge, the Santee River
                                    Delta would add an important ecological component to the man-
                                    agement area already loosely defined by State and Federal pro-
                                    grams.

                                    For the past 42 years, the waters of the Santee River have
                                    been diverted by the State of South Carolina and the Works
                                    Progress Administration to flow down the Cooper River to the
                                    south.   It is now planned to be rediverted back down the San-
                                    tee River in 1983.   The rediversion would therefore affect this
                                    site, and scientists are in a unique position to study the na-
                                    ture and magnitude of such effects.

                     Ill. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                           Lunz, G. R., 1944, Marine fishery resources of South Carolina:           Bull.
                               No. 14, S.C. State Planning Bd., Columbia, S.C., 61 pp.

                           Shealy, M. H., J. V. Miglarese, and E. 13. Joseph, 1974, Bottom
                               fishes of South Carolina estuaries:      S.C.M.R.C. Tech. Rept. No.
                               6, S.C. Dept. Wildlife and Mar. Res., Charleston, S.C., 184 pp.

                           S.C. Water Resources Commission, 1976, Lower Santee River environ-
                               mental quality study:      Rept. No. 122, S.C. Water Res. Comm.,
                               Columbia, S.C., 56 pp.

                           Tiner, R. W., 1977, An inventory of South Carolina's coastal marshes:
                               S.C.M.R.C. Tech. Rept. No. 23, S.C. Dept. Wildlife and Mar.
                               Res., Charleston, S.C., 33 pp.

                           U. S.  Fish and Wildlife Service,        1980,   Atlantic Coast ecological
                               inventory:    U.S. Dept. Int., Biol. Serv. Prog. FWS/OBS-80/51,
                               163 pp.

                                                                                        Santee Delta      Page. 4

                                   S. C.                     GEORGETOWN

                             SANTEE R.

                                                                                     SANTEE
                                                                    MURPHY            POINT
                                                                      \ Is.

                             APPROX.BOUNDARY- - - -

                                                                               0          5          10
                                                                               r, ---------- 1%
                                                                     CAPE               MILES
                                                                     ROMAIN

                                                           LOCATION MAP

                                               PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                        MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                       1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                          A. SITE NAME: Port Royal Sound, South Carolina

                          B. LOCATION:        (SOUTH ATLANTIC REGION)

                              1.   LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE: 32017' N, 80'45' W

                              2.   DESCRIPTION:     The candidate site lies entirely within State
                                   waters covering an area of approximately 54 Mi2 (140 kM2).
                                   Port Royal Sound is South Carolina's largest deepwater sound
                                   and largest high-salinity body of water.     Freshwater influence
                                   is primarily from the Coosawhatchie and Pocotaligo Rivers with
                                   a combined mean discharge of less than 500 cubic feet per sec-
                                   ond; consequently, turbidity remains low and salinity remains
                                   high.  The tidal amplitude averages 7.5 ft (2.3 m) with tides
                                   occasionally exceeding 9 ft (3 m).    The high-quality waters of
                                   this site are used primarily for fishing and recreation.

                                   The candidate site is bordered in part by over 70,000 acres of
                                   highly productive marshlands which provide important nutrient
                                   input for the area's foodweb.      Numerous shellfish including
                                   shrimp, oysters, crabs, and clams inhabit these waters.       Many
                                   species, such as king and Spanish mackerel, found primarily
                                   in coastal ocean waters elsewhere, are commonly found in the
                                   high-salinity candidate site.

                     11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                          A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                              1.   The candidate site includes areas of high quality wildlife habi-
                                   tat with substantial populations of fin- and shellfish species.
                                   T-he waters of the site and adjacent marshlands are hiT@y -Pro-
                                   ductive habitat for numerous marine invertebrates, adult, and
                                   juvenil  fish, and resident and migratory waterfowl, wading
                                   and shorebirds.

                              2.   The candidate site is habitat for threatened and endangered
                                   species. The bald eagle, brown pelican, alligator, anTTo-gger-
                                   F-eadturtle are regularly observed in the vicinity of this site.

                              3.   The area is an easily accessible and aesthetically attractive
                                   area for recreational activities such as sail"ing, motorboating,
                                   swimming, and nature study.

                              4.   The diversity and high quality of habitats and wildlife in the
                                   area are the subject of continuing research conducted by the
                                   State of South Carolina and universities in -fhe region.

                                                                           Port Royal Sound - Page 2

                           B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                               1.  NATURAL RESOURCES

                                   The extensive marshes of the Port Royal Sound area form the
                                   basis of this estuarine site's detritus-based foodweb.            The
                                   marshes are important nesting and foraging grounds for migra-
                                   tory mallards, pintails, canvasbacks, and teals, and provide a
                                   permanent habitat for willets, ospreys, marsh hens, rails,
                                   gulls, terns, egrets, herons, coots, marsh hawks, clapper
                                   rails,  sandpipers,    plovers,   and black-winged blackbirds.
                                   Minks, raccoons, opossums, marsh rabbits, grey squirrels,
                                   and insects also live among and are associated with the
                                   marshes.    The lower marsh consists of smooth cordgrass and
                                   Spartina alterniflora.   The higher marsh plant life is more di-
                                   versified including smooth corclgrass, needlerush, sea ox-eye,
                                   salt grass, Salicornia, marsh elder, and other species.

                                   The site's high-salinity,      high-quality waters are a major
                                   spawning and nursery area for numerous recreationally and
                                   commercially important fin and shellfish species including
                                   cobia, menhaden, black drum, blue crabs, clams, oysters, and
                                   shrimp.    Large quantities of rock shrimp, brown shrimp, white
                                   shrimp, blue crabs, and oysters are harvested from the site.
                                   Approximately 46 species of finfish utilize these waters.

                                   The candidate site is a habitat for the endangered bald eagle,
                                   brown pelican, and alligator. The threatened loggerhead tur-
                                   tle nests on beaches in the vicinity of the site.       Other turtle
                                   species which are occasionally reported nesting or washed up
                                   in the area include the leatherback, green (federally listed as
                                   a "threatened" species), hawksbill, and Kemp's Ridley turtles.
                                   Bottle-nosed dolphins,      whales,   and porpoises have been
                                   observed in the area.

                               2.  HUMAN USES

                                   The candidate site is used for waterborne transportation, fin-
                                   and shellfishing, as well as various additional outdoor recrea-
                                   tional activities.

                                   Angling is a popular pastime within this area.           Sea trout,
                                   drum, flounder, cobia, mackerel, jack, bluefish, and sheeps-
                                   head are caught from boats, bridges, and the shore.             Since
                                   the implementation of the State Record Fish Program in 1967,
                                   twelve record fish have come from the waters of Port Royal
                                   Sound.    The potential for expansion of the recreational fishery
                                   is good.    Public shellfish grounds are within the candidate
                                   site.   The waters of this area supply major portions of the
                                   State's total production of oysters, clams, blue crabs, and
                                   shrimp.    Over 25 percent of the state's commercial catch of
                                   white and brown shrimp, over 75 percent of the blue crabs,
                                   and a major percentage of oysters harvested commercially in
                                   South Carolina come from Port Royal Sound.          The oyster and

                                                                     Port Royal Sound - Page 3

                                 blue crab fisheries are confined almost entirely within the
                                 inner estuarine area of the sound and tidal streams.   Shrimp-
                                 ing is primarily carried out by trawlers in the sound and in
                                 the open ocean from nearshore to five miles offshore.  Oysters
                                 and clams are obtained from commercially leased shellfish
                                 banks.   Approximately 300 shrimp trawlers and 150 crab
                                 fishermen licensed by the South Carolina Wildlife and Marine
                                 Resources Department operate regularly in the area.    Slightly
                                 over 2000 acres of interticlal shellfish bottoms are currently
                                 under lease to 17 oyster and clam producers.

                                 The candidate area is easily accessible and aesthetically very
                                 attractive for recreational activities such as sailing, motor-
                                 boating, swimming, photography, and nature study.         There
                                 are several public boat launching ramps and marinas in the
                                 a rea. Waterfowl and rail hunting is popular during the colder
                                 months.

                                 Scientific research has been conducted by various universities,
                                 and the SoUth Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Depart-
                                 ment conducts ongoing research and monitoring programs in
                                 the area concerning fisheries management. The South Carolina
                                 Department of Health and Environmental Control cpnducts on-
                                 going research and monitoring of water quality and shellfish
                                 areas.

                                 The Intracoastal Waterway traverses the candidate site and is
                                 maintained by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.         Shipping
                                 traffic to and from the State Ports Authority Terminal at Port
                                 Royal is extremely light.

                                 The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines, indi-
                                 cates that the Port Royal Sound area may have potential as a
                                 source of clay, peat, sand, gravel, and heavy minerals.

                                 The area is adjacent to Hilton Head Island, a rapidly urban-
                                 izing island community.

                    111. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                         The Center for Low Country Environments, 1981, Nomination of Port
                             Royal Sound as a marine sanctuary:       Unpubl. Communication to
                             NOAA, 30 pp.

                         Drane, E. B. (P. 0. Box 4904, Hilton'Head, SC 29938) et al., 1982,
                             Nomination of Port Royal Sound for designation as a marine sanctu-
                             ary: Unpubl. Communication to NOAA, 11 pp.

                         South Carolina Water Resources Commission, 1972, Port Royal Sound
                             environmental study: 555 pp.

                                                                                  Port Royal Sound        Page 4

                                                    8001 4e                                      rpi

                                    rv-

                                                                               HEL N
                                                                           ISLAN

                                                           0

                                                                                                    31

                                                       HILTON       EAD
                                                                 SLAND                      S.C.
                                                           APPROX.BOUNDARY- - -

                                                     0          5           10

                                                               MILES

                                                           LOCATION MAP

                                                  PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                          MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                        1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                           A. SITE NAME: Florida Shelf Coral Grounds

                           B. LOCATION:         (SOUTH ATLANTIC REGION)

                                1. LATITUDE/LONGITUDE (approximate):

                                     Oculina Reefs, Fla.                   270301 N to 270531 N
                                                                           790561 W to 800001 W

                                     St. Lucie Nearshore Reef, Fla.        270081 N, 800091 W

                                2.   DESCRIPTION:       This candidate site       contains two separate
                                     areas.   The inner shelf site includes the reefs immediately
                                     north and south of the St. Lucie Inlet, encompassing an area
                                     of 4.5 Mi2 (11.7 kM2).         Sabellariid wormrock and areas of
                                     limestone bedrock   with 1-15 ft (0.3-4.9 m) relief are common at
                                     depths less than    30 ft (10 m) and within 1 mi (1.6 km) of
                                     shore.   The area is rich in temperate and subtropical fishes
                                     and invertebrates   and represents the northern known limit for
                                     several species of hard and soft corals.        The outer shelf site
                                     is 106 Mi2 (275 kM2) in area and contains monospecific coral
                                     reefs of moderate-to-high relief.      It is located 17 mi (27 km)
                                     off the coast of central eastern Florida at a depth of 230-328 ft
                                     (70-100 m).     Both sites together are approximately 110 mi2
                                     (286 kM2).

                     11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                           A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                                1.   Located in a transition zone for subtropical-to-temperate faunal
                                     affinities, the reefs at St.       Lucie Inlet appear to be the
                                     northernmost limit in the United States for several species of
                                     hard and soft -corals.

                                2.   The St. Lucie Reefs are readily accessible and are used heav-
                                     ily by sport scuba divers, snorklers, and recreational fisher-
                                     men.   The area north of th-e-in @et is@. used heavily by bafh-ers
                                     anJ snorklers.

                                3.   The Oculina Reefs are the only known banks of monospecific
                                     colonial coral that occur on the continental shelf anywhere in
                                     t
                                         U---- 7@tates.
                                     he   nitecT

                                4.   The Oculina Reefs show great species diversity, with over 200
                                     species of mol      s, 50 species of decapod crustaceans, 20
                                     species of echinoderms, and 23 families of polychaete worms.

                                                                  Florida Shelf Coral Grounds. - Page 2

                                5. The Oculina Reefs form an impressive breeding nursery and
                                    feeding grounds for numerous commercial fish species.

                           B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                                1. NATURAL RESOURCES

                                    a.   St. Lucie Reefs - Several different biologic and geologic
                                         features  are present in the site.       Interticlal and subticlal
                                         colonies of sabellariid wormrock (Sabellaria vulgaris) are
                                         common,   forming an interticlal barrT'er- i @eree_FfFa_tparal-
                                         lels the  shore at the northern end of the site.          Subtidal
                                         colonies  form rounded heads 1-3 ft (36-90 cm) high and
                                         are common immediately north and south of the inlet.
                                         Coquinoid limestone of the Pleistocene Epoch is present as
                                         flat pavement, ledges with relief up to 15 ft (5 m) , arch-
                                         es, and spur and groove buttresses which are best devel-
                                         oped at the southern portion of the site but also occur
                                         north of the inlet seaward of the subtidal wormrock.
                                         Large patches [10-20 ft (3-6 m) diameter] of red boring
                                         sponge (Cliona sp.) are present along with carpets of the
                                         anemone-like zoanthids [up to 20 ft (6 m) diameter], flat
                                         colonies [1-3 ft (25-100 cm) diameter] of brain coral, and
                                         some soft corals.    Sea urchins, stone crabs, and numerous
                                         marine worms inhabit the reef.        These invertebrates and
                                         other microscopic forms are vital to the abundant fish pop-
                                         ulations that feed along this shelf.      More than 122 species
                                         of fish and shellfish inhabit the area, including herring,
                                         anchovy, sea bass, jack, snapper, grunts, porgy, drum,
                                         moray eels, butterfiyfish, damselfish, wrasses, parrotfish,
                                         barracuda,    blennies,   gobies,    scorpionfish,    triggerfish,
                                         puffers, porcupines fish, lobsters, and scallops.        Sea tur-
                                         tles frequent the area and nest on the beaches nearby.

                                         The fore reef is variable, consisting in some areas as a
                                         spur-and-groove system with buttresses 10 ft (3 m) high
                                         with surge channels cut between perpendicular to shore.
                                         In other areas, the fore reef is a rubble slope of irregular
                                         steps and ledges of limestone.       The cover consists of al-
                                         gae, sponges, and widely scatterqd colonies of hard and
                                         soft corals.   The base of the forereef grades into sand at
                                         depths of approximately 30 ft (9.1 m).          Landward of the
                                         reef crest are ledges which drop to a maximum of 15 ft
                                         (4.6 m) depth and are best developed, with undercuts and
                                         arches, along the southern half of the reef tract.             The
                                         ivory tree coral, Oculina, is common along with myriads of
                                         tropical and temperate Mish.

                                         Geologically, the area is also unusual.         Not only is the
                                         reef directly connected to the beach, but the continental
                                         shelf width narrows sharply between the St. Lucie Inlet
                                         and Palm Beach.      This has an impact on the proximity of
                                         the Gulf Stream to the beach and affects littoral and other
                                         currents in the reef area.       The impact of current turbu-
                                         lence and mixing in this area on the prevalence of marine

                                                                Florida Shelf Coral Grounds - Page 3

                                        species and the overall ecology is inadequately understood.
                                        The onshore movement of very cold bottom water during
                                        the summer months in recent years is another manifestation
                                        of the complex current movements in the St. Lucie Inlet
                                        vicinity.

                                   b.   Oculina Reefs - These reefs represent highly productive
                                        and richly diverse biotic assemblages dominated by ivory
                                        tree coral (Oculina varicosa).       Oculina forms extensive
                                        thickets of Te-ricately-T-ranched 165-u-sT@e-s and coral banks
                                        with pinnacles up to. 82 ft (25 m) in height providing a
                                        substrate and protection for a diversity of marine macro-
                                        invertebrates.   Some of the molluscs, 85 percent of the
                                        amphipod crustaceans, and other species are yet unde-
                                        scribed and new to science.

                                        Hundreds of species of macroi nverteb rates are directly as-
                                        sociated with Oculina including 200 species of molluscs, 50
                                        species of clec-a-p-62--crustaceans, 50 species of amphipods,
                                        20 species of echinoderms, and 23 families of polychaete
                                        worms.    These invertebrates help to support the dense
                                        and diverse populations of fishes (over 70 species) includ-
                                        ing   morays,    herring,   porgies,    drums,     butterflyfish,
                                        angelfish, clamselfish, wrasses, gobies, tunas, sharks,
                                        mantas, scorpionfish, and the unique sunfish, Mola mola.

                                        The Oculina Reefs form important breeding grounds for
                                        commercially valuable populations of gag and scamp group-
                                        er, nursery grounds for these and other fish            including
                                        black sea bass, red grouper, amberjack, and red snapper.
                                        This shelf-edge system may form part of the             migration
                                        pathway for king mackerel.      Large populations of   the com-
                                        mercially important squid, Illex oxygonius, spawn on reefs
                                        and spiny tail stingray use-TtFe reef region for       courtship
                                        and mating.

                               2.  HUMAN USES

                                   The reefs adjacent to St. Lucie Inlet front County, State, and
                                   Federally owned beaches, making the area easily accessible to
                                   the public.    Recreational diving, boating, shelling, lobstering,
                                   and fishing are common ongoing activities.          There is also a
                                   State-cle@signatecl aquatic preserve inside the inlet and adjacent
                                   to the inlet.     The provided access through publicly owned
                                   lands insures that these activities will flourish and more than
                                   likely increase in popularity.

                                   The shelf-edge Oculina Reefs are' popular grounds for charter
                                   and   private fishing b ats.     The sailfish tournaments of the
                                   area  are well known.    The area is also important from a scien-
                                   tific standpoint, particularly in determining the interrelation-
                                   ship  of the reefs and indigenous organisms to the surrounding
                                   waters (including trophic structure, upwelling, etc.).

                                                               Florida Shelf Coral Grounds - Page 4

                                   The -nearshore reef, wholly in State waters, also suffers from
                                   its easy accessibility.   Divers and boat-anchoring could cause
                                   damage, as could pollution and dredging of the St. Lucie
                                   River.

                                   At the outer shelf edge site, there are few activities currently
                                   undertaken that would be incompatible with designation of
                                   these coral reefs as a marine sanctuary.      Commercial and rec-
                                   reational fishing, using hand and long lines, takes place in
                                   some of these areas, and there is an increasing utilization of
                                   certain fishing gear (i.e., roller trawls) designed to fish reef
                                   habitats for grouper and snapper.           Sea turtles are often
                                   caught in shrimping nets and are drowned.        Indiscriminate an-
                                   choring on or near the reefs damages the coral structure.         Al-
                                   though the trawlers may avoid high-relief ares, some of the
                                   shelf-edge Oculina colonies occur on relatively flat bottom away
                                   from the pinnacles.    There are no programs at present which
                                   protect coral reefs in Federal waters from trawling, dredging,
                                   or otherwise removing or harming the coral of the shelf-edge
                                   habitat.

                                   Shore-based construction activities which may impact on the
                                   water quality of the nearshore St. Lucie reefs are regulated
                                   by the State of Florida.        The Gulf of Mexico and South
                                   Atlantic Fishery Management Councils have developed a Coral
                                   Fishery Management Plan designed to provide comprehensive
                                   management of all corals and coral reefs within the proposed
                                   site.  This plan identifies a portion of the Oculina reef tract
                                   as a Habitat Area of Particular Concern and would prohibit the
                                   use of bottom long lines, dredges, bottom trawls, and fish
                                   pots and traps in this area.

                                   Public access to the St. Lucie Nearshore Reefs is good.
                                   Martin County is currently acquiring beachfront lands to de-
                                   velop the Bathtub Reef County Park at the northern end of
                                   the St. Lucie Nearshore Reefs.      There currently exist the St.
                                   Lucie Inlet State Park and a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
                                   Hobe Sound National Wildlife Refuge with a total of 4 mi (6.4
                                   km) of beachfront facing the reef.          A one-mile stretch of
                                   beach directly north of St. Lucie Inlet is owned and under de-
                                   velopment by the Mobil Oil Corporation.       Immediately south of
                                   the inelt is the State Park which extends for 2.7 mi along the
                                   beach.   The 0.8 mi of shoreline abutting the park is part of
                                   the Reed Wilderness Seashore Sanctuary in which development
                                   is barred.   Access to this area is restricted to boat or by foot
                                   from the State Park or from the town of Jupiter Island..

                                   The boundaries of the St. Lucie Nearshore Reef site includes a
                                   portion of the Intracoastal Waterway, a portion of the existing
                                   small-boat navigation project for St.       Lucie Inlet, and the
                                   Florida State Park at the northern end of Jupiter Island which
                                   is periodically nourished to control beach erosion.       The U.S.
                                   Army Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District, is responsible
                                   for maintaining these navigational channels within the proposed
                                   site by dredging and spoil disposal operations.

                                                             Florida Shelf Coral Grounds - Page 5

                                  This site is also part of the Federal lease program for oil and
                                  gas exploration.

                    111. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                          Halas, J. C. and W. C. Jaap, 1982, Biological assessment of the pro-
                              posed marine sanctuary, St. Lucie Inlet worm reef:     Memo to Capt.
                              Glisson and G. Henderson, Fla. Dept. Natural Resources, 7 pp.

                          Perry, M., L. Harris, F. Puttman, J. Bridges, C. Schule, C. Tyrone,
                              J. White, L. Leonard, F. Aubin, and T. Szlyk, 1982, Coastal zone
                              management of Hutchinson Island, Martin County, Florida:           Fla.
                              Oceanographic Soc., Inc., Stuart, Fla., 118 pp.

                          Reed, J. K., 1981, Nomination of shelf-edge Oculina coral reefs off
                              central reefs off central eastern Florida as T-F-at-5-nal marine sanc-
                              tuary:   Unpubl.    Manuscript,   Harbor Branch      Foundation,    Ft.
                              Pierce, Fla.

                          Reed, J. K., 1982, A proposal for the nearshore reefs adjacent to St.
                              Lucie Inlet, Florida, as part of an Atlantic hard bottom sanctuary:
                              Unpubl. Manuscript, Ft. Pierce, Fla., 11 pp.

                                                                                   Florida Shelf Coral Grounds                 Page 6

                                           CAPE CANAVERAL

                                                             FLA.                                          TCHINSON IS.

                                                                                                                ATHTUB REEF

                               SEBASTI    N_
                                                                                                      SAI  ISH PT.       3G e
                                                                                                                                     L7:
                                                                     Motu INA
                                                                                                                                     10,
                                                                            REEFS

                                                                                  27'
                                                                                  30'               ST LUCIE
                                         FT. PIERCE           lam   50m 183m                  INLET STATE PAR

                                                                                          0        1        2

                                                                                               NAUT MILES
                                             ST LUCI',':7:'1,.t:@- ---FIG. B
                                                                                                          HOBE SOUND
                                                                                                          NAT. WILDLIFE
                                                                                                               REFUGE

                               0           15
                                                      JUPITE'*                                          80,110,
                                    MILES
                                                             FLA.

                                                                     If H-i

                            APPROX.BOUNDARY----

                                                                       LOCATION MAP

                                         WEST PACIFIC REGION

                                  MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION LIST
                                          WESTERN PACIFIC REGION

                                           MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW

                  1. Resource Evaluation Team

                  The Western Pacific resource evaluation team was made up of three
                  marine scientists from the region.       The team leader was Dr. Roy
                  Tsuda, Dean of Graduate School and Research, University of Guam.
                  The other team members were Dr. Richard C. Wass, Office of Marine
                  Resources, American Samoa, and Dr. E. Alison Kay, Professor of
                  Zoology at the University of Hawaii.

                  2. Site Evaluation and Public Participation Process

                  The team held its f irst meeting in Guam and Saipan on May 6-7,
                  1982.    Prior to this meeting the team members made numerous
                  contacts with their associates in academic institutions, terri-
                  torial and local governments, Federal agencies, environmental,
                  fishing and other interest groups in the area.        The regi
                  included Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands and American Samoa.
                  It did not include the American Trust Terrritories as they are
                  currently in political transition and will probably acquire
                  independence shortly. At the first meeting the team considered
                  and discussed many potential marine sanctuary sites in the
                  Western Pacific region.      They also reviewed all Western Pacif ic
                  sites that were contained in NOAA's List of Recommended Areas (44
                  Fed. Reg. 62552, Oct. 31, 1979).

                  No Hawaiian sites were considered because NOAA determined that
                  the proposed Humpback Whale Marine Sanctuary, off Maui, now an
                  active candidate in the designation process, satisfies the
                  sanctuary needs of the islands.

                  At the first meeting held in Guam and Saipan, the team narrowed
                  the candidate list down to seven potential Marine Sanctuary
                  Sites. They were:

                  WP-1. Northern Mariana Islands.         The original site included
                  waters around Saigon, Pagen and Maug islands out to 10 miles.
                  The expanded site added waters adjacent to three more islands -
                  Uracas, Asuncion and Guguaran. All six are high islands of vol-
                  canic origin and all are unpopulated.

                  WP-2.   Southern Mariana Islands.      These areas provide a variety
                  of tropical marine habitats in selected sites off the islands of
                  Saipan, Tinian and Rota. All display species diversity and sus-
                  tain recreational, educational and research activities.

                                                 WP_l

                  WP-3.   Tuman Bay, Guam.    This site, located on the western side
                  of Guam, consists of a broad fringing reef of varying width. It
                  is a significant recreational area.

                  WP-4.   Cocos Lagoon, Guam.     This site consists of Cocos Lagoon
                  (2.8 sq mi) and approximately 1.1 sq mi of barrier reef at the
                  southern tip of Guam. It contains a diversity of seaweeds, inver-
                  tebrates and fishes.

                  WP-5. Goat Island Point - Utulei Reef, American Samoa. Located
                  on the western side of Pago Pago Bay, this site extends along
                  6,000 feet of shoreline.     It includes the intertidal area, reef
                  flat and associated dredge area.

                  WP-6.    Pala Lagoon, American Samoa.         This roughly circular
                  lagoon,  of about 1.2 sq mi, is located on the east side of
                  Tutuilla Island.     It is the only large semi-enclosed body of
                  brackish  water in American Samoa.

                  WP-7.   Papalaloa Point, Ofu Island, American Samoa.        This site
                  encompasses about 3 miles of shoreline and adjacent fringing reef
                 .on the southern border of Ofu Island.

                  Descriptions and maps of these sites were mailed to 80 groups and
                  individuals in the Western Pacific area and to 82 national
                  organizations and Federal agencies.            Chelsea received 16
                  responses by the end of the 45-day public comment period
                  (September 3, 1982).

                  Five additional or expanded sites were also nominated by the
                  public by the October 4, 1982, nomination deadline. These were:

                  1.  Luminao Barrier Reef, Guam
                  2.  Inner Apra Harbor, Guam
                  3.  Double Reef, Guam
                  4.  Guam Coastline from Facpi Point to Fort Santo Angel
                  5.  Expanded Northern Marianas Islands

                  The team held their second meeting in Pago Pago, American Samoa,
                  on October 12-14, 1982. During this meeting the team reexamined
                  their seven original candidates in light of the comments received
                  during the public participation process, and considered the five
                  additional or expanded sites nominated by the public.

                  The Luminao Barrier Reef w     as nominated by Charles Birkeland,
                  Director, Marine Laboratory, University of Guam.       The Inner Apra
                  Harbor, Double Reef and Facpi Point to Fort Santo Angel proposed
                  sites were nominated by the Guam Environmental Protection Agency.
                  The Governor of the Commonwealth of the Northern Marina Islands
                  requested that the original Northern Mariana Islands candidate
                  site be expanded from three to six Islands. The team considered

                                                WP-2

                  each of these new nominations and concluded that two candidates
                  met the criteria set forth in the NOAA Program Development Plan
                  (PDP) and deserved to be considered with the original candidates
                  during the final evaluation process. They were:

                  WP-8. Facpi Point to Fort Santo Angel, Guam. This 2 sq mi site
                  includes the offshore waters to a depth of 60 feet on the south-
                  west side of Guam.     A wide variety of fish and coral are found
                  there and it is a significant recreation area.

                  WP-1. Northern Mariana Islands (expanded)

                  In addition to the above, the Pacific Seabird Group nominated the
                  waters surrounding Rose Atoll (American Samoa) and the waters
                  surrounding the Hawaiian Islands National Wildlife Refuge in the
                  northwestern Hawaiian Islands.       The team concluded that these
                  nominations did not contain sufficient background information to
                  support comprehensive evaluation.

                  3. Recommendations

                  The Western Pacific team, using the criteria outlined in the NOAA
                  PDP, recommends the following five sites, in the order of their
                  priority, for placement on the Marine Sanctuary Site Evaluation
                  List:

                  1.  Northern Mariana Islands (expanded)
                  2.  Cocos Lagoonr Guam
                  3.  Papaloloa Point, Ofu Island, American Samoa
                  4.  Southern Mariana Islands
                  5.  Facpi Point to Fort Santo Angel, Guam

                  In addition, the team wishes to express unanimous support for the
                  two active candidate sites in the Western Pacific that currently
                  are proceeding toward site designation.       They are the proposed
                  Humpback Whale Sanctuary in Hawaii and Fagatele Bay in American
                  Samoa.   In the case of the latter, the team suggested that NOAA
                  consider exioanding the Fagatela Bay site to include neighboring
                  Larson Bay.

                  This portion of the regional report contains highlights of the
                  team's rationale for selecting each of the five sites, a summary
                  of oublic comments received and svecific comments on management
                  issues that came to the team's attention.

                  3.1. Northern Mariana Islands (expanded)

                  The proposed site, approximately 700 sq mi, includes the waters
                  out to 12 miles adjacent to six of the ten Northern Mariana
                  Islands. These islands are Uracas, Maug, Asuncion, Pagan, Guguan
                  and Sarigan. Oriented in a north to south direction, the islands

                                                WP-3

                  are unique and offer a natural laboratory for biogeographical
                  studies of marine organisms along a north to south temperature
                  gradient.     The Proposed site surrounds islands representing
                  different geological ages.      The northernmost island, Uracas, is
                  the youngest, with each island to the south being progressively
                  older.   The principle reasons for nominating these islands as a
                  potential marine sanctuary are for geological and marine
                  research, preservation and fisheries management.

                  The team spent the second day of the first meeting in Saipan with
                  members of the Fish and Wildlife Division of the Department of
                  Natural Resources and the Commonwealth CZM program.         As origi-
                  nally conceived the Northern Mariana site included only 3 islands
                  - Maug, Pagan and Sarigan.             However, during the public
                  participation processr Governor Tenorio of the Commonwealth
                  suggested that the site be expanded to include the islands of
                  Uracas, Asuncion and Guguan.           The team agreed with this
                  re-commendation and the expanded site description was sent out for
                  public review.        The originAl recommendation elicited six
                  responses, five in favor and one opposed. Fourteen comments were
                  received on the expanded nomination, six in favor and only one
                  opposed. There was no governmental opposition; two environmental
                  groups supported the new proposalf while the Sport Fishing
                  Institute reiterated its opposition, saying only Pagan Island
                  needed additional protection.

                  3.2. Cocos Lagoon, Guam

                  The proposed sanctuary includes the Cocos barrier reefs,          Cocos
                  Lagoon, three islets (Cocos Island, Babe Island, and a third
                  sandy island), and the coastal region lying between the mouth of
                  Mamaon and Manell Channels. Together the barrier reef and lagoon
                  have an area of 3.9 sq mi. The proposed site, already well known
                  for its recreation, educational and research activities, contains
                  habitat  and species diversity unique to Guam.       The area is the
                  nursery  groun@ for offshore fisheries.       To date, tourists have
                  not had  a negative effect on water quality, but overcollecting is
                  beginning to denude the lagoon of corals. A luxury hotel is now
                  being constructed on Cocos Island, which will increase the impact
                  of tourists on the area. The team believes that Marine Sanctuarv
                  status is needed to protect the area by providing funds for
                  increased enforcement, public education and research.

                  During the public participation process, eight comments were
                  received, all were in favor of the nomination. Support came from
                  Guam Governor Paul Calvo, USEPA Region IX, U.S. Department of the
                  Interior, Defenders of Wildlife, Sport Fishing Institute,
                  Marianas Recreation and Parks Society, and the Guam Fisherman's
                  Cooperative, who offered "enthusiastic support," so long as
                  access to southern fishing grounds was not restricted.

                                                WP-4

                  The local EPA suggested extending the boundaries to include the
                  mangrove area immediately to the east of the proposed area.       The
                  team considers Cocos Lagoon the best site for a marine sanctuary
                  in Guam and recommends that, if it achieves active candidate
                  status, the issue of boundaries be reopened.      They beli,eve that
                  consideration should be given to including.. the mangroves and
                  combining this area with Facpi Point to create a larger
                  multi-habitat sanctuary (see 3.5 below),

                  3.3 Papaloloa Point, Ofu Island, American Samoa

                  The proposed siter encompassing about 3 miles of shoreline and
                  adjacent fringing reef down to 150 feet, is located on Ofu Island
                  between Papaloloa Point and the Asaga Strait, which separates Ofu
                  and Olosega Islands.    The marine life in the area is plentiful
                  and diverse. The site is unique in that it is the only place in
                  American Samoa where the blue coral is known to occur. The area
                  is the best snorkeling spot in American Samoa, containing
                  extremely clear water. It contains a wide variety of coral life
                  and is orotected from swells and surf by a fringing reef.         The
                  proposed sanctuary is a short plane ride from Tutuila and a grass
                  landing strip is located next to the site.        A small hotel 'is
                  presently being built near the site.

                  During the public participation process, 5 letters supported this
                  site while none were opposed. Sur)r)ort came from the USEPA Region
                  IX, U.S. Department of the Interior, Sport Fishing Institute, and
                  the Director of the University of Guam Marine Laboratory. Tenta-
                  tive support was qiven by the Defenders of Wildlife pending more
                  information regarding the national significance and the potential
                  educational or research values to be served by sanctuary desig-
                  nation.

                  3.4. Southern Mariana Islands

                  Like the proposed Northern Mariana Sanctuary, this site was also
                  originally nominated by members of the Commonwealth Government.
                  It consists of a variety of coral reef habitats in selected areas
                  off the islands of Saipan, Rota and Tinian, as well as the waters
                  surrounding Aguijan Ii1and and Naftan Rock.     The proposed bound-
                  ary in each area extends from the high-water line to the 150 foot
                  deDth contour.

                  Most of the areas proposed are already experiencing increasing
                  human related impacts as tourism continues to expand.        Fishing,
                  boating, and diving are popular and there have been reported
                  cases of dynamiting and poisoning reef fishes. The team believes
                  that sanctuary status would help protect these reefs for future
                  generations.

                                               WP-5

                  Six comments were received on this site; five in support and none
                  opposed.    Governmental suDiDort came from Commonwealth Governor
                  Pedro Tenorio, USEPA Region IX, and the U.S. Department of the
                  Interior.    The Sport Fishing Institute supported the nomination
                  while the Defenders of Wildlife did not take a position, stating
                  they did not possess enough information to base an assessment.
                  Additional support came from the Director of the University of
                  Guam Marine Laboratory.

                  3.5. Facpi Point to Fort Santo Angel, Guam

                  This site was one of the new areas nominated during the public
                  participation process and the only one to make the final list of
                  five.    It includes the waters from Facpi Point to Fort Santo
                  Angel out to the 60 foot contour and is almost two square miles
                  in area.

                  There were 14 comments received; 7 in favor and none opposed.
                  The Whale Center and Sport Fishing Institute favored the recom-
                  mendation, while Defenders of Wildlife did not comment because of
                  a lack of information.          The Marianas Recreation and Parks
                  Association offered enthusiastic support.

                  The area is an important recreational site for local residents
                  and tourists who use the area for fishing, diving, swimming,
                  boating and hiking.       It is located next to Cocos Lagoon, but
                  contains a distinctively different habitat.         The team suggests
                  that if Cocos Lagoon achieves active candidate status, this area
                  might be included as part of an expanded Cocos Marine Sanctuary.

                  In summary, the team strongly endorses the proposed Humpback
                  Whale and Fagatele Bay Sanctuaries now in the designation process
                  and believes the five new sites proposed in this report consti-
                  tute an excellent cross-section of marine habitat in the Western
                  Pacific Region and would make ideal Marine Sanctuaries.

                                                 WP_6

                                                   PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                           MARINE SANCTUARY SITE E:VALUATION

                         1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                            A. SITE NAME: Northern Mariana Islands Sanctuary

                            B. LOCATION:          (WESTERN PACIFIC REGION)

                                 1. LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE:            Uracas (Farallon
                                                                      cle Pajaros)      20035-  N , 1440541  E
                                                                    Ma ug:              200011  N , 1450131  E
                                                                    Asuncion:           190401  N   1450241  E
                                                                    Pagan:              18007-  N   145-46-  E
                                                                    Guguan:             170151  N   1450511  E
                                                                    Sarigan:            160421  N   1450471  E

                                 2.   DESCRIPTION:       The proposed site includes the waters of the
                                      Commonwealth out to 12 miles (20 km) adjacent to six of the
                                      ten northern Mariana islands (see map).          All of these islands
                                      are high islands of volcanic origin.       Pagan was the only pop-'
                                      ulated island until the volcano erupted in May 1981.          At pres-
                                      ent, all islands are unpopulated and volcanically active.            The
                                      total area encompassed by the boundaries of the proposed site
                                      approximates 700 Mi2 (1813 kM2).

                                      Broad fringing reefs are not found within the proposed site;
                                      instead,   there are apron       reefs,   cliffs,   rocky shorelines,
                                      wave-washed beaches, black volcanic beaches, and some coral-
                                      line beaches.    Apron reefs are thin, incipient fringing reefs
                                      lacking any significant reef flat.     Steep slopes to the sea floor
                                      from volcanic activity and/or tectonic instability inhibit reef
                                      growth and vigor.        The foreslopes of apron reefs may be
                                      capped by algal ridges.

                      11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                            A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                                 1.   The six islands represent biological communities varying in
                                      structure along a north-south orientation and in the presence
                                      of an active volcano (Pagan).

                                 2.   Human use value lies mainly in the beauty of these islands and
                                      surroundina waters since they are all presently unpopulated.

                                 3.   Development of the islands as oil storage sites (proposed for
                                      Maug in 1976) may have the potential for modifying the natural
                                      resources.

                                                     Northern Mariana Islands Sanctuary - Page 2

                         B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                              1.  NATURAL RESOURCES

                                  The primary reason for designating these islands as a potential
                                  marine sanctuary is for research, preservation, and fisheries
                                  management.    These islands, with their north-south orienta-
                                  tion, are unique and present a natural setting for biogeo-
                                  graphical studies of marine organisms along a temperature gra-
                                  dient [mean sea surface temperatures on Guam and Maug are
                                  8@.51 F (27.50 C) and 80.41 F (26.90 C), respectively]. They
                                  are part of the Northeast Trade Wind Zone and are located
                                  within the Indo West Pacific Marine area which is described as
                                  the world's largest and most diverse marine zoogeographic
                                  zone, in which relative richness of island ecosystems is found
                                  to the west and decreased richness is found to the east.      Each
                                  island of the northern area of the Marianas Archipelago and
                                  the six which are part of the newer northern arc represent
                                  different geological ages.  The northernmost island of Uracas
                                  is the youngest with each island to the south progressively
                                  older.  A rich diversity of marine species and habitat are as-
                                  sociated with these islands, ranging from pristine to vol-
                                  canically devastated.

                                  More than 519 species of marine organisms have been recorded
                                  from the waters of the northern Mariana Islands.       The green
                                  and ridley sea turtles, Federally-listed as "threatened" spe-
                                  cies, and the "endangered" hawksbill turtle inhabit these wa-
                                  ters.  Eleven species of porpoises and whales (including the
                                  Ilendangered" humpback and sperm whales) frequent the area
                                  during their annual migrations.     These islands represent im-
                                  portant nesting, breeding, and resting areas for more than 16
                                  species of shorebirds and seabird@ (e.g., terns, noddies,
                                  boobies, frigate birds), many of which are listed in the Migra-
                                  tory Bird Treaty between the United States, Japan, and the
                                  U.S.S.R.    More than 100 species of reef fish and schools of
                                  pelagic fish, deep-water shrimp, and spiny lobster, and nearly
                                  300 species of molluscs inhabit the coral reef communities sur-
                                  rounding the Northern   Marianas.

                                  Especially noteworthy within the area are two species of
                                  abalone (Haliotis spp.) which do not occur south of Anatahan
                                  (approx. 161__N@, the phenomenon of bioluminescence, the ob-
                                  servation that Maug's marine flora has a closer affinity to
                                  Hawaiian species than to southern Mariana Island species, the
                                  occurrence of high-quality precious corals with an apparent
                                  southern Ilimit at 180N, and the occurrence of flyingfish and
                                  three species of rare algae.

                              2.  HUMAN USES

                                  In the Constitution of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mari-
                                  ana Islands (CNMI), Maug and Sarigan are required to be
                                  11maintained as uninhabited places and used only for the pres-
                                  ervation of bird, fish, wildlife, and plant species." The CNMI

                                                        Northern Mariana Islands Sanctuary - Page 3

                                    Coastal Zone Management Program identifies these islands as
                                    Areas of Particular Concern for the future purpose of preser-
                                    vation and restoration.     Maug, Guguan, and Uracas were also
                                    designated as "islands for science" during the Technical Meet-
                                    ing on Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN)
                                    held on Guam and Palau in November 1968. The Commonwealth
                                    Department of Natural Resources has promulgated stringent
                                    regulations governing hunting, fishing, and trapping on these
                                    islands.

                                    Pagan, which was the only populated island (39 people in 1975)
                                    until May 1981, has been considered as an ideal site for a ma-
                                    rine station.   In the past, there have been proposals to devel-
                                    op the island as a tourist attraction because of its beautiful
                                    landscape and   natural hot springs.

                                    The bottom-fish and highly migratory species fisheries offer
                                    great potential for development.     Though present harvest yield
                                    is insignificant, there are plentiful catches taken by local
                                    fishermen and the elusive foreign fleet.      The marine species of
                                    the northern islands constitute a high pool from which the
                                    degraded fisheries of the islands to the south can be replen-
                                    ished.

                                    The scientific research and education potential of the site is
                                    very high.    Several unique research opportunities include the
                                    analysis of the medicinal value of rare algae and other biota,
                                    identifying the occurrences and determining the cause of
                                    ciguaterra fish poisoning, investigations of Acanthaster planci
                                    (crown-of-thorns starfish) biology, tuna migration, fish catch
                                    statistics, the life histories of Indo-West-Pacific fishes, coral
                                    reefs, marine communities, marine mammals, birds, successional
                                    theory, shoreline development, plate tectonics, submarine vol-
                                    canism, and energy (geothermal, ocean thermal, wave, and so-
                                    lar) resource assessment.       Such research investigations may
                                    have an important economic impact on the islands resulting in
                                    investments, employment, and world recognition. At minimum,
                                    the information will be extremely important for resource plan-
                                    ning and management throughout the Northern Marianas and
                                    elsewhere in Micronesia.

                                    Interisland transportation is currently limited.        At present,
                                    the islands' inhabitants are dependent on vess6ls which make
                                    quarterly sallies, bringing mail, food, and supplies.         No air
                                    service is available between the islands.        Radio is the only
                                    form of instant communication.         Establishment of a marine
                                    sanctuary would mean       more ships visiting the area, better
                                    communication facilities, and perhaps even the establishment of
                                    administrative facilities  on one of the inhabited Northern Is-
                                    lands.   Visitors to the   sanctuary, whether scientists, manag-
                                    ers, or tourists, could    offer the local people a small but de-
                                    pendable market for foods, crafts, guide service, information,
                                    and transportation.     This might help to slow or reverse the
                                    trend of migration to the main island of Saipan.

                                                        Northern Mariana Islands Sanctuary - Page 4

                                    Oil pollution from ships transiting the area has become a seri-
                                    ous and growing problem.       Oil regularly washes ashore to the
                                    detriment of living marine and coastal resources.          Japan re-
                                    cently announced its plans to dump low-level radioactive wastes
                                    in international waters approximately 300 mi east of Pagan Is-
                                    land.   It has also been suggested that this dump site might
                                    later serve as a disposal area for high-level radioactive wastes
                                    as well.    The United States and Japan are collaborating on
                                    such a plan.

                                    The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines, reports
                                    that the proposed Marine Sanctuary lies within an area which
                                    may contain potential for phosphate, sand and gravel, shell,
                                    and calcium carbonate sand mining development.

                     111. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                           Byrne, J. E. (ed.), 1979, Literature review and synthesis of informa-
                               tion on Pacific island ecosystems:        U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv.,
                               Ofc. Biol. Serv., DOI, Wash., D.C.

                           Corwin, G., L. D. Bonham, J. J. Terman, and G. W. Viele, 1957,
                               Military geology of Pagan, Mariana Islands:        Intelligence Div., Of-
                               fice of the Engineer, Headquarters U.S. Army Forces Far East,
                               Tokyo, Japan, 259 pp.

                           Eldredge, L. G., 1965, A New World adventure:             Glimpses of Guam,
                               Vol. 15(2), pp. 36-45.

                           Eldredge, L. G., 1982, Impact of a volcanic eruption on an island en-
                               vironment:    Information Bull. Pacific Sci. Conf., Vol. 34(30), pp.
                               26-29.

                           Eldredge, L. G., 1982, Summary of environmental and fishing informa-
                               tion of Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands:          Unpubl. Manus. ,
                               Nad. -Mar. Fishery Serv. , NOAA, 200 pp.

                           Eldredge, L. G., R. T. Tsuda, P. Moore, M. Chernin, and S. Neu-
                               decker, 1977, A natural history of Maug, Northern Mariana Is-
                               lands:   Univ. Guam Mar. Lab., Tech. Rept. No. 43, 87 pp.

                           Fosberg, F. R., 1960, The vegetation of Micronesia.            1. General de*-
                               scriptions, the vegetation of the Marianas Islands, and a detailed
                               consideration of the vegetation of Guam:         Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat.
                               Hist., Vol. 119(l), pp. 1-75, 40 pls.

                                       Northern Mariana Islands Sanctuary Page 5

                                 1440       1460       480

                                        URACAS

                           26 -          MAUG
                                           ASUNCION
                                               MARIANA
                                           0 ISLANDS

                                      PAGAN P

                                            a
                                            *GUGUAN

                                   SARIGAN o

                                            Cm
                           lie -

                                            SAIPAN
                                          PINIAN

                           14@ -        co ROTA

                                 GUAM
                              rpi

                                       LOCATION MAP

                                             PRELIMINARY EVALUATION
                                       MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                      1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                         A. SITE NAME: Cocos Lagoon, Guam

                         B. LOCATION:       (WESTERN PACIFIC REGION)

                             1.   LATITUDE/LONGITUDE: 13115' N, 1441401 E

                             2.   DESCRIPTION:     The proposed area includes the Cocos barrier
                                  reefs, Cocos lagoon, three islets (Cocos Island, Babe Island,
                                  and a third sandy island), and the coastal region lying be-
                                  tween the mouth of Mamaon and Manell Channels (see map).
                                  The triangular lagoon is enclosed by barrier reefs nearly 3 mi
                                  (5 km) long on the northwest side, 3.5 mi (5.6 km) long on
                                  the south side, and by 2.5 mi (4 km) of steep mountainous
                                  land and alluvial coastal lowland on the northeast side.      The
                                  Geus River forms a broad alluvial valley which trends north-
                                  easterly from the head of Mamaon Channel.         Several rivers
                                  form alluvial valleys and a broad coastal plain at the head of
                                  Manell Channel. Two deep channels connect the lagoon waters
                                  with the open sea--Mamaon Channel opens to the Philippine Sea
                                  and Manell Channel opens to the Pacific Ocean.

                                  Three islands are. located on the south barrier reef.       Cocos
                                  Island, slightly longer than a mile (1.6 km), lies along the
                                  west end of the south barrier reef.   Babe Island, an elongated
                                  low strip of raised' limestone, lies on the south barrier reef
                                  midway between the east end of Cocos Island and Manell Chan-
                                  nel. A third, small, sandy island has developed on the lagoon
                                  side of the barrier reef, 1 000 ft (300 m) east of Cocos Island.

                                  Cocos Lagoon is unique in that it is the only shallow-water,
                                  barrier-reef lagoon on Guam.      The proposed site, excluding
                                  the barrier reefs, has an area of 2.8 Mi2 (7.2 kM2) and lies
                                  entirely within the territorial waters of Guam.  The area of the
                                  barrier reefs and lagoon together is 3.9 Mi2 (10 kM2).      Aside
                                  from the deep Mamaon and Manell Channels, the deepest part
                                  of the lagoon is about 45 ft (14 m) .

                    11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                         A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                             1.   Natural resources display habitat and species diversity unique
                                  to Guam includ-ing two species of marine turtles and an occa-
                                  sional marine mammal (Dugong clugong).

                             2.   The area sustains substantial recreation,. educational and re-
                                  search activities. -

                                                                           Cocos Lagoon, Guam         Page 2

                                3.   Impact of uncontrolled land activity resulting in siltation will
                                     degrade the environmental quality of the area.

                                4.   The area serves as a significant recreational site for both local
                                     population and tourists.      Recreation inclucl@s_ -fishinq,' boating,
                                     @Living, and other Va--ter-related sports.

                            B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                                1.   NATURAL RESOURCES

                                     The Cocos Lagoon site consists of various habitats with its own
                                     unique community of marine organisms.:         (1) fringing reef flats
                                     and nearshore area, (2) barri@r reef with its seaward slopes
                                     and lagoonal slopes, (3) deep channels with its vertical and
                                     oblique sloping walls, (4) patch reefs, and (5) shallow lagoon
                                     floor.  Cocos Lagoon supports 159 coral species including stag-
                                     horn, soft, fire, and razor corals.           The astonishing array
                                     represents more species than are found in all of the tropical
                                     Pacific Ocean. Both red and yellow mangroves are found along
                                     the island's shores which, in addition to protecting the coast-
                                     line from the effects of tropical typhoons, also provide impor-
                                     tant nursery areas for reef fish, shellfish, and other inverte-
                                     brate species.     Large numbers of juvenile fish are commonly
                                     observed in areas of natural reef cover and within the exten-
                                     sive beds of seagrass (e.g. , Enhalus acoroides, Halodule
                                     uninervis) that provide food and -cover oF _thefring@ing-reeT
                                     TTa_ts__a_n_cT areas of the shallow lagoon floor.  The Cocos area is
                                     one of the more important schooling sites for juvenile rabbit-
                                     fish (e.g., Siganus argenteus, S. spinus) during the months
                                     of April and-Wa-yancT, -occasionalTy,-a-uring June and October.
                                     Rabbitfish are considered a delicacy by the local islanders.

                                     Other observations indicate that portions of the lagoon may be
                                     important spawning areas.        One Guam Department of Aquatic
                                     and Wildlife Resources (DAWR) biologist recently noted what
                                     appeared to be a spawning aggregation of the goatfish
                                     (Parupeneus trifasciatus) near the mouth of Mamaon Channel.
                                     The occurrence of this type of activity near the channel mouth
                                     is supported by existing data indicating that optimum spawning
                                     conditions are found in areas of strong seaward flushing, thus
                                     increasing the efficiency of larval *disbursement away             f rom
                                     reef-associated predation.

                                     Aside from the diversity of seaweeds, invertebrates, and fish
                                     associated with the above habitats, marine turtles (both the
                                     "threatened" green turtle and the "endangered" hawksbill tur-
                                     tle) inhabit the lagoon.      Recently, a specimen of the sea cow
                                     (Dugong dugong) was sighted in the lagoon at Merizo Channel;
                                     tFe first observation of a sea cow in Cocos Lagoon was in
                                     February 1974.       Several pods of spinner dolphins (Stenella
                                     longirostris), often accompanied by calves, are regularly ob-
                                     served in the waters just outside the lagoon.         Pilot whales and
                                     the "endangered" humpback whale have also been seen in the
                                     surrounding waters.

                                                                          Cocos Lagoon, Guam - Page 3

                                     Cocos  Island is a major breeding ground of the white tern
                                     (Gygis alba candida) during the months of January through
                                     June.   OFTFsho--re--fis-hermen depend upon these birds to locate
                                     schools of fish.   Cocos Island also supports a small population
                                     of the  Micronesian staling (Aplonis opacus quami) which is
                                     slowly disappearing from sout         Guam.

                                2.   HUMAN USES

                                     Cocos Island and its accompanying lagoon is the most popular
                                     recreational site on Guam for the residents and tourists alike
                                     because of the lagoon's aesthetic qualities and the shelter from
                                     storm swell and wind-generated waves that the barrier reef
                                     provides.   In 1981, 255,130 Japanese tourists visited Guam and
                                     the majority of these tourists visited the Cocos area.          Recre-
                                     ational activities include swimming, snorkeling, scuba diving,
                                     boating, water skiing, and fishing.         Tourists, so far, have
                                     not had a negative effect on the environmental quality of the
                                     waters; however, corals are collected despite a local law which
                                     prohibits the collection of corals above the 60 ft (15 m) depth.

                                     Commercial fishing within Cocos Lagoon is restricted to the op-
                                     eration of six fish weir sites.       Subsistence and recreational
                                     fishermen also use and depend on the lagoon's resources.             Il-
                                     legal fishing practices (i.e., use of explosives and chlorine
                                     bleach)   have recently destroyed many productive fishing
                                     spots. ___DAWR policy has been to issue permits for existing,
                                     active sites, phasing them out as their use is discontinued,
                                     and opening no new sites.        A small fleet of offshore fishing
                                     (trolling and bottom-fishing) vessels in the 16-35 ft size range
                                     is based out of Mamaon Channel. Throw nets and gill nets are
                                     used nearshore and on the reef flats.

                                     The relatively pristine nature of the lagoon and its accessibil-
                                     ity by the public help to establish this area as an exceptional
                                     educational resource requiring only minimal development such
                                     as the construction of interpretive displays and other appro-
                                     priate educational exhibits.

                                     Two-thirds of Cocos Island is under the control of a private
                                     development corporation which is now constructing a 260-room
                                     resort hotel complex.    Until now, tou  'rists have been restricted
                                     to day visits, resulting in minimal biological impact.      The most
                                     direct negative tourist-related impact on the biological quality
                                     of the lagoon is probably the opportunistic taking of coral and
                                     shells as souvenirs.     The western third of Cocos Island has
                                     been recently acquired by the Government of Guam.

                                     Siltation from surrounding lands during storms can also impact
                                     the area.   The major cause of murky waters in the lagoon, es-
                                     pecially during the rainy season (July to November), can be
                                     attributed to the silt-laden runoffs from the shore and river
                                     systems emptying into the lagoon.

                                                                          Cocos Lagoon, Guam       Page 4

                                    The U.S. National Park Service is considering this proposed
                                    area as part of a Guam National Seashore and will hold public
                                    review meetings late in 1983.       Portions of the park's funding
                                    will be supplied by NOAA's Office of Coastal Zone Management.

                                    The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines, reports
                                    that the proposed Marine Sanctuary lies within an area which
                                    may  contain potential for phosphate, sand and gravel, shell,
                                    and  calcium carbonate sand mining development.

                      111. PRINCIPAL    REFERENCE MATERIAL

                           Chase,    J.   A. ,   1975,    Distribution    of   butterflyfishes     (Pisces:
                                Chaetoclonticlae) on three contrasting Guam reefs:          Univ. Guam,
                                M.S. Thesis in Biology, 20 pp.

                           Eldredge, L. G., 1979, Marine biological resources within the Guam
                                seashore study area and the War in the Pacific National Historical
                                Park: Univ. Guam, Mar. Lab., Tech. Rept. No. 57, 75 pp.

                           Emery, K. 0., 1962, Marine geology of Guam:               U.S. Geol. Surv.,
                                Prof. Pap. 403-B, 76 pp.

                           Gawel, M. J., 1977, The common shallow-water soft corals (Alcyonacea)
                                of Guam: Univ. Guam, M.S. Thesis in Biology, 201 pp.

                           Hedlund, S. E., 1977, The extent of coral, shell, and algal harvesting
                                in Guam waters:     Univ. Guam, Mar. Lab., Tech. Rept. No. 37, 34
                                1010.

                           Jennison Nolan, J. with C. OlMetra, D. Bradley, Jr., J. Guest, and
                                D. Moore, 1979, Cultural resources within the Guam seashore
                                study area and the War in the Pacific National Historical Park:
                                Univ. Guam, Dept. of Anthrop. and Geog. , 123 pp.

                           Randall, R. H., 1979, Geologic features within the Guam seashore
                                study area: Univ. Guam, Mar. Lab., Tech. Rept. No. 55, 53 pp.

                           Randall, R. H. and L. G. Eldredge, 1976, Atlas of the reefs and
                                beaches of Guam:         Guam Bureau of Planning,           Coastal Zone
                                Management Section, 191 pp.       (Appendix: M. J. Wilder, Estuarine
                                and mangrove shorelines.)

                           Randall, R. H. and J. Holloman, 1974, Coastal survey of Guam: Univ.,
                                Guam, Mar. Lab., Tech. Rept. No. 14, 404 pp.

                           Randall, R. H. , R. T. Tsuda, R. S. Jones, M. J. Gawel, J. A.
                                Chase, and R. Rechebei, 1975, Marine biological survey of the
                                Cocos barrier reefs and enclosed lagoon:       Univ. Guam, Mar. Lab. ,
                                Tech. Rept. No. 17, 160 pp.

                                                                     Cocos Lagoon, Guam - Page 5

                          Raulerson, L., 1979, Terrestrial   and freshwater organisms within, and
                              limnology and hydrology of,   the Guam seashore study area and the
                              War in the Pacific National   Historical Park:    Univ. Guam, Dept.
                              Biol. , 93 pp.

                          Stojkovich, J. 0. , 1977, Survey and species inventory of representa-
                              tive pristine marine communities on Guam:         Univ. Guam, Mar.
                              -I.-ab. , Tech. Rept. No. 40, 183 pp.

                          Tsucla, R. T. and H. T. Kami, 1973, Algal succession on artificial
                              reefs in a marine lagoon environment in Guam:          Jour. Phycol. ,
                             ,Vol. 9(3), pp. 260-264.

                       GUAM

                                                                ERI0

                                                                     REACM

                                                                    4ANELL   @C4

                                                                               ACHA G

                                                   -6.c                          3ALAN

                                                                            0       .5
                                                          APPROX.BOUNDARY@@  Pon
                                                                                  MILES

                                                     LOCATION MAP

                                                PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE-
                                        MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                       1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:
                           A. SITE NAME:      Papaloloa Point-Asaga Strait, Ofu Island
                                                                           American Samoa-,---
                           B. LOCATION:       (WESTERN PACIFIC REGION)

                               1.  LATITUDE/ LONG I TUDE: 14011' S, 1690401 W

                               2.  DESCRIPTION:        The site is located on Ofu Island (Papaloloa
                                   Point) and Asaga Strait (the channel between Ofu and Olosega
                                   Islands). These waters are within the jurisdiction of American
                                   Samoa and are, therefore, administered by the US Department of
                                   Interior. The site encompasses approximately 3 mi (4.8 km) of
                                   shoreline and adjacent fringing reef to 150 ft (45 m) depth
                                   for an approximate total area of 0.75 sq mi (1.9 sq km). Most
                                   of the fringing reef is shallow (3 ft (I m) deep at high tide
                                   and consists of rubbT6-and consolidated limestone. A near.shore
                                   depression, 5-8 ft '(1.5-2.5 m) deep, supports numerous micro-
                                   atolls of living coral on a sandy bottom.

                     11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                           A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                               1.  This is the only sitein Samoa where the blue coral (Heliopora
                                   coerulea) is known to occur.

                               2.  The location offers exceptional recreational opportunities for
                                   snorkeling and swimming.

                               3.  The marine life is diverse, abundant, and unaffected by pollu-
                                   tion.

                           B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                               1.  NATURAL RESOURCES

                                   Papaloloa Point is an excellent example of a fringing reef com-
                                   munity and is typical of that found throughout the tropical in-
                                   sular South Pacific.     Fishes, corals, and other invertebrates
                                   are highly diverse and abundant.        The site is pollution 'free
                                   and subject only to relatively light subsistence and recreational
                                   fishing pressure because of its fairly remote location.

                                   The site is unique in that it is the only place in Samoa where
                                   the blue coral, Heliopora coerulea, is known to occur.           This
                                   species forms lar-gemicroaTo-lls(10-16 ft; 3-5 m diameter) in
                                   the nearshore depre   *ssion offering shelter to fishes and inver-
                                   tebrates alike.   Other abundant corals are Porites, Millepora,
                                   and Montipora. Sea cucumbers are abundant- -in--t-Fe s_a-_na`y__d_e-
                                   pressions as is the green alga Halimeda discoidea.         Damselfish

                                                    Papaloloa Point-Asaga Strait, Ofu Island - Page 2

                                     (Glyphidodontops spp. ,     Stegastes spp'. 1,   parrotfish    (Scarus
                                     spp) ,   surgeonfish    (Acanthurus spp. ) ,      and     butterflyfish
                                     (Chaetodon spp) dominate the ichthyofauna.

                                2.   HUMAN USES

                                     The fringing reef at Papaloloa Point-Asaga Reef is not heavily
                                     used at present. Some subsistence fishing occurs here , and an
                                     occasional snorkeler enjoys a quiet swim, but the site largely
                                     remains to be discovered by tourists. It has the potential for
                                     becoming one of the most popular snorkling and swimming areas
                                     in American Samoa.    The sandy beach, clear water, and the wide
                                     shallow reef on the   seaward side for protection from surf are
                                     physical attributes   complementary to the diversity and abundance
                                     of marine life. The   presence of the Ofu Airport provides access
                                     which will be increased upon the completion of a small hotel(10
                                     rooms) presently under construction.

                                     The U.S. Department of the Interior, Department of Mines,
                                     reports that the proposed Marine Sanctuary lies within an area
                                     which may contain potential for phosphate, sand and gravel,
                                     shell, and calcium carbonate sand mining development.

                      Ill. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                     Anonymous, 1980, American Samoa coral reef inventory, Part A (text) and
                           Part B (atlas):     U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Pacific Ocean Div.,
                           Contract No. DACW84-79-C-0022.

                                              40                          38                          36

                                                      S. PACIFIC OCEAN

                                  TAUGA PT
                                     ...........

                                                ......... ....
                                                     ........         ............. @@SAGATAI PT..-"*""
                                                            ..........
                           NUUTIEL                                             .... .......
                                                                                   OLOSEGA
                                                                                        is.
                                            OFU  IS.

                                                         .:,APPROX.
                                                          BOUNDARY

                                              PAPALOLOA PT
                                                                             tMEGA POINT
                          12-
                                                                    1     .5     0
                             ........... REEF                                    MILES            rp!

                                                        LOCATION MAP

                                                    PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                           MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                         1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                            A. SITE NAME: Southern Mariana Islands Marine Sanctuary

                            B. LOCATION:          (WESTERN PACIFIC REGION)

                                 1. LATITUDE/ LONGITUDE: Saipan:                    150151 N,   1450471 E
                                                                   Rota:            140081 N,   1450101 E
                                                                   Tinian:          14058- N,   1450381 E
                                                                   Aguijan:         14051 - N,  1450341 E
                                                                   Naftan Rock:     140501 N,   1450321 E

                                 2.   DESCRIPTION:        The proposed marine       sanctuary consists of a
                                      variety of tropical marine habitats in       selected sites off the is-
                                      lands of Saipan, Rota, and Tinian, as well as the waters sur-
                                      rounding Aguijan (Island) and Naftan Rock.               All boundaries
                                      extend from the high waterline to the 150 ft (46 m) depth con-
                                      tour. The total area encompassed within the boundaries of the
                                      proposed Marine Sanctuary is approximately 18 Mi2 (46 kM2),
                                      entirely within the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth of the
                                      Northern Mariana Islands.

                                      On Saipan:      The site boundaries encompass Tanapag Lagoon
                                      and   the    interticlal  reef   flat  platforms,     rocky    shoreline,
                                      beaches, and barrier reef outside the lagoon.             Two small is-
                                      lands are located within the site:       Managaha Island, inside the
                                      lagoon, and Bird Island (Maigo Fahang) on the northeast side
                                      of Saipan.    The seaward boundary of the site extends to the
                                      150 ft (46 m) depth contour.

                                      On Tinian:     The site boundaries encompass the patch reef just
                                      south of the harbor.

                                      On Rota:     The site boundaries encompass the fringing reefs
                                      and submarine terrace from West Dock south around Puntan
                                      Taipingot to East Dock, as well as the southeastern portion of
                                      Sosanjaya Bay.

                       11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                            A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                                 1.   Natural resources display habitat and species diversity rep-
                                      resentative of southern Mariana Islands.

                                 2.   The area offers exceptional          recreational,     educational,    and
                                      research opportunities.

                                 3.   An increase in tourism may have an impact on the environ-
                                      mental quality of the area.

                                                  Southern Mariana Islands Marine Sanctuary - Page 2

                                4. Areas (on Saipan, Rota, and Tinian) serve as recreational
                                     sites for both local populations and tourists.          Recreation iF--
                                     cludes     fishing,  boating,   diving,    and other water-related
                                     sports.

                            B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                                1 .  NATURAL RESOURCES

                                     The sites selected for inclusion in the proposed Southern
                                     Mariana Islands Marine Sanctuary each represent relatively
                                     pristine coral communities, rich in species diversity and high
                                     in water quality.     Each is similar in many ways, and yet each
                                     has something unique to offer.

                                     The Saipan site contains a variety of habitat types.              Fifteen
                                     distinct habitat    types can be identified within the lagoon.
                                     Tanapag Lagoon is unique in that few lagoons exist in the
                                     Mariana Islands.     The lagoon is also an important nesting area
                                     for   the   g reen   sea  turtle,   a    species   Federally-listed   a s
                                     "threatened. "    Outside the lagoon are several examples of flat
                                     reef platforms, rocky shorelines, wave-washed sandy beaches,
                                     and barrier reefs which when exposed during low tides present
                                     an ideal opportunity to observe the interticlal flora and fauna.
                                     Bird Island is a nesting site for many species of marine birds.
                                     Humpback whales, a species Federal ly-I isted as "endangered,"
                                     have been observed off Sabaneta Point on            the northern ex-
                                     tremity of Saipan.     Outside Tanapag Lagoon       (Saipan), there is
                                     a grotto which contains colonies of a sponge        which at one time
                                     was considered to be extinct.        The reef flat at Bird Island is
                                     noted for its abundance of cowrie shells.          In addition to nat-
                                     ural habitats, several artifacts of World War 11 dot the lagoon.
                                     Two sunken ships, three landing craft, and three planes pro-
                                     vide suitable substrate and habitat for a variety of coral and
                                     fish species.    Offshore of Wing Beach in 70 ft (21 m) of water
                                     are seven amphibious tractors, dumped there by marines after
                                     the invasion of Saipan, which have also evolved into artificial
                                     reef communities.      Bonzai Cliff, the site where many Japanese
                                     soldiers jumped to their deaths rather than face capture, is
                                     also situated within the proposed site.

                                    .,The patch reef south of Tinian Harbor is noted for an abun-
                                     dant and diverse assemblage of corals.          Of particular interest
                                     is an area dominated by soft corals which take on various pas-
                                     tel colors and grow together resembling a large patch quilt.
                                     Aguijan Island and Naftan Rock are characterized by rocky
                                     shorelines and shallow, submarine slopes.          No reef flats have
                                     developed; however, coral is diverse and active reef develop-
                                     ment can be observed.        Aguijan is uninhabited, which results
                                     in less fishing pressure and, hence, in the presence of larger
                                     fish.    Naftan Rock is an important nesting area for marine
                                     birds.

                                                 Southern Mariana Islands Marine Sanctuary - Page 3

                                    The Rota site offers a contrast in coral communities.              The
                                    western side of the island is subject to prevailing winds and
                                    seas, while the eastern margin is tucked in under high cliffs
                                    and therefore is generally calm.        Large, stacked colonies of
                                    Porites spp. grow in the harbor.           Rota, the southernmost
                                    isTa--n-EFin the Marianas archepelago, provides an interesting
                                    data base for comparing zonation and biological community
                                    variation within the northern Mariana Islands.

                               2.   HUMAN USES

                                    The two major uses of the areas within the proposed Marine
                                    Sanctuary site are recreation and fishing.        On Saipan, recre-
                                    ational activities include sailing, boating, glass-bottom boat
                                    sightseeing, surfing, scuba diving, and snorkeling.          Although
                                    tourist activity is high and will probably increase, the impact
                                    upon the environment is minimal.         The entire area is within
                                    the lagoon and reef Area of Particular Concern (APC) for the
                                    Coastal Resource Management Program (CRMP). The CRMP re-
                                    views all new activities and activities which intensify the use
                                    of APC. An application was recently received for the develop-
                                    ment of a park on Managaha Island.         The application was ap-
                                    proved with conditions limiting the daily number of tourists to
                                    the island.    Sanitation facilities must be closed systems, and
                                    signs must be posted informing visitors not to remove corals.
                                    Fishing and removing coral are by far the most significant
                                    activities impacting on the integrity of these areas.       Until this
                                    year, no appropriate regulations were in effect in the Common-
                                    wealth of the Northern Marianas (CNMI) with the exception of
                                    regulations prohibiting the use of dynamite and chlorine
                                    bleach. These regulations, however, are not enforced.            These
                                    destructive fishing practices and the use of large nets with
                                    very small mesh size have contributed to a very noticeable and
                                    steady decline of nearshore fish populations.       The CNMI legis-
                                    lature is now considering a bill which would restrict the re-
                                    moval of corals and shells.     Underwater parks have been pro
                                    posed for portions of each of the sites selected for designation
                                    as a Marine Sanctuary, and regulations have been drafted;
                                    however, funds have not been made available to establish or
                                    manage them.

                                    The patch reef off Tinian and the proposed si       tes on Rota are
                                    also recreational areas used by local island residents.

                                    Tinian may be the site of further military activity.

                                    The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines, reports
                                    that the proposed Marine Sanctuary lies within an area which
                                    may contain potential for phosphate, sand and gravel, shell,
                                    and calcium carbonate sand mining development.

                                               Southern Mariana Islands Marine Sanctuary - Page 4

                     Ill. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                          Amesbury, S. S., D. R. Lassuy, R. F. Meyers, and V. Tyndzik,
                               1979, A survey    of the fish resources of Saipan Lagoon:          Univ.
                               Guam Mar. Lab. , Tech. Rept. No. 52, 58 pp.

                          Cloud, P. E. , 1959,   Geology of Saipan.    Part 4. Submarine topography
                               and shoal-water ecology:      U.S. Geol. Surv., Prof. Pap. 280-K:
                               362-445.

                          Cloud, Jr., P. E., R. G. Schmidt, and H. W. Burke, 1956, Geology
                               of Saipan.     Part 1. General Geology:     U.S. Geol. Surv., Prof.
                               Pap. 280-A:1-126.

                          Doty, J. E. and J.      A. Marsh, Jr. (eds.), 1977, Marine survey of
                               Tanapag, Saipan:      the power barge "Impedance":         Univ. Guam
                               Mar. Lab. , Tech. Rept. No. 33, 147 pp.

                          Eldredge, L. G. and     R. H. Randall, 1980, Atlas of reefs and beaches
                               of Saipan, Tinian  and Rota: Univ. Guam Mar. Lab., 161 pp.

                          Jones, R. S., R. H. Randall, and R. T. Tsucla, 1974, A candidate
                               marine environmental impact survey for potential U.S. military
                               projects on Tinian Island, Mariana Islands:         Univ. Guam Mar.
                               Lab., Tech. Rept. No. 9, 143 pp.

                          Tsucla, R. T. (ed.), 1969, Biological results of an expedition to Rota,
                               Mariana Islands:   Univ. Guam Mar. Lab., Misc. Rept., 37 pp.

                          Tsucla, R. T. (compiler), 1971, Status of Acanthaster planci and coral
                               reefs in the Mariana and Caroline Islands, June 1970 to May 1971:
                               Univ. Guam Mar. Lab., Tech. Rept. No. 2, 127 pp.

                                                                                                    Southern Mariana Islands Marine Sanctuary                                                                   Page 5

                                                                                      144*             146-            14e

                                                                            2e                             IS.
                                                                                                                                           SAIPAN
                                                                                                           MARIANA
                                                                                                           ISLANDS

                                                                                          PAGAN IS.,P
                                                                                                                                                              TANAPAG

                                                                                         SARIGAN IS..                                                GARAPAN

                                                                             16

                                                                                                     61 SAIPAN
                                                                                                    @TINIAN

                                                                             14"                   ROTA
                                                                                      GUAIVIt?

                                                                                                                                                                           MILES
                                                                                       I                I

                                                                                                                                          TINIAN

                                                                                         ROTA

                                                                                                             0       2       4
                                                                                                                   MILES

                                                                                                                                                   TINIAN HARBOR
                                                                                                                                       0       2      4
                                                                                                 ROTA                                        MILES

                                                                                                                    N

                                                                                  rpi         APPROX.                                 ROCK                 Aguijan Is.

                                                                                                                  LOCATION MAP
                                                                                                                     2       4
                                                                                                                                                           @.AMOR

                                                 PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE
                                         MARINE SANCTUARY SITE EVALUATION

                       1. SITE LOCATION AND NAME:

                          A. SITE NAME: Facpi Point to Fort Santo Angel, Guam

                          B. LOCATION:         (WESTERN PACIFIC REGION)

                               1.  LATITUDE/LONCITUDE: 1300171 N to 130211 N, 1440391 E

                               2.  DESCRIPTION:       The proposed area includes the offshore wa-
                                   ters to depths of 60 ft (18.3 m) from Facpi Point to Fort Santo
                                   Angel on the northern side of Umatac Bay.              The shoreline
                                   consists of rocky volcanic headlands with steep volcanic shore-
                                   lines and beaches at the heads of three bays:              Sella Bay,
                                   Cetti Bay, and Fouha Bay. Low-lying narrow terraces of lime-
                                   stone border much of the shoreline.         The bordering reef flat
                                   is narrow interticlal reef.   The total area of the site is approx-
                                   imately 2 Mi2 (5 kin-2-), situated entirely within Guam's waters.

                     11. RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERATION AS A SANCTUARY

                          A. DOMINANT CONSIDERATIONS

                               1.  The natural resources of this coastline include habitat and
                                   species diversity unique to Guam.

                               2.  The entire coastline and adjacent waters are a significant rec-
                                   reational site for local residents and tourists.      Recreationar-a-c-
                                   tivities include fishing, diving, swimming, boating, and hik-
                                   ing.

                               3.  Although the area is presently included in a territorial sea-
                                   shore park, some development pressure exists.

                          B. SITE EVALUATION NARRATIVE

                               1.  NATURAL RESOURCES

                                   A wide variety of coral and fish are found in the area, despite
                                   the influx of fresh water from numerous small streams.             The
                                   coastal strand vegetation provides a fine example of this eco-
                                   logical community.    Both the "threatened" green turtle ind the
                                   Ifenclangered" hawksbill turtle utilize 'the area.      The coastline
                                   also contains seven prehistoric archaeological sites and five
                                   historic sites from the Spanish occupation.

                                   Located 11 mi off the southern coast of Guam are fishing banks
                                   which attract dolphins (Stennella longirostris).        The dolphins
                                   rest in Bile Bay, Umatac Bay, and Cetti Point.            There have
                                   also been verified sightings of pilot whales off Facpi Point.
                                   Therefore, these represent areas of great importance to the

                                                      Facpi Point to Fort Santo Angel, Guam - Page 2

                                     life histories (i.e., movement and resting patterns) of native
                                     dolphins and whales.

                                2.   HUMAN USES

                                     The coastline area is extensively used for recreation with visi-
                                     tors arriving by boat and on foot--no other means of access is
                                     available.  Activities include charter fishing, overnight yacht-
                                     ing, shelling, swimming, diving, and hiking. A semipermanent
                                     shelter exists at the head of Cetti Bay.          Tourists enjoy the
                                     area via charter boat service and from a scenic overlook on
                                     the main highway.

                                     The coastline area is a major resource in the Guam Territorial
                                     Seashore Park which is managed by Guam's Department of
                                     Parks and Recreation with partial (if appropriated) funding
                                     made available from NOAA's Office of Coastal Zone Management.
                                     Most of the land behind the coastline is privately owned, and
                                     development pressure is growing.          Sella Bay was an active
                                     candidate for a new ammunition wharf proposed by the U.S.
                                     Navy in the late 1960s, but intense pressure from environ-
                                     mental groups and a law suit from a private landowner has
                                     ceased further consideration of the site.

                                     The U.S. National Park Service is considering this proposed
                                     area as part of a Guam National Seashore, and           they will hold
                                     public review meetings late in 1983.

                                     The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of          Mines, reports
                                     that the proposed marine sanctuary lies within          an area which
                                     may contain potential for phosphate, sand and           gravel, shell,
                                     and calcium carbonate sand mining development.

                                     The government permits subsistence fishing on the islands.             It
                                     is now legal to take endangered sea turtles in the Common-
                                     wealth of Northern Mariana Islands.

                      Ill. PRINCIPAL REFERENCE MATERIAL

                      Amesbury, S. S., 1978, Studies on the biology of the reef fishes of Guam.
                            Part 1.    Distribution of fishes on the reef flats of Guam.            Part il.
                            Distribution of eggs and larvae of fishes at selected sites on Guam:
                            Univ. Guam Marine Lab., Tech. Rept. No. 55, 53 pp.

                      Department of Parks and Recreation, 1979, Master Plan, Guam Territorial
                            Seashore Park.

                      Eldredge, L. G., 1979, Marine biological resources with the Guam seashore
                            study area and the War in the Pacific National Historical Park:             Univ.
                            Guam Marine Lab. , Tech. Rept. No. 57, 75 pp.

                      Randall, R. H. (ed.) , 1978, Guam's reefs and beaches.            Part 11.    Transect
                            studies:   Univ. Guam Marine Lab., Tech. Rept. No. 48, 90 pp.

                                                 Facpi Point to Fort Santo Angel, Guam - Page 3

                    Randall, R. H., 1979, Geologic features within the Guam seashore study
                         area: Univ. Guam Marine Lab., Tech. Rept. No. 55, 53 pp.

                    Randall, R. H. and C. Birkeland, 1978, Guam's reefs and beaches, part 11.
                         Sedimentation studies at Fouha Bay and Ylig Bay:      Univ. Guam Marine
                         Lab. , Tech. Rept. No. 47, 77 pp.

                    Raulerson,  L. , 1979, Terrestrial and freshwater organisms within and lim-
                         nology and hydrology of, the Guam Seashore study area and the War
                         in the Pacific National Historical Park:   Univ. Guam, Dept. Biol. , 93
                         PP.

                    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1980, Guam comprehensive study shoreline
                         inventory.

                                                       Facpi Point to Fort Santo Angel, Guam           Page 4

                                     SAIPAN
                                    TINIAN                                                             rD]
                                                                                                         JL-
                                 MARIANA                   ANAE 1.
                                  ISLANDS

                                    ,0 ROTA

                                   GUAM
                                                         FACP T                          GUAM

                             2
                                                         SEA

                                                                            FOUHA

                                                                                                 FT SANTO
                                                                                                /ANGEL

                                                                               UMATAC SAY
                                APPROX. BOUNDARY@

                                    0        1       2                      MAMATGUN PT
                                           MILES                                                         144'
                                                                                                          4611

                                                         LOCATION MAP

                    ATTACHMENT A    National Marine Sanctuary Site Identification

                                               Criteria

                                                     ATTACHMENT A

                                NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY SITE IDENTIFICATION CRITERIA

                       During summer 1981, 'the National Marine Sanctuary Progran draft Site
                 Identification Criteria were reviewed and refined by three marine scientists:
                 Drs. Walter H.  Adey, Rezneat M. Darnell, and G. Carlton Ray.     Taking their
                 recommendations into consideration, the criteria presented below and the
                 Site Evaluation Matrix in Appendix D were developed.

                       The site identi fication criteria are directly related to the Program's
                 purposes:   (1) that the system of sanctuaries established is illustrative of
                 the variety of  ecosystems found in the United States; (2) that sanctuaries
                 allow, to the maximum extent feasible, multiple use for public and private
                 interests; (3) that sanctuaries are designated for the purpose of protecting
                 or restoring conservation, recreational , ecological , or esthetic values; and
                 (4) that -sa nctuaries are established to serve as a conservation component,
                 or a management tool , in a broad national -intere'st approach to marine resource
                 development, conservation, and utilization.     The criteria are grouped accord-
                 ingly into four categories: (1) natural resource values; (2) human use values;
                 (3) potential activity impacts; and (4) management concerns.      The criteria
                 under each category reflect concerns significant to the Program.

                       Sites initially identified using the Sanctuary Program Classification
                 System (Appendix B) are evaluated in terms of these criteria (i.e., to see
                 which criteria are met). Appendix D describes how sites meeting a majority
                 of the criteria are further assessed to identify priority sites.      The Regional
                 Resource Evaluation Teams are to utilize these criteria in their site eval-
                 uations.  A glossary of terms which are used in this and other sections
                 of the PDP is presented in Appendix F.

                                                         C-2                                                                                                C-3

               1. Natural Resource Values                                                                                 (3)   In the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary, the cold waters
                                                                                                                   of the Ca I I forni a Current I'l owl ng north meet the warm waters of the Ca I I forn I a
                      A.    Regional Representation                                                                Counter Current flowing south to create upwellings of cold notrient-rich wIters
                                                                                                                   that enhance the biological productivity of the area. (HotL: This example also
                      The area under consideration is characteristic of the broad biogeographic                    meets Criterion I.G.).
               region in which it is located.       (Reference:    Sanctuary Program Classification
               System for biogeographic regions of the United States and its territories --                               (4)   In many cases, coral reefs are not only energetically self-sustaining
               Appendix B).                                                                                        (i.e., they produce locally enough food to support the conmonity), but they are
                                                                                                                   also specifically organized to entrap, hoard, and recycle materials recelved fro"
                      B.    Subregional Representation                                                             the surrounding waters (i.e., products that are Imported and conserved).

                      The area under consideration Is    representative of the biogeographic                              E.    Biotic Character/Species Representation
               subregion In which It Is located.       (Reference: Sanctuary Program Classification
               System).                                                                                                   The area  under consideration Is of special interest because It supports:

                      Example: This criterion would apply to an area containing species                                       (1)   ecologically limited species;
                      _T_                                                                                                     (2)   ecologically Important species; or
               assemb ages which are especially characteristic of the Oregonian subregion
               of the British Columbian region.       Another example would be an area containing                             (3)   unique species associations or biological assemblages.
               species asseablages which are especially characteristic of the. Floridian or
               American Atlantic Antillean subregion of the West Indian region.                                           Examples:   (1)   This criterion would apply to marine habitat areas upon
                                                                                                                   which ec-o-rogicaily limited species (e.g. . threatened, endangpred, rare. depleted,
                      C.    Community Representation                                                               endemic, or peripheral species) are dependent during all or part of their lives.
                      The area under consideration    is significant In relation to the ecological                        (2)   This criterion would apply to marine areas containing species which
               communities which are found within the specified habitat type or within the                         contribute In a significant way to themaintenance of a specified ecosystem
               biogeographic region or subregion      (i.e., on a macroscale, communities are                      found In the region or subregion, such as the Channel Islands National Marine
               assemblages of species populations within a prescribed area or habitat).                            Sanctuary which supports one of the largest and most varied asseiiblages of
                                                                                                                   marine mammals and seabirds in the world.
                      Emamil s'  (1) The wide spectrum of marine habitats In the Channel           Islands
                            e
               Nation     M. rne Sanctuary In California created by accentuated bottom relie(,                            (3) The waters off Point Lobos, California support a unique assvinblakle of
               varied bottom substrates, and gradation.in water depth from Island shorelines                       kelp.  sea urchin, abalone, and sea otters.
               to deep coastal basins support a variety of ecological communities.                                        (4)   Submarine canyons support unusual biological conimunIties of soft
                      (2)   Coral reef, grass bed, soft bottom, and open-bay habitat areas in the                  corals, crustaceans, and fish known as "pueblo villages."
               Key Largo National Marine Sanctuary support a variety ecological conmunitles
               associated with the east Florida reef tract,                                                               (5)   This criterion would also apply to wide sandy bottom areas which are
                                                                                                                   characterized by low productivity, but unique species composition, such as
                      0.    Biological Productivity                                                                certain areas off central Texas.

                      The area under consideration     Is significant in relation to its level of                         F.    Species Maintenance
               primary and/or secondary production.                                                                       The area under consideration Is Important to life history activitis@s,
                      ,Examples:  (1) East Breaks at the edge of the outer continental shelf                       including special feeding, courtship, breeding, birthing/norsery, resting/
               off Corpus LhrlStl, Texas Is characterized by intense local upwelling, high                         wintering, and migration areas.
               primary productivity, and exceptional fish production.                                                     Exa   les: (1)   The waters off the Point Reyes-Farallon islands provide
                                                                                                                             17, ITow water feeding areas for a,wide variety of marine organisms.
                      (2)   in the Gray's Reef National Marine Sanctuary, much production may                      deep and sia
               be Imported; outcroppIngs of limestone rocks may serve to entrap, conserve,                         including seabirds. marine mammals, and marine fisheries.            flie Fdral lon Islatids
               and circulate detritus and plankton which provide energy sources (or                                support the largest seabird rookeries In the contiguous United States and are
               reef invertebrates. which In turn support marine fisheries and sea turtles.                         used, along with the mainland, by California sea ]tons. harbor seals, aiid
                                                                                                                   elephant seals for hauling out and pupping purposes. Miales. Including several
                                                                                                                   endangered species. and porpoises pass through the sanctuary on annual mijrdtions.

                                                 C-4                                                                                           C-5

               (2)  The waters around certain Ilawallan Islands are important wintering.                      B.    Fishery Resources of Commercial importance
          birthing/nursery. and perhaps courtship/breeding areas for endangered
          humpback whales.                                                                                    The area under consideration contains fish and shellfish sperles. species
                                                                                                        groups (e.g., snaVVer-grouper complex), or fishery habitats which are Important
               (3)  Spiny lobster migration routes off Florida are Important for        the             to the ccumiercial fishing industry and for which conservation and manayellienL Is
          .off shelf" movement of this species.                                                         in the public interest.
               (4)   The mouth of the Mississippi River Is an important brown shrimp                          Example:   The waters of the Point Reyes-Farallon Islands National Marine
          over-wintering ground.                                                                        Sanctuary provide substantial fishing opportunities, Including coninercial
                                                                                                        fisheries for bottom fishing, crab, Salmon, albacore, and Pelagic anchovy.
                  G.   Ecosystem  Structure/liabitat Features                                           herring, and other species.              I
                  The area under consideration is characterized by special chemical,                          C.    Ecoiog_ical/Aesthetic Resoqri?es of Importance for Recreational
          physical, and/or geological habitat features.                                                             Tc-tivif-les Other Than Fishing
               Examples: (1)   The Florida Middle Grounds on the Gulf of Mexico continental                   The   area under consideration contains exceptional natural resources and
          shelf represent an unusual geological formation _- a drowned Pleistocene                      features which, because of their importance to nature watching and other
          reef--which supports rich and diverse reef communities.                                       nonconsumptive recreational activities. enhance human appreciation, under-
                                                                                                        standing, and enjoyment of nature.
                  (2) Transition zones occur where two different marine systems converge --
          such as at coastai/marine system interfaces, s@elf/slope interfaces, soft                           Exam  I          Rocky shorelines, shallow nearshore waters. arid Inter-
          bottom/hard'bottoiii ecotones, or cold water/warm water current convergence zone.             tidal Pools   n the Channel Islands and Point Reyes-Farallon Islands Mitional
          These areas of mixing often have unique physical and ecological characteristics,              Marine Sanctuaries have rich and varied plant and animal life which attract
          high production, and species diversity/ population densities which are often                  many persons interested In photography and nature study.
          greater than in areas flanking them.     For example, a transition zone is formed
          near Cape Hatteras where cold northern waters of the Labrador Current mix with                      (2)   The prominent topography around the Channel Islands arid Point
          warm water eddies of Gulf Stream/Florida Current and as a result. northern and                Reyes-Farallon Islands National Marine Sanctuaries provides outstanding
          southern species mix and co-exist with species endemic to the area.        (Note:   This      ocean vistas.
          example also meets Criterion I.D.).
                                                                                                              (3)   The spectacular spur-and-groove coral reef formation In the Lone
                  (3) Easternmost coastal areas of Maine--with unique bay-heads and rocky               Key National Marine Sanctuary attracts SCUBA and snorkeling enthusiasts from
          coasts, varied substrates derived from glacial materials, extensive sub-fjord                 all over the world.
          character, and numerous offshore Islands--are matched by few areas In the world
          in habitat types and species diversity.                                                             (4)   The waters off Maui. Ilawall are popular for humpback whale watching.
                                                                                                              U.    Research Opportunity
            it.   liuman-Use Values
                                                                                                              The area under consideration provides exceptional opportunities for
                  A. Fishery Resources of Recreational Importance                                       research In marine science and resource management.
                  The area under consideration contains fish and shellfish species, species                   Examples: (1)    The Gray's Reef National Marine Sanctuary serves as a
          groups (e.g., snapper-grouper complex). or fishery habitats which are Important               natural laboratory or control area for research in live botLoiii ecology.
          to the recreational fishing Industry/conmunity and for which conservation and
          management Is In the public Interest.                                                               (2)   The Key Largo National Marine Sanctuary Is amenable to onsite
                                                                                                        research activities for many reasons, including the diversity of resources
                  Examp e:  The Florida Middle Grounds rank high in statistical surveys of
                  -   L                                                                                 available, the past history of scientific research and education In the area,
          dc4nersal--and pelagic fish catch and effort. recreational sector participation.              the compatibility with similar research efforts in adjacent John Pennekamp State
          and socioeconomic contribution.                                                               Park and Biscayne National Park. and the proximity of the site to user groups.
                                                                                                        In addition, the Carysfort Reef Lighthouse provides a unique research base from
                                                                                                        which to launch studies concerning the sanctuary environment.

                                                   C-6                                                                                                C-7

                  (3)  The Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary offers a special                        ADDITIONAL FACTORS IN SITE IDENTIFICATION
           opportunity to coordinate research with the Channel Islands National Park.            Suc h
           coordination will contribute to a better scientific understanding of the marine
           environment and to more effective management by answering questions such as                       Ill.   Potential Activity Impacts
           those related to fisheries, marine mammals, seabirds and those related to
           development and use of marine resources.                                                                 Many marine areas are subject to human use, some of which bring adverse
                                                                                                             pressures to bear on the natural resources. The initial identification of
                 E.   Interpretive -pportunity                                                               potential marine Sanctuary areas by Resource Evaluation Teams should include
                                                                                                             a Summary of existing and potential hunian activities in these areas as Wei I
                The area under consideration provides an excellent opportunity to interpret                  as a prel iminary assessment of envirotonental impacts.       Since the pressures
           the meanings and relationships of     special marine resources In order to enhance                may arise from various activities, the present or potential ecological
           general understanding, appreciation, and wise use of the marine environment.                      significance of each activity, as well as the cumulative Impact of several
                                                                                                             activities, must be analyzed so that appropriate mana(jenlent action may be
                  Ex@@: (1)       Through a variety of Interpretive media, including aquaria                 designed and Implemented.     Definitive environmental Impact analyses, however,
           displays, narrated slide shows and glassbottom boat tours, a visitor to the Key                   are hampered by the fact that adequate field data on natural or "existing"
           Largo National Marine Sanctuary Is exposed to a variety of marine and coastal                     conditions are often lacking, thus making assessments of "human-Induced"
           ecosystems. Including open ocean, fringing coral reefs, patch reefs, mangroves,                   versus "natural" conditions difficult.       Many judgments are, therefore,
           and open bay and barrier islands.                                                                 based on projections and can be subjective, I.e., the evaluation depends
                                                                                                             largely upon the experience and special interest of the reviewer.
                  (2) The Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary provides an exceptional
           opportunity to interpret marine and insular ecosystem features through the use                         Regional resource evaluation teams will prelimInarily assess activity
           of various interpretive "hands on" techniques that go beyond traditional                          impacts based on a review of scientific literature (e.g., baseline studies
           educational tools, such as brochures and pamphlets.                                               and environmental Impact studies) and discussions with Persons knowledgeable
                                                                                                             in the field.    The types of activities which may be considered for potential
                  F.   Historical, Archaeological or Paleontological                                         impacts include:    (1) vessel traffic; (2) aircraft ovf@ifllghts; (3) coininercial
                                                                                                             and recreational fishing; (4) other recreational activities such as SC1111A.
                  The area under consideration contains (or Is likely to contain) submerged                  snorkeling, spearfishing, and specimen collecting; (5) ocean dumping and
           remnants of past life that are of special historical, cultural or paleontologIcal                 waste disposal (including litter); (6) scientific research and Pdiifational
           value.                                                                                            demonstrations; (7) dredging and dred e disposal;        (8) disturbing marine
                                                                                                             mammals and seabirds; (9) anchoring; 60) salvage operations-, and (11) oil
                  Examples: (1)   This criterion would apply     to marine areas where known or              and gas recovery and associated activities.        Ih I sIs not meant as an exhaustive
           possihT-e--@Fipwrecks, armaments. or other maritime relics occur and where                        listing, but rather to illustrate the range and types of activities which
           protection Is desirable to conserve or restore aesthetic values and to advance                    may be evaluated for potential Impacts on resources within a site idenl.ifim
           the goal of the United States antiquities laws to protect historical resources.                   for future marine Sanctuary consideration.
                  (2)  This criterion would apply to inarine areas containing. or suspected                   IV.   Management Concerns
           of containing, remnants of historic hum?d occupation by Indians, Eskimos, early
           Americans, or other peoples.                                                                             A.   Relationship To Other Programs

                  (3)  This criterion would apply to marine areas containing fossils and                            While some sanctuaries may be tlf!slgnatpd to protect resources not
           geological formations whose study would reveal clues to the earth's geologic                      currently managed by other existing programs (e.g., the U.S.S. MON1101? on the
           history. the character I stirs of ancient environments and the relationship of                    continental shelf off North Caroiina),.inost reconimendati6ns involve. conpr-raLion
           ancient plants and animals to the earth's evolutionary history.                                   with some other rederal.. State, or local agency or organization.          iho d h i I I ty
                                                                                                             of existing regulatory mechanisnis to Protect the values of the area ami the
                                                                                                             contribution of the Sanctuary Program to that existing manatjenlent effort inay
                                                                                                             be an Important factor in selecting Sanctuary candidates.          nep(@ndinq oil the
                                                                                                             location, the resource, and the existing system, the Program could either
                                                                                                             complement the status quo by filling specific gaps or forin a management
                                                                                                             umbrella over a fragmented system to help coordinate and stren(jthen diverse,
                                                                                                             but related efforts.     At different sites, NOAArnay work to coniplement other
                                                                                                             programs efforts such as esttiarine sanctuaries, national parks, wildlife

                                                            C-8

                       refuges, or state preserves. among others.   There may be instances where
                       NOAA's primary contribution to protection of special marine areas wil I
                       be in the form of enhanced public awareness through interpretive and
                       research programs.

                              B. Kanagement of a Conservation Unit

                              Optimum size of a marine sanctuary Is an issue to be considered in
                       potential sanctuary sites. Sanctuary boundaries are discussed in some detail
                       In Section 111.1' and Appendix E of the PDP. The size or extent of a marine
                       sanctuary should be a cohesive conservation unit amenable to effective
                       manage,ment given fiscal and staff constraints of the managing entities.

                              C.  Accessibility

                              Since national marine sanctuaries are to be readily available for
                       public use, when use is compatible with the sanctuary's goals and objectives.
                       consideration should be given to factors which limit or enhance public access
                       to a particular site.

                              0.  Surveillance and Enforcement

                              Another issue to be considered when evaluating a potential sanctuary
                       site is the the degree to which the area (i.e., the location, its size, and
                       the types of resources Involved) lends Itself to adequate enforcement and
                       surveillance and the capabilities of responsible agents (e.g., U.S. Coast
                       Guard, state law enforcement divisions, or the like). Specifically,
                       consideration should be given to: (1) degree of surveil lence/enforcement
                       presence needed In the area-light, medium, or heavy; (2) schedul e- -rout I ne,
                       prescribed, or case-by-case basis; and (3) logistics--vessels, aircraft,
                       manpower, equipment. and budgetary requirements.

                             E.  Economic Considerations

                            The designation of any national marine sanctuary could have economic
                       effects at both local and national levels. Prior to the development of a
                       management plan for a particular site which describes permitted and restricted
                       activities, it is difficult to calculate the economic impact of sanctuary
                       designation. It is even more difficult to determine the economic value of
                       the sanctuary to slociety as a whole based on such things as public use,
                       research and interpretive value. Sanctuary designation often enhances
                       economic value by ensuring long-term protection for commercially significant
                       resources. such as commercial or recreational fish stocks. vital habitats.
                       and resources which generate tourism.   Conversely, a marine sanctuary may
                       also have negative economic impacts if management regulations restrict
                       activities that generate Income. However, in these cases, the economic
                       value is usually not irretrievably lost since the resources remain protected
                       for the long term and could be used If necessary.   In cases where certain
                       economic values are reduced or foregone, this Impact must be weighed
                       against the long-term benefits to society.   Analysis of a potential site
                       for marine sanctuary status wil I take socioeconomic Impacts into consideration.

                                                  APPENDIX D

                                            SITE EVALUATION MATRIX

                       Appendix C outlines the criteria for identifying potential marine
                 sanctuary sites.   Four categories of criteria are presented, namely, natural
                 resource values, human use values, potential activity impacts, and management
                 concerns.  The criteria address characteristics which are of particular
                 significance to the national marine sanctuary program.

                       After a site is examined to determine which criteria are met, the next
                 step involves an eva7bation of the relati've value of each criterion. This is
                 accomplished using the'Site Evaluation Matrix (see Figure 2, page 25) and the
                 guidelines provided below.   Sites are evaluated in terms of the individual
                 value of each criterion met  (e.g., low, moderate, or high value) and in
                 relation to other sites with complementary characteristics. The following
                 rating system is recommended:

                       Low Value (L) --   Low quality; not significant but still a viable
                                concern; of minor contribution to national system; of minor
                                importance; other equally good representatives are available;
                                or duplicates, in significant measure, another recommended
                                area or designated sanctuary.

                       Moderate Value (M) -- Moderately good quality; significant but not the
                                most important concern; helps to support species, but not
                                critical; helps to support the regional ecology, but only
                                in a small measure or in a general way; a few other good
                                representatives are available; or moderate contribution to
                                the national system.

                       High Value (H) -- Very high value; high quality; a major reason for
                                sanctuary considerat.ion; extremely important to regionally
                                significant species; of great importance in terms of ecolog-
                                ical features and processes; regional ecology would likely
                                be significantly altered if the values were not protected;
                                no significant duplication of other recommended areas; abso-
                                lutely unique; one of a kind; best available regional repre-
                                sentive; or excellent contribution to the national system.

                       Unknown Value (X) -- Value or consequences unknown; more study needed
                                to determine value or consequence; factor does not apply; or
                                factor is not an issue, does not need to be considered.

                       Sites which consistently have relatively low values receive an overall
                 "low priority" assessment and are eliminated.    In contrast, sites which
                 consistently have relatively high values receive a "high priority" assessment
                 and are recommended for further consideration. The Site Evaluation Matrix is
                 used to tabulate this information.   From this evaluation, the Regional
                 Resource Evaluation Teams compile an initial list of the most highly qualified
                 sites for public review (see page 0-11). Guidelines for evaluating sites
                 using program criteria are presented in the following pages.

                                              D-2                                                                                             D-3

            NATURAL RESOURCE VALUES                                                                        E.    Biotic Character/Species Representation
            A.     Regional Representation                                                                       L -- Characteristic species are common In the region/subreglon; few,
                                                                                                                      If any: (1) ecologically limited species (e.g., threatenerj.
                   L   Other equally good or better sites available; not a good                                       endangered, rare, depleted, endemic' or peripheral species);
                       representative of the region.                                                                  (2) ecologically important spelces; or (3) special species
                                                                                                                      combinations or biological assemblages; low percentage of
                   M   Few other sites available; good representative of the region.                                  regionally or locally available species; other equally good
                                                                                                                      or better sites available.
                   11  Best available site; only one or two sites in the region;
                       best representative of regional characteristics.                                          H -- The area is only of moderate Importance to populations of
                                                                                                                      ecologically limited species or ecologically important species;
            B.     Subregional Representation                                                                         few, if any, special species combinations or assemblages;
                                                                                                                      percentage of regional ly or locally available species is
                   L   Other equally good or   better sites available; not a good                                     moderate; some other similar sites available.
                       representative of the   subregion.
                                                                                                                 H -- Very important to species which are of high ecologic value or
                   M   Few other sites available; good    representative of the subregion.                            ecologically limited in regional, national or international
                                                                                                                      distribution or existence (e.g. endemic, threatened, endangered.
                   H   Best available site; only one or two sites in the subregion;                                   rare, depleted);   contains special species combinations or
                       best representative of subreglonal characteristics.                                            biological assemblages; outstanding diversity for a particular
                                                                                                                      habitat or community type; best available site; only one or two
            C.     Community Representation                                                                           sites In the region or subregion.
                   L -- Poor representation  of the community types found within the                      F.     Species Maintenance
                       specified habitat type or within the biogeographic region or
                       subregion; low percentage of communities on site; low percent                             L    Of some Importance to supporting life history activities of
                       cover of communities on site.                                                                  regional/subregional species; no local dependence upon this
                                                                                                                      area; many other equally important sites available.
                   M -- Good representation of the community types found within the
                       specified habitat type or within the biogeographic region or                              M    Important to supporting life history activities of re(jlonal/
                       subregion; limited number of communities on site; good range                                   subregional species, but not critical ; some other equal ly
                       of common communities present; moderate percent cover of                                       important sites available.
                       communities on site.
                                                                                                                 11   Extremely important to Supporting life history activities of
                 H -- Excellent representation of the communi.ty types found within the                               regional/subregional species; only one or two other Sites
                       specified habitat area or witon the biogeographic region or                                    available.
                       subregion; good or very goofrange of habitats and communities
                       on site; localized, relict.-or special communities present.                         G.    Ecosystem Structure/liabitat Features

            D.     Biologital Productivity                                                                       L -- Habitat features are common in the region/sutireglon, but are not
                                                                                                                      outstanding representatives; no significant contribution to
                   L   Contribution to regional/subregional production minor.                                         regional /subregional. ecosystem structure; no special chemical ,
                                                                                                                      physical or geological habitat features.
                   M   Contribution to regional /subregional production moderate; trophic
                       relationships are typical or common for the region or subregion.                          H    Ilabitat features are common In the region/subreglon; some
                                                                                                                      special features are available; few other sites avallable.
                   H   Contribution to regional/subreglonal production extremely                                      moderate contribution to the regional /subretiloiij I structure.
                       important; regional /subreglonal ecology would likely be signif-
                       icantly altered If natural (normal) production levels change-,                            H    Unique, different or special habitat features-, only one or two
                       highly exemplary, special or unusual trophic relationships.                                    other sites available; significant contribution to regional/
                                                                                                                      subregional structure; structual features have strong InflUCuCe
                                                                                                                      on ecological processes in the area.

                                                D-4                                                                                            D-5

             iwman Use Values
             A.    Fishery Resources of Recreatio@@@                                                                 L   Low or minimal interpretive valde; opportknilties for loterpretd-
                                                                                                                         tion are limited-. has already received considerable interpretive
                   L    Low recreational importance; many other fishery opportunities                                    attention; resource features are cottimon In the reqion; many
                        available.                                                  I                                    other sites available.

                   M    Moderdte recreational importance6 some other fishery                                         M   Moderate or good interpretive value; opportunities for
                        opporLunities available.                                                                         Interpretation fairly good; visually attractive features;
                                                                                                                         resource features are fairly limited In the region; tew
                   11   Iligh recreational importance; only one or two other fishery                                     other sites available.
                        opportunities available.                                                                                                   I
                                                                                                                     11  Excellent interpretive Value; opportunities for hiLerpreLatlon
             B.    Fi                of Couitnercial                                                                     excellent or unusuai;'visually attractive features; resource
                   -shery Resources                   @tance@
                                                                                                                         features are special In the region or subregion; only one or
                   L    Low cuimiercial Importance; many  other fishery opportunities                                    two other sites available; good potential for Interpretive
                        available.                                                                                       center and/or displays; the enhancement of public awareness
                                                                                                                         through this resource is paramount.
                   M    Moderate commercial Importance; some other fishery
                        opportunities available.,   -                                                         F.     Historical, Cultural or Paleontological ITpyrtailce

                   11   High c(nmercial importance; only one or two other fishery                                    L   Little or no historical, cultural or pileoritological
                        opportunities available.                                                                         importance; many other sites available.
             C.    Ecological/Aesthetic Resources of Importance for Recreational                                     M   Moderate or good historical. cultural or paleontological
                   K-tivi-f@iesfthi-r Than Fishing                                                                       importance; few other sites available.

                   L    Low value; minimum opportunity for recreation; many other                                    11  Very special historical, cultural or paleontological value;
                        sites available.                                                                                 only one or two other sites available.

                   K    Moderate value. good opportunity for recreation; few other
                        sites available.                                                                 Ill.  Potential Activity Impacts

                   II   Iligh value; excellent opportunity for recreation; rare in                             Existing and potential activities within a particular area are listed
                        the -egion; only one or two sites available.                                     by Resource Evaluation Teams on the Site Evaluation ftitrix.      The potential
                                                                                                         impact of each  activity Is evaluated using the following recommended scheme:
             0.    Research Opportunity
                                                                                                                     L -- This activity is not highly significant. but still a viable
                   L -- Very limited research opportunities; the site has already                                        issue; little or no impact at current activity levels; very
                        received considerable research attention (i.e., "researched                                      little potential for hann by'increase of this activity; if
                        to death"); not suitable for study; many other sites available.                                  the activity is remote, there is an adequate buffer to protect
                                                                                                                         the area; no known or proposed future development which could
                   M    Good research opportunities; good for use at most levels of                                      affect resource or human use value; no current or potential
                        research. forinai and Informal; few other sites available.                                       user conflict.

                   If   Excellent research opportunities; outstanding for use at a)     I                            M   This activity Is significant, but not the most important
                        levels of research, formal and informal ; can withstand some                                     issue; some impact on resources of current activity levels,
                        pressure from these activities; only one or few other sites                                      but the system is resilient with little permanent damage or
                                                                                                                         other long-lastIng effect; some possible negative impact If
                        available.
                                                                                                                         activity level Increases; if the activity Is remote, there
                                                                                                                         is a fairly good buffer zone to protect the area; suit*-

                                                U-6                                                                                          D-7

                          possible future development likely which could affect resource                   C.     Accessibility
                          or human use values; some current or potential user conflicts
                          which threaten resource or human use value.                                             L   Inaccesible or accessible with considerable difficulty;
                                                                                                                      situated In an extremely remote area; no human Interest In
                     H    Potential for impact at current activity levels Is high or                                  visiting the site.
                          is already major issue; resources are suspected to be very
                          sensitive to environmental change, not resilient; resources                             M   Fairly accessible; if remote, access Is good, but often
                          would likely be significantly altered If values are not                                     with some difficulty (e.g., weather or sea conditions
                          protected; the area is in immediate need of protection;                                     variable); only limited human Interest In visiting tile site.
                          negative Impact likely if activity levels Increase or continue
                          continue at present level; current or potential user conflicts                          11  Easily accessible, with no major difficulty; considerable
                          could significantly threaten resource or human use values.                                  human Interest in visiting the site, Increased visitation Is
                                                                                                                      likely and/or could severely threaten resource or huumn use
                     X    Environmental consequences unknown.    More study is needed.                                values without some management structure.

                                                                                                           D.     Surveillance and Enforcement
         IV. Management Concerns
                                                                                                                  L -- Open, long, or Insecure boundary; remote, not amenable to
               A.    Relationship to Other Programs                                                                   surveillance and enforcement efforts; requires consi(fi?rable
                                                                                                                      commitment of manpower, equipment and budget; no on-going or
                     L    Other equally good or better programs In effect for all                                     potential activities that would require an Increase In
                          aspects of marine sanctuary management.                                                     surveillance and enforcement efforts.

                     M    Few complementary programs in place, but none that offer                                M   @ioderate boundary, fairly secure; accessible; requires
                          the same comprehensive management opportunities or public                                   moderate commitment of manpower, equipment and funds; some
                          benefits.                                                                                   on-going or potential activities in the area which would
                                                                                                                      require an increase in c6rrent su@velllance and enforcement
                     H    No other programs available or in place; marine sanctuary                                   efforts.
                          program is the best available program; offers unique or
                          special management opportunities or public benefits; fills                              H   Reasonable boundary, secure; accessible; amenable to
                          existing regulatory or nonregulatory management gaps;                                       surveil lance and enforcement efforts; minimal commitaleni. of
                          coordinates management, research and education efforts.                                     manpower, equipment and funds; major activity (ies) in the
                                                                                                                      area which require an increase in surveillance and enforcement
               B.    Management of a Conservation Unit                                                                efforts.

                     L -- Does not represent a conseryfition unit; contains only fragments                 E.     Economic Considerations
                          of the ecosystem of concern .; protection of a portion of the
                          system does not help or ly minimally helps the overall system;                          L -- High management costs likely; designation or restriction of
                          not a manageable unit; excessive size; somoe boundary problems                              certain activities would result In negative econcxnic Impact;
                          foreseen.                                                                                   public benefit does not outweigh economic values which may
                                                                                                                      be reduced or foregone by designation.
                     M    Represents a good portion of the ecosystem in question;
                          represents fairly good conservation unit; protection of this                            M -- Moderate management costs likely; designation or restriction
                          area would benefit the ecosystem, but only in a smal I measure                              of certain activities would result In some short-term negative
                          or in a general way; fairly manageable unit; moderate size;                                 economic Impact, but public benefit outweighs econoinic values
                          few. If any. boundary problems.                                                             which may be reduced or foregone; resources are protected for
                                                                                                                      tile long terTn.
                          Represents a complete and ecologically sound conservation
                          unit; protection of this area would benefit the ecosystem In                            11 -- Low management costs; designation or restriction of certain
                          a significant way; manageable unit; not of excessive size;                                  activities would result In very minor If any negative econcinic
                          no boundary problems foreseen.                                                              impact; benefit to society greatly outweighs any reduction of
                                                                                                                      economic value; designation enhances economic value.

      i

     'N

                                   ATTACHMENT B   List of Acronyms

      I

                                                ATTACHMENT B
                                              LIST OF ACRONYMS

                             CRI        Caribbean Research Institute
                             CzM        Coastal Zone Management
                             DEC        Department of Environmental Concervation
                             DEIS       Draft Environmental Impact Statement
                             DNR        Department of Natural Resources
                             FEIS       Final Environmental Impact Statement
                             F&WS       Fish and Wildlife Service
                             LCDC       Land Conservation Development Commission
                             LRA        List of Recommended Areas
                             LSU        Louisiana State University
                             NEPA       National Environmental Policy Act
                             NOAA       National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
                             NWR        National Wildlife Refuge
                             PCB        Poly-chlorinated biphenyls
                             PDP        Program Development Plan
                             RPI        Research Planning Institute, Inc.
                             SEL        Site Evaluation List
                             SPO        Sanctuary Programs Office
                             UNESCO     United Nations Environmental
                             USEPA      United States Environmental Protection Agency
                             USVI       United States Virgin Islands
                             WCMC       Wisconsin Coastal Management Council

                                                                           i

                                                                 1
                                            1010111111111110     1
                                             3 6668 00000 5316