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



          Olympic Coast
          National Marine
          Sanctuary


          Final Environmental Impact Statement/Management Plan
          Volume 1


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

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

                                           . .... . . . . .
                                        ...... ...............
                                       .. .. . . .....
                                 I.NW." ..... .... ..

                                             .... .....









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














                                                                                  Al.



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






                                                     Wq


                                                                      Sanctuaries and Reserves Division
                                                                               1305 East-West Highway
                                                                                              12th Floor
                                                                                Washington, D.C. 20910


                OF                                                                      November 1993

                         U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
                         National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
                         Sanctuaries and Reserves Division
                 ot




                                             %I Or

                                                       uNrrr=o s-rATES or=PARTmr=NT OF commrsRcE
                                                       National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
                                                       The Chief Scientiat
                                               Of      Washington, O.C. 20230



                                                         DEC 13 1993





             Dear Reviewer:

                    In accordance with the provisions of Section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental
             Policy Act of 1969, we are enclosing for your review and consideration the Final
             Environmental Impact Statement/Management Plan on the Olympic Coast National Marine
             Sanctuary, prepared by the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National
             Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of
             Commerce.

                    The responsible Federal official for this project is W. Stanley Wilson, Assistant
             Administrator for Ocean Services and Coastal Zone Management, National Ocean Service,
             NOAA. Any written comments you may have should be submitted to the contact person
             identified below by February 12, 1993. Also, one copy of your comments should be sent to
             me in Room 6222, U.S. Department of Commeirce, Washington, D.C. 20230.


                                                CONTACT PERSON

                                         Ms. Debra Malek, Regional Manager
                                          Sanctuaries and Reserves Division
                                   Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management
                                                National Ocean Service
                                         1305 East West Highway, 12th Floor
                                           Silver Spring, Maryland 20910

                    Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.

                                                              Sincerely,


                                                                                          fe

                                                              Donna Wieting
                                                                            C5
                                                              Acting Director
                                                              Ecology and Conservation Office







          Olympic Coast
          National Marine
          Sanctuary


          Final Environmental Impact Statement/Management Plan
          Volume 1








          Sanctuaries and Reserves Division
          1305 East-West Highway
          12th Floor
          Washington, D.C. 20910

                                                  U - S . DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
          November 1993                           COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
                                                  2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
                                                  CHARLESTON, SC 29405-2413


                                                       property of CSC LibrarY



                        U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
                       National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
                        Sanctuaries and Reserves Division

 
                Printed on Recycled Paper
 



























                      UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE


                      FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
                          AND MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE
                      OLYMPIC COAST NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY





















                                      Prepared By:

                                      Sanctuaries and Reserves Division
                                      Office of Ocean and coastal
                                           Resource Management
                                      National Ocean Service
                                      National Oceanic and Atmospheric
                                           Administration
                                      1305 East-West Highway
                                      SSMC 4, 12th Floor
                                      Silver Spring, MD 20910











                                        Title
       Final Environmental Impact Statement and Management Plan for the
       Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary

                                      Abstract
       The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) proposes
       to implement the designation of marine and intertidal coastal
       waters adjacent to the Olympic Peninsula of Washington State, and
       the submerged lands thereunder, as a National Marine Sanctuary.
       The Final Environmental Impact Statement/Management Plan (FEIS/MP)
       differs from the Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Management
       Plan (DEIS/MP) in three significant ways. First, although the
       preferred boundary in the Strait of Juan de Fuca is at Koitlah
       Point both in the DEIS/MP and FEIS/MP, the study area has been
       expanded, pursuant to public comments, to include waters of the
       Strait of Juan de Fuca eastward to Observatory Point. Second, oil
       and gas development is prohibited within the Sanctuary. Third, as
       long as the permit exists authorizing the Navy to use Sea Lion Rock
       as a practice bombing target, NOAA is imposing a condition on the
       permit limiting access to the rock from November 1 through April
       30. When, and if, the permit is revoked by the U.S. Fish and
       Wildlife Service (USFWS), no practice bombing in the Sanctuary will
       be allowed.

       The Sanctuary boundary encompasses approximately 2,500 square
       nautical miles (8,577 kM2)  of ocean waters, and submerged lands
       thereunder, over the continental shelf, from the United
       States/Canada international boundary to the southern boundary of
       the Copalis National Wildlife refuge. The boundary extends from
       Koitlah Point, near Neah Bay, due north to the United States/Canada
       border, then proceeds in a northwesterly direction to a point just
       north of Buoy Juliette where it intersects the Exclusive Economic
       Zone (EEZ). The boundary then follows the EEZ in a westerly then
       southwesterly direction where it intersects the 100 fathom isobath
       at latitude 48014 4611,1N, longitude 125*40,159"W. The boundary
       continues southeasterly in a straight line, approximating the 100
       fathom isobath, to a point at latitude 47057113"N, longitude I
       12502911311W. There, it continues across the head of Juan de Fuca
       Canyon by continuing southeasterly in a straight line to a point at
       latitude 4705010111N, longitude 125"05,'42"W. It then follows a
       straight line in a more southerly direction to a point at latitude
       47040105"N and longitude 12500414411W. The boundary then
       approximates the 100 fathom isobath to 4703510511N and longitude
       125*0010011W. The boundary then continues in a straight line in a
       southerly direction, crossing the head of Quinault Canyon, to a
       point west of the mouth of the Copalis River at latitude
       47*07145"N, longitude 124*58112"W. It then continues due east to
       the shoreline. The coastal boundary of the Sanctuary reaches to
       the mean higher high water line except when adjacent to either
       Indian reservations or State owned land, where it extends only to
       mean lower low water, cutting across the mouths of any rivers  I









         Part I of this (FEIS/MP) is the Executive Summary. It reviews the
         authority for Sanctuary designation, the goals of the National
         Marine Sanctuary Program, the purpose and need for designating a
         national marine sanctuary off the Olympic Peninsula, the
         socioeconomic consequences of designation, the manageability of the
         area, and a description of the Sanctuary designation process.

         Part II of the FEIS/MP describes the study area used for
         determining a final preferred boundary alternative, including human
         uses, natural resources, and the existing resource protection
         regime. The area recommended for 'the proposed Sanctuary, boundary
         alternative 4 (approximately 2,635 square nautical miles), provides
         the habitat and setting for a distinctive assortment of living and
         non-living marine resources.

         Part III examines the alternatives considered in developing the
         proposal to designate a national marine sanctuary off the Olympic
         Peninsula. These alternatives were considered in terms of
         achieving optimum protection for the ecosystem, improving
         scientific knowledge of the area, promoting public understanding of
         the value of the resources, minimizing overlap with existing
         political jurisdictions and minimizing any harmful effects to the
         area's economy. Based on these criteria, preferred boundary,
         management, and regulatory alternatives were selected.

         Part IV of the FEIS/MP describes environmental and socioeconomic
         consequences associated with each alternative.

         Part V describes the management plan for the Sanctuary. This plan
         is intended to ensure that all actions taken after designation will
         meet stated Sanctuary objectives. Management actions are
         considered in four program categories: (1) Resource protection;
         (2) Research; (3) Education; and (4) Administration.

         Volume II of the FEIS/MP contains the appendices including the
         Response to Comments and Designation Document.

         Lead Agency:    U.S. Department of Commerce
                         National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
                         National Ocean Service
                         Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management

         Contact:        Rafael V. Lopez, Pacific Regional Manager
                         Sanctuaries and Reserves Division
                         office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management
                         National Ocean Service/NOAA
                         1305 East West Highway, Suite 12108
                         Silver Spring, MD 20910











                FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR
                      THE PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY


                                       TABLE OF CONTENTS


          VOLUME I.                                                                  PAGE

          LIST OF FIGURES   ..................................                       iV

          LIST OF TABLES  ............   o ..................................       Vii

          LIST  OF ACRONYMS  ..........................     o............   o.....   iX


          PART  I:    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY   ..................    oo .......           I-1


          PART  II:   THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT     ...........................      II-1


          PART  III:  ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE         ... III-1


          PART  IV:   ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF ALTERNATIVES         ..... o.... IV-1-


          PART  V:    SANCTUARY MANAGEMENT PLAN     ....................    o....... V-1


          PART  VI:   LIST OF PREPARERS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS       ........  oo ..... VI-1


          PART  VII:  LIST OF AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND PERSONS
                      RECEIVING COPIES    ...................................      VII-1


          PART  VIII:REFERENCES   ..... o..........................     o.......  VIII-1


          VOLUME II


          PART IX: APPENDICES


          A.    Response to Comments     ......................   o .........  o... A-1

          B.    Notice of National Marine Sanctuary Designation;
                Final Rule; and Summary of Final Management Plan          ........ B-1

          C.    Material for use in Preparation of Environmental Impact
                Statement... o  .........................    4 .............   #... c-1

          D.    Treaties with the Makah and Quinault..        ....o .............  D-1

          E.    Fish, Shellfish, Waterfowl, and Plants Relied on by the
                Makah, Quileute, Hoh and Quinault Peoples for
                Subsistence and Ceremonial Purposes        .....................   E-1

          F.    Species Inhabiting Habitats in the Proposed Sanctuary...F-1

          G.    Intertidal organisms of the Olympic Peninsula           .......... G-1









         H.   Navy Analysis of Alternatives to Sealion Rock     ........... H-1

         I.   Sanctuary Development Process    ............................ I-1

         J.   International, Federal, State, Tribal and Local
              Authorities Applicable to the Olympic Coast National
              Marine Sanctuary    ......................................... J-1

         K.   Memorandum of Understanding between Assistant
              Administrator for Fisheries and Assistant Administrator
              for ocean Services and Coastal Zone Management
              Concerning the National Marine Sanctuary Program     ........ K-1












                                        LIST OF FIGURES

         Figgre.                            Title                         Page

         1.   National Marine Sanctuary Designation Status    ........... 1-3

         2.   Sanctuary Study Area Location Identified in the
              Site Evaluation List  ...................................   1-8

         3.   Biogeographic Provinces of the United States    ........... I-11

         4.   Study Area for the Olympic Coast Sanctuary    ............. 11-5

         5.   NOAA Preferred Boundary Alternative   ....................  11-6

         6.   Olympic Coast Designations of National Significance    .... 11-8

         7.   Makah Indian Reservation   ...............................  II-11

         8.   Quileute Indian Reservation  ............................   11-13

         9.   Hoh Indian Reservation  .................................   11-15

         10.  Quinault Indian Reservation  ............................   11-16

         11.  Plate Tectonic Structure of the Pacific Northwest
              Continental and Oceanic Region   .......................... 11-22

         12.  Bathymetry of the Olympic Coast Offshore Area and
              Submarine Canyons  ......................................   11-24

         13.  Oceanic and Continental Currents   .......................  11-27

         14.  Simplified Mean Winter and Summer Current Patterns
              on the Washington Shelf   ................................  11-28

         15.  Generalized Position and Extent of Columbia River
              Plume in Winter and Summer   .............................  11-31

         16.  Beach Surf Zone Environment  ............................   11-33

         17.  Beach Surf Zone Habitat-Unprotected   ....................  11-35

         18.  Beach Surf  Zone Habitat-Protected  ......................  11-36

         19.  Rocky Surf  Zone  ........................................  11-37

         20.  Rocky Surf  Habitat-Unprotected  .........................  11-39

         21.  Rocky Surf  Habitat-Protected ...........................   11-41

         22.  Above Tide  Rocky Shore Zone .............................  11-42

                                            v









         23. Pelagic Ocean Zones      ....................................     11-43

         24.   Euphotic Pelagic Zone Habitat     ...........................   11-44

         25.   Disphotic Pelagic Zone Habitat:    .........................    11-46

         26.   Rocky Non-Vegetated Benthic Zone Habitat      ...............   11-47

         27.   Mud Non-Vegetated Benthic Zone Habitat     ............   ..... 11-48

         28.   Muddy Sand Noh-Vegetated Benthic Zone Habitat       ..........  11-49

         29.   Sand Non-Vegetated Benthic Zone Habitat      ................   11-50

         30.   Kelp Habitat   ............................................     11-51

         31.   Surfgrass Benthic Zone    .................................     11-53

         32.   Sanctuary Study Subareas    ...............................     11-54

         33.   Percentage of Breeding Seabirds along the Marine
               Shorelines of Washington    ................................    11-69

         34.   Estimated Breeding Populations of Seabird Families by
               Region along Coastal Washington     ........................    11-70

         35.   Distribution of Nesting Sites of the Washington
               Species of Seabirds    .....................................    11-71

         36.   Populations of Breeding Seabirds and Percentages of
               Total Aggregate Population in Washington      ...............   11-74

         37.   Distribution of Harbor Seal and Sealion Haulout Sites
               Along the Washington Coast     ..............................   11-83

         38.   Historic and Current Distribution of Sea Otters in
               Washington State  .............   ..........................    11-86

         39.   Indian Reservations and Associated Archeological Sites
               Along the Olympic Coast    .................................    11-91

         40.   Commercial and Recreational Fishing Areas       ..............  11-96

         41.   Washington-Oregon Planning Area     ........................    11-99

         42.   MMS Planning Areas for Lease Sale #132 off Washington.. II-100

         43.   Tank Vessel Traffic-Outer Coast     ........................    11-105

         44.   Tanker Exclusion Zone    ....................................   11-106

         45.'  Vessel Traffic Management Service off the Strait of

                                              VJL












              Juan de Fuca   ...........................................      11-117

         46.  Traffic Separation Scheme in the Strait of Juan de
              Fuca and Puget Sound   ...................................      11-119

         47.  Zones of Military Activity off the Coast of Washington. 11-130

         48.  Quinault Range Tracking Area and Bottom-Mounted
              Instrumentation    ........................................     11-132

         49.  Restricted Airspace R-6707     .............................    11-134

         50.  Flight Paths of Aircraft Transiting from Whidbey Island
              Naval Airforce Base to R-6707      ..........................   11-136

         51.  Number of Days/Month the Navy has Used Sealion Rock
              from 1986-1990   .........................................      11-137

         52.  Number of Days/Year the Navy has Used Sealion Rock from
              1986-1990  ..............................................       11-138

         53.  Study Area Proposed in the DEIS/MP and FEIS/MP       ........   111-5

         54.  Boundary Alternative 1    ......................   o .......... 111-8

         55.  Boundary Alternative 2    .................................     111-9

         56.  Boundary   Alternative  3 ...............  o.................   III-11

         57.  Boundary   Alternative  4 with Alternative Boundaries      ..... 111-13

         58.  Boundary   Alternative  5 ...............  o.................   111-16

         59.  Boundary   Alternative  1 in Relation to Fisheries     ........ IV-8

         60.  Boundary   Alternative  1 in Relation to Marine Mammal
              Haulout Sites and Distribution of Kelp      .................   IV-9

         61. Boundary Alternative 1 in Relation to Seabird Colonies
              and Seabird Foraging Areas     .............................    IV-10

         62.  Boundary Alternative 1 in Relation to Vessel Traffic
              Management Regimes, Dredge Disposal Sites, oil and
              Gas Resources and Gravel Deposits      ......................   IV-11

         63.  Boundary Alternative 2 in Relation to Fisheries        ........ IV-14

         64.  Boundary Alternative 2 in Relation to Marine Mammal
              Haulout Sites and Distribution of Kelp      .................   IV-15

         65. Boundary Alternative 2 in Relation to Seabird Colonies
              and Seabird Foraging Areas     ............. __     ........... IV-16

                                             vii









          66.  Boundary Alternative 2 in Relation to Vessel Traffic
               Management Regimes, Dredge Disposal Sites, oil and
               Gas Resources and Gravel Deposits       ......................   IV-17

          67.  Boundary Alternative 3 in Relation to Fisheries        ........  IV-19

          68.  Boundary Alternative 3 in Relation to Marine Mammal.
               Haulout Sites and Distribution-of Kelp       .................   IV-20

          69. Boundary Alternative 3 in Relation to Seabird Colonies
               and Seabird Foraging Areas      ..............................   IV-21

          70.  Boundary Alternative 3 in Relation to Vessel Traffic
               Management Regimes, Dredge Disposal Sites, Oil and
               Gas Resources and Gravel Deposits.. ... oo     .....  oo ...... o. IV-22

          71.  Coastal Beaches in the Strait of Juan de Fuca.......... IV-29

          72.. Boundary Alternative 4 in Relation to Fisheries.        ......   IV-31

          73.  Boundary Alternative 4 in Relation to Marine Mammal
               Haulout Sites and Distribution of Kelp....        .....          IV-32

          74. Boundary Alternative 4 in Relation to Seabird Colonies
               and Seabird Foraging Areas     ....... o......   .......         IV-33

          75.  Boundary Alternative 4 in Relation to Vessel Traffic
               Management Regimes, Dredge Disposal Sites, Oil and
               Gas Resources and Gravel Deposits....      .............  -oo IV-34

          76.  Boundary Alternative 5 in Relation to Fisheries        ........  IV-37

          77.  Boundary Alternative 5 in Relation to Marine Mammal
               Haulout Sites and Distribution of Kelp..       ..... -oo  ...... IV-38

          78. Boundary Alternative 5 in Relation to Seabird Colonies
               and Seabird Foraging Areas.... ... IV-39

          79o  Boundary Alternative 5 in Relation to Vessel Traffic
               Management Regimes, Dredge Disposal Sites, Oil and
               Gas Resources and Gravel Deposits... o     ..... o ..... --oo IV-40

          80o  Analysis of Navy Overflights and Seabird Breeding
               Activity.... .................                                   IV-91










                                              viii











                                           LIST OF TABLES

         Tables                               Title                            FAqe

         1.    Bird Species Observed in Sealion Rock Study Area       ....... 11-63

         2.    Marine Bird species Additional to those Listed in
               Table 1 occurring in or near the Sanctuary Boundary        ... 11-64

         3.    Marine Mammal Species Reported from the Coastal Waters''
               of Washington  ..........................................     11-81

         4.    Volume and Value of Washington State's Local Water
               Catch by Fishery Type (1981-1985 average; 1990)      ........ 11-94

         5.    Current and Projected Vessel Transits in the
               Study Area  .............................................     11-103

         6.    Known Threats to Marine Organisms from Oil and Gas
               Exploration and Development    ............................   111-22

         7.    Number of Common Murres at Major Breeding Sites on the
               Outer Coast of Washington, 1979-1992...    ......... 0  ...... 111-48

         8.    Summary of Environmental Effects of Marine Mining by
               Resources Affected   .....................................    IV-70































                                              ix












                                  LIST OF ACRONYMS


        Acron                          Mean.ng

        APA             Administrative Procedure Act
        AGL             Above Ground Level
        ARPA            Archeological Resources Protection Act
        ASA             Abandoned Shipwreck Act
        ATBA            Area to be Avoided
        ATCAA           Air Traffic Control Assigned Air Space
        CERCLA          Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
                             and Liability Act
        COE             U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
        CVTMS           Coordinated Vessel Traffic Management System
        CWA             Clean Water Act
        DEIS/MP         Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Management Plan
        DWT             Dead Weight Ton
        EEZ             Exclusive Economic Zone
        EPA             Environmental Protection Act
        ESA             Endangered Species Act
        FAA             Federal Aviation Administration
        FAR             Federal Aviation Regulations
        FDA             Food and Drug Administration
        FE              Federal Endangered
        FEIS/MP         Final Environmental Impact Statement/Management Plan
        FMP             Fishery management Plan
        FT              Federal Threatened
        IM0             International Maritime Organization
        JCG             Joint coordinating Group
        MkRPOL 73/78    International Convention for the Prevention of
                             Pollution from Ships
        MBTA            Migratory Bird Treaty Act
        MFCMA           Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act
        MOA             Military Operating Area
        MMPA            Marine Mammal Protection Act
        MMS             Minerals Management Service
        MPA             Marine Preservation Association
        MPPRCA          Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act
        MPRSA           Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act
        MSRC            Marine Spill Response Corporation
        NAS             National Academy of Sciences
        NEP             National Estuary Program
        NEPA            National Environmental Policy Act
        NERRS           National Estuarine Research Reserve System
        NHPA            National Historic Preservation Act
        NMFS            National Marine Fisheries Service
        NOAA            National oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        NPDES           National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
        NPS             National Park Service
        NWIFC           Northwest Indian Fisheries commission
        NWR             National Wildlife Refuge
        OCS             Outer Continental Shelf


                                          x









        OMS             Washington State office of Marine Safety
        OPA 90          Oil Pollution Act of 1990
        ORAP            Ocean Resources Assessment Program
        PFMC            Pacific Fishery Management Council
        PSVTS           Puget Sound Vessel Traffic Service
        SAB             NOAA's Strategic Assessment Branch
        SE              State Endangered
        SEL             Site Evaluation List
        SEPA            State Environmental Protection Act
        SMA             Shoreline Management Act
        SSC             Sanctuary Steering Committee
        ST              State Threatened
        USCG            United States Coast Guard
        USFWS           United States Fish and Wildlife Service
        WDCD            Washington Department  of Community Development
        WDOE            Washington Department  of Ecology
        WDF             Washington Department  of Fisheries
        WDNR            Washington Department  of Natural Resources
        WDOA            Washington Department  of Agriculture
        WDW             Washington Department  of Wildlife
        WSPA            Western States Petroleum Association




































                                           xi









                                               PART 1:     Executive summaKy



















































                                                                I










                            EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TABLE OF CONTENTS,                   PAGE

          I.    Introduction    ............................................         1

          II.   The National Marine Sanctuary Program        ...................     2

          III.  History of the Olympic Coast Proposal        ...................     7

          IV.   Purpose and Need for Designation       ........................      9
                A.    Introduction    ........................................       9
                B.    Natural and Historical Resources       ...................    10
                C.    Present and Potential Uses      .........................     14
                D.    Adequacy of Existing Authorities to Manage the Area           17
                E.    Benefits Derived From Sanctuary Status         .............  18
                      1.    Oil, Gas and Mineral Activities       ...............   19
                      2.    Discharges and Deposits into the Sanctuary        ....  20
                      3.    Discharges and Deposits that Enter the Sanctuary
                            and Injure a Sanctuary Resource or Quality        ..... 20
                      4.    Moving, Removing or Injuring Historical
                            Resources   ......................................      20
                      5.    Alteration of or Construction on the Seabed          .... 20
                      6.    Taking Marine Mammals, Seabirds-or Turtles        ..... 21
                      7.    overflights   ....................................      21
                      8.    Vessel Traffic    .................................     21
                      9.    Fishing/Aquaculture/Kelp Harvesting       ............  22

          V.    Socioeconomic Impacts of Designation        .....................   23
                A.    Oil, Gas and Minerals     ...............................     23
                B.    Discharge and Deposits      ..............................    24
                C.    Alteration of or Construction on the Seabed          ......... 24
                D.    overflights    .........................................      25
                E.    Vessel Traffic   ..................                           25
                F.    Fishing/Aquaculture/Kelp harvesting        .................  25

          VI.   Manageability of the Area      ................................     27

          VII.  Consultations    ............................................       29
                A.    National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)        ............  29
                B.    Endangered Species Act (ESA)       ........................   30
                C.    Resource Assessment     .................................     31
                D.    Federal Consistency Determination        ...................  31
                E.    Fishery Regulations     .................................     31
                F.    Other Federal, Tribal, State and Local Agencies
                      and the U.S. Congress     ...............................     31












        PART I:   EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
        I.   INTRODUCTION

             in accordance with Title III of the Marine Protection,
        Research, and Sanctuaries Act.(MPRSA), as amended, 16 U.S.C. ï¿½ï¿½
        1431 et seq. (MPRSA), this FEIS/MP proposes the establishment of a
        national marine sanctuary off the Olympic Peninsula of Washington
        State to facilitate the long-term management, protection,
        understanding and awareness of its resources and distinctive
        attributes.

             Title III of the MPRSA authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to
        designate discrete areas of the marine environment having special
        national significance as national marine sanctuaries so as to
        ensure comprehensive management, conservation and protection of
        their recreational, ecological, historical, research, educational,
        or aesthetic resources and quality. The U.S. Congress directed
        NOAA (P.L. 100-627, section 205) to designate the Western
        Washington outer Coast (referred to herein as the Olympic Coast) as
        a National Marine Sanctuary.









        .II. The National Marine Sanctuary Proaram

             Consistent with the mission of' developing a system of National
        Marine Sanctuaries for the long-term benefit and enjoyment of the
        public, the following policies were established for the program by
        section 301(b) of the 1992 re-authorization of the MPRSA
        (P.L. 102-587):

             1.   to identify and designate as national marine sanctuaries
             areas of the marine environment which are of special national
             significance;

             2.   to provide authority for comprehensive and coordinated
             conservation and management of' these marine areas, and the
             activities affecting them, in a manner which complements
             existing regulatory authorities;

             3.   to support, promote, and coordinate scientific research
             on, and monitoring of, the resources of these marine areas,
             especially long-term monitoring of these areas;

             4.   to enhance public awareness, understanding, appreciation,
             and wise use of the marine environment;

             .5.  to facilitate to the extent compatible with the primary
             objective of resource protection, all public and private uses
             of the resources of these marine areas not prohibited pursuant
             to other authorities;

             6
             p@   to develop and implement coordinated plans for the
               otection and management of these areas with appropriated
             Federal agencies, State and local governments, Native American
             tribes and organizations, international organizations, and
             other public and private interests concerned with the
             continuing health and resilience of these marine areas;

             7.   to create models of, and incentives.for, ways to conserve
             and manage these areas;

             8.   to cooperate with global programs encouraging
             conservation of marine resources; and

             9.   to maintain, restore, and enhance living resources by
             providing places for species that depend upon these marine
             areas to survive and propagate.

             Thirteen National Marine Sanctuaries have been established
        since the Program's inception in 1972 (Figure 1):

             1.   The Monitor National Marine Sanctuary serves to protect
             the wreck of the Civil War ironclad, U.S.S. MONITOR. It was
             designated in January 1975 and is located 16 miles southeast

                                        1-2














                               NOAA National Marine Sanctuary Program
                               Marine Sanctuary Designation Status
                               October 1992


                                                           Northwest Straits, WA

                                                 Olympic 
                                                 Coast, WA
                                                                                                                                   Thunder Bay, MI

                                                                                                                                                          Stellwagen
                                                                                                                                                            Bank, MA
                                  Cordell Bank, CA

                                   Gulf of the
                                   Farallones, CA                                                                                                      Norfolk Canyon, VA
                                    Monterey Bay, CA                                                                                                      MONITOR. NC

                                    Channel Islands, CA

                                                                                                                                                   Gray's Reef, GA

                                Hawaiian Islands                  Designated Sites
                                Humpback  Whale                    Active Candidates                             Flower Garden                 
                                Whale                              Study Areas                                                                      Florida Keys, FL
                                           Kaho'olawe                                                          Banks, TX/LA                        (Key Largo)
                                            Isla nd, HI        Fagatele Bay, American Samoa                                                              (Looe Key)


                               Sanctuary Program Sites
                               Designated Sanctuaries                           Western Lake Erie Islands, Ohio                                Designation Process
                                                                                Cape Vincent (Lake Ontario), New York
                               Stellwagen Bank, Massachusetts                   Nantucket Sound, Massachusetts                                National Marine Sanctuaries are 
                               USS Monitor, North Carolina                     Mid-Coastal Maine                                             chosen for their national signifi-
                               Gray's Reef, Georgia                             Virginia/Assateague Island, VA/MD                             cance based on natural and
                               Florida Keys, Florida                            Ten Fathom Ledge/Big Rock, NC
                                                                                                                                              human use values. For  a site to
                               Key Largo                                        Port Royal Sound, South Carolina
                               Looe Key                                         Florida Coral Grounds                                         be designated, it must first be 
                               Flower Garden Banks, Texas/Louisiana             Big Bend Seagrass Beds, Florida                               placed on the Site Evaluation List
                               Channel Islands, California                      Eastern Chandeleur Sound, LA                                  (SEL).  When named an Active
                               Monterey Bay, California                         Baffin Bay, Texas                                             Candidate, an Environmental
                               Gulf of the Farallones. California               Cordillera Reefs, Puerto Rico                                 Impact Statement and Manage- 
                               Cordell Bank, California                         East End, St. Croix, Virgin Islands                           ment Plan is prepared.  State 
                               Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale                  Southeast St. Thomas, Virgin Islands                                                        
                                                                                                                                              governments and  other agencies
                               Fagatele Bay, American Samoa                     Cortes-Tanner Banks, Caltomia                                 are  consulted, and public 
                                                                                                                                              meetings are held.  Upon
                                                                                Morro Bay, California
                               Active Candidates                                Heceta-Stonewall  Banks, Oregon                               
                                                                                Northern Mariana Islands, South Pacific                       completion of this process,  and
                               Thunder Bay, Michigan                            Southern Mariana Islands                                      with the approval of Congress                                                                                 Cocos Lagoon, Guam                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                              and the state governor, the site is
                               Norfolk Canyon, Virginia                         Facpi Point, Guam                                             designated by the Secretary of
                               Olympic Coast, Washington                        Papaloloa Point, American Samoa                               
                               Northwest Straits, Washington                                                                                  Commerce as a National Marine
                                                                                                                                              Sanctuary.
                               Congressional Study Areas                        Cultural Resource Sites (Proposed)
                                                                                Manitou Passage (Lake Michigan), MI
                               Kaho'olawe Island, Hawaii                        Whitefish Point/Bay (Lake Superior), MI
                                                                                Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island                     Sanctuaries and Reserves Division
                                                                                Yorktown Fleet, York River, VA                     Office of Ocean and Coastal
                               SEL Sites                                        Battle of the Atlantic/Cape Hatteras, NC           Resource Management
                                                                                Douglas Beach, Florida                             National Ocean Service
                               Natural Resource Sites (1983)                    Tampa Bay, Florida                                 National Oceanic and Atmospheric
                               Green Bay (Lake Michigan), Wisconsin             Apalachee Bay, Florida                             Administration
                               Apostle Islands/Isle Royale (Lake                U.S.S. Tecumseh/Battle of Mobile Bay, AL           U.S. Department of Commerce
                               Superior), MI/WI                                 Westernmost Aleutians, Alaska                      (202) 606-4126
                                                             

























                      Figure 1. National Marine Sanctuary Designation Status.

							I-3                                                                                                         1-3









              of Cape Hatteras, North Carolina.

              2.   The Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary, designated
              in September 1980, encompasses 1252 square nautical miles of
              offshore, nearshore and inter-tidal habitats roughly 20
              nautical miles offshore of Santa Barbara, California. The
              waters of the sanctuary support breeding habitat for five
              species of seals and sea lions and thousands of seabirds.
              Over 20 additional species of whales and dolphins occur in the
              sanctuary. Large nearshore forests of giant kelp provide a
              nutrient rich environment for teeming populations of fish and
              invertebrates. Several endangered species inhabit the '
              sanctuary including the gray, blue, humpback and sei whales,
              southern sea otters, Guadalupe fur seals, the California brown
              pelican and the California least tern. The ocean floor
              contains a wealth of prehistoric artifacts from the Chumash
              Indians and the remains of over 100 historic shipwrecks.

              3.   The Gray's Reef National Marine Sanctuary, designated in
              January 1981, is a submerged live bottom coral reef located in
              50-70 feet of water on the South Atlantic continental shelf
              17.5 nautical miles east of Sapelo Island, Georgia. The
              Sanctuary encompasses 17 square nautical miles. Gray's reef
              consists of limestone outcroppings and ledges up to six feet
              in height which support a host of sessile invertebrates. It
              is.recognized as a highly productive and unusual habitat for a
              wide variety of species including corals, tropical fish, and
              sea turtles.

              4.   The Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary,
              designated in January 1981, encompasses 948 square miles off
              the California coast just north of San Francisco. It provides
              a habitat for a diverse array of marine mammals, including
              California's largest.breeding population of harbor seals,
              along with California sea lions and elephant seals. Several
              species of whales and dolphins live in or migrate through the
              sanctuary. The Farallones Islands are home to one of the
              largest concentration of breeding marine birds in the
              continental United States. Nurseries and spawning grounds for
              commercially valuable species of fish such as Dungeness crab,
              Pacific herring and rockfish are within the sanctuary.

              5.   The Fagatele Bay National Marine Sanctuary in American
              Samoa was designated in August 1986. This .25 square mile
              sanctuary surrounding an eroded volcano crater on the island
              of Tutuila, contains deepwater coral terrace formations
              that are unique to the high islands of the tropical Pacific.
              It serves as   habitat for a diverse array of marine flora and
              fauna including the endangered hawksbill sea turtle and the
              threatened green sea turtle.

              6.   The Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuary, designated in









             May, 1989, encompasses 397 square nautical miles off the
             central California coast, contiguous with the northern
             boundary of the Gulf of the Farallones National Marine
             Sanctuary. Due to a rare combination of oceanic conditions
             and undersea topography, in a discrete well-defined area,
             Cordell Bank and its surrounding waters provide a highly
             productive marine environment for a rich variety of benthic
             organisms as well as fish, marine mammals and seabirds.

             7.   The Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary was designated
             by the U.S. Congress, under the Florida Keys  National Marine
             Sanctuary and Protection Act (P.L. 101-605),  on November 16,
             1990. The Act designated an area of coastal   waters off the
             Florida Keys encompassing approximately 2600  square nautical
             miles. This area includes the world's third   largest barrier
             reef. The purpose of this Act is to protect   Florida's coral
             reefs, one of the most diverse ecosystems in  the world, from
             harmful activities such as vessel groundings  and pollution.
             Upon implementation of the Management Plan, Key Largo and Looe
             Key Sanctuaries, designated in 1975 and 1981, respectively,
             will be incorporated into the Florida Keys National Marine
             Sanctuary.

             8.   The Flower Garden-Banks National Marine Sanctuary was
             designated in November 1991. The Sanctuary is partitioned
             into the East and West Flower Garden Bank. The East Flower
             Garden Bank component, encompassing 19.20 square nautical
             miles of ocean waters and submerged lands, is located
             approximately 120 nautical miles south southwest of Cameron,
             Louisiana. The West Flower Garden Bank, encompassing 22.5
             square nautical miles of ocean waters and submerged lands, is
             located 110 miles southeast of Galveston, Texas. This site
             represents a complex, biologically productive reef community
             noted for outstanding fragile coral development and the only
             known oceanic brine seep on the continental shelf of the
             Atlantic Ocean. The banks lie on the extreme northern edge of
             the zone in which extensive reef development can occur.

             9.   The Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary was
             congressionally designated in September, 1992. The
             Sanctuary, approximately 50 miles south of San Francisco,
             encompasses an area of approximately 4,024 square nautical
             miles off the central California coast, approximately 50 miles
             south of San Francisco. Monterey Bay is California's second
             largest bay and one of the few major bays along the entire
             Pacific Coast. The bay's most significant feature is the
             Monterey Canyon, the deepest and largest.submarine canyon
             incising the continental shelf of North America. The
             nutrient-rich waters of the Monterey Bay support extensive
             fish, invertebrate, seabird, and marine mammal populations.
             The area supports several endangered and threatened species of
             marine mammals such as the California    Sea Otter. The


                                         1-5









              world's entire population of Ashy Storm-Petrels feed above the
              Monterey canyon during summer and fall months.

              10. Stellwagen  Bank National Marine Sanctuary was
              Congressionally designated in November, 1992. The Sanctuary
              encompasses 638 square nautical miles of Federal waters
              situated on and around the submerged Stellwagen Bank located
              6.3 miles north of Cape Cod, Massachusetts. The Bank supports
              a seasonal abundance of several cetacean species, including
              the largest high-latitude population of humpback whales in the
              contiguous United States. Biologically productive Sanctuary
              waters also provide important feeding and nursery grounds for
              fin, minke, northern right whales and several smaller cetacean
              species. Commercially and recreationally fished since
              Colonial times, the Bank also supports a growing whalewatch
              industry.

              11. The Hawaiian'Islands Humpback Whale National Marine
              Sanctuary was Congressionally designated in November, 1992
              pursuant to the Oceans Act of 1992. The primary purposes of
              the sanctuary are to protect humpback whales and their
              breeding habitat and to provide for the identification of
              marine resources and ecosystems of national significance for
              possible inclusion in the sanctuary. Other resources
              inhabiting the waters of the Sanctuary include several
              additional cetacean species (sperm, pilot, false killer, pygmy
              killer, melon headed, Pacific bottlenose dolphins, and many
              others), a majority of the Hawaiian population of juvenile and
              adult green sea turtles, the endangered leatherback and olive
              ridley sea turtles, and the highly endangered Hawaiian monk
              seal. There are a number of seabird colonies in the Sanctuary
              as well. The Sanctuary supports an extensive.coral reef
              ecosystem and commercially valuable fisheries.










        III. History of the Olympic Coast Proposal

             The Olympic Coast, recognized for its rich natural resource
        potential and human resource values, was placed on the National
        Marine Sanctuary Program Site Evaluation List (SEL) in August, 1983
        (48 FR 35568) (Figure 2). The re-authorization and amendment of
        the Act in 1988 directed the Secretary of Commerce to issue a
        notice of designation with respect to the Olympic Coast National
        Marine Sanctuary (as generally described in the Federal Register
        Notice of August 4, 1983) not later than June 30, 1990 (P.L. 100-
        627, section 205). In report language accompanying this
        legislation, Congress noted that the Olympic Coast possesses a
        unique and nationally significant collection of flora and fauna,
        and that the combination of rocky stacks, sea birds, marine
        mammals, and it's adjacency to the Olympic National Park merited
        the designation of the area as a national marine sanctuary (H. Rep.
        No. 4210, 100th Cong., 1st Sess., 1988).

             NOAA conducted four scoping meetings in Washington State
        during April 10-13, 1989, to solicit public comments on the
        proposed sanctuary: Aberdeen, Port Angeles, Forks, and Seattle (45
        FR 10398, March 13, 1989).

             All interested persons were invited to attend, and asked to
        comment on readily identifiable issues,*suggest additional issues
        for examination, and provide information useful in evaluating the
        site's potential as a sanctuary. A map of the study area was
        presented to depict the area under consideration for designation as
        a National Marine Sanctuary.

             NOAA released the DEIS/MP in September, 1991. Six public
        hearings were held between November 6-20, 1991 at Port Angeles,
        Seattle, Olympia, Aberdeen, Seaview, and Washington, D.C. A total
        of 894 comments were received on the DEIS/MP. Appendix A contains
        a summary of the comments and NOAA's responses.

             Pursuant to public comments, the FEIS/MP includes the Strait
        of Juan de Fuca eastward to Observatory Point in the study area of
        the proposed Sanctuary (Figure 4, p. 11-4). The analysis of the
        Strait of Juan de Fuca.as part of the preferred alternative is
        presented in Parts III and IV of the FEIS/MP. The inclusion of the
        Strait of Juan de Fuca in the preferred alternative of the Olympic
        Coast National Marine Sanctuary was rejected by NOAA due to the
        lack of: 1) public involvement in the process of considering the
        inclusion of the Strait within the Sanctuary boundary; and 2) an
        opportunity for NOAA and the public to analyze the Strait within
        the context of the boundary alternative for the proposed Northwest
        Straits National Marine Sanctuary. The estuaries of Grays Harbor
        and Willapa Bay are not included in the study area considered in
        the FEIS/MP.



                                        1-7
















                                    126*10' 126*W                            125*30,                        M*00'                          M*301                          124900'                        123*30' 123'20'
                                 48*45'                                                                                                                                                                                48*45






                                                                                                             ftT FT
                                 48*30!                                                                                                                                                                                48*30'



                                                     2ao                                                                                                                       "z-'     -'6'c4          @4
                                                     300

                                                                                                                                                                                    5o-
                                                                                                                                                                                         To
                                                                                                  d,

                                                    tio
                                                +                             +                                                                                                                                        4eW
                                                  BOUN AR
                                               ALTERN
                                                         NO. I










                               47*W -                                                                                                                                                                                  47'30'


                                                                                                               GANYoN











                               47'00' -                                                                                                                                                                                4TW














                                                                                                                                                                                                                       46W
                               46-30'
                                                     UNITED STATES -WEST COAST
                                                                    WASHINGTON
                                                    PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                               NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY
                                                                       ,NAUTICAL MILES,

                               46*12'                                                                                      f                                                                                           46*1LY
                                  126010' 126'00'                           125'30!                        125*00'                        1   *30,                        124*00'                       123*30' 123OW




                      Figure 2. Sanctuary Study Site                                                                Identified in the Site Evaluation List.

                                                                                                                       1-8










       IV. Purpose and Need for Designation
            A. -Introduction

            The overriding objective of the Olympic Coast National Marine
       Sanctuary is to provide a comprehensive ecosystem-wide approach to
       natural and historical resource management. Sanctuary status will
       permit the implementation of a coordinated and comprehensive
       management plan resulting in better protection of ecological and
       historic resources. The preferred alternative would promote
       resource protection by:

                 bolstering the existing resource protection regime;
                 establishing a coordinated research program to expand
                 our knowledge of the resources within the Olympic Coast
                 Sanctuary and to provide the basis for sound management;
                 establishing a broad-based education and interpretive
                 program designed to improve public understanding of the
                 sanctuary's importance as the habitat for a unique
                 community of marine organisms;
                 providing a comprehensive plan to protect this habitat.

            Various agencies currently have responsibilities for specific
       activities or for particular natural resources in the area. No
       single government agency, however, monitors the cumulative effects
       of human activities in a comprehensive, system-wide manner.
       Additionally, more effort is needed to promote research and public
       education.

            The designation of a national marine sanctuary in the waters
       off the Olympic Coast will create a system for assessing the
       overall impacts of current and future activities in the area.
       Sanctuary designation will ensure that it is given specific
       protection and consideration from an overall planning perspective.
       Further it will encourage careful review of proposals for
       potentially harmful activities. Monitoring and study of sanctuary
       resources will provide a greater understanding of both the area's
       needs and it's ecological balance, thereby providing a foundation
       for better management. Finally, a sanctuary program of public
       education/interpretation will promote greater sensitivity to the
       significance of the area's natural resources. Such a program in
       coordination with existing interpretive centers and other
       educational programs, can inform the public of the effects of human
       activities on marine resources.

            Therefore, a forum of special management that provides
       research, resource assessment, education, coordination, long-term
       comprehensive planning, and additional protection is desirable in
       order to ensure that the extraordinary wealth of natural resources
       in the area is not jeopardized. Sanctuary designation will provide
       the opportunity to fill management gaps and enhance existing
       resource management systems.


                                        1-9








              B.   Natural and HistoricalIzesources

              The sanc tuary area is a highly productive, nearly pristine
         coastal environment that is important to the continued survival of
         several ecologically and commercially important species including
         invertebrates, fishes, marine birds, and marine mammals. The
         diversity and richness of marine organisms, and the contributions
         made by these organisms to the species migrating through the area,
         suggest that sanctuary designation. will provide exceptional
         opportunities for scientific research in the areas of species
         interactions, population dynamics, and'physiological ecology
         (Chelsea International Corporation., 1983). The sanctuary is
         representative of an ecosystem within the Oregonian biogeographic
         province characterized by rocky coastlines with pocket beaches, a
         narrow continental shelf incised by submarine canyons, and
         relatively clear water (Wolteira, 1992) (Figure 3).

              The diversity of habitats that make up the sanctuary support a
         great variety of biological communities. This unusually large
         range of habitat types includes: offshore islands and rocks;
         intertidal pools; erosional features such as rocky headlands,
         seastacks and arches; interspersed exposed beaches and protected
         bays; protected inlets at river mouths; submarine canyons and
         ridges; the continental shelf, including broad shallow plateaus
         known as the La Perouse Bank (referred to as "the Plains"), and
         Swiftsure Bank; and continental slope environments.

              The area is characterized by high biological productivity with
         abundant floral and faunal communities. During spring and summer
         months, prevailing northwesterly winds combined with the Coriolis
         effect (the tendency of moving matter to turn right in the northern
         hemisphere as a result of the Earth's rotation) cause the surface
         waters to be deflected and replaced with nutrient-rich bottom
         waters. This "upwelling" supplies nutrients that increase the
         productivity of the surface waters, especially when the phenomenon
         corresponds with periods of high solar radiation. Submarine
         canyons indent the shelf along the Washington outer coast and are
         sites of enhanced upwelling.

              Numerous seastacks and rocky outcrops along the coast, coupled
         with a large tidal range and wave splash zone, provide a substrate
         for an extensive rocky intertidal community. The biological
         community of the intertidal zone is characterized by distinct
         horizontal bands of plants and animals that correspond to a range
         of physical and biological factors (e.g., wave intensity,
         predation, and tolerance to drying). The abundance of organisms
         and zonation in the rocky intertidal zone illustrates a readily
         apparent example of the region's productivity and diversity.

              The area provides an essential habitat for a wide variety of
         marine birds and mammals, and is of special interest due to the
         large number of endangered and threatened species that live or

                                         I-10
























               Chukchi/Arctic
                  
          Beringian      West Coast Fjords
               Aleutian                                           Great Lakes

                                                                                            Acadian
                      Oregonian



                                                                                           Virginian
                      Montereyan


                                  San Diegan                                           Carolinian


                                                                                    Floridian
                      Tropical Insular Pacific                    Louisianian                     
                                                                                            

                                                                                      Antillean
                                                                          













          Figure 3. Biogeographic Provinces of the United States (Wolteira,
                       1992).

                                                     I-11









         migrate through the region.

                The seabird colonies of Washington's outer coast are among
         the largest in the continental United States. Over 87 species of
         marine birds have been sighted in the nearshore coastal area
         (Speich, et al., 1987), and at least 11 species have been observed
         feeding in or migrating over the nutrient-enriched waters of the
         continental shelf (Wahl, 1984). The region contains one of the
         largest populations of bald eagles in the continental United
         States. In 1985 there were 220 confirmed nesting pairs of
         threatened bald eagles in Western Washington (McAllister et al.,
         1986). In 1987 about 30 active nests were reported on the outer
         coast between Cape Flattery and Copalis Head (Speich, et al.,
         1987). Currently, there are 51 observed breeding territories in
         the coastal area, reflecting a trend of increasing success in
         reestablishingthe bald eagle population in Washington state (WDW,
         1993). Coastal rocks and islands provide important breeding,
         nesting and roosting areas for marine birds. One of the ten
         largest colonies of Rhinoceros auklets in the eastern Pacific ocean
         occurs on Destruction Island (Speich, et al., 1987). Estimates of
         the total nesting seabird population along the Washington coast
         range'from 10.8,530 breeding pairs (G. Tillet, pers. comm., in
         Strickland and Chasan, 1989) to 240,000 individuals (Wahl, 1984).

              Twenty-nine species of marine mammals are reported to breed,
         rest within, or migrate through the Olympic coast region. Marine
         mammals commonly found in the area include the California sea lion,
         northern (or Steller) sea lion, Pacific harbor seal, harbor
         porpoise, California gray whale, and sea.otter. The sea otter,
         harbor seal, and harbor porpoise are the only marine mammal species
         known to breed in the region. Species which regularly migrate
         along the Washington coast include the northern sea lion,
         California sea lion, California gray whale, and northern fur seal.

              The northern part of the coast is an important habitat for a
         reintroduced population of sea otters. Sea otters were hunted for
         their pelts during the late 19th century, and by the early 20th
         century the entire population had been extirpated from the
         Washington coast. In 1969 - 1970, 59 sea otters were brought from
         the Aleutian Islands and released at two locations along the
         Washington coast believed to have been population centers for
         original sea otter stocks. Today sea otters  'have expanded their
         range to include 70 km of the coast; and the present population is
         estimated to be 300 individuals (Bowlby, 1992).

              The proposed Sanctuary supports a wide variety of fish and
         invertebrates that are of ecological, commercial, recreational and
         subsistence value. Five species of salmon migrate through the
         Sanctuary and concentrate over the Juan de Fuca Canyon where
         upwelling of nutrient rich waters during the summer months fuels a
         rich food web (Parmenter and Bailey, 1985). Steelhead and sea-run
         cutthroat trout also can be found in this area. Groundfish are









       concentrated on the banks surrounding the Juan de Fuca Canyon and
       along the edges of the continental Sihelf. Common species include
       halibut, flounder, lingcod, rockfish, among others. Pink shrimp
       and Dungeness crab are found in concentrations over the continental
       shelf as well. The Olympic coast is recognized for its diversity
       of invertebrates. Diverse invertebrate communities can be found in
       all habitats within the study area including rocky intertidal,
       sand, and cobble. The most intensely studied invertebrate
       communities are those on Tatoosh Island off Cape Flattery.

            Significant historical and cultural resources within and
       immediately adjacent to the Sanctuary include: Indian village
       sites, ancient canoe runs, petroglyphs, Indian artifacts, and
       numerous shipwrecks. Extensive archeological work oriented toward
       late prehistoric culture has been completed along the Washington
       coastline. A major archeological dig donducted at Ozette, near
       Cape Alava, uncovered an ancient village thought to be 2,000 years
       old. This excavation, which spanned 10 years, is considered to be
       one of the most significant in North America.

            The intertidal zone supports some of the most diverse
       intertidal communities in the world. Tatoosh Island off Cape
       Flattery is one-of the most intensely studied areas in the
       Sanctuary with respect to invertebrates.

            The Olympic Coast is one of the few regions of the U.S.
       coastline that has remained undisturbed. Lack of roads, steep
       rocky cliffs, andrestricted access by private owners and Indian
       tribes make accessibility difficult, contributing to the lack of
       shoreline development. Another special feature of the region is
       the unusual geology found along the Quinault reservation south of
       the Hoh River. An unusual mixture of rock types and formations,
       called the Hoh Milange, has been recognized by the Geologic society
       of America as one of the most important geological areas in
       Washington state. In addition, the Washington State Shoreline
       Management Act (SMA) recognizes the Olympic Coast for its natural
       beauty and biological richness. The SMA states, "The outstanding
       natural qualities of its rugged shoreline features have been
       recognized as a national asset and will be managed in their natural
       state."


















                                       1-13










              C.   Present and Potential Uses

              The human population along the outer coast is concentrated
         predominately on four Indian Reservations - the Makah, Quileute,
         Hoh, and Quinault. Tribal members use the proposed Sanctuary area
         for subsistence and commercial harvesting, and religious
         ceremonies. The presence of Indian tribes along the coast adds
         special cultural character and historical significance to the
         proposed marine sanctuary. Uses of lands in the coastal watersheds
         include commercial forestry, private development, and county and
         state recreation areas. Tourism, and commercial, tribal and
         recreational fishing and are important activities occurring in the
         proposed Sanctuary.

              1.   Fishing
              The diversity and abundance of fish species along the coast is
         an important recreational and commercial resource for coastal
         residents. Salmon, bottomfish, and razor clams are the primary
         recreational fisheries. Commercial fisheries target primarily
         salmon, bottomfish, halibut, dungeness crab and pink shrimp.
         Recreational bottomfishing has increased in recent years. Black
         rockfish, lingcod, and yellowtail or olive rockfish are the most
         important bottomfish of the coastal area targeted by sport fishers.
         Recreational bottomfishing is'concentrated primarily seaward of the
         entrance to the Strait of Juan de Fuca and in the coastal areas off
         Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor. Razor clam digging is a very popular
         recreational activity and many people travel to the coast
         specifically to harvest clams. The Quinault Indian Tribe also
         harvest razor clams on the beaches of the Quinault Reservation.

              High concentrations of commercial fishing occur throughout the
         Strait and near the approach to the Strait over Swiftsure Bank and
         La Perouse Bank (commonly referred to as "the Plains"). Crab
         fishing occurs nearshore within 30 fathoms between the Hoh and Raft
         Rivers on the outer coast and between Pt. Grenville and the
         Columbia River. Pink shrimp trawling areas occur between the 50
         and 100 fathom isobaths of the outer coast.

              Washington's local (as opposed to the distant water fleet
         operating in Alaska) commercial fishing industry is important to
         the state's economy. Fishery resources harvested include five
         species of salmon, bottomfish, and shellfish (Dungeness crab and
         pink shrimp). Currently, many specific salmon fisheries
         (particularly the ocean troll fisheries for chinook and coho
         salmon) are controlled an the basis of "weak stock management." In
         weak stock management harvest limits are set to safeguard against
         over-harvest of the least viable individual stocks. This
         management regime has severely constrained harvest levels (NRC,
         1988). Dungeness crab stocks have been historical  'ly unstable and
         harvests from 1986-1988 have been under the most recent '16 year
         average (NRC, 1988). The harvest of pink shrimp, also very
         cyclical in nature, has increased since 1986. The harvest of









       groundfish has declined considerably in 1988 from 1986 levels.
       Salmonids are still the most important coastal tribal fishery
       (Washington Department of Fisheries, in Butts, 1988); steelhead
       trout is more important for commercial purposes than other salmonid
       species for some of the coastal tribal communities.

            Between 1985 and 1987 there was a decline of 375 fishing
       vessels (tribal and non-tribal combined) in Washington's local
       water fleet (including offshore waters, Columbia River and Puget
       Sound) (NRC, 1988). The decline is due to the withdrawal of
       approximately 372 salmon troll permits since 1985, permits which
       under the limited entry system cannot be reinstated. This is
       consistent with the long term trend in the fishery. Since 1975,
       the number of trolling permits issued has dropped by over 2,000
       (NRC, 1988). The local water fleet is typified by small-scale
       operations with relatively small earnings per vessel. Between
       1986-1988, ex-vessel revenues averaged between $54,000 and $69,000
       per boat. salmon gillnet, purse seine, and groundfish trawls
       earned the greatest ex-vessel value of all gear types in the local
       fleet, earning $46.3 million, $21.7 million, and 11.6 million,
       respectively.

            2@   Recreation
             The Olympic National Park borders a large portion of the
       proposed sanctuary and is frequented by hikers and campers. Of the
       estimated 3.5 million annual visits to the Park, approximately one
       third visit the coastal area. Many people travel to the coast to
       watch the annual migration of California gray whales. Beaches and
       tide pools are used for research, educational, and interpretive
       activities. The pristine quality of the region provides a truly
       natural coastal and nearshore setting.

            The proposed sanctuary offers the opportunity to coordinate
       research and interpretive programs with the Olympic National Park
       and the USFWS offshore National Wildlife Refuges. The Olympic
       National Park sponsors nature walks and other educational
       activities and also supports research projects on coastal habitats
       within the Park. Research could also be coordinated with
       universities which use a portion of the proposed sanctuary for
       field study and gathering baseline information.

            3.   Marine Transportation
            Next to fishing, the predominant use of waters off the Olympic
       coast is commodities transportation to and from port facilities in
       Puget Sound. Recent oil spills (in Alaska and off Grays Harbor)
       have heightened public concern over vessel traffic along the
       Washington coast. Contingency plans designed to respond to oil
       spills resulting from tanker accidents are being formulated. Tug
       boats with barges also carry hydrocarbon products along the coast.
       These shallow draft vessels are able to transit nearer to the rocky
       shoreline than tankers. The U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) is
       recommending to the International Maritime organization (IMO)

                                       1-15









         implementation of a 25 nautical mile Area To Be Avoided (ATBA) off
         the outer coast for all vessels andbarges transporting -hazardous
         materials.

              4.   Offshore Oil and Gas Development
            ,Outer continental shelf (OCS) oil and gas leasing within the
         boundaries of the proposed sanctuary has been considered by the
         U.S. Department of Interior's Mineral Management Service (MMS).
         MMS had planned to conduct lease sale W132 in April, 1992 for
         exploration and development off the Washington and Oregon coasts.
         However, in June, 1990 President Bush.announced a policy on OCS oil
         and gas activities which accepts the recommendation of the
         Secretary of Interior to delay Lease Sale #132 until a series of
         environmental studies are completed (expected to take 5 to 7
         years); and direct that no leasing activity occur until after the
         year 2000, and then, only if studies show that development can be
         pursued in an environmentally safe manner. The 1992 Re-
         authorization of Title III prohibits oil and gas leasing and
         development within the boundaries of the Olympic Coast National
         Marine Sanctuary (P.L. 102-587).

              5.   Discharges and Disposal Activities
              There are no permitted discharges within the boundaries of the
         proposed Sanctuary. Although theMakah Tribe have a permit to
         discharge primary treated sewage into the Strait, the treatment
         facility has been inoperable and the use of the discharge pipe has
         been terminated for a number of years. The greatest threat to the
         coastal resources of the Sanctuary from land-based discharges are
         from non-point source pollution resulting from timber operations
         within coastal watersheds.

              The variety of human uses has not dramatically altered or
         damaged the resources of the outer coast. However, increasing
         development from tourism and other commercial enterprises has
         increased the potential for adverse cumulative effects on Sanctuary
         resources and water quality.



















                                         1-16









             D.  Adeguacy of Existing Authorities to Manage the Area

             Much of the coastal area adjacent to the Sanctuary is
        protected by Olympic National Park, the offshore wildlife refuges,
        wilderness areas, biosphere reserves, wilderness areas designated
        by the coastal tribes, state beach management plans, and county and
        state parks. The need for economic development within the
        watersheds draining into the Sanctuary will put increasing pressure
        on coastal resources, in terms of point and non-point source
        discharges, coastal development, increasing recreational pressures
        and increasing overflights.

             While all of these uses are managed by specific agencies and
        authorities, there is no single authority charged with overseeing
        the numerous uses affecting the ecosystem of the proposed
        Sanctuary. There are no offshore areas designated to protect the
        valuable fish, and marine bird and mammal populations. With
        limited funding of existing programs, the coordination of resource
        protection and management programs is essential. The Olympic Coast
        National Marine Sanctuary could play an important role in such
        coordination. It is not the intention of the Sanctuary to
        duplicate existing regulations.

             Currently, no institution addresses the range of significant
        questions concerning the interaction of resources and uses in the
        Sanctuary area. While a variety of organizations conduct research,
        there is no systematic coordination to ensure that information
        needs are properly addressed in a timely and adequate manner. Even
        if information becomes available through research projects, no
        institution is charged with applying that information to practical
        management issues such as regulation. similarly, no agency '
        attempts to monitor the health, stability and changing conditions
        of this valuable marine ecosystem. Resource assessment through
        gathering of baseline data and continued monitoring of
        environmental conditions are essential to assess the adequacy of
        the protection afforded these important resources. The status quo
        alternative (no sanctuary designation) would leave the protection
        of this area to the chance coordination of regulatory efforts of a
        number of agencies, and would forego opportunities for
        comprehensive management.















                                        1-17










              E.   Benefits Derived From Sanctuary Status

              The major benefit of the Sanctuary is the integration of
         important nearshore and oceanic marine resource zones and
         corresponding human activities into one management regime. Other
         benefits of designation include: (1) enhancement of research and
         monitoring; (2) promotion of public awareness of the marine
         ecosystem; (3) assistance coordinating of initiatives implemented
         by existing authorities; (4) formulation of long-range plans that
         respond to currently unforeseen threats; and (5) regulation of
         activities which either pose a current risk of causing significant
         damage or may later prove harmful as use of the area increases.
         Formal recognition of the species and habitat value of these water-.
         should in itself focus additional attention on the resources of
         this area and thus encourage direct special attention to any future
         development plans.

              Besides providing an ecologically diverse haven for many
         significant concentrations of living resources, the waters also
         support a number of socially beneficial human activities. These
         range from fishing, subsistence harvesting of intertidal
         invertebrates, nature observation, education, scientific research,
         national defense, vessel traffic, and law enforcement. To date,
         such activities have been pursued at low intensity levels.
         However, these and other potential human activities, (e.g., oil and
         gas development, possible dredge spoil disposal) are clearly
         capable of generating conflicts which could harm Sanctuary
         resources.

              In short, the marine ecosystem's diverse resources and rich
         productivity make it an area of regional and national significance.
         The area deserves long-term protection to enhance and complement
         the protection already provided for some of its resources onshore,
         and for portions of the extreme nearshore zone. For example, the
         Department of Interior has jurisdiction over much of the coastal
         lands and offshore Islands. Additionally, the state has authorized
         establishment of the Olympic Center to examine the ecological
         linkages between terrestrial and marine ecosystems on the Olympic
         Peninsula. The tribes manage the coastal intertidal habitats
         adjacent to much of the Sanctuary.

              Sanctuary designation can provide an excellent opportunity for
         establishing not only a coordinated Federal/State/Tribal management
         regime, but also would promote research and education efforts
         through integration of existing facilities, resources and programs.
         This type of coordination and focus, emphasizing land-sea
         interactions, could serve as a model for other coastal areas of the
         United States where local land issues and coastal zone problems
         have traditionally been separated from offshore marine issues with
         respect to management, and research and education efforts.

              Sanctuary designation will improve resource protection by

                                         1-18









       instituting new regulatory measures and by supplementing present
       surveillance and enforcement actions. The overall effect of these
       regulations will be beneficial. Title III of the MPRSA
       specifically provides in section 304(c) that NOAA may not terminate
       valid leases, permits, licenses or rights of subsistence use or of
       access existing as of the date of Sanctuary designation; but may
       regulate the exercise of such authorizations and rights consistent
       with the purposes for which the Sanctuary was designated.

            Final regulations are proposed governing: hydrocarbon and
       mineral activities; discharges and deposits (both from within and
       outside of the Sanctuary boundary); overflights; alteration of or
       construction on the seabed; historical resources; and marine
       mammals, turtles and seabirds. Vessel traffic is in the scope of
       regulations. NOAA has proposed conditioning the Navy's existing
       permit from the Department of Interior to practice bomb Sealion
       Rock by prohibiting bombing activities during the critical breeding
       season - from March 1 through October 31. In addition, two final
       regulations are proposed to aid the enforcement of the other
       regulations: a prohibition on possession of resources which are
       prohibited from "taking" from within the Sanctuary, and on
       interference with enforcement operations. The exact regulations,
       including procedures for applying for permits are found in Appendix
       B.

       1.   Oil, Gas, and Mineral Activities

            The resources and attributes of the Sanctuary - particularly
       sea otters, sea birds, pinnipeds that use haul-out sites, kelp
       forests and rocks along the outer coast, and the exceptional water
       quality of the area - are especially vulnerable to oil and gas
       activities. A prohibition on such activities within the Sanctuary
       would provide partial protection for the area. only partial
       protection would be provided due to the remaining threat from oil
       and gas activities outside of the Sanctuary boundary and from
       vessel traffic, particularly oil tankers, transiting through and
       near the Sanctuary. See #5 below regarding mineral activities.

            If oil and gas activities were allowed in the Sanctuary, such
       development, and construction of man-made structures, would disrupt
       the natural and aesthetic qualities of the area and be inconsistent
       with the purposes of the Sanctuary. Although certain man-made
       structures may be permissible in the future for limited purposes
       such as research or natural resource protection, the threats from
       oil and gas activities to Sanctuary resources and qualities warrant
       an absolute prohibition of oil and gas activities within the
       Sanctuary boundary. Threats include catastrophic events such as
       oil spills associated with blow-outs, rupture of pipelines or
       spills during the loading of tankers and long-term chronic events
       such as discharge of drilling fluids, cuttings and air emissions.
       Finally, due to the lack of offshore oil and gas activities thus
       far, the area would suffer aesthetic disturbances including the

                                       1-19









         presence of offshore structures, the construction of shore
         facilities, and the transportation of personnel and equipment to
                                                                   P
         and from the offshore rigs.

         2.   Discharges and Deposits into the Sanctuary and

         3.   Discharges and Deposits that Enter the Sanctuary and Injure a
         Sanctuary Resource or Ouality

              These prohibitions are necessary in order to protect the
         sanctuary resources and attributes from the harmful effects of land
         and sea-generated discharges from point sources from both within
         and outside the Sanctuary boundary. This provision complements the
         existing regulatory system, enhances the area's overall appeal, and
         helps maintain the present water quality of the Sanctuary. The
         regulations would prohibit disposal of dredge material within the
         Sanctuary.

              There are currently no point-source discharges entering
         directly into the Sanctuary. Point source discharges (such as
         discharges from municipal waste water treatment, power, or
         industrial plants) into the Sanctuary require permits from
         Washington Department of Ecology (WDOE) or the Environmental
         Protection Agency (EPA) depending upon whether the point source
         originates from a non-tribal or tribal enterprise, respectively.
         Discharges permitted after the date of Sanctuary designation would
         be allowed provided the permit is certified by NOAA in accordance
         with Section 925.11. Municipal treatment plants would be required
         to have at least secondary treatment capabilities and tertiary or
         greater as appropriate or necessary depending on the risk to
         Sanctuary resources and qualities.

         4.   Moving, Removing, or Injuring Historical Resources

              Historical resources in the marine environment are fragile,
         finite and non-renewable. This prohibition is designed to protect
         these resources so that they may be inventoried, researched and
         information so derived be made available to the public. This
         prohibition does not apply to moving, removing or injury resulting
         incidentally from kelp harvesting, aquaculture or traditional
         fishing operations.

         5.   Alteration of, or Construction on, the Seabed

              The intent of this prohibition is to protect the resources and
         attributes of the Sanctuary from harmful effects of activities that
         may disrupt and/or destroy sensitive marine benthic habitats, such
         as kelp beds, invertebrate populations, fish habitats, and
         estuaries and marshes. Such activities include, but are not
         limited to, archeological excavations, drilling into the seabed,
         strip mining, laying of pipelines and outfalls, ocean mineral
         extraction (including but not limited to sand mining), and offshore

                                          1-20










        commercial development.

        .6.  Taking Marine Mammals, Sea Turtles, or Seabirds

             The prohibition overlaps the Marine Mammal Protection Act
        (MMPA), the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Migratory Bird
        Treaty Act (MBTA) and empowers Sanctuary officials to enforce the
        provisions of these Acts. This regulation extends protection for
        Sanctuary resources by providing a greater deterrent by
        establishing civil penalties of up to $100,000 per taking. It
        includes all marine mammals, marine reptiles (turtles) and seabirds
        in or above the Sanctuary. Activities authorized or permitted
        pursuant to the MMPA, ESA, or MBTA are exempted from this
        prohibition.

        .7.  Overflights

             Flying motorized aircraft within one nautical miles seaward of
        mean high water within the Sanctuary and at less than-2,000 feet
        above the Sanctuary would be prohibited. This prohibition is
        consistent with the 2000 foot advisory over the adjacent Olympic
        National Park and USFWS refuges off the coast.

             The area-specific prohibition on overflights below 2,000 feet
        (305 m) within one nautical mile seaward of all land boundaries is
        designed to limit the potential effects of noise, particularly as
        it might affect hauled-out seals and sea lions, sea otters and
        nesting birds along the shoreline and offshore rocks and islands of
        the Sanctuary.

             NOAA recognizes that overflights are regulated under the
        Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs). Unlike FARs, however,
        sanctuary overflight regulations are intended to protect the living
        marine resources of the Sanctuary from disturbance by low-flying
        aircraft. The less-than-2000-foot overflight prohibition would not
        apply if the low overflight is necessary to: 1) respond to an
        emergency threatening life, property or the environment (this
        exception is true for the most of the other prohibitions as well);
        2) valid law enforcement purposes; or 3) certain national defense
        activities.


        a.   Vessel Traffic

             No Sanctuary vessel traffic regulations are planned at this
        time. Vessel traffic, however, is within the scope of regulations.
        The Strait of Juan de Fuca Cooperative Vessel Traffic Management
        System (CVTMS), vessel traffic separation schemes in the Strait of
        Juan de Fuca, and radar coverage from Tofino Vessel Traffic Service
        (covering a range of 60 nautical miles from the entrance of the
        Strait) already provide some safeguards for Sanctuary resources.
        NOAA is currently working with the USCG, the primary agency
        responsible for regulating vessel traffic, on the establishment of

                                        1-21









        an ATBA from the shoreline to 25 nautical miles off the Olympic
        Peninsula. This would provide an additional measure to ensure
        protection of the Sanctuary. This measure is based on a
        determination of resources most at risk and vessel traffic
        practices most threatening to Sanctuary resources.

             Despite existing regulations and management, NOAA recognizes
        the potential threat to the Sanctuary from vessel traffic. If the
        promulgation of additional vessel traffic regulations is deemed
        necessary, NOAA will pursue appropriate actions after consultation
        with the USCG, State agencies, and the IMO. Coordination among
        agencies is intended to focus ongoing efforts on the provision of
        adequate protection of Sanctuary resources and qualities.

             Fishing/Aguacultute/Kelp harvesting

             No sanctuary fishing or aquaculture regulations are proposed
        nor in the scope of regulations. Fish resources in the Sanctuary
        are already extensively managed by existing authorities. Fisheries
        management will remain under the jurisdiction of the WDF,
        Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), National Marine
        Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the Pacific Fisheries Management
        Council (PFMC). Sanctuary prohibitions that may indirectly affect
        fishing activities have been written to explicitly exempt
        activities incidental to traditional fishing methods, aquaculture
        and kelp harvesting activities. Kelp harvesting is within the
        scope of regulations.






























                                        1-22









        V. Socioeconomic Effects of Designation

             The net environmental and socioeconomic effects of designating
        the Sanctuary and implementing the Sanctuary Management Plan and
        its regulations are anticipated to be positive. While such effects
        are difficult to quantify, one goal of the Sanctuary will be to
        maintain the high level of water quality, fisheries, aesthetics and
        tourism without causing adverse effects.

             The final sanctuary regulations pr ohibit a relatively narrow
        range of activities. Under certain circumstances specific
        activities, otherwise prohibited, may be allowed. For example,
        prohibited activities may be allowed if: (1) the activity is done
        pursuant to a National Marine sanctuary permit; (2) the activity
        occurs pursuant to a valid permit existing on the effective date of
        designation and the'permit for the activity was certified by NOAA,
        or (3) a permit was applied for after Sanctuary designation and the
        proposer of the activity notifies NOAA of the proposed activity in
        within 90 days and NOAA approved the activity.

             NOAA will keep additional administrative burdens to a minimum
        by coordinating closely with state and Federal regulatory and
        permitting agencies. Efforts will be made-to avoid duplication and
        to review applications for a prohibited activity as quickly as
        possible.

        A.   Oil, Gas and Minerals

             Estimates of potential lost revenue from the prohibition on
        oil, gas and mineral (e.g., sand and gravel) activities within the
        Sanctuary boundary are presented in Part IV ("Environmental  '
        Consequences of Alternatives"). Prohibiting oil, gas and mineral
        activities has positive socioeconomic effects that compensate for
        lost revenue. For example, the potential for environmental damage
        from oil spills or discharges will be reduced and the exceptional
        aesthetic quality of the area will be maintained. In addition, the
        proposed prohibition may alleviate or remove costs to local
        communities for developing on-shore facilities, and political/legal
        actions resulting from controversy regarding proposed oil, gas or
        mineral activities.

             Unfortunately, 'it is not possible to quantify accurately the
        negative or positive socioeconomic effects of prohibiting OCS oil
        and gas activities. A National Academy of Sciences study (1989) on
        the "Adequacy of Environmental Information For Outer Continental
        Shelf Oil and Gas Decisions: Florida and California" found that
        "few data have been collected by MMS or anyone else to address the
        social and economic impacts of OCS activities." This conclusion
        has been reinforced by an MMS study (1991) entitled "Potential
        Effects of OCS Oil and Gas Exploration and Development on Pacific
        Northwest Indian Tribes: Final Technical Report", and an MMS study
        (1991a) entitled "Inventory and Evaluation of Washington and Oregon

                                         1-23









        Coastal Recreation Resources: Assessing Economic Impacts to
        Coastal Recreation and Tourism from oil and Gas Development in the
        Oregon and Washington Outer Continental Shelf."

        B.   Discharges and Deposits

             The regulation prohibiting discharges and deposits may require
        applicants for discharge permits to seek other areas of disposal or
        apply at least secondary treatment to discharges. All measures,
        terms and conditions will be done in consultation with the affected
        party and the appropriate management agency. The designation of
        dredge disposal sites is prohibited within the Sanctuary.

             overall, this regulation may impose additional costs by
        requiring the use of more expensive dredge disposal methods or
        dumpsites. Presently, the only planned dredging adjacent to the
        Sanctuary is at the Makah and Quileute Reservations. Both Tribes
        plan for upland disposal or beach or jetty nourishment using dredge
        spoils. The regulation could also result in additional costs if it
        were determined that a higher level of treatment or other, more
        expensive sewage disposal methods were preferable to disposal in
        the Sanctuary. It is difficult to predict accurately the economic
        impact of this regulation without analyzing specific proposals.
        This regulation adds further protection to Sanctuary resources
        beyond that afforded by existing legislation. The requirement for
        review and Sanctuary certification of permits will ensure that
        potentially harmful activities receive special consideration from
        the perspective of Sanctuary protection.

        C.   Alteration of or Construction on the Seabed

             Dredging activities are not extensive within the sanctuary
        boundary; nevertheless, unrestricted alteration of, construction
        on, or drilling of the seabed represents a threat to marine
        resources. Foremost among adverse effects are increased turbidity
        levels, destruction, disruption or displacement of benthic and
        intertidal communities, and human intrusion into areas of marine
        bird and marine mammal population concentrations.

             This.regulation would enhance resource protection by reducing
        the presence and operation of large and noisy dredging machinery.
        Thus human intrusion upon marine wildlife, along with potentially
        adverse impacts on their food supplies, (e.g., benthic and pelagic
        fish resources), would be minimized., No economic impacts upon
        commercial firms are expected. Exemptions from the dredging
        prohibition would allow for installation of navigation aids, and
        harbor maintenance (although harbors are excluded from the
        Sanctuary boundary, and construction, repair, replacement or
        rehabilitation of docks and piers.

             Mineral mining activities in the Sanctuary will be prohibited.
        Studies have shown that this activity may cause, among other

                                        1-24









        impacts, acceleration of natural erosion of the seabed and adjacent
        areas, increased turbidity, and changes in water circulation.
        Mining activities also disturb benthic habitats that support whale
        feeding grounds, seabird foraging habitats and fishery resources
        (MMS, 1993).

        D.   Overflights

             Overflights below 2000 feet are prohibited within one nautical
        miles seaward from the coastal boundary of the Sanctuary and within
        one nautical mile of each of the offshore wildlife refuges. The
        intent of this prohibition is to protect sensitive Sanctuary
        resources, such as nesting seabirds and mammals at haul out areas,
        from the disturbance effects of low-flying aircraft. Access to
        airports by commercial and recreational airplanes would not be
        affected. Takeoff and landings at local airports at Sekiu,
        Quileute, Neah Bay and Copalis Beach will be unaffected.

        E.   Vessel Traffic

             There would be no economic effect on vessel traffic as a
        result of Sanctuary designation since NOAA is proposing no vessel
        traffic regulations. NOAA has considered vessel traffic regulation
        and the preferred alternative is not to regulate vessel traffic at
        the time of Sanctuary designation. Such regulation may include,
        but is not limited to: (1) routing of all, or certain classes of
        coast-wise domestic vessel traffic outside of the boundary of the
        Sanctuary, (2) prohibiting domestic oil barge traffic within the
        Sanctuary; (3) restriction of all large domestic vessels inbound
        to, and outbound from, designated port access route(s); and (4)
        designation of ATBA's for domestic vessels or other measures
        designed to protect the marine environment. NOAA has requested the
        USCG to submit a request for implementing an ATBA from the
        shoreline to 25 nautical miles off the outer coast for
        international and domestic vessels carrying hazardous materials.
        The 25 nautical mile boundary poses minimal disturbance to vessels
        as it is largely compatible with existing voluntary management
        measures followed by the shipping industry. Discussion of economic
        impacts of the ATBA proposed by the USCG to IMO are identified in
        Part IV of this document.

             NOAA will maintain close communication with the USCG to
        evaluate the need for additional regulations regarding vessel
        safety and/or emergency response plans and equipment.

        F.   Fishing/Aauaculture/Kelp Hagyesting

             Implementation of the Sanctuary should have no adverse effects
        on the fishing industry. Moreover, Sanctuary protection of habitat
        and water quality by controlling both pollutants and disturbance of
        the seabed should be positive for maintaining healthy and
        productive fish stocks. Inclusion of kelp harvesting in the scope

                                        1-25









        of regulation will ensure that the integrity of the kelp habitat is
        maintained. Protection of kelp beds will protect important fishery
        habitat which will benefit the fishing industry.

























































                                        1-26









        VI   Manageability of the Area

             Sanctuary designation offers increased opportunities for
        interpretation and coordination among programs due to the
        availability of proposed satellite facilities and immediate
        staffing. Full-time attention of the manager would be available
        for resource protection due to the immediate availability of
        research and education coordinators.

             Management of the proposed Sanctuary would integrate and
        utilize all aspects of the program to provide for protection of the
        special values of this unique marine area. Research, education,
        coordination, long-term planning and necessary regulations are
        described in the enclosed management plan.

             The management plan describes sanctuary goals and objectives
        tailored to the specific resources and uses of the area. The goals
        and*objectives will provide all Sanctuary users with a framework
        for conserving resources and integrating uses compatible with the
        goals of the management plan. These management goals are broad and
        allow for flexible implementation of action plans to fulfill the
        stated goals. Each objective of the management plan represents a
        short-term measurable step towards achieving the broader management
        goals.

             The sanctuary manager will promote coordination among all
        authorities concerned with sanctuary resources and will
        particularly stress consideration of the special value of the
        Sanctuary's living resources in the formulation of policies
        affecting the area. NOAA's contribution to the policy-making
        process of other agencies managing uses in the Sanctuary will be
        enhanced by the Sanctuary's comprehensive research and monitoring
        programs.

             The management program for the Sanctuary will be developed and
        implemented by the on-site manager. This will be accomplished in
        conjunction with other Federal, state, local and tribal agencies in
        order to benefit *from existing expertise and personnel, and to
        promote state, Federal, and tribal interagency coordination and
        cooperation. Existing agencies include, among others, the WDF;
        Washington Department of Wildlife (WDW); Washington Department of
        Community Development (WDCD); WDOE; WDNR; and Washington Department
        of Agriculture (WDOA); and the Makah, Hoh, Quileute and Quinault
        Tribes; Clallam, Jefferson and Grays Harbor Counties; the National
        Park Service; USFWS; USCG, NMFS; PFMC; and Canadian authorities.

             A particularly useful mechanism for coordination will be a
        Sanctuary Advisory Committee (SAC). The SSC will include members
        from Federal, state, local and tribal agencies, as well as
        commercial and private interests, and the environmental community.
        The SAC will ensure an exchange of information and will advise the
        sanctuary manager on permit applications and certifications,

                                        1-27











         VII: Consultations

         A.    National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA):
               This document is both a FEIS/MP for the Olympic Coast National
         Marine Sanctuary. Some of the section headings, and their order,
         are different from those frequently found in other environmental
         impact statements. To assist NEPA reviewers, the following table
         has been developed. Under the heading 11NEPA Requirements" are
         listed those topics normally discussed in an EIS. The
         corresponding section of this document and the page numbers are
         provided in the other two columns.

         NEPA Reauirement                          Management Plan               Page

         Purpose and Need for Action               Part I:   ...............      1

         Alternatives
            Preferred Alternative                  Part III:    ..............    1

            Preferred Boundary Alternatives        Part III     ..............    4

            Other Alternatives                     Part  III    ..............    42

         Affected Environment                      Part  II     ......-   ......  1

         Environmental Consequences                Part  IV     --.oo     ......  1

            A. General and Specific                Part         .......           5
                  Impacts

            B. Unavoidable Adverse                 Part  IV   ....... oo.o..o.. 96
                  Environmental or
                  Socioeconomic Effects

            C. Relationships between               Part IV    ....                97
                  Short-term Uses of the
                  Environment and the
                  Maintenance and
                  Enhancement of Long-term
                  Productivity


         NEPA Reauirement                          Management Plan               Page

         List of Preparers                         Part VI... ...

         List of Agencies,     organizations,      Part
            and Persons Receiving Copies of
            the FEIS/MP*





                                               1-29









          B.    Endangered Species Act (ESA):

          NOTE: An informal Section 7 consultation has been completed. The
          following is the result of this consultation.

                Pursuant to Section 7 of the ESA, the USFWS of the Department
          of the Interior, and the NMFS of the Department of Commerce, were
          consulted in the performance of the biological assessment of
          possible impacts on threatened or endangered species that might
          result from the designation of a National Marine Sanctuary off the
          Olympic Peninsula. The consultations confirmed that some 14
          Federal Endangered (FE) and six Federal Threatened (FT) species are
          known to occur in the area. In addition, one Washington State
          Endangered Species (SE) and one Washington State Threatened Species
          (ST) are known to inhabit the sanctuary ecosystem. Consultations
          determined that Sanctuary designation is not likely to adversely
          affect these species. The species identified are:

          1.   Aleutian Canada Goose    ........ Branta canadensis leucopareia         FE
          2.   American peregrine falcon     ......... Falco peregrinus anatum         FE
          3.   Bald Eagle..                      .... Haliaeetus leucocephalus         FT
          4.   Blue whale  ..........................     Balaenoptera musculus        FE
          5.   Brown Pelican  ......................    Pelicanus occidentalis         FE
          6.   Fin whale  .....................................      B. physalus       FE
          7.   Gray whale  ..........................     Eschrichtius robustus        FE
          8.   Harbor Porpoise   .........................    Phocoena phocoena        ST
          9.   Humpback whale   .....................   Megantera novaeangliae         FE
          10.  Steller Sea Lion   .......................    Eumetopias jubatus        FT
          11.  Right whale  ...........................     Eubalaena glacialis        FE
          12.  Sei whale  .....................................      B. borealis       FE
          13.  Short-tailed albatross    ..................   Diomedea albatrus        FE
          14.  Snowy Plover  ......................    Charadrius alexandrinus         SE
          15.  Sperm whale  ..............................      Physeter catodon       FE
          16.  Leatherback Turtle   ....................   Dermochelys coriacea        FE
          17   Loggerhead Turtle   .........................     Caretta caretta       FT
          18.  Green Turtle  ...............................      Chelonia mydas       FT
          19.  Olive ridley  ........................     Lepidochelys olivacea        FT
          20.  Sacramento River Winter-Run Chinook Salmon.O. tshawvtscha               FT
          21.  Snake River Sockeye Salmon     .......................    0. nerka      FE
          22.  Snake River Fall Chinook Salmon      ............  0. tshalgytscha      FE















                                                1-30












             Resource Assessment:

             The MPRSA, as amended, requires a resource assessment report
        documenting present and potential uses of the proposed Sanctuary
        area, including uses subject to the primary jurisdiction of the
        Department of the Interior. This requirement has been met in
        consultation with the Department of the Interior and the assessment
        report is contained in Part II.


        D.   Federal Consistency Determination:

             Section 307 of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as
        amended, requires that each Federal activity within or outside the
        coastal zone that affects any land or water use or natural resource
        of the coastal zone shall be carried out in a manner that is, to
        the maximum extent practicable, consistent with the enforceable
        policies of approved state management programs. This requirement
        is being met through a Federal Consistency Determination made by
        NOAA to the WDOE that the designation of the coastal and offshore
        waters adjacent to the Olympic peninsula as a National Marine
        Sanctuary is consistent, to the maximum extent practicable, with
        Washington's Coastal Management Plan.

        E.   Fishery Regulations

             Section 303 (b)(2)(D) of the MPRSA, as amended, requires
        consultation with the PFMC. During consultation, NOAA requested
        the PFMC to determine if additional fishery regulations were
        necessary with Sanctuary designation in accordance with Section
        304(b)(5). PFMC responded that no additional regulations were
        necessary and that management responsibility regarding fishing
        activities should remain with existing authorities.

        F.   Other Federal and State Agencies and the U.S. Congress

             The Secretary has consulted with the Committee on Merchant
        Marine and Fisheries of the House of Representatives and the
        Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate.
        In September, 1991 the Designation Prospectus for the Olympic Coast
        National Marine Sanctuary was provided to all members of each
        committee. The results of these consultations have been
        incorporated into the FEIS/MP.

             The Secretaries of State, Defense, Transportation, and the
        Interior, the Administrator of EPA, and the heads of other Federal
        agencies were consulted and their comments were,addressed by the
        FEIS/MP. Summaries of a '11 written comments and comments,made at
        the hearings are provided in Appendix A of the FEIS/MP.

             Appropriate Washington State and local government agencies
        were consulted and their comments were addressed by the FEIS/MP.

                                        1-31









         Summaries of all written comments and comments made at the hearing
         are provided in Appendix A of the FEIS/MP.

             Appropriate Tribal organizations and Indian Tribes were
         consulted and their comments were addressed by the FEIS/MP.
         Summaries of all written comments and comments made at the hearings
         are provided in Appendix A of the Feis/MP.

             The comments of all other interested persons were addressed by
         the FEIS/MP and summaries of all written comments and comments made
         at the hearings are provided in Appendix A of the FEIS/MP.















































                                        1-32












                                      PART II: THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT















 I
















 I












                                            TABLE OF CONTENTS                      PAGE



          Part Ii. The Affectgd Environment         .........................      1
                      A.    Regional Context     ............................      3
                            1.    Sanctuary Study Area Location       ..........   3
                            2.    Socio-Demographic Profile and Land Use.          7
                                  a.    Tribal Economies     ..................    9
                                        i.    Makah Indian Nation     ..........   10
                                        ii. QuileUte Indian Tribe       ........   12
                                        iii.  Hoh Indian Tribe... 14
                                        iv.   Quinault Indian Nation      .......  14
                                  b.    Treaty Rights and Legal Status       ....  17
                                  C.    Current and Future Activities      .....   19
                      B.    Sanctuary   Study Area Resources     ..............    20
                            1.    Environmental Conditions      ...............    21
                                  a.    Geology   ...........................      21
                                  b.    Meteorology    .......................     23
                                  C.    Waves and Currents     ................    25
                                  d.    Habitat Types   .....................      30
                                        i.    Beach Surf Zone    ..............    32
                                        ii.   Rocky Surf Zone    ..............    34
                                        iii.  Above Tide Rocky Shore Zone..        40
                                        iv.   Pelagic Ocean Zone     ...........   40
                                        V.    Benthic Ocean Zone     ...........   45
                            2.    Natural Resources     ......................     52
                                  a.    Plankton   ..........................      56
                                  b.    Benthic Algae   .....................      57
                                  C.    Invertebrates   .....................      58
                                  d.    Fish Resources   ....................      60
                                  e.    Marine Birds    ......................     61
                                        i.    Seabirds  .....................      66
                                        ii. shorebirds     ...................     78
                                        iii.  Waterfowl  ....................      79
                                        iv.   Birds of Prey    ................    79
                                  f.    Marine Mammals   ....................      80
                                  g.    Marine Turtles   ....................      87
                            3.    Cultural and Historical Resources        ......  89


                      C.    Human Activities     ............................      90
                            1.    Commercial Fishing and Aquaculture       .....   90
                                  a.    Commercial Non-Treaty Fishery      .....   95
                                  b.    Treaty Fisheries     ..................    95
                                  C.    Aquaculture and Coastal
                                       -Hatcheries   ........................      97
                            2.    Oil  and Gas Activities     .................    97
                            3.    Commercial Shipping    ....................      102
                                  a.    Routes and Areas of Vessel
                                        Concentration   .....................      104
                                        i.    Tanker Traffic    ...............    104
                                        ii. Barges and Tug Boats       .........   107
                                        iii. Foreign Product Carriers      .....   109










                                         vi. Pleasure Boats    ...............    110
                                   b.    Washington State Ports and Harbors.      111
                                         i.   Willapa Harbor    ................  111
                                         ii.  Grays Harbor  ..................    ill
                                         iii. La Push   .......................   113
                                         iv.  Neah Bay   ......................   113
                                         V.   Port Angeles  ..................    114
                                         vi.  Ports of Anacortes and
                                              Ferndale  ..........                115
                                   C.    Economic Contributions @f**V*essel
                                         Activities  .........................    115
                                   d.    Vessel Management Regimes    ..........  115
                                         i. - Voluntary Management
                                              Initiatives   ...................   115
                                         ii. Cooperative Vessel Traffic
                                              Management Service    ............  116
                                   e.    Contingency Plans  ..................    120
                                         i.   Oil Pollution Act of 1990     ..... 120
                                         ii.  State Framework for
                                              Contingency Planning    ..........  121
                                         iii. Response Readiness for Oil
                                              Spills  ........................    124
                                         iv.  Emergency Towing Response for
                                              Vessels and Tugs/Barges
                                              Adrift  ........................    127
                             4.    Military Activities    .....................   128
                             5.    Ocean Waste Disposal    ....................   140
                                   a.    Point source Discharges    ............  141
                                   b.    Non-Point Source Discharges     ........ 142
                                   C.    Ocean Dumping of Non-Dredge
                                         Material  ...........................    143
                             6.    Hard  Mineral Extraction   .................   144
                             7.    Overflights   .............................    145
                             8.    Research and Education   ..................    145
                             9.    Protected Areas   .........................    147
                             10.   Recreational Activities and Tourism      ..... 149






















                                               -11-2












                  PART II: THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

         A. Regional Context

             1. Sanctuary Study Area Location

             A Western Washington Outer Coast site was included on NOAA's
         original Site Evaluation List (SEL) established in 1983 (48 FR
         24296, May 31, 1983). This SEL consists of 29 marine sites with
         high natural resource values that were identified and recommended
         to NOAA by regional resource evaluation teams. The SEL Western
         Washington Outer Coast site extends from Duntze Rock (north of
         Tatoosh Island on the northwestern tip of the state of
         Washington), 90 miles (145 km) southward along the coast to Point
         Grenville. The offshore boundary is contiguous with the boundary
         established for the Washington Islands National Wildlife Refuge,
         2 to 3 miles (3.2-4.8 km) offshore. The Sanctuary study site
         encompasses approximately 225 square miles (169 nM2, or 576 km2)
         (Figure 3, p. I-11).

             The 1988 amendments to the MPRSA (PL 100-627, November 7,
         1988), direct the Secretary of Commerce to issue a notice of
         designation with respect to the Western Washington Outer Coast
         (proposed herein as the "Olympic Coast") National Marine
         Sanctuary not later than June 30, 1990,(section 205). In report
         language accompanying this legislation (H. Rep. No. 4210, 100th
         Cong., 1st. Sess., 1988), Congress noted that the boundaries of
         the area identified in the SEL may fail to provide an adequate
         buffer, and directed NOAA to use the SEL boundaries only very
         generally as a point from which to embark upon a more detailed
         public review and comment process which would lead to the
         development of various boundary options. NOAA was directed by
         Congress to consult extensively with state agencies, local
         government-officials, marine scientists, and the public in
         carrying out the designation process and establishing specific
         boundaries.

             In response to the Congressional directive, NOAA met with
         several government officials and marine scientists, and conducted
         four public scoping meetings in Washington State during April
         1989. NOAA was strongly urged by tribal, state and local
         governments, other Federal agencies, private interest groups, and
         citizens to expand the area to be evaluated for sanctuary
         designation; specifically, areas south of Point Grenville to the
         Columbia River, and offshore to the edge of the.continental shelf
         (defined herein as the 100 fathom depth contour). The heads of
         submarine canyons incising the shelf, and a highly productive
         fishing area adjacent to the head of Juan de Fuca Canyon, known
         as "the plain", were recommended for study. It was also
         suggested that consideration be given to extending the northern
         sanctuary boundary to the international boundary between Canada
         and the United States to promote and facilitate a potential

                                       11-3









           "international sanctuary" at some future time. Some comments on
           the Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Management Plan
           (DEIS/MP) issued in September 1991, suggested that an'eastern
           boundary be established within the Strait of Juan de Fuca. The
           total study area for the proposed Sanctuary evaluated by NOAA is,
           therefore, quite  extensive compared to the original SEL site
           description, and  covers approximately 4,155 nM2   (14,249 kM2)
           (Figure 4).

                The Olympic  coast extends for approximately 150 miles from
           Cape Flattery in  the north, southward to Cape Disappointment at
           the mouth of the  Columbia River. The southernmost portion of the
           coastline is characterized by estuaries, wetlands, long sandy
           beaches, and dunes. North of Point Grenville the coastline is
           more rugged and rocky with high cliffs and sea stacks.

                The area selected by NOAA for inclusion in the proposed
           Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary (i.e., NOAA,1s "preferred
           boundary option") is similar to that proposed in the DEIS/MP with
           slight variations to the shoreward boundary (Figure 5). The
           preferred boundary extends from Koitlah Point northward across
           the Strait of Juan De Fuca to the U.S./Canada international
           boundary where it continues seaward to the 100 fathom isobath,
           and southward along the coast to the southern border of the
           Copalis National Wildlife Refuge off of Copalis Beach, thus
           incorporating the entire northern rugged, rocky coastline.     This
           sparsely populated 135 mile stretch of coast remains one of    the
           few relatively undeveloped and pristine coastlines in the United
           States. In waters adjacent to Federally owned lands, t    'he
           boundary of the proposed sanctuary extends landward to the higher
           high water line, and across the mouths of rivers and streams.
           When adjacent to Indian reservations and State lands, the
           Sanctuary boundary extends to the lower low water line.

                The seaward extent of the sanctuary boundary generally
           follows the 100 fathom isobath except where it cuts across the
           heads of the Juan de Fuca, Quinault and Nitnat Canyons. The
           northern'boundary encompasses the productive fishing areas known
           as "the plain," and Swiftsure Bank. The total surface area of
           the sanctuary is approximately 2,500 nM2   (8577 kM2).

                Characteristic of the coastal area of the.,proposed Sanctuary
           are rugged headlands and cliffs; sea stacks and sea arches;
           tidepools; hundreds of small offshore islands, rocks, and reefs;
           and sand and cobble beaches. Nutrient-rich waters and diverse
           habitat types result in an abundance and diversity of marine
           species of algae, invertebrates, finfish, shellfishi birds, and
           marine mammals. Commercial and recreational fisheries for
           salmon, groundfish, razor clams, and dungeness crab within the
           area contribute to the economy of Washington state and the
           nation. Popular recreational di,-@,ring sites are located throughout


                                           11-4














                                   larmy 12rw                                     12VW                                126*W                              124-V                               124,00,                             123'30' 123*20'
                               49W
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 48o45'







                               4M
                                                                                                                                            14
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 V3o'
                                                                                                                                                   to




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        50"
                                                                                             to

                                                      @300                                                                                                                                                                      0!
                                                                                                                                                                                                                tic,


                                                                                                                                                                                                         so__
                                              @,-500                                                                                                                                                          30
                                                                                                                                                                                                                           a
                                                                                                 A.,


                               4M                                                                                                                                                                                                                48*W

                                                      BOUNDKR
                                                ALTERNAtl-'
                                                            NO. 5

                                                         WIMP           ON

                                                      3  47vrw          IPA
                                                      4  47*0W          =
                                                      ,  4r4M           lZrN'44r
                                                      6  47wor          lww4r
                                                      7  47Tr1r         aswir
                                                      8  49VrW          1251ww
                                                      10 49'14'4W       12V40W
                                                         aww            125iffir
                                                      11 4M4r           iffilooor                                       4
                                                      12 aww            lw5wlr
                               47W -                  is "I"            tW50`4r
                                                      14 482M           WA*4941'    +                                                                                                                                                            47'30'
                                                      15
                                                         497w           IN-wir
                                                      16 4"'17W         IpAlorar
                                                      17 4r14Vr         12ragvr
                                                      IS 49WW           12rww
                                                                                                                          C
                                                                                                                          C
                                                                                                                              YON











                               47*W -                                                                                                                                                                                                            47*00'
                                                                                                                                                                                                     -,Mow









                                                                                                                                                                             19              W-U@ &I
                                                                                                                                                                                                    L
                                                                        QD 0
                               4M -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 46*30'
                                                         UNITED STATES -WEST COAST
                                                                         WASHINGTON
                                                         PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                                 NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY
                                                                             NAUTICAL JC11=

                                                                                                                                                                                      '@7
                               4r                                                                                                        ?   !@-J,-,          I                                 @ 7;,                      1@ 46*12'
                                  1119wV10, @m-                                                                       126*W                               iu*w                                12A*00'                            123'30' 123'20'



                     Figure 4. Study Area for the Proposed Olympic Coast National Marine
                                                          Sanctuary.







                  201          126"'         401          20'          125"         401           201,        '124'0




                                                                                        Q
                                                                                                                               20'
                       Soo                                                                                           -Q4 IVA 04



                                                                                                                               480


                                                                                                           WASHING
                                                                                                                     TOW:





                                                                                                                              40,








                                                                                                  1 CAPE EL!ZA ETH:
                                                                                                        .. . . ...........
                                                                                                                              20
                                                                                                       PT. GRE V IL L.E



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


                                                                                                        :Ocean city.
                                                                                                                              470

                                                                                                           Harbor

                                                                                                          PT.
                         PACIFIC OCEAN


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


                                                                                                                             40'



                                            DEPTHS IN FATHCMS

                                            NAUTICAL MILES

                                            3    10      20
                                                                                                             CAP
                                            STATUTE MILES                                                   DISAPPOIN.TME NT
                                            sz5;5252!Q-w                                                                     20
                                            0   10     20
                                                                                           100
                                                         L


                Figure 5. NOAA's             Preferred Boundary Alternative.

                                                                    11-6










         the Strait of Juan de Fuca.

              2. Socio-demographic.Profile and Land Use

              Most of the land area adjacent.to the sanctuary study area
         is protected and sparsely populated. There are four Indian
         Reservations from Neah Bay to Moclips and more populated non-
         tribal communities bordering Grays Harbor and Willapa Bay. The
         land not encompassed by reservations or non-tribal communities on
         the outer coast, and offshore rocks and islands are largely
         protected by the NPS and the USFWS (both within the Department of
         Interior). Olympic Coast de 'signations'of national significance
         include migratory bird sanctuaries, wildlife refuges, wilderness
         areas, a Biosphere Reserve, and a World Heritage Site (Figure 6).
         Most of the remaining coastal lands along the outer coast not
         managed under Federal authority or within reservations are state
         public use areas (i.e., 74% of Clallam and Jefferson counties are
         under public ownership).

              Small residential communities dot the Strait of Juan de Fuca
         between Neah Bay and Observatory Point including Joyce, Clallam
         Bay, and Sekiu. Public beaches abutting privately-owned land
         border much of the Strait resulting in few access points to the
         Strait. Clallam County has developed a park at Tongue Point and
         Observatory Point, and the Washington State Department of Natural
         Resources has developed a park at the Lyre River.

              Population density in the counties adjacent to the study
         area is, and projected to remain low and relatively static
         (Appendix C, Figure 8). While the population of the State of
         Washington is expected to double from its 1960 level by the year
         2010, the coastal counties in the northern extent of the study
         area, Clallam and Jefferson counties, are expected to increase by
         only 30 percent. Grays Harbor and Pacific counties, bordering
         the southern portion of the study area, are projected to increase
         even less, with some areas actually projected to experience a
         population decline, from -20 to 14 percent. The overall
         population density of the four coastal counties bordering the
         sanctuary study area is projected to be only between 0-49 persons
         per square mile by the year 2010 (Culliton et al., 1990).

              The economy in the coastal region is inextricably linked to
         its natural resources, based primarily upon seafood, timber
         harvesting, pulp and paper production, and tourism. This is
         reflected in a number of socioeconomic indicators including a
         high reliance on manufacturing jobs compared to other coastal
         communities, high unemployment, low property values compared to
         those of the rest of the coastal U.S., and fewer construction
         permits. The tourist industry generates approximately $560
         million annually from visits to the Olympic National Park. Of
         the estimated 3.5 million visits annually to the Park,
         approximately one third are to the coastline (SAB, 1984).

                                       11-7








                                                                                       Figure


                                                                                                    ations
                                                                                 lRic  Coast Design
                                                       REM                     0. Rtiona! Significance


                                                                            Migratory Bird Sanctuaries (1907)/
                                                                            National Wildlife Refuges (1940)
                                                                                             7
                                                                                       @ccalls
                                                                                       rl@ttery Rocks
                                                                                       Quillayute Needles
                                                                            Olympic National Park (1.953)
                                                                            Washington Island Wilderness   (1970)
                                                        OZ-17 LAY--         Biosphere Resezve (1976)
                                                                            World Heritage Siteiwl9SI)


                                                      XATMAL
                                                       PARK








                                                                                             Washington








                                                     D.w-vj- T.UM NO






                           PACIFrC   OCEAN



                                                                              Q    UL


                                                                        0.
                                                                              RESERVA11ON













                                   National Wildlife Re!use


                                    CIY--Pic National Park





                                                                                       CPA YS
                                                                                       HARBOR




              Figure 6. Olympic Coast Designations of National Significance.
                                                                                          5
                                                                                       C@
                                                                                       HARBOR









             Low population densities along the coast contribute to the
         relatively pristine nature of the outer coast and Strait of Juan
         de Fuca. Pollution sources such as agricultural and urban
         runoff, and domestic and industrial point sources are minimal.
         Likewise, a lack of shoreline development has enabled wildlife
         habitats to remain largely undisturbed. However, there are
         indications that excessive runoff resulting from timber
         operations are stressing coastal habitats.

             Because of the presence of the Olympic National Park, forest
         lands dominate land use within all four coastal counties
         (Appendix C, Figure 1). Agriculture and wetlands are the next
         two most intensive land uses around Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor.
         Freshwater inflow into the proposed sanctuary watershed is
         relatively small compared to other areas of the contiguous West
         Coast. However, volumes of freshwater flow per square mile of
         drainage basin are high because the land, characterized by small
         drainage basins and steep terrain, experiences high rainfall
         (over 200 inches per year in some areas) (Rohmann, 1990).

         Tribal Economies


             Four Indian reservations are located on the outer coast of
         Washington State: 1) the Makah, located on the northwestern tip
         of the Olympic Peninsula; 2) the Quileute, located at La Push;
         3) the Hoh, situated at the mouth of the Hoh River; and 4) the
         Quinault, located between Queets and Moclips. These four tribes
         are Federally recognized Indian Nations pursuant to the Steven's
         Treaties of 1855 which include the Treaty of Neah Bay (January
         31, 1855. 12 Stat. 939) with the Makah Indians and the Treaty of
         Olympia (July 1, 1855. 12 Stat. 971) whose signatories include
         the Quinault, Quileute and Hoh Tribes (Appendix D).

             The Ozette Reservation is a separate reservation inhabited
         historically by the Ozette Tribe. It is of cultural importance
         to the Quileute, Hoh and Makah Tribes, each of which now
         incorporate some Ozette ancestry, and each of which have
         historically fished and traded with the Ozette. Both the
         Quileute and Makah Tribes have asserted their right of access to
         the Ozette Reservation (Penn, 1992).

             The following discussion presents: 1) an overview of the
         four Indian Tribes and their historical dependence on ocean
         resources; 2) the legal status of Treaty Tribes and their treaty-
         secured rights; and 3) current activities occurring on, or
         proposed for, the four Indian reservations. 6escription of the
         tribes and their legal status is extracted predominately from two
         Minerals Management Service publications (MMS, 1990; 1991) and by
         representatives of the respective tribes.





                                       11-9









          The Four Coastal Tribes and Historical Dependence on Marine
          Resources


                         Makah Indian Nation

               The Makah Trib6 differs from their Salish neighbors in that
          they are of Nooktan origin. Their main settlements at Neah Bay
          were set aside as a reservation pursuant to the Treaty of Neah
          Bay and subsequent Executive Orders, and they are governed under
          an Indian Reorganization Act constitution adopted in 1936. The
          Makah reservation is located on the northwestern-most tip of the
          Olympic Peninsula (Figure 7). It encompasses 44 square miles of
          land bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west and the Strait of
          Juan de Fuca to the north. The Ozette Reservation, 10 miles
          south of Neah Bay is part of the Makah Reservation, with the
          Olympic National Park managing the contiguous shoreline between
          the two components of the Reservation.

               Neah Bay is one of the largest and most accessible
          communities on the Olympic Peninsula with a year-round population
          of 1,400. It suffers from limited economic opportunities, and
          chronic and seasonal unemployment of over 16% and 50%,
          respectively (MMS, 1991). There has been a steady increase in
          the on-reservation portion of the population from 1960-1980
          attributed partly to a higher birth rate, and expanded on-
          reservation economic opportunity subsequent to, and as a result
          of the Court's decision in United. States-v. Washington, 384 F.
          Supp. 312 (W.D. Wash. 1974), aff1d, 520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975),
          commonly referred to as the "Boldt Decision". As a result, the
          on-reservation Makah population age structure is younger than
          that of.Washington State as a whole.

               Historically, the Makah's relied on the marine resources for
          approximately three fourths or more of their diet which was
          comprised predominately of halibut and whale. Primary fishing
          and whaling grounds extended up to 50 miles seaward of Cape
          Flattery'over La Perouse Bay and Swiftsure Banks. Other food
          fisheries included salmon, squid, skates, sea urchins, mussels,
          barnacles, crabs, sea slugs, periwinkles and limpets. Gadoid
          fish were consumed including true cod, lingcod, rockcod,
          sablefish, sculpins and rockfish. Porpoises, seals, sea-lions,
          otters, and seabirds were also hunted. Traditional salmon
          fishing was concentrated in the Sekiu and Hoko rivers just to
          the east of Neah Bay on the Strait.

             . After the 18801s, the Makah Tribe experienced dramatic
          changes in their economy.. Increased exploitation of seals and
          halibut by American fishing fleets forced the Makah's to rely
          more heavily on salmon and other nearshore fishery resources. By
          1942, fishing (approximately 1/3 for halibut) accounted for only
          a little more than 25 percent of the Makah's income. Today,
          marine resources are vital to the Makah Tribe for commercial and


                                         II-10






























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


                                                                                                                                          K:


                                        v4aateo
                                                                tv
                                                                C@






                                                Makah Indian
                                                  Reservation


                                         Makah Hatchery


                                                                                                             .,V"T
                                                                               Sekiu





                                                                                                                             lei


                                                                                                                        0
                                                                                                                      0





                                                                  Elk Lake



                                                                                                 MAKAH & OZETTE
                            Ozette Indian                                                    INDIAN RESERVATIONS
                           i Reservation


                                                                                       0               MILES               5



                                ft



                Figure 7. Makah Indian Reservation (MMS, 1991).

                                                                        II-11








          subsistence purposes. Over 60 percent of Tribal members actively
          fish and 75 percent of Tribal households are directly or
          indirectly dependant on fisheries for their economic survival.
          Many tribal members continue to harvest other marine resourcest
          including shellfish and marine mammals for subsistence (MMS,
          1991). A more complete list of ocean and coastal resources
          utilized by the Makah is presented in Appendix E.

                                   Quileute Tribe

               The Quileute Reservation is located approximately 36 miles
          south of Cape Flattery (Figure 8). Their reservation encompasses
          one square mile of land at La Push. Approximately 450 of the 723
          persons enrolled in the Quileute Tribe in 1990 live on the
          reservation. The unemployment rate on the reservation is
          approximately 81 percent, with 92 percent of those employed
          earning less than $7,000 annually.

               The Quileute are ethnically and linguistically distinct from
          their Tribal neighbors who are of Nooktan and Salish origin with
          two exceptions: 1) the Hoh, part of the Quileute Tribe until
          recent times, incorporates the same language and ethnic
          characteristics; and 2) the recently extinct Chinacum. Tribe of
          the Olympic Peninsula and Port Townsend Area, was also known to
          have spoken essentially the same language as the Quileute Tribe
          (Penn, 1992). The Quileute language is one of only five
          languages in the world lacking nasal sounds. The Quileute and
          Hoh Tribes are closely related aboriginally, but have functioned
          increasingly as distinct legal entities since the early part of
          the century. Although the Treaty of Olympia provided for a
          single reservation for both the Quileute and-Hoh Tribes, two
          small reservations were set aside for each by Executive orders of
          September 11, 1893, and February 19, 1889, respectively. The
          Quileute adopted an Indian Reorganization Act Constitution in
          1936, and the Hoh in 1969.

               The main Quileute winter village was historically located at
          La Push. The Quileute harvested salmon, smelt, bass, ocean
          perch, cod, rockcod, redcod, lingcod, halibut, flounder and other
          flatfish, bullheads, rays, octopus, shark, herring, sardine, and
          sturgeon. They hunted hair and fur seals, sea lions, sea otters,
          porpoise, and whale, and gathered butter clams, razor clams, rock
          oysters, mussels, acorn and goose-neck barnacles, sea urchins,
          anemones, slipper-shells and crabs. Among the seabirds harvested
          were ducks, geese, white-crested cormorant, brandt, gulls,
          puffins, auklets, and loons.

               As a result of increasingly restricted access to marine
          mammals and terrestrial resources such as deer and elk by Federal
          and state laws, the coastal tribes became more dependent upon
          fishing for commercial and subsistence purposes. By 1944,
          fishing accounted for approximately two thirds of the Quileute

                                        11-12











                                     1=39' 40*                   39'                                                                               37                                15*
                                                                                                                                                                                   477'W-)'30


                                                                                                                                OLYMPIC




                                                                                                              JVFR                               NATIONAL




                                                                                                                                                                   PARK



                                                                               Little
                                                                           Jam- I'land


                                                                      Gunsi-ht
                                                                                                       0,
                                                                                                      Y LA
                                                                                                            PUSH
                                                                        Q)
                                                                      James                                                QUILEUTE             INDIAN


                                                                                                                                 RESERVATION





                                     -54-                                                                                                                                         54'



                                                                                0.




                                                                                                                        OLYMPIC
                                               QUILEUTE INDIAN                                              A;;,.

                                                     RESERVATION
                                                                                                                                           NATIONAL
                                           LA PUSH, WASHINGTON                                              Cmin  1.11dY
                                                                                                                  R)

                                                                                                                                                                 PARK











                                                                                                                                                                    0


                              47'.52
                                  124'49'40'                  39'                                        3S                                                                124t3o'13'
                                                                Ca@@,es













                       Figure S. Location of the Quileute Indian Reservation (MMS,
                                                    1991).

                                                                                                      11-13









          Tribe's earned income, with the remainder derived from fur
          trapping, crafts, some cattle-raising and wage work, chiefly in
          logging and for the Forest Service. Resources currently
          harvested by the Quileute are listed  in Appendix E. Shellfish
          and other shoreline resources play a  year-round role in
          sustaining the Quileute people (MMS,  1991).

                              Hoh Indian Tribe

               The main Hoh village is located  at the mouth of the Hoh
          River on a small reservation encompassing approximately 480 acres
          (Figure 9). The reservation extends along the coast for about
          one mile. There is no protected harbor either at the river mouth
          or elsewhere on the reservation. According to a 1989 report by
          the Bureau of Indian Affairs, 94 of 120 persons enrolled in the
          tribe live on or near the Reservation. Unemployment is
          approximately 53 percent with 82 percent of employable persons
          earning less than $7,000 annually'.

               The Hoh historically harvested salmon halibut and black
          bass, clams and smelt. They also harvested whales   near
          Destruction Island. Their current economic opportunities are
          bleak with most Hoh families subsisting from oceanic and coastal
          resources. Today, the Hoh consume more ocean and shoreline
          resources per household than any other Washington coastal Tribe.
          The resources upon which the Hoh depend are listed in Appendix E.
          other economic activities occurring on the Hoh reservation
          include the production of native crafts and a limited amount of
          timbering.

                              Quinault Indian Nation

               The Quinault Reservation was established by Executive Order
          'in 1873. The Tribe functions under an Indian Reorganization Act
          constitution adopted in 1965. The reservation, encompassing
          approximately 200,000 acres extends 26 miles along the Pacific
          Coast (Figure 10). The two principle villages are Taholah and
          Queets. A third village on the reservation, Amanda Park, is
          populated by non-Indians. The total population on the Quinault
          reservation is approximately 2260 (MMS, 1991). The per capita
          income on the Quinault Reservation in 1988 was $3,182 compared to
          $7,446 in Grays Harbor County. Approximately 32.6 percent of
          families on the Quinault reservation are below the poverty level
          compared to 10.5 percent of families in Grays Harbor County (MMS,
          1991).

               The Quinault are speakers of Chinookan, Salish or Chemakuan.
          The present Quinault Reservation contains the ancient lands of
          two distinct tribes, the Quinault and the Queets. Historically,
          marine resources harvested were salmon, smelt and candlefish,
          halibut, cod, rock cod, sea bass, and soles, razor clams, mud
          clams, rock oysters, black-shelled mussels, slipper-shells, sea

                                        11-14



























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

                                                                            Lower
                                                                                                  Hoh
                                                                                                                      Road
                                                                      ..............
                                                                     . ....... .. ....




                                                                          Bt LWm
                                                                           Road
                                            ........                                                                           ........






                                                                              Fish
                                                                              Hatdwy
                                                                              Road





                                                                                                             OCY







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






                                                            .......... .


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

                                   HOH RIVER
                           INDIAN RESERVATION


                                   Reservation Boundary


                                  Roads



                          0             1000           2000

                                        FEET
                                                    . ...... . .
                              . ........ ..




               Figure 9. Location of the Hoh Indian Reservation (MMS, 1991).

                                                                    11-15


























                                                       j
                                                     r
                                                                                       Olympic National Forest
                                       mpic National Park
                                                            Washington Stale
                                                    r
                          Oueets                                Lands


                                                                    Ve orasir at@,
                                                                           unaay
                                                                               North l3oundary
                                                                               Restoration Area


                                                                                                 r
                                                                                              r @vrt  00.!,.*i:i*;":: Ole .. .........
                                                                                                         W.,
                                           QUINAULT                                        Amanda
                                                                                              Park
                                              INDIAN
                                       RESERVATION
                                                                                                   A, r
                                                                                                    Nw- r

                                                                                                      J
                                                                                                     9,

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




                                  Taholah









                                   .... .........
                                 01





                         X..
                                                                                           Approx. 5 Miles


                       X.









               Figure 10. Location of the Quinault Indian Reservation (MMS, 1991).

                                                                11-16









         anemones and crabs, flounders, herring, seals, sea lions, whales,
         and sea otters. Birds harvested included ducks, geese, gulls,
         and loons and their eggs. Seaweed was also harvested for food.

              By the 1870's the Quinault were economically integrated into
         European society. They were engaged in a variety of wage-earning
         occupations such as seal hunting, and employed by oyster, fishing
         and logging companies. Today, salmon has become the commercial
         mainstay of Quinault fisheries, in addition to halibut, lingcod,
         black bass, other rockfish, smelt, flounder, perch, sturgeon and
         razor clams. A more complete list of ocean resources harvested
         by the Quinault is provided in Appendix E.   Virtually every
         Quinault tribal member derives some benefit from the fishery
         resources through participation in ceremonies, distribution of
         fish within families, and sharing of fish among extended families
         and friends. The Tribe is pursuing a strategy of vertical
         integration to increase the benefit return from ocean resources.
         A seafood processing facility at Taholah depends both upon tribal
         catch and fish purchases from off-reservation suppliers.

         Treaty Rights and Legal Status

              The Tribes have a unique legal status under which they enjoy
         a collective interest in lands and natural resources quite
         different from the property rights accorded to others. By
         entering into treaties with the tribes, the United States
         accepted a fiduciary duty to protect all of the rights which the
         treaty secured, including marine hunting and fishing rights.
         There is "an extensive body of cases holding that when the
         federal government enters into a treaty with an Indian tribe....
         the Government commits itself to a guardian-ward relationship
         with that tribe." Joint Tribal Council of Passamaquoddy v.
         Morton, 528 F.2d 370, 379 (1st Cir. 1975). This fiduciary duty,
         known as the federal trust responsibility, extends to all federal
         agencies. Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe v. United States, 898 F.2d
         1410, 1420 (9th Cir. 1990). In addition, it requires that
         federal agencies seriously consider and protect Indian rights and
         interests to the fullest extent possible. Northern Cheyenne
         Tribe v. Hodel, 12 Ind. L. Rptr. 3065 (D. Mont. 1985).
         The Federal government, however, is not obligated to provide
         particular services or benefits, nor to undertake any specific
         fiduciary responsibilities in the absence of a specific provision
         in a treaty, agreement, executive order, or statute. Havasupai
         Tribe v. U.S., 752 F. Supp. 1471 (D. Ariz. 1990), citing Vigil,
         667 F.2d at 934; North Slope Borough v. Andrus, 642 F. 2d 589,
         611 (D.C. Cir. 1980); Gila River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community,
         427 F.2d 1194, 190 Ct.Cl. 790 (1970).

              The Treaty of Neah Bay and the Treaty of Olympia expressly
         reserved, among other things, each Tribes' right to continue to
         fish in its "usual and accustomed fishing grounds and stations."
         The Treaty of Neah Bay differs from the Treaty of Olympia in that

                                       11-17








          it secures for the Makah Indian Nation the "right of taking fish
          and of whaling or sealing at usual and accustomed grounds and
          stations... "(Article 4, Treaty of Neah Bay, 1855). The addition
          of whaling in the Treaty of Neah Bay addresses the Makah's
          historical dependence on whaling for subsistence, cultural and
          ceremonial purposes.

                In addition to reserving the right to fish and whale at
          usual and accustomed fishing areas, the Treaties also secure the
          -right of access to Tribal lands for the Treaty Tribes. Article 2
          of each Treaty states that 11 ... said tract shall be set apart, and
          so far as necessary surveyed and marked out for their exclusive
          use; nor shall any white man be permitted to reside upon the same
          without permission of the said tribe and of the superintendent or
          agent... 11 Thus, access to Tatoosh Island and the Ozette site by
          the Makah Tribe is secured by the Treaty of Neah Bay.

                The post-treaty history of Northwest Indian fishing rights
          has been contentious and complex. With increasing exploitation
          of marine mammals, pinnipeds and fish by European settlers, the
          Treaty Tribes fought to maintain their treaty-secured right of
          access to marine resources in the courts. In 1905 the United
          States Supreme Court interpreted the Treaties securing the right
          of treaty tribes to fish to be "not a grant of rights to the
          Indians, but a grant of rights from them,--a reservation of those
          not granted." United States v. Winans, 198 U.S. 371, 384 (1905).

                Aboriginal and treaty-secured rights can only be abrogated
          if there is "clear evidence that Congress actually considered the
          conflict between its intended action on the one hand and Indian
          treaty rights on the other, and chose to resolve that conflict by
          abrogating the treaty" United States v. Dion, 476 U.S. 734, 739-
          40 (1986). Regulations which restrict the exercise of treaty-
          secured hunting and fishing rights are lawful only if they: 1).
          are "reasonable and necessary" to "prevent demonstrable harm" to
          a.harvested species or stock; and 2) are the least restrictive
          alternative for achieving this purpose. (United States v.
          Washington, 384 F. Supp. 312, 342, 415 (W.D. Wash. 1974), aff1d,
          520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975).

                Two significant legal decisions have addressed the extent to
          which state and Federal regulatory measures were justifiable for
          conservation purposes. In 1942 the United States Supreme Court
          struck down license fees for tribal members as unrelated to the
          conservation of fish, and hence contrary to the intent of the
          treaties. Tulee v. Washington, 315 U.S. 681 (1942). In 1974,
          the landmark "Boldt Decision" held that Indian tribes of Puget
          Sound and coastal Washington have the right to an opportunit to
          take up to 50 percent of the total number of harvestable
          salmonids, as well as the right to regulate their own fishers.
          United States v. Washington, 384 F. Supp. 312 (W.D. Wash. 1974),
          aff1d, 520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975). Non-salmonid fisheries may

                                          11-18









         eventually be brought within the same legal regime because Indian
         tribes in Washington State have launched a challenge against the
         State's shellfish harvesting regulations (MMS, 1991).

         Current and Future Activities

              Current activities occurring on and/or planned for the
         reservations adjacent to the proposed study area include
         timbering, harbor development and maintenance, an increased
         emphasis on attracting tourism, and the preservation of
         culturally significant and wilderness'areas. The tribes seek to
         promote economic development on the reservations to alleviate
         unemployment and poverty, enhance their ability to provide basic
         public services and facilities, and further the joint tribal-
         Federal goal of tribal self-sufficiency (MMS, 1991).

              Timbering is an important economic activity on the Makah and
         Quinault Reservations, and to a lesser extent on the Hoh
         Reservation. The'Bureau of Indian Affairs manages, as trustees
         for the Tribes, a substantial timber resource, under a sustained
         yield operating plan approved by the Tribal Councils. Revenues
         from sales of timber stands is an important component of the
         Makah and Quinault tribal government income. Most of the
         employment generated by the forestry resource is in logging and
         transportation, since most of the timber harvested on the
         reservation is transported to mills outside of the reservation
         (Pacific Rim Planner, Inc., 1980).

              Harbor development and maintenance activities occur on the
         Makah and Quileute Reservations. The Makah Tribe undertakes
         maintenance dredging of Neah Bay every 10 to 20 years. The Tribe
         is also planning harbor improvements and expansion to develop a
         commercial marina along the central portion of the south shore of
         Neah Bay. The marina would accommodate 300 boats and would be
         dredged to a minimum depth of 28 feet mean lower low water. The
         volume of dredge spoil generated by the proposed marine expansion
         is estimated to be approximately 154,000 cubic yards of sand.
         Dredge spoil will be utilized -for beach nourishment projects with
         excess spoils utilized or disposed of on land (Simmons, 1993).

              Additionally, the mouth of the Quillayute River is dredged
         to maintain the channel by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers.
         Pursuant to the Quileute Coastal Zone Management Plan (Hyas' Yal
         Kollal, 1981) dredging of the navigation channel shall occur only
         between January 1 and March 31 of any year. Dredge spoils are
         routinely deposited on the north jetty and breakwater of the Port
         of La Push. All dredging is timed, and measures are undertaken
         to protect fish habitat of the Quileute Reservation. The port
         facility is in need of significant repair and upgrading. The
         Tribe has received a small grant from the state to assist in
         strategic planning for port improvements including bulk fuel
         storage, waste oil containment, solid waste removal and public

                                        11-19









          rest rooms (Schaftlein, 1992).

               Scattered areas on and off the Reservations are culturally
          significant to the Tribes. Property of cultural significance
          have an important role in the current community, but also may
          have historic significance to the Tribe's beliefs, customs and
          practices as well. These sites may be important if culturally
          significant events, activities or observances have occurred at
          the location, or if the user group designated a name to that
          particular place. These sites include ancient villages such as
          Ozette, burial grounds, ceremonial places for prayer, preparation
          and training, lookout places, etc... (Pascua, 1992). James Island
          and First Beach are particularly important to the Quileute Tribe
          as ancient burial grounds and areas of spiritual significance.
          The Hoh shoreline is a burial area for ancestors of the Hoh
          people. Destruction Island is also spiritually significant to
          the Hoh Tribe. In addition to areas set aside as culturally
          significant, the Makah Tribe has reserved over 1,000 acres of
          reservation land bordering the Pacific Coast as a wilderness
          area. The Quinault Tribe has set aside offshore rocks and
          islands as bird and wildlife sanctuaries. In addition, the
          estuarine habitats essential for salmon and wildlife are
          protected from development by policies set forth in the Quinault
          Coastal Zone Management Plan (Quinault Planning Commission,
          1979).

               Tourism holds future economic promise to the coastal tribes
          and is being strategically targeted as a way to alleviate the
          severe economic conditions prevailing on the reservations. The
          Quileute Tribe has a strong interest in tourism. La Push Ocean
          Park Resort provides a range of accommodations. Future efforts
          to accommodate tourism will emphasize providing food service,
          building additional tourist rental units, increasing winter
          tourism visitation rates, providing charter fishing services, and
          providing a museum/cultural center. During the tourist season,
          the tourist enterprises on the Quileute Reservation may bring the
          effective population of La Push to approximately 3,000 persons
          (Penn, 1992). The Makah Tribe is also targeting tourism,
          especially with their plans to expand and diversify the port of
          Neah Bay.                        I

          B. Sanctuary study Area Resources

               The study area of the Olympic Coast National Marine
          Sanctuary lies in the Oregonian biogeographic province (Figure 2,
          p. I-10) which extends from Cape Mendocino, California, north to
          Cape Flattery, Washington, including the Strait of Juan de Fuca.
          This province is characterized by, a narrow continental shelf,
          mountainous shoreline and steep rocky headlands, interspersed
          with open sandy and pocket beaches, many small and few large
          rivers, and small estuaries with bay-mouth barriers. Waters in
          the Oregonian Province are cool and relatively clear with sea-

                                        11-20









          surface temperatures ranging between 90-11* in winter and 13*-150
          in summer. ocean waters are dominated by the California Current.
          This province is characterized by having the greatest volume of
          upwelling in North America from February to September resulting
          from the interaction of ocean currents, winds and the submarine
          canyons that indent the shelf, most notably, the Juan de Fuca
          Canyon. These environmental factors combine to produce highly
          productive nutrient-rich waters and abundant marine resources
          along the outer coast and in the estuaries of Grays Harbor,
          Willapa Bay and the Columbia River.

              The proposed marine sanctuary supports a multitude of
          species of algae, invertebrates, birds, marine mammals, and
          commercially important finfish and shellfish. Federally listed
          endangered or threatened species such as the bald eagle,,
          peregrine falcon, brown pelican, Aleutian Canada gbose, short-
          tailed albatross (although not listed as endangered within the
          United States), northern (Steller) sea lion, and gray, blue, and
          humpback whales inhabit this coastal area and the adjacent
          mainland. The rocky headlands along the coast north of Point
          Grenville provide important habitat for a wide variety of seabird
          populations, while the offshore islands and rocks of the Flattery
          Rocks, Quileute Needles, and Copalis National Wildlife Refuges
          are important as haulout areas for California sea lions and
          northern sea lions, and roosting and nesting habitat for
          seabirds. The western Strait of Juan de Fuca serves as an
          important migration corridor for bird and fish species moving to
          and from the San Juan Island archipelago and Puget Sound.
          Salmon, groundfish (e.g., halibut, rockfish, cod, sablefish,
          whiting), and shellfish (crabs, razor clams, oysters) are the
          mainstays of commercial and recreational fisheries in the
          sanctuary study area.

               1. Environmental Conditions

               (a) Geology

               The Pacific margin of the United States is the tectonically
          active edge of the North American crustal plate (composed mostly
          of continental crust) that has collided with and is overriding
          the sea floor of the Juan de Fuca oceanic crustal plate. The
          coastal margin is characterized by a narrow continental shelf,
          slope and rise, and is marked by earthquakes associated with
          geological faulting and volcanism. (McGregor and Offield, 1986).
          The area of the proposed sanctuary is subjected to tectonic
          forces caused by the combined movements of the large Pacific and
          North America Plates and the smaller Juan de Fuca Plate (Figure
          11). The altered sedimentary rocks of the Olympic Mountains and
          the volcanoes of the Cascade Range (Mount Saint Helens, for
          example) are the result of the convergence of these plates
          composed of oceanic and continental crusts.



                                        11-21
















                                                        Continental Slope
                                                           Continental Shelf



                                            ., N-2;                          If. - @1@0
                         R46
                        0


                                                        qj                . ........






                              77i
                                                                                     Washington........

                                             Sediments           'Contin ntal Crust./


                                               eam Crust!,-,-
                                                                                   Mag
                                                          Mantle


                                    agma





















            Figure 11. Plate Tectonic Structure of the Pacific Northwest
                           Continental and Oceanic Region (Strickland and
                           Chasan, 1989).

                                                 11-22










               The continental shelf of the Washington coast is smooth and
         narrow, ranging in width from eight to forty miles (Washington
         State Dept. of Ecology, 1986). Submarine canyons incise the
         continental shelf and slope along the entire coast, and the heads
         of Juan de Fuca and Quinault Canyons are included within the
         proposed sanctuary (Figure 12). The continental slope consists
         of a steep and highly incised upper portion, and a more gently
         sloping lower portion which grades into the Cascadia Basin (Baker
         and Hickey, 1986). Although glacial deposits comprise the
         underlying relic sediments of the continental shelf, the Columbia
         River is the dominant source of modern sediments for the southern
         Washington Shelf (Nittrouer, 1978 in Baker and Hickey, 1986).
         The northern shelf is fed by sediments carried from the Strait of
         Juan de Fuca. Year-round bottom currents and winter storms
         transport much of this sediment north-northwest. The sediment
         accumulates on the shelf as a band of sandy silt with the inner
         shelf sandy and the outer shelf comprised primarily of silt and
         clay (Carson, et al., 1986). Much of this sediment is
         transported to and deposited in the Quinault Canyon where it
         gradually works downhill into the Cascadia Basin (Cutshell, et
         al., 1986). Overlying the bedrock along many areas of the coast
         are deposits of sand and gravel laid down by glacial streams
         during extensive glaciation of the Olympic Mountains during the
         Pleistocene Epoch some 17,000 to 70,000 years ago (Rau, 1973).
         Prominent gravel pockets lie off Cape Flattery, Grays Harbor, and
         the mouth of the Quinault River (Moore and Luken, 1979).

               The uplifted broad coastal plain that forms the coast of
         Washington extends from Cape Flattery southward and includes two
         tidal inlets, Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor (Weissenborn and
         Snavely, 1968). Broad beaches, dunes, and ridges dominate the
         coastline from Cape Disappointment on the north side of the
         Columbia River mouth, to the Hoh River (Moore and Luken, 1979).
         The plain rises eastward and merges with the foothills of the
         Olympic Mountains. Wave action has eroded the plain through time
         and formed steep cliffs along the coast, except at river mouths.
         For most of the coast between Cape Flattery and Point Grenville
         these cliffs rise abruptly 50 to 300 feet above a wave-cut
         platform. This wave-cut platform, which normally extends about
         half a mile from shorel is nearly two miles wide west of Ozette
         Lake. Small islands, sea stacks, and rocks dot the
         platform's surface. Islands can be found in all stages of
         development from partially isolated promontories to true islands
         several acres in extent (op. cit.). The largest, Destruction
         Island, is 1.5 km long.

               (b) Meteorology

               The climate of western Washington is characterized by
         relatively mild winters and moderately dry cool summers. Most
         air masses reaching the coast originate over the Pacific Ocean
         and exert a moderating influence throughout the year. The

                                       11-23









                     201       1260          Q1        201       1250        4o,        20'        1240


                                                                                                         v
                                                                                                         U.
                                                                     Ountze Rod


                                                                                                                 201
                                                                                                      e  A IVA PA
                        BARKLEY
                        CANYON
                                                                             CAPE ALAVA:
                                    N
                                     111NAT
                                     WYON
                                    C
                                                                                 rM
                                                                                                            W    480
                                                   UAN E
                                                  i
                                                    FUC
                                                                                1:'.      x          HINGTOW
                                                                                     Push...2"
                                                                                         A
                                                  CANYON                               M
                                                                     %                 IN
                                                                                      '-w
                                                                                 %
                                                                                                         1&-.8
                                                                                                         A

                                                                           De!w@    t!'Jam               @A 0
                                                                                                                 40'

                                                                                          Z
                                                                                                            p

                                                                                                  50-
                                                                                            Ram R.
                                                                                Sealion'pl@ck
                                                                                                            OM

                                                              QUIN ULT
                                                              CAN                                           "M   20'
                                                                                                            W
                                                                                                            MP




                                                                                   %

                                                                                               Ocean city
                                                                                                         m
                                                                                                         A "be!r "4de n470
                                                                                                 lay
                                                                                                 Hafbor
                                                                    'U,
                                                                                                PT.      HAL15i.
                                                               GRAY'S
                                                              CANYON
                            PACIFIC OCEAN                                                        . .. ... Ap '41
                                                                                                 CA J@
                                                                                                  SHOALWAT.


                                                                                                                 4.01
                                                                                                               N


                                             DEPTHS IN FATHOMS

                                             NAUTICAL MILES

                                             0- -10 -  20

                                             STATUTE MILES                                       D1   P
                                                                         Fp                                      20'
                                             0   10   20                             100,
                                  @'N   A
                                     I;W T
                                    CANYO@Nq,



                                                             S




















                Figure 12. Bathymetry of the Olympic Coast Offshore Area and
                                     Submarine Canyons (Illustrations Unlimited, 1991).

                                                                      11-24









          climate is influenced by topography, location along the windward
          coast, prevailing westerly winds, and the position and intensity
          of high and low pressure centers over the North Pacific Ocean
          (Phillips and Donaldson, 1972).

               In late spring and summeri westerly to northwesterly winds
          associated with the North Pacific high pressure system produce a
          dry season. In late fall and winter, southwesterly and westerly
          winds associated with the then dominant Aleutian low pressure
          system provide ample moisture and cloud cover for the wet season
          which begins in October. The rising and cooling of moist air
          along the windward slopes of the Willapa Hills and Olympic
          Mountains produces an area of heavy precipitation from the coast
          to the crests. Annual amounts range from 70 to 100 inches over
          the southern coastal plains and from 125 to 200 inches in the
          "rain forest" area on the western slope of the Olympic Mountains
          (op. cit.).

               Afternoon temperatures near the coast during the summer are
          generally in the upper 60's (OF). In an average winter, maximum
          temperatures range from 38*F to 45*F and minimums from 280F to
          35 OF (op. cit.). The highest wind speeds recorded on the
          Washington coast reached 150 mph at North Head at the mouth of
          the Columbia River in January 1941, and 94 mph at Tatoosh Island
          in November 1942 (Oceanographic Institute of Washington, 1977, in
          Strickland and Chasan, 1989).

               Ocean surface water temperature near the coast averages
          about 480F in February, 52*F in May, 570F in August, and 50OF in
          November. The range of seawater temperature is greater in
          shallow and protected bays along the coast. The temperature
          range offshore is slight throughout the year, thus inshore-
          offshore migrations of biota associated with seabed temperature
          changes (common in other coastal areas such as the mid-Atlantic)
          do not occur.


               (c) Waves and Currents

               The Washington outer coast is known for its rough seas and
          large waves. Extremes of wave height ranging from 15m to 29m
          have been recorded on and beyond the continental shelf
          (Strickland and Chasan, 1989). The height and direction of waves
          vary seasonally. During summer, waves are lower in height,
          predominately from the northwest, causing longshore currents and
          sediment transport to the south. In winter, waves are generally
          higher and from the southwest, causing northerly longshore
          currents and sediment transport (Ballard, 1964 in Terich and
          Levenseller, 1986). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) hindcast
          data for a station off Grays Harbor show nearshore wave heights
          to average about 4m during November through January with maximum
          heights of almost 8m during October through December. Wave
          heights on the outer shelf average almost 5m during December

                                        11-25









         through January with a maximum of 11m in January (U.S. Army Corps
         of Engineers, 1988). The most severe wave conditions are caused
         by winter storms originating near Japan that move onto the U.S.
         Pacific coast. Storm winds ahead of warm fronts generate waves
         with significant wave heights up -to 6-7m; winds associated with
         cold fronts generate waves of 8-10m significant height (Kachel
         and Smith, in press). Tsunamis, long-period sea waves produced
         by submarine earthquakes or volcanoes, occasionally strike the
         Washington coast. The Alaskan earthquake of 1964 produced a
         tsunami that reached a height of almost 4m at Seaview,
         Washington.

              The oceanic current system off the coast of Washington is
         comprised of the California Current, Davidson Current, and
         California Undercurrent (Figure 1:3). The seasonal variation in
         the pattern of coastal circulation is the result of changes in
         direction of the dominant winds associated with large-scale
         atmospheric pressure cells over the Pacific Ocean.

              The California Current flows southward beyond  the
         continental shelf throughout the year. This current is
         approximately 1,000 km wide with a typical velocity of 10 cm/s.
         It brings low temperature, low salinity, high oxygen, and high
         phosphate subarctic water from high to low latitudes (Hickey, in
         press). The California Current is strongest in July and August
         in association with the dominant westerly to northwesterly winds.

              The California Undercurrent, a narrow (20 km) subsurface
         countercurrent, flows northward-along the upper continental slope
         with its core at a depth of about 200m. This current is also
         strongest in the summer with a mean velocity of about 10 cm/s.
         It brings warmer, more saline, low oxygen, low phosphate
         equatorial water from low to high latitudes (Hickey, 1979). A
         southward flowing bottom current (the Washington Undercurrent)
         flows deeper along the slope at about 400m depth during the
         winter.

              During winter, the California current either moves offshore
         or is replaced by the near surface  northward flowing Davidson
         Current. The Davidson Current flows over the slope and outer
         shelf during winter and early spring in association with the
         dominant southerly or southwesterly winds. It flows at a mean
         velocity of 20 cm/s and is associated with water masses with the
         same characteristics as the California Undercurrent.


              Currents over the continental shelf tend to follow the
         seasonal pattern of the oceanic currents, but are also strongly
         influenced by local winds, bottom and shoreline configuration,
         and freshwater input (Strickland and Chasan, 1989) (Figure 14).
         General circulation.over the shelf during winter is northward,
         driven by the southerly or southwesterly winds that predominate
         during that season. During the summer, northerly winds and

                                        11-26




















































                                            0





                     X.


                                                                         California Current
                                                                         Davidson Current
                                                                         (Winter)
                                                                   California Undercurrent
                                                                   Washington Undercurrent















          Figure 13. Oceanic and Continental Slope Surface Currents
                         (Hicky, 1979).

                                              11-27




























                                    N
                                   W       E
                                          S
















                                                                    Winter Wind
                                                                    Summer Wind
                                                                    Winter Current
                                                                    Summer Current
                                                                 Ua












          Figure 14.   Simplified Mean Winter and Summer Current Patterns on
                       the Washington Shelf.   Mean Flow along the bottom is
                       northward in all seasons. Mean surface flow is
                       southward in summer, accompanied by Coastal Upwelling
                       of Deeper Water. Mean Surface Flow is northward in
                       Winter, accompanied by Coastal Downwelling of Surface
                       Water ] (Strickland and Chasan, 1989).

                                         11--28









         associated upwelling produce a southward flow in the upper 100m.
         Current meter data (Hopkins, 1971; Hickey et al., 1986, in Ridge
         and Carson, 1987) show that, on the average, near-bottom currents
         move northward and slightly offshore over the entire year.

              Both the strength and direction of the currents over the
         shelf are highly variable. maximum mean surface current speeds
         of 17 to 20 cm/s in a southerly direction have been observed at
         20-30m depth in mid-shelf between April and June. Local currents
         in the surface layer may show complete reversals over the course
         of a few days due to passing weather systems, or fluctuations
         over weeks or months due to large-scale events such as
         temperature/salinity anomalies or El Nifio.

              As currents flow south along the coast during spring and
         summer, a combination of northwesterly winds and the earth's
         rotation causes the surface waters to be deflected offshore. As
         these waters are moved offshore they are replaced with cold,
         nutrient-rich waters from below. This process of upwelling
         introduces the nitrates, phosphates, and silicates that are
         essential for the high phytoplankton production that forms the
         basis for the oceanic food chain. The majority of this upwelling
         occurs within 10-20 km of the coast with the strongest offshore
         flow in the upper lom of the water column. The submarine
         canyons that indent the Washington shelf are sites of enhanced
         upwelling (Parmenter and Bailey, 1985). Water upwelled from the
         Astoria and Quinault canyons moves across the shelf and is
         uplifted into the near-surface layers in the nearshore zone
         (Hickey, in press). Water upwelled in the Juan de Fuca canyon
         reaches close enough to the surface that it mixes into the
         surface layer and provides a direct source of nutrients over the
         canyon system (Freeland and Denman, 1982, in Hickey, in press).
         Upwelling occurs into the Strait of Juan de Fuca via the eastern
         head of the canyon. Downwelling, or sinking of surface waters,
         occurs along the coast during winter when southwest winds cause
         the onshore transport of surface waters. Downwelling produces
         intrusions of offshore surface water into the Strait of Juan de
         Fuca.

               Tides on the Washington coast and Strait of Juan de Fuca
         are semidiurnal mixed tides with two high and low tides each
         tidal cycle characterized by inequalities in heights of
         successive high and/or low tides. Tidal currents on the shelf
         may reach 10 cm/s. Near shore, where tides are influenced by
         flow in and out of estuaries, tidal currents may exceed the mean
         wind-driven currents. Tidal ranges along the coast are large,
         averaging about 3.5m, ensuring a rich intertidal community. At
         Port San Juan (Port Renfrew) on Vancouver Island, for instance,
         the highest tides reach a level of about 3.5m above mean lower
         low water (Kozloff, 1983).

              The Columbia River'is the largest river on the U.S. west

                                       11-29









          coast and its large input of freshwater to the ocean affects the
          coastal waters of Washington and Oregon. A low-salinity surface
          plume is directed northward along the Washington coast by the
          prevailing currents in winter (Figure 15). The surface waters
          moving toward the coast hold the river discharge from the
          Columbia River near the shoreline and downwelling allows the
          water to migrate into the Strait of Juan de Fuca along the
          southern shore. Fresh water discharges from other rivers in the
          sanctuary study area are shown in Appendix C (Figure 2).

               (d) Habitat Types

              A marine ecosystem is a very complex and interconnected
          world with no hard lines of delineation between its various
          parts. Physical changes often occur gradually. Changes may
          include the shape and composition of the sea floor, depth, light
          intensity, salinity, temperature, biota, etc...  Different
          combinations of these conditions form unique areas referred to as
          "habitats." Marine habitats are functional associations between
          places, water characteristics and living resources. The depth,
          surroundings, and species of a given area largely define the
          habitat for that area. A group of similar habitats forms an
          ecological "zone" and a unique combination of one or more zones
          forms an ecosystem.

              A marine ecosystem has three broad regions that cut across
          zones and habitats. These regions are referred to here as
          "environments." The I'littoral" environment is simply the
          tidelands or intertidal area. The 11subtidal" environment is the
          sea floor from extreme low-tide to the edge of the continental
          shelf. The "neretic" environment is the water column over the
          continental shelf. These environments shape the form and
          function of all living marine resources.

              The littoral and sublittoral environments (tidelands and
          floor of the continental shelf) are home to such invertebrate
          groups as polychaete worms, molluscs, arthropods, echinoderms,
          and crustaceans. In addition, these benthic environments harbor
          a wealth of marine plant life to include many varieties of kelp,
          surfgrass, and red, green, and brown algae. Marine vegetation is
          dependent upon quality and quantity of sunlight for growth and
          reproduction and is therefore confined to depths less than 55
          fathoms (the euphotic zone). Therefore, non-planktonic species
          are most abundant in the nearshore thinning out as the sea floor
          progresses seaward to greater depth. Since the seaward limit of
          the preferred sanctuary boundary generally follows the 100 fathom
          isobath, all marine plant resources off the Olympic coast would
          be within the sanctuary boundary.

              organisms found in the neritic environment (the waters over
          the continental shelf) include phytoplankton, zooplankton, and
          most of the commercially important fish stocks (e.g., salmon,

                                        11-30







                                         20'     1260         4o,                 20'      1250 4W          20'         1240
                                                                   ..........     X.
                                                                   ........                                                                          Surface salinity
                                                                                  eXXXX
                                                                                                                                                 (parts per thousand)
                                         Sum                                                   xx
                                                                                                                                              El 0-27               MJ 30-32.5
                                                                                                                              .0       20,

                                                                                                                                                                           32.5
                                                                                                                                              El 27-30

                                         %%
                                         0 .X"
                                                                                                                                       480
                                                                                               x
                                                                                                                     WASHINGTON
                                                                                           X
                                                   ............
                                                   ...........
                                                                                  %
                                                                                  .k-M,
                                                                                           V
                                                                                           NX



                                                                                                           %
                                                     ......................
                                                                                                   v vc-

                                                                                  ................ . ....      CAPE E E@
                                                                                           ...... ... .
                                                                                                                  11 GR..@E

                                                                                  .-V...
                                                                                                         U. Kxt:.

                                                                                  ............
                                                                                  . ................ ... N%X-X-Xx 0.- MY
                                                                                                                                       47

                                                                                  .. .........
                                                                   .... .......                                          CNeMAUS
                                         -X-:-:-:-:-PACIFIC CCEAh;--:-:%-x:-1x,-:-:-*                                   4
                                                                                           .... . ........ X - - -.%-.- .-.- -
                                                                                                                  X.. CArE
                                                                                                                         SPIO@WAIV
                                               . ............       . .......                                X
                                                                                  ........... ......

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


                                                              Z.                                         . ......


                                                                                                                                       20'



                                         20'      1260        40'                 2o,      1250  40'        20,         124*
                                                                                                                                                     Surface salinity
                                         Winter                                                                                                  (parts perthousand)
                                                 L
                                                                                                                                              E] 0-27                      30-32.5
                                                                                                                                       20'
                                                                                                                                                                    M,32.5
                                                                                                                                                      27-30
                                                                                                  CAPE


                                                                   `X;
                                                                   `-X                                                                 480
                                                              Kl@  ......
                                                                   _X             X
                                                                   X              ......                             WASHINGTON


                                                                                                                                       Q,
                                                .. ..............


                                                                                           :-:N:.:X
                                         ......      ............
                                                                                                               CAM ELWBE@
                                                                                  %

                                                                                                                      GRENMLE
                                              .....................
                                                   X.,


                                                                                                                    0-
                                                                                                                                       47*
                                              .....................
                                                              . ..............
                                                                                           X
                                                                                           %
                                                                                  %        .. ........
                                         :':':':':-:-:PACIFIC OCEAN                        ........ .
                                                                                           X
                                                                                                                         SMO-AM
                                                     ...........
                                                                                                                                       40'
                                                       ..........
                                                                         F-
                                         %


                                                                   SIANTE @Es                                                          20'
                                                                   ... . .........
                           Figure                15.               Generalized                           Position and Extent Of Columbia River
                                                                   Freshwater Plume in Winter and Summer (Strickland and
                                                                   Chasan, 1989).

                                                                                                                         11-31








           lingcod, sablefish, Pacific cod, and hake). Anadromous species
           are most present in the study area during outward juvenile
           migration and inland spawning migration. Marine birds such as
           shearwaters, alcids, storm-petrels, jaegers, and phalaropes feed
           throughout the study area. Marine mammals, including the
           northern and California sea lions, harbor seal, sea otter,
           California gray whale, harbor porpoise, and numerous other
           species of cetaceans are found in these coastal and offshore
           waters to varying degrees and at varying times.

                As noted above, the littoral, subtidal and neretic
           environments weave through a series of bio-geographical      zones.
           There are five 'such zones along the Washington coast: 1) the
           beach surf zone; 2) the rocky surf zone; 3) the above tide rocky
           shore zone; 4) the.pelagic oceanic zone; and 5) the benthic
           oceanic zones.    These zones run parallel to the shore and are
           defined by depth, bathymetry and sediment composition. Habitats
           within these zones are the basic marine communities discussed in
           this section.

                The five zones and twelve associated habitats of the
           Washington coast extend seaward from the shore to the edge of the
           continental shelf. They range from turbulent rocky intertidal to
           deep and relatively placed sandy bottoms offshore. Each habitat
           is described separately in the pages that follow. Species lists
           for each habitat are arranged by trophic classification groupings
           in Appendix F. The pictorial descriptions and species lists are
           reprinted from a report prepared for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
           Service (Procter, et al., 1980).

                i. Beach Surf Zone

                The beach surf zone is a dynamic environment with constantly
           shifting sands caused by wave action and longshore transport
           (Figure 16). The beach surf zone is characterized by two habitat
           types: 1) beach surf-unprotected; and 2) beach surf-protected.
           The sandy beaches of the northern. outer coast of Washington are
           pocket beaches, nestled between resistant headlands. Beach surf
           habitats have much lower productivity and diversity than rocky
           habitats, but may be the sole support for certain species (eg.
           razor clam, Dungeness crab, and spawning surf smelt). Most
           organisms, such as polychaete worms, bivalve mollusks (including
           razor clam), isopods, and amphipods, burrow in the sand. Sand
           dollars, shrimps, purple olive snails, and Dungeness crabs live
           on the sandy bottom. Fishes found in this habitat include the
           staghorn sculpin, flounder, sand lance, and various species of
           sole and surfperch. Shorebirds and some terrestrial birds also
           forage in these areas.

                          Beach Surf-Unprotected Habitat

                Unprotected beach habitat areas are interspersed along the

                                           11-32

























                                           BEACH SURF ZONE
                                           Extensive beach/dune complexes occur from the Southern Washington coast southward along the
                                           0regon Coast to Cape Blanco:   Smaller beaches and strand communities are associated with head-
                           GENERAL         land complexes all along the coast. The Beach Surf Zone Is a high energy area with shifting
                           COMMENTS        substrate and limited species diversity. The Above Tide Beach and Dune Zone are unstable' and
                                           subject to water and wind erosion as well as flooding.

                                           There are only small changes in elevation within the zone but the changes are very important
                                           due to cycle changes  in the beaches and water table relationships In the dunes. Predominant
                         TOPOGRAPHY        dune soils include the Westport and Metart series. Westport soils are typically found in re-
                              AND          cently stabilized slightly weathered sand. They are a poorly developed  soil and are a member
                            SOILS          of the mixed mesic family on  Typic Udipsommerts (U.S.D.A.. 1975A). Soils are nutrients poor
                                           and become saline near the beach (Ramwell, 1972).
                                           Marine influences strongly modify climatic conditions, especially on the immediate coastal strip.
                                           The climate is mild with small  variations in temperature. Mean temperature for January ranges
                         CLIMATE           between 5 to 8' C (41 to 47 0F) and between 13 to l6 0C (55 to 610F ) for July.  Snow and heavy freezes
                                           are infrequent. Winters are wet and cool with occasional storms generating heavy precipita-
                                           tion and strong winds (90-100 MPH winds can be expected to occur once every 100 years)
                                           (U.S.D.A., 1975A).  Microclimate changes are dramatic In dunes (Ranwell. 1972).
                                           Precipitation averages between 200 to 300 cm (78 to 118 inches) with the bulk falling
                                           between November and April. Frequent summer fogs and subsequent fogdrip compensate for
                          HYDROLOGY        summer hydration stress. The soils are highly permeable. Recharge of ground water and
                                           surficial waters Is directly from precipitation. The deflation plain and marshes are
                                           subject to annual inundation during winter. The water table is  usually very close to
                                           the surface on the deflation plain but Is subject to seasonal variations. If ground
                                           water removal is greater than recharge, salt water intrusion frequently occurs.
                                           ZONE 8 HABITAT TYPES 













                           Unprotected    Protected













                   Figure 16. Beach Surf Zone Environment (Procter et. al, 1980).

                                                                             II-33









          Olympic coast as pocket beaches between rocky shores and
          headlands (Figure 17). This habitat becomes distinctly more
          prevalent south of Point Grenville. These beaches receive direct
          wave energy that sometimes "armors" the beach with gravel,
          cobbles or a mix of both. This armoring is often seasonal,
          affected by changes in tide levels, winds, currents and other
          oceanographic and atmospheric conditions. Changing conditions
          may also simply add or subtract sand, altering the slope and
          elevation of the beach. As the substrate sediments shift, flora
          and fauna must be able to endure the alterations or move to new
          areas to survive. Thus, species composition and dominance may
          fluctuate at different times of the year.

                         Beach surf-Protected Habitat

               Protected beach habitats occur along the Olympic coast as
          pocket beaches between rocky shores and headlands (Figure 18).
          These areas are shielded from direct wave force by close
          proximity to headlands or protection behind offshore reefs, sea
          stacks, or islands. Protected beaches.are more stable than
          unprotected beaches and are more likely to retain a consistent
          substrate composition. Less scouring from waves allows finer
          sediments (sand and organic matter) to settle on the seafloor.

               Boulderand cobble fields are often found lying on sandy
          bottoms in the protected coves of the northern Olympic coast
          (e.g. Cape Alava and Cedar Creek). They support a much greater
          diversity of organisms than the sandy intertidal areas. These
          unique conditions support rocky-shore organisms found on large
          boulders, protected-shore organisms occurring in the lee of large
          rocks, and soft-sediment organisros, living in the substrate
          beneath cobbles and boulders (Dethier, 1988). Algae and many
          invertebrates such as hardshell clams, crabs and other
          crustaceans, polychaete worms, and sea squirts are found in this
          habitat.

               ii. Rocky Surf Zone

               The rocky surf zone is found on rocky substrate between the
          lowest tidal level and the highest tidal level (Figure 19).
          organisms living in this zone must be able to withstand periodic
          desiccation, high temperature and light, low salinities, and
          strong wave action (Nybakken, 1982). In the northeastern
          Pacific, intertidal zones of the most wave-beaten shores.receive
          more energy from the breaking waves than from the sun (Leigh, et
          al., 1987). High wave energy enhances the productivity of
          intertidal organisms by providing space for habitation as species
          are eroded away, and by increasing the capacity of algae to
          acquire nutrients and use sunlight.

               The rocky surf zone of the outer coast of the Olympic
          Peninsula includes some of the most complex and diverse shores in

                                        11-34








































                                        Beach Surf Zone
                                     A Unprotected Beach




                                                                           UNPROTECTED BEACH
                                  Habitat Description                                            Characteristic Flora
                                  Open ocean beaches are exposed to surf action all year.     Surf zone water column often dominated by one species
                                  As a result of waves and associated currents, the sands      of diatom. Chaetoceros  armatum associated with Aster-
                                  are continually in motion parallel to the coast and off-     ionellia socialis (Lewin and Mackas, 1972).
                                  shore or onshore depending on the season. Sumer move-
                                  ment Is toward the south and onshore; winter movement Is     Characteristic Fauna
                                  to the north and offshore. Because of pounding waves and     Invertebrates: razor clam, mole crab, purple olive
                                  shifting sands this Is a rigorous environment as re-         snail, nereld worms, blood worm, shrimp, mysids,
                                  flected by the reduced standing crops and low diversity.     amphipods, isopods.
                                  Diatom community In surf zone water column is distinct       Fish: surf perch, starry flounder.
                                  from that beyond the breakers. Habitat extends from
                                  driftwood an berm seaward to breaker depth and Includes      Birds: gulls, sanderling.
                                  the foreshore and nearshore. Logs and other debris are
                                  stranded behind the berm.

                                  Food Web
                                  Lower beach macrofauna (burrowing in sand) depend  pri-
                                  marily on surf zone phytoplankton. Melofauna (living
                                  on and between sand grains) depend mainly on dissolved
                                  organic matter and  microdetritus filtered from sea water
                                  by sand. Beach wrack at and above high tide line is
                                  food source for scavengers  such as beach hoppers.



















                   Figure 17. Beach Surf Zone Habitat-Unprotected (Procter et. al.,
                                            1980).

                                                                                  II-35








































                                    Beach Surf Zone
                                 B Protected Beach


                                               HIGH TIDE 


                                                LOW TIDE 


                                                                   PR0TECTED BEACH
                              Habitat Description                                           Characteristic Flora
                              Low energy beaches associated with headlands and behind       No  significant primary production occurs.
                              protective barriers (e.g. offshore reefs). More organic
                              material In sand than on the unprotected beaches.             Characteristic Fauna
                              Beaches not as subject to erosion and hence provide a         Invertebrates: isopods, amphipods, beach hopper,
                              more stable habitat for the more diverse fauna found on       spionid worms, phoronids, Dungeness crab, hermit 
                              protected beaches than an beaches subject to the              crab.
                              pounding surf. Habitat includes foreshore  and near-
                              shore. Driftwood and beach wrack are stranded behind           Fish: surf perch, flatfish.
                              the berm.                                                      Birds: shorebirds and gulls.
                              Food Web
                              Detritus plays a major role In the food web. Additional
                              primary contributions come from the phytoplankton
                              complement of the ocean water. Detritivores and
                              omnivores are fed upon by several Invertebrate carni-
                              vores, which in turn are fed upon by birds.






                                                                       









                  Figure 18. Beach Surf Zone Habitat-Protected (Procter et. al.,
                                         1980).

                                                                             II-36

















                                      HEADLANDS & ROCKY ISLANDS
                                           
                                      Headlands are marina/terrestrial ecotones typical of open rocky coasts. They are stressful, high
                        GENERAL       energy environments.  Coastal Islands occur all along the coast except in the vicinity of the
                        COMMENTS     Columbia River mouth. Many support Important sea bird colonies and hauling areas for marine
                                      mammals. Intertidal areas are subject to severe physical and chemical conditions. Some Oceanic
                                      habitats (e.g. Surfgrass) overlap with the Rocky Surf Zone.



                                      Headlands are typically steep and precipitous. Soils are generally local In origin and derived from
                     TOPOGRAPHY       basalt north of Cape Blanco and of sedimentary material south of the Cape. Cliffs can drop directly
                                      Into the marine system to moderate depths. Slumping of cliffs Is the sediment source for many
                         AND           local beaches.
                         SOILS



                                      Climate Is maritime with fluctuations of temperature and precipitation muted. Mean  temperature
                        CLIMATE    ranges between 5 0 and 8 O (41 to 46 0F) for January and between 14 0 and  16 OC (57 to 61 OF) for July.
                                      Snow and heavy freeze are atypical. Winters are wet and cool with occasional storms generating
                                      heavy precipitation, extreme tidal ranges, and strong winds. Strong winds frequently break off
                                      trees and carry salt spray Inland which strongly influences the makeup of the habitat.


                                      The three major water Inputs to the Above Tide area are winter precipitation, salt spray, and
                                      summer fog drip. Fresh water aquatic habitats are uncommon. Discharge is usually directly Into
                        HYDROLOGY     the ocean. Waves are concentrated on headlands, and local currents can be severe.


                                      
                                      ZONE 8 HABITAT TYPES 
                                                











                        
                                               A                                   B                                   A
                                       Unprotected                             Protected                         Headlands & Rocky Islands 
                                       ROCKY SURF ZONE                                                     ABOVE TIDE ROCKY SHORE ZONE











                  Figure 19. Rocky                    Surf Zone (Procter et. al., 1980).

                                                                             II-37









          the United States (Dethier, 1988). Dethier estimates that the
          rocky intertidal area of this section of coast contains at least
          130 plant species (2 vascular plants, 5 or more lichens, and over
          120 algae) and 180 animal species (mostly invertebrates)
          (Appendix C). Two habitats are present in this zone,
          distinguished from one another primarily by differences in wave
          energy.

              Variation in the degree of exposure to environmental factors
          can create marked zonation patterns within rocky surf habitats
          (Foster, et al., 1988). These visually distinctive bands of
          organisms are the result of wave action intensity at varying tide
          levels, tolerance of organisms to air and sunlight, and the
          presence or absence of predators (Steelquist, 1987). Within each
          rocky surf habitat are four vertical bands (or "zones"-this term
          should not to be confused with ecological zones): a splash zone,
          and upper, middle, and lower intertidal zones. The splash zone
          receives the spray from the surf during high tide and is covered
          with water only during storms. Algae, lichens, limpets, and
          periwinkles are residents here. The upper intertidal area is
          flooded during high tides. Barnacles, snails, mussels, seaweeds,
          and crabs frequent the rocks while shrimp, sculpin, and other
          fishes swim in the tidepools. The middle intertidal area is
          inundated more regularly and contains more biota than the higher
          zones. Predominant animals include mussels, sea stars, snails,
          worms, crabs, whelks, chitons, and rock scallops. The lower
          intertidal zone is exposed to the air only during the lowest
          tidal stages. It has a greater biological diversity than the
          other three zones. Typical organisms include starfish, anemones,
          octopi, sea urchins, sea cucumbers, and nudibranchs.

              Sand-impacted rocky areas occur where rocky outcrops lie
          adjacent to or in the middle of high-energy sand beaches. Rocky
          surfaces that are scoured or periodically buried by sand require
          organisms living there to be tolerant of the burial and resistant
          to the scouring. Tolerant animals include the cloning anemone
          and several genera of chitons and tube worms.

                        Rocky Surf-Unprotected Habitat

              Exposed rocky surf habitats vary from steep bedrock found on
          promontories and sea-stacks, to flat benches dotted with
          tidepools (Figure 20). Only the most wave-tolerant organisms
          such as gooseneck barnacles and sea palms can survive on the
          steep bedrock. These areas receive full, direct wave force that
          produces a continuous erosional process. The sediment from this
          scouring action is sorted and deposited on nearby pocket beaches.
          Species in this environment are quite resilient and typically
          find protection within hard shells cemented to the rocks or by
          inhabiting available crevices.




                                       11-38









































                                  Rocky Surf Zone
                               A Unprotected
                                  Headlands & 
                                  Rocky Islands



                                                          ROCKY SURF - UNPR0TECTED 
                            Habitat Description                                        Characteristic Flora
                            This zone Is characterized as a high energy environment.   Macroalgae are the most visible flora.  Important
                                                                                        
                            Both plant and animals living in this zone must be able    genera include Ulva, Fucus Postella, Iridophycus,
                            to withstand the force of the pounding surf. Many of       CorallIna, Lamanacia, and Lithothamnuia.  A surfgrass
                                                                                       (Phyllospadix scoulari) is the principal vascular   
                            the organisms must also be adapted to extreme tempera-                    
                            tures and salinity variability, as well as exposure to     plant.  Benthic diatoms are probably important.
                            fresh water rain conditions. This habitat is coinci-       Distinct intertidal benthic zonations are found.
                            dent with part of the near-shore Kelp habitat
                            and of the Surfgrass habitat            of the oceanic     Characteristic Fauna
                            Vegetated Benthic Zone.                                    The mussel, Nytilis californianus and the goose
                                                                                       barnacle, Mitella polymeris, are characteristic and
                            Food Web                                                   important species. These species form a biotic
                            The food chains are quite short (often with only           substrate which provides the necessary habitat for
                            three traphic levels) and include at least the            many other species. The predacious starfish,
                            following modes of feeding: planktonic foods               Pisaster orchraceus, Is also characteristic.
                            extracted by filter feeders; sacroalgae harvested by
                            the grazing animals; bacteria and periphyton eaten
                            by other grazers. Predators are from both the
                            terrestrial and marine realms.


















                  Figure 20. Rocky Surf Habitat-Unprotected (Procter et. al.,
                                          1980).

                                               II-39









                         Rocky Surf-Protected Habitat

               The protected rocky surf habitat is a broad wave-cut terrace
          or an area where the force of waves is reduced by offshore rocks
          or sea stacks (Figure 21). Lower wave action and less spray
          enable different species of plants and animals to live here than
          on the exposed coast. Barnacles, turban snails, periwinkles, as
          well as surfgrasses are abundant in this more protected habitat.

               iii. Above Tide Rocky Shore Zone

               Though this habitat is landward beyond the sanctuary
          boundary, it is extremely important to the nearshore ecosystem
          (Figure 22). It provides critical stationing and nesting areas
          for marine birds as well as pupping and haulout sites for marine
          mammals. Human modifications to this habitat can have drastic
          effects on the local ecology by altering sediment loading or
          creating conditions that allow predator access to previously
          isolated areas.   Most headlands and rocky islands of the outer
          Olympic coast and western Strait of Juan de Fuca are protected
          within Federal, state, or tribal lands.

               iv. The Pelagic oceanic Zone

               The oceanic zones in the Sanctuary study area are di vided
          into two major categories: 1) the pelagic zone - comprising the
          water column; and 2) the benthic zone - comprising the seafloor
          and waters one meter above (Proctor, gt Al., 1980) (Figure 23).
          The pelagic and benthic zones each have habitats that are
          characterized by the presence or absence of light. The pelagic
          zone can be divided into the euphotic and disphotic zones, and
          the benthic zone intovegetated and non-vegetated zones.

               The euphotic and disphotic habitats together comprise the
          pelagic oceanic zone. These are the largest spatial habitats
          within the marine ecosystem, and they support plankton (sea
          drifters), and nekton (free swimmers). Seabirds thrive in the
          euphotic habitat, and many dive to impressive depths for food.
          Within the context of this report, the pelagic zone is synonymous
          with the neritic environment discussed at the beginning of this
          section.

                         Euphotic Pelagic Habitat

               The depth of the euphotic layer is determined by the
          distance that light penetrates the water column (Figure 24).
          This boundary is continually in flux and is affected by factors
          such as latitude, season, cloud cover, turbidity, sea state, and
          time of day. This is the layer of the ocean where
          phytoplanktonic production occurs and is a great feeding area for
          many species.


                                         11-40









































                                Rocky Surf Zone
                             B  Protected
                                Headlands and
                                Rocky Islands



                                                              ROCKY SURF - PROTECTED
                          Habitat Description                                        Characteristic Flora
                          The wave energy in this region is lower than for unpro-    Surfgrass (Phyllospadix torreyi and P. scouleri)
                          tected headlands, but is high enough so that almost no    is important. Attached  macroalgae are abundant
                          fine sediments and very little sand occurs. The organ-     in this region.
                          isms must be adapted to the extremes in temperature and
                          salinity characteristic of this environment. Vertical      Characteristic fauna
                          zonation Is very pronounced. Parts of two oceanic Vege-    Most of the species found in the unprotected outer
                          tated Benthic Zone habitats coincide with this habitat;    coast are also found in this region, but some added
                          they are Surfgrass           and nearshore Kelp.           forms are also apparent. The various sea anemones
                                                                                     (Auttroplewra spp.) are especially notable. Various
                          Food Web                                                   sea stars and  brittle stars also occur.
                          The food  web consists of three rather short and   distinct
                          food chains, as were characteristic of the unprotected
                          coast. Surfgrass becomes much more prevalent in this
                          area and the associated community Is Important.





















                 Figure 21. Rocky Surf Habitat-Protected (Procter et. al., 1980).

                                                                              II-41

















































                                    Above Tide Rocky
                                    Shore Zone-
                                 A Headlands and
                                    Rocky Islands


                                                                          ABOVE TIDE - HEADLNDS & ROCKY ISLANDS
                              Habitat                                                     Characteristic Flora
                              This habitat occurs on steep topography,   shallow soils,   Vegetation Is low lying, gradating from herbaclows
                              and non-erosive substrate above the previously de-          plants nearest the coast (seaside plantain, red
                              scribed salt spray zone and seaward of the coastal          fescue, thrift, seawatch, vetch) to shrubs (thimble-
                              forests.  Islands are small and are usually within   ten   berry, salal, Suksdorf sage, Nootka rose) and finally
                              miles of shore.                                             to inland forest typically dominated by Sitka spruce
                                                                                          and western hemlock.
                              Food Web
                              On terrestrial habitats, browsing components of the         Characteristic Fauna
                              food web are typical. The food web on islands is            Mammals: black-tailed deer, Townsend's mole, vagrant
                              limited. However, islands provide a base from                shrew, California sea lion, northern sea lion, sea
                              which sea birds and marine mammals exploit marine           otter, gray fox.
                              food sources.
                                                                                          Birds: storm-petrels, western gull, California gull,
                                                                                          common murre, pigeon guillemot, auklets, other
                                                                                          alcids, black oystercatcher, cormorants. Many of
                                                                                          the Islands are intensively used by colonial sea bird
                                                                                          nesters.














                    Figure 22. Above Tide Rocky Shore Zone (Procter et. al., 1980).

                                                                                  II-42




















                                                 OCEANIC ZONES
                                             In neritic zone (near shore, over continental shelf) Northeastern Pacific surface waters (upper
                                             
                                             
                                             200m) mix with runoff and upwelling deeper ocean waters. Runoff recharges  nutrient supply during
                            GENERAL          winter. Spring diatom bloom rapidly depletes this supply, but upwelling continually replaces
                            COMMENTS         limiting nutrient, chiefly nitiate, sometimes also silicate (Anderson,G. C.,1972). Annual rate
                                             of production Is over 30 gC/m2, more than 6 times the average productivity of the whole ocean,
                                             Including neritic zone (Curl, 1970).

                                             Continental shelf relatively flat and featureless. Slopes steeper near shore and outer edge than
                            BYTRYMETRY       in wider central area. Slopes steepen and shelf narrows from north to south. Recent sands lie
                               AND           Inshore, muddy- sediments seaward. Relict sands exposed at places along outer edge. Rocky banks
                            SEDIMENTS        occur Irregularly, often associated with headlands. Thickness of sediments is in dynamic equi-
                                             librium, accreting in summer, eroding In winter (Bourke et al., 1971 ; Kulm et al.,1975).
                                             Small seasonal variation in temperature means range only 4 0C (39 0F). Large differences in wind and
                                             precipitation; prevailing winter winds are southwesterly, bringing storms to the coast; sweeter
                                             winds are mostly from the northwest at speeds usually lower than In winter. About 80% of the
                            CLIMATE          annual precipitation occurs from October to March. Shore station precipitation data overesti-
                                             mates rainfall at sea by a factor of 2 to 4 (Elliott at al., 1971). Dense fogs, related to up-
                                             welling of colder waters, occur most frequently from midsummer to fall , averaging 3 to 8 days
                                             per month (OIW, 1977).
                                             Salinity of Surface waters Varies widely, from 20 to 340/oo, altered by runoff and upwelling.
                                             Runoff lowers surface salinity to ^32.5 /00. Upwelling increases surface water salinity to
                            HYDROGRAPHY      '32.50/oo in summer. Water temperature varies from a mean high of 17.7 OF (640F) to a mean low of
                                             7.60C (460F), but annual mean temperature range is only 50 C (41 0F), from 14 OC (570F) In summer to
                                             90C (480F) in winter.  Both highest and lowest temperatures occur in summer during upwelling
                                             (Bourke et al., 1971).
                                         ZONE & HABITAT TYPES 















                                A               A                 A          B              C              D            A            B
                                                                                                        
                            Euphotic          Disphotic         ROCKY      MUD        MUDDY SAND         SAND          KELP       SURFGRASS           
                            EUPHOTIC          DISPHOTIC
                            PELAGIC ZONE     PELAGIC ZONE                    NON-VEGETATED BENTHIC ZONE                   VEGETATED BENTHIC ZONE
                              PELAGIC OCEANIC ZONES                                    BENTHIC OCEANIC ZONES
                                                      















                  Figure 23. Pelagic Oceanic Zone (Procter et al., 1980).

                                                                                  II-43














































                                     Pelagic Oceanic
                                     Zones
                                        Euphotic Pelagic
                                       Zone
                                        
                                    A  Euphotic
                                                                                   EUPHOTIC
                                 Habitat   Description                                            Food Web, continued
                                                                                                 level (Pearcy, 1972).  Suspended detrital material
                                                                                                                      
                                 This habitat is   the upper layer of neritic ocean water                       
                                 which is supplied with sunlight sufficient for the             may enter food web through microplankton.
                                 photosynthesis of plants, i.e. down to compensation
                                 depth. All net production of organic matter in the              Characteristic Flora
                                 Oceanic pelagic environment occurs in this habitat.             Phytoplankton: diatom are generally predominant in
                                 Depth of this layer varies seasonally and locally,             shelf waters, with dinoflagellates showing increased
                                 generally ranging between 20 to 80 meters (60 to 260 ft)        abundance in late summer and fall.
                                 deep (Sverdrup et al., 1942; Small et al., 1972). In
                                 winter, low primary production is balanced by grazing,          Characteristic Fauna
                                 maintaining dependent populations.     In spring, diatom        Zooplankton: copepods, euphausids, medusae, salps,
                                 blooms indicate high primary production temporarily             shrimps, chaetognaths, ctenophores, amphipods.
                                 exceeding consumption. At night, many carnivores from
                                 deeper waters (disphotic zone) invade this habitat to           Nekton: lantern fish, anchovy, saury, squid, salmon.
                                 food.                                                           Sea birds; common murre, western gull, sooty shear-
                                                                                                 water, Cassin's auklet, cormorants.
                                 Food Web                                                        Mammals: baleen whales (gray whale), killer whale,
                                 Primary productivity Is provided by phytoplankton.              porpoises, California sea lion, northern sea lion,
                                 Grazing food chains are predominant. Herbivorous                northern fur seal.
                                 crustaceans, principally copepods and euphausids,
                                 dominate the second trophic level; jellyfish, fishes,
                                 and shrimp are important consumers at the third trophic














                    Figure 24. Euphotic Pelagic Habitat (Procter et. al., 1980).

                                                                                    II-44









                        Disphotic Pelagic Habitat

             Below the euphotic layer is the dark sphere known as the
        disphotic zone (Figure 25). The disphotic layer is the depth at
        which photosynthesis ceases in marine plants due to insufficient
        light energy. At night, the disphotic zone may extend from the
        sea floor to the sea surface to encompass the entire water
        column. As light penetrates through the water column, it is
        absorbed and scattered by water properties, particles and
        organisms (Duxbury and Duxbury, 1989). A twilight state exists
        at the boundary of the euphotic and disphotic zones. Blue and
        green wavelengths of light may penetrate into the disphotic zone
        but quickly fade to darkness. Zooplankton inhabit this habitat
        in large number during the day and migrate upward during the
        night to feed on the abundant phytoplankton in the upper layer.

             ve   Benthic Ocean Zone

             The benthic oceanic zone encompasses all submerged lands of
        the continental shelf. It is divided into two sub-zones
        distinguished by the presence or absence of light. The vegetated
        benthic zone coincides with rocky habitats and exists where light
        is sufficient for photosynthesis in attached marine plants. Two
        habitats (kelp forests and surfgrasses) exist in this zone. The
        non-vegetated benthic zone is completely devoid of plant life and
        is classified by changes in the sediments on the sea floor. Four
        different habitats are present in the non-vegetated benthic zone
        including the rocky, mud, muddy sand, and sand (Figures 26-29).

                  Kelp Forests (Vegetated Benthic) Habitat

             Kelps are large brown algae (Order Laminariales) that attach
        to rocky substrates and grow to the surface in water depths from
        about 2m to 20m (Figure 30).    The floating portions of these
        plants form dense canopies on the sea surface. Kelp forests form
        one of the world's most productive habitats. They provide
        critical habitat for encrusting animals such as sponges,
        bryozoans, and tunicates, as well as for juvenile fish, algae,
        abalone, and many other invertebrates. Fish associated with kelp
        beds include lingcod, kelp greenling, cabezon, various rockfishes
        and perch species, wolf eel, and red Irish lord. Kelp provides a
        food resource for fish, and for grazing and detritus-feeding
        invertebrates such as sea urchins and isopods. Sea otters depend
        on kelp beds for both food and shelter. Kelp beds also serve as
        resting areas for some birds such as gulls and herons. They also
        reduce wave action and currents shoreward of the beds, creating a
        sheltered environment for intertidal plants and animals, and
        reducing inshore erosion on beaches (WDOE, 1980b).






                                       11-45
















































                               Pelagic Oceanic
                               Zones
                                 Disphotic Pelagic
                                 Zone
                              A  Disphotic
                                                                              DISPHOTIC 

                            Habitat Description                                        Characteristic Flora
                            Deeper, dark, daytime location of pelagic carnivores       None. Phytoplankton, sinking through this zone, are
                            that migrate vertically each day in response to light.     very sparse and unproductive.
                            These animals form vertically compressed layers (called
                            scattering layers because of their effect on sonar         Characteristic Fauna
                            transmissions) during daylight but rise toward the          Zooplankton: euphausid (Euphausia pacifica), shrimp
                            surface, spreading out vertically to feed throughout       (Sergestes similis .
                            the upper layer (euphotic zone) during the night.          Nekton: lantern fishes (Diaphus theta, Stenobrachius
                            Food Web                                                   leucopsarus and Tarletonbeania crenulari). 
                            Grazing and detrital food chains based on primary          Mammals: baleen whales.
                            production in euphotic zone above. Local transfers
                            are primarily between third and fourth trophic level.





















                    Figure 25. Disphotic Pelagic Habitat (Procter et. al., 1980).

                                                                                 II-46












































                          Benthic Oceanic
                          Zones
                             Non-vegetated
                               
                             Benthic Zone
                          A Rocky
                                                                         ROCKY

                        Habitat Description                                        Characteristic Flora
                        Rocky bottom, below compensation depth but often higher    Only phytoplankton which sinks to the bottom from
                        than the surrounding shelf, occurs in scattered banks      the photic zone.  No primary production.
                        at various distances offshore all along the coast. The
                        rough, irregular terrain has more wave and current         Characteristic Fauna
                        activity, little finer sediment. These areas are           Attached Invertebrates: barnacles, sea anemones,
                        generally avoided by trawl fisheries.                      bryozoans, tube worms, hydroids, corals, and tunicates.
                        Food Web                                                   Unattached Invertebrates: starfish, crabs, shrimp,
                        Primarily detrital food chains based on production in      hermit crabs, nereid worms, nudibranchs, and snails.
                        overlying waters. Some demersal fish also feed             Fish: halibut, rockfish.
                        periodically in euphotic zone grazing food chains.





















                 Figure 26. Rocky Non-Vegetated Benthic Habitat (Procter et. al.,
                                        1980).

                                                                              II-47

















                                                                                                   
                                Benthic Oceanic
                                Zones
                                  Non-vegetated
                                  Benthic Zone
                               B Mud
                                                                                  MUD

                            Habitat Description                                          Characteristic Flora
                            Marine soft bottom communities where most of the             Due to a paucity of light, few plants are found in
                            sediment grains are less than 0.062 m in diameter            this region.
                            form a major portion of the offshore region at depths
                            between 100 and 200m. These level bottom communities         Characteristic Fauna
                            contain a much more abundant and diverse community           Primarily infaunal and epifaunal invertebrates and
                            than the level bottom sandy substrates and can be            demersal fish.
                            composed of fine grained silts and clays but most            Infauna: sea urchin (Brisaster), bristleworms
                            often are mixed with either relict or terrigenous            (Sternaspis), snails.
                            sands. They are thought to be very stable environments
                            with diverse benthic populations which serve as major        Epifauna: shrimp (Pandalus), brittle stars (Ophlura),
                            feeding areas for demersal fish and shrimp.                  sea urchin (Allocentrotus).
                            Food Web                                                     Fish: Dover sole, arrowtooth flounder, sablefish.
                            The food web of this system is dependent on detritus
                            both from the production In overlying waters and to a
                            lesser extent from terrigenous sources. Detritivores,
                            scavengers, and carnivores are Important links In this
                            system.

















                     Figure 27. Mud Non-Vegetated BenthiC Habitat (procter et. al.,
                                             1980)

                                                                                  II-48











































                                                                                         

                             Benthic Oceanic
                             Zone
                               Non-vegetated
                               Benthic Zone
                            C Ruddy Sand
                                                                       MUDDY         SAND
                           Habitat Description                                       Characteristic Flora
                           This habitat is intermediate between sand and mud         Due to a paucity of light. there is no plant pro-
                           bottom (50-75% of grains greater than 0.0625 mm in        duction in this habitat- Some heterotrophic diatoms
                           diameter). Ruddy (finer) sediments accumulated during     may persist.
                           summer are mixed into the sandier substrate by the
                           burrow g-feeding activity of benthos before winter        Characteristic Fauna
                           Storms resuspend them. There Is more organic matter In    Infauna; clam (Macoma elimata), polychaetes
                           the sediment here than In the sandy bottom. less than in  (Nephtys sp., Sternaspis fossor), and amphipods
                           a mud bottom.                                             (Paraphoxus variatus).
                                                                                     Epifauna. sea cucumber (Stichopus), urchins
                           food Web                                                  (Allocentrotus). shrimp  (Pandalus). starfish (Lurid&),'
                           The food  web of this habitat Is dependent on detritus
                           both from the production In overlying waters and to       snails (Polinices)
                           some extent gram terrigenous sources. Detritivores.
                           scavengers, and carnivores are Important.




















                 Figure 28. Muddy Sand Non-Vegetated Benthic Habitat (Procter et.
                                         al., 1980).

                                                                              11-49
 














































                                   Benthic Oceanic
                                                                           
                                                             
                                   Zones
                                      Mon-vegetated
                                     Benthic Zone
                                  D  Sand
                                                                                     SAND
                                Habitat description                                         Characteristic Flora
                                This is the smooth. relatively hard bottom area seaward      There are no primary producers an the substrate
                                of the surf zone and beyond the immediate influence of       because of the reduced light level over most of this
                                breaking waves and longshore currents. Current activity      environment. Diatoms in the phytoplanktan enter from
                                Is regular and fairly strong. though not as strong as        the emphotic zone. and my concentrate near the
                                in rocky areas. The bottom sediment Is sand (75% or          bottom.
                                more of grains are larger than 0.0625 an In diameter)
                                similar to that on the beaches but significantly             Characteristic Fauna
                                more stable. As a result of the greater stability,           Invertebrates.: polychaete worms. gamneridian
                                lack of wave breaking action. and more organic material      ampbipods. State's razor ciao, Dungeness crab,
                                than an beaches. populations are larger and there are        gastropods, and sand dollars.
                                awe species than In the beach habitat. This habitat
                                gradually grades Into the muddy sand bottom habitat          Fish: English sole. Pacific sandidab. butter sole.
                                as the water deepens to the west. Rellct sand patches        skates. and dogfish.
                                occur along outer shelf.

                                Food Web
                                The energy for the habitat comes from phytoplankton
                                In the overlying waters and from the detrical material
                                which continually rains down from above or is Intro-
                                duced from nearby estuaries. Many of the' important
                                organisms are detrital feeders and components of the
                                food web are relatively simple.
                                                          



















                    Figure 29. Sand (Non-Vegetated) Benthic Habitat (Procter et.
                                             al., 1980).

                                                                                    11-50
 
















































                                 Benthic oceanic
                                 Vegetated Benthic
                                 zone
                              A  Kelp
                                                                                 KELP

                           Habitat Description                                            Characteristic flora
                           Kelps occur in what is called the Protected Outer             The typical helphabitat Is maltileyered. being
                           Coast. They persist on rocky reefs subject to occa-            Composed of Canopy. unstory. turf. and crustose layers.
                           sionally severe wave action and tidal currents. Kelps          The canopy Is made up of Mereocystis luetkeana (bull
                           range from extreme low water (ELW) to a depth of about         kelp). The understory is made up of several kelps.
                           40 feet (13 in).                                               notably Pterygophora callfornica, Alaris marginata
                                                                                          Laminaria saccharina. Larsinarla set    I. and Egregla
                           Food Web                                                       menzlesif The -turf layer Is made up of filamentous
                           Productivity Is  dominated by the kelps and their              and thallose red algae. The crustose layer Is largely
                           associated algal flora. The food web Is dorminated             made up of kildenbrandtia and Lithophyllum.
                           by grazing organisms. Detrital components of the
                           food web are present, but of secondary importance.             Characteristic Fauna
                                                                                          Invertebrates: a variety of sea    urchins, limpets.
                                                                                          chitons, starfish, crabs. snails. ampbIpods. Isopods.
                                                                                          Fish: copper, brown, quillback. and black rackfishes,
                                                                                          lingcod, kelp greenling.




















                     Figure 30. Kelp Habitat (Procter et. al., 1980).

                                                                                     II-51
 








                    Surfgrasses (Vegetated Benthic) Habitat
               A common surfgrass species, phyllospadix scoulerf, ranges
          from Vancouver Island to southern California (Figure 31). It
          also appears on the exposed shores of the San Juan Islands.
          Though not a true grass, phyllospadix does produce flowers and is
          closely related to the grass family. Surfgrass does not root,
          but attaches to rocks by tenacious fibers. It offers cover and
          concealment for many organisms while releasing oxygen to
          nearshore waters. Phy-1lospadix can survive low-tide exposure in
          pools or channels with minimum water levels. It becomes a
          valuable haven to invertebrates and other intertidal species
          seeking shade from the sun during low tide (Kozloff, 1983).

               2. Natural Resources

               The natural resources of the Washington outer coast are the
          result of the environmental conditions previously described. The
          geology, winds and other meteorological factors, oceanic and
          nearshore currents, and diversity of habitats all contribute to
          the wealth of natural resources present. The living natural
          resources which will be protected by sanctuary designation
          include numerous species of plankton, algae, invertebrates,
          fishes, seabirds, and marine mammals.

               For comparative purposes, the entire sanctuary study area
          was divided into seven subareas in the DEIS/MP to allow for the
          analysis of the distribution of living marine resources (Figure
          32). An eighth region (subarea la) has been included in this
          FEIS/MP beyond the original seven due to evidence that the
          coastal ecosystem continues several miles into the Strait of Juan
          de Fuca. Coastal, geomorphological, oceanographic, and/or
          political features were used to delineate these subareas.

               *Subarea 1 encompasses a relatively shallow offshore plateau
          known as "the plain", and the head of Juan de Fuca Canyon.   The
          eastern boundary extends due north from Koitlah Point to the
          U.S./Canada international boundary. The northern edge follows
          the international boundary westward to the 100 fathom isobath.
          The western edge transects the head of Juan de Fuca Canyon and
          then generally follows the'100 fathom isobath. The surface area
          is approximately 753 nml (2583 k
                                          ,M12


               *Subarea la includes an area within the Strait of Juan de
          Fuca that exhibits decidedly oceanic characteristics by its
          biological dynamics, oceanographic properties, bathymetry and
          coastal geology. This area was studied in a separate review to
          determine where oceanic properties of the outer coast cease to
          dominate the marine environment in the Strait. The area
          boundaries were established in accordance with the findings of
          the*review. The analysis of the Strait of Juan de Fuca ecosystem
          can be found in Appendix E. The western boundary of subarea 1A

                                        11-52















































                             Benthic Oceanic
                            Zan S
                               Vegetatcd Benthic
                               Zone
                           I   Surfgross
                                                                         SURFGRASS

                         Habitat Description                                         Characteristic Flora
                         Surfgrass occurs on rocks on protected outer coast from     Surfgrass (Phyll spadix spp.) predominates. Ulva (sea
                         Alas" to Baja California.     it Is most common from Mon-   lettacel. Iridaea           Rhodoneela laux. Calliarthron
                         terey to southern Vancouver Island.    It Is found from     tuberculosa and Odonthalia floccoosa are common as
                         the Intertidal to 7 meters deep and is associated with      understory )ants. Diatoms. Simthora (a red alga).
                         Fucus.                                                      and Petalonia (a brown alga) are found on the leaves.
                         Food Web                                                     Commonly associated kelps are. Alarla. Laminaria, and
                         Surfgrass along with several species of kelps are            Egregia.
                         responsible for most of the primary productivity.
                         Scene coastlines have beaches dominated by surfgrass;       Characteristic Fauna
                         others have a mixture of surfgrass and beathic algae.       Invertebrates: nereid worms, Isopods. amphipods. snails:
                         Principal components of the food web are detrital.          limpets. copepods. crabs. starfishes, and sea urchins.
                                                                                     Birds: black brant.
                                                                                     Fish: coho juveniles.






















                   Figure 31. Surfgrass Benthic Zone (Procter et. al., 1980).

                                                                                  11-53
 










                                                                                                       ,Map              Proposed Sanctuary Areas

                                                                      1251000*w
                                                                                                                                       1240DO-W

                                                                                                                                                ----------
                                                                                                                                                            ------------------------

                                                        AREA I



                                                   00 fathoms                                                                        CLALL AM COUNTY

                                                                                                                                                    ............ .                 i 48000 N
                                                                  AREA


                                                                                                          isiisilifii isilisiss   -iiii-t-q!  ig

                                                                                                                -iifi.
                                                                                         AREA 3                          "N
                                                                                                                         ..:its

                                                                                                            AREA       4          ---ii@iifi!,JEFFERSON COUNTY
                                                500 fathoms                                                                                                                      ji
                                                                                                                                                            "is    ;its @tt`iliij;
                                                                                                                                                            Mii    tjis titi!ijEjE
                                                                                                                                                                   itil is -
                                                                                                                                                                   i'!iiiis
                                                                                                                                                            it     it ;is Y.", i i i i i i.: is
                                                                                                                                                            qi-    if  liiii!.:  i.
                                                                                                                                                                                         iiiiii !!is Ej!ji:
                                                                                '50 fathom                                                                         iififsili@ii!iiii
                                                                                         at
                                                                                                 20 fathom

                                                                                                                                                                                 if
                                                                                                                         iiiiiiti;@i
                                                                                                                                 ililf1iiiiiiiiiiii                              is iit
                                                                                                                                                                                 ............      i@iiil:
                                                                                                                                                    s::: E: i: 1: i is ii E:!: i@ i iii ii; i:i ii 1: ij:: s i
                                                                                                                                                            .......... ... . .....



                                                                                                                                                        siii.:i
                                                                                                                                                                                           ts t.:
                                                                                                                                                                                 it
                                                                                                                                                                                 ifi
                                                                                                                                                                                 s
                                                                                                                                                                                 it                is
                                                                                                                                                                                 it
                                                                                                                                                            )R COUNTY                              qf.
                                                                                                                                     GRAYS H ARB(
                                                                        C
                                                                         'o                                                            iji i i i: s
                                                                                                                                                                                           its     !it
                                                                                                                                                                                 @iiisiiiilil
                                4700074       ..................................                                                                                                 iiiii@ii@iiiii4 47000"

                                                                                              50     athoms
                                                                                              50
                                                                                                                                                                                          ..... .....
                                                                                                                                               ii: is if I
                                                                                         AREA       5                                               iiiiiiii:
                                                                                                                AREA 6
                                                                                                                                  AREA              is it;!: is s@;! sE s: s i s i


                                                                                   100 athoms
                                                                                                                                                                                                   fit
                                                                                                                                                                     il          ii ii it ifi11 i@ if if  iiitisiiii is:
                                                                                                                                                                                        i2sislsi:i sit
                                                                   300 i@thoms                                                                                     ......
                                                                                                                                                                                                   it:
                                                                                                                                                            iiliiiisli
                                                                                                                                                    iii PACIFIC COUNTY                   ii!tiiiiiiiiiii
                                                                                       t

                                                                                                                         0 fathoms       t:
                                                                                                                                         it
                                                                                                                                                                                                   !is
                                                                                                                                         i is ii                                                   q
                                                                                                                                                 iti,       its
                                                                                                                                        lists
                                                                                                                                                                                                   i is
                                                                                                                                                 iislit!iiiisl
                                                                                                                                                gisiii!iiiill      ::isiisii@iti:                  4:'

                                                                           OOV
                                                                    125'@                                                            124';0
                                                                                             fr




                           Figure 32. Sanctuary Study Subareas (SAB, 1990).

                                                                                                                       11-54









          is contiguous with subarea 1 and extends due north from Koitlah
          Point to the U.S./Canada international boundary. The
          international boundary in the Strait serves as the northern edge
          of the subarea. The eastern boundary extends due north from
          Observatory Point to the international boundary. The surface
          area is approximately 255 nM2-   (873 kM2).

               *Subarea 2 lies above the outer edge of the continental
          shelf, is generally bounded east and west by the 50 fathom and
          100 fathom isobaths respectively, and includes the head of the
          Quinault Canyon. The southern edge follows a line which extends
          due west from the southern tip of Copalis National Wildlife
          Refuge where coastal geomorphology changes from broad sandy
          beaches, to a rugged, rocky coastline with pocket beaches. The
          surface area is approximately 791 nM2     (2712 kM2).

               *Subarea 3 represents the mid-shelf area, from the 50 fathom
          isobath in the west to the state's limit of jurisdiction (3nm) in
          the east. The southern edge follows a line which extends due
          west from the southern tip of Copalis National Wildlife Refuge
          where the coastal geomorphology changes from broad sandy beaches,
          to a rugged, rocky coastline with pocket beaches. The northern
          boundary encompasses the Juan de Fuca Canyon head to a point west
          of Cape Flattery. The surface area is approximately 669 nM2
          (2296 kM2).

               *subarea 4 is equivalent to the sanctuary boundary proposed
          in the original SEL. It generally extends from the mean high
          water line to the seaward extent of the territorial sea (3 nm).
          The northern boundary arcs around Cape Flattery and terminates at
          Koitlah Point. The southern boundary is formed by an east/west
          line at the southern tip of the Copalis National Wildlife Refuge
          (NWR). The surface area is approximately 392 nM2       (1346 kM2).

               *Subarea 5 represents the outer edge of the continental
          shelf between the 50 fathom and 100 fathom isobaths; and
          includes the head of Grays Canyon. The northern edge follows a
          line that extends due west from the southern tip of Copalis NWR.
          The southern boundary follows a line that extends due west from
          Cape Disappointment at the mouth of the Columbia River. The
          surface area is approximately 820 nM2     (2813 kM2).

               *Subarea 6 represents the mid-shelf area, from the 50 fathom
          isobath to the state's limit of jurisdiction (3nm). The northern
          edge follows a line that extends due west from the southern tip
          of Copalis NWR. The southern boundary follows a line that
          extends due west from Cape Disappointment at the mouth of the
          Columbia River. The surface area is approximately 690 nM2         (2366
          kM2 ).

               *Subarea 7 extends seaward to the state limit of
          jurisdiction (3 nm). It includes the estuarine areas of Grays

                                           11-55









          Harbor and Willapa Bay. The northern edge follows a line that
          extends due west from the southern tip of Copalis NWR. The
          southern boundary follows a line that extends due west from Cape
          Disappointment at the.mouth of the Columbia River. The surface
          area is approximately 286 nM2 (981 kM2).

               NOAA's Strategic Assessment Branch (SAB) analyzed each
          subarea to determine its relative significance for selected
          species of invertebrates, fishes, marine birds, and 'marine
          mammals (subarea la was not included in this analysis).
          Individual species were assigned scores for each subarea based on
          their relative distribution and density. It was'not necessary to
          assign special scoring points for endangered and threatened
          species since distribution of each species within the study area
          is scored relative to the entire population of that species for
          the EEZ of the contiguous U.S. west coast. Thus, a subarea may
          be significant to a species that is present only rarely, such as
          the sperm whale. one or two sightings of a species with a small
          population base would establish a high score.

               The scores are presented in a series of tables (Appendix C,
          Tables 3 through 9) that allow the reader to compare subareas
          according to selected assemblages of marine fauna. While these
          tables do not provide an exhaustive list of species for each
          subarea, they do exemplify the general biological character of
          each region. The results of this analysis are used in developing
          and evaluating boundary options for the Sanctuary, as well as
          assessing the potential impacts of human activities occurring in
          the area.


               (a) Plankton

               Phytoplankton production on the Washington continental shelf
          is high. The upwelling of nutrient-rich waters into the surface
          layers, which is enhanced by the Juan de Fuca Canyon, supports
          the production of these microscopic plants which form the basis
          for the oceanic food chain. High productivity in the spring and
          summer coincides with the periods of coastal upwelling. The
          almost continual replenishment of nutrients (especially nitrogen)
          into the surface waters during the time of year when solar
          radiation is high, and days are long, is responsible for the
          continually high phytoplankton standing stocks and rates of
          production characteristic of this region (Perry, et al., in
          press).

               Diatoms are the primary component of the phytoplankton.
          Dinoflagellates are also an important component and it is blooms
          of these single-celled plants that cause the outbreak of red
          tides in Washington. One of the dinoflagellates (Gonvaulax
          catenella) contains a powerful neurotoxin that causes paralytic
          shellfish poisoning and shellfish. bed closures. While most surf-
          swept sandy beaches are areas of low phytoplankton occurrencel

                                        11-56









          the sand beaches of the southern portion of the outer coast have
          such a large persistent population of diatoms in the surf that
          the water is colored a conspicuous brown (Lewin, in press). The
          razor clam relies on the surf-zone dwelling diatom (Chaetoceros
          armatum) as its principal food source in area 4 and 7. The
          population of razor clams is so abundant that it accounts for
          over 70% of the recreational harvest of razor clams on the west
          coast (Schink, et.al., 1983; SAB, 1590).

               Unlike phytoplankton, which are limited to the euphotic zone
          (approximately the upper 100m), zooplankton occur at all depths
          and can undertake daily vertical migrations of up to several
          hundred meters. A variety of zooplankton such as ciliates,
          copepods, euphausiids, and pelagic tunicates feed upon
          phytoplankton. In turn, zooplankton are an important food source
          for fish and other organisms, including whales. A large standing
          stock of zooplankton resides in an area from 5 nautical miles
          (10km) to 16 nautical miles (30km) off the coast (primarily
          within areas 3 and 6) during the summer. Copepods are the
          dominant group of zooplankton in terms of biomass (Landry and
          Lorenzen, in press). Euphausiids and copepods are the main food
          source for adult pelagic fishes. Most marine fish and shellfish
          species have planktonic eggs and larvae; these form an important
          part of the zooplankton at certain times of the year.

               (b) Benthic Algae

               Both microalgae and macroalgae are abundant and diverse on
          the outer coast. over 120 species of algae have been identified
          in the rocky intertidal areas of the outer coast of the Olympic
          National Park (Dethier, 1988). Microalgae are primarily composed
          of benthic diatoms which are found as thin coatings on rocks or
          living within the sediment. These diatoms are an important part
          of the "algal film" forming diatom slicks on rocks and providing
          a principal food source for many grazing animals such as
          gastropods and chitons (McConnaughey, 1970). Marine lichens are
          found as thin veneers on rocks in the highest intertidal areas on
          exposed rocky areas.

               Macroalgae are seaweeds that grow attached to a firm
          substrate from the intertidal region down to as deep as 40m, thus
          occurring primarily in areas 4 and 7. The seaweeds are composed
          of three main phyla: red algae (Rhodophyta), brown algae
          (Phaeophyta), and green algae (Chlorophyta). Kendrick and
          Moorhead (1987) present a summary of the algal species found, or
          expected to occur, at three intertidal sites along the coast of
          the Olympic National Park. The authors also discuss using two
          species of algae (Fucus distichus, and Endocladia muricata) as
          potential indicators of recreational impact on the intertidal
          communities of the National Park.

               The red algae are the most diverse of the macroalgae in

                                        11-57









          terms of number of genera (about 115) and species (at least 265)
          in the Pacific Northwest (Waaland, 1977). In intertidal and
          shallow subtidal areas, red algae often occupy the understory of
          the larger kelps. Less common in the exposed areas of the outer
          coast, green algae inhabit the more protected marine and
          estuarine areas in Washington. These algae reside primarily in
          tidepools and rocky intertidal areas. Brown algae include the
          largest marine plants and are probably the most important
          macroalgal group in terms of primary productivity and direct
          economic value (Gardner, 1981). Brown algae vary from the large
          kelps to the less conspicuous forms that encrust rocks or form
          filaments on other algae. The Pacific Northwest coast supports
          the highest diversity of kelps in the world (Dayton, 1985). Two
          species of brown algae dominate the extensive kelp forests of the
          outer coast: the bull kelp (Nereocystis leutkeana) which is
          found in relatively protected waters; and the giant kelp
          (Macrocystis intergrifolia) which prefers more exposed areas
          (Steelquist, 1987). Macrocystis beds extend into the Strait    of
          Juan de Fuca to Crescent Rock. Some of the most proliferous
          macrocystis beds in the state are found in the Strait.

              Algae play an important role in the functioning of the
          entire coastal ecosystem. Beside being a direct food source for
          animals, algae (especially kelps) produce large amounts of dead
          plant material (detritus) which is the basis for the detrital
          food web. Duggins et al. (1989) showed-that growth rates of
          benthic suspension feeders are two to five times as high at kelp-
          dominated islands as at those without kelp beds. Algae provide
          important habitat for many animals and function as nursery and
          spawning areas for small fish. Sea otters and many species of
          fish closely associate with giant kelp forests.

               (c) Invertebrates

              Many factors determine the distribution, species
          composition, and abundance of the invertebrate fauna. The
          seafloor geology, types of rocky substrate or unconsolidated
          sediments, offshore currents and circulation patterns, exposure
          to waves, water depth, Columbia River low salinity plume, and
          presence of mammal predators all influence the niches occupied by
          the various species. The upwelling off the coast brings cold,
          nutrient-rich water to the nearshore zone where it nourishes high
          marine plant productivity. This provides food and habitat for
          invertebrates that suspension feed or graze on algae (Dethier,
          1988).

              The rocky intertidal habitat supports the widest array of
          invertebrate species (Ricketts et al., 1985). Invertebrate
          species found during surveys along the coast of Olympic National
          Park are listed in Appendix G. Representative invertebrates
          include sponges, bivalves, isopods, ampfiipods, shrimp, barnacles,
          bryozoans, sea urchins, sea cucumbers, and sea stars.

                                        11-58









               Invertebrates residing in the boulder and cobble areas are
          diverse and consist of organisms living on and around the rocks
          and the soft sediment beneath them. Different species dominate
          in this habitat than in the rocky intertidal areas.
          Invertebrates living in the sediment under the rocks include the
          mud shrimp (Upogebia), mud dwelling brittle stars, and several
          species of clams and polychaete worms. Invertebrates living on
          or under boulders and cobbles include barnacles, limpets,
          amphipods, isopods, sea snails (Lacuna and Tegula), several
          species of crabs, the sea squirt Clavelina, and various species
          of edible clams (butter clams, littleneck clams, and horse
          clams).

               Invertebrates found in sandy intertidal areas are less
          diverse than in other habitats, but some species may be found in
          large numbers. For example, Dethier (1988) discovered great
          quantities of amphipod crustaceans and polychaete and nemertean
          worms at several sites on the outer coast. The amphipod
          Euhaustorius was found in densities up to 10,670 individualS/M2.
          Densities of the bloodworm Euzonus reached almost 7,  OOO/M2.
          Other invertebrates present include razor clams (Siliqua),
          isopods, mysids (opossum shrimp), sand dollars, purple olive
          snails, several species of clam (eg. Macoma secta and Telling
          bodegensis), and Dungeness and mole crabs.

               Invertebrates associated with kelp beds include many
          encrusting varieties such as sponges, bryozoans, and tunicates.
          Other invertebrates include amphipods, copepods, euphausiids,
          numerous species of crabs, sea urchins, shrimps, sea stars,
          brittle stars, periwinkles, limpets, sea snails, sea slugs,
          scallops, and abalone.

               Squid, octopi, jellyfish, salps, heteropods, shrimp, and
          euphausiids are some of the macro-invertebrates found in the
          pelagic environment. Numerous larval invertebrates are also
          found there during their planktonic stages of development.

               Thus, both the coastal and offshore areas are important to
          invertebrates depending on whether the invertebrates are
          sedentary or pelagic. The significance of selected invertebrate
          species to each of the 7 areas within the study area is shown in
          Appendix C (Tables 3 and 4). Two observations are apparent:
          areas 4 and 7 stand out as the most significant of all seven
          zones; and four invertebrates are particularly significant
          within the study area: 1) Pacific oyster, 2) ocean pink shrimp,
          3) Dungeness crab, and 4) razor clam.   Pacific oyster, Dungeness
          crab, and ocean pink shrimp landings from the areas under
          consideration for sanctuary status had combined landed values in
          1987-88 of over $25 million (about 85% of the statewide totals
          for harvests off Washington) (WDF, 1987; NMFS, 1989).
          Decimation of razor clam populations due to pathogen infestations
          and other natural calamities in the early 1980's has ended

                                        11-59









          commercial harvests, but recreational digging on Washington's
          outer coast currently accounts for over 70% of the contiguous
          U.S. coastal sport harvest.

               Area 7 is particularly important for Pacific oysters because
          of the significance of Grays Harbor and especially Willapa Bay to
          oyster production (Appendix C, Figure 14). These two estuaries
          account for over half of all oysters harvested along the entire
          U.S. West Coast, and sometimes represent nearly 1/5 of the
          nationwide harvests (NMFS, 1989a). Areas 4 and 7, and the
          shallower portions of areas 3 and 6 (within 40 fathoms), are
          locations where more than 75% of the state's Dungeness crab catch
          is taken. Additionally, areas 4 and 7 are important for
          juveniles of the Dungeness Crab. The areal distribution of the
          ocean pink shrimp in the Washington outer coast occurs primarily
          in areas 2 and 5.

               (d) Fish Resources

              The diverse and abundant fish fauna along the outer coast
          are significant commercial and recreational resources. The same
          environmental factors that determine distribution, abundance, and
          species composition of other living resources of the area also
          affect fish communities. The diverse habitats of Washington's
          outer coast each claim their own characteristic assemblage of
          fish.

              Fish of the nearshore sublittoral habitat show the greatest
          diversity and include many commercially important species.
          Salmon are anadromous fish that spend most of their life in salt
          water but return to fresh water to spawn at maturity. Five
          species of Pacific salmon occur along the outer coast of
          Washington: chinook, sockeye, pink, chum, and coho. Two other
          salmon-related anadromous species, sea-run cutthroat trout and
          steelhead, also inhabit offshore waters. Other species include
          albacore tuna, Pacific halibut, flounder (starry and arrowtooth),
          sole (petrale, Dover, English), numerous species of rockfish,
          Pacific cod, Pacific hake, lingcod, sablefish, thresher shark,
          Pacific herring, northern anchovy, jack mackerel, pollock, spiny
          dogfish, green and white sturgeon.

              Fishes associated with sandy intertidal areas include starry
          flounder, staghorn sculpin, sand lance, sand sole, redtail
          surfperch, and sanddab. Surf smelt spawn at high tide on sandy
          beaches where surf action covers and aerates the eggs (Gardner,
          1981).

              Many of the finfish found in shallow rocky reefs are also
          common in kelp beds. The kelp canopy, stipes, and holdfasts
          increase the available habitat for pelagic and demersal species,
          and offer protection to juvenile fish. The numerous species of
          rockfish are the dominant fish. Other associated species include

                                        11-60









         lingcod, kelp greenling, cabezon, kelp perch, wolf eel, and red
         Irish lord.

               The rocky intertidal habitat is characterized by a rather
         small and specialized group of fish adapted for life in tidepools
         and wash areas. These fishes include tidepool sculpin, wolf eel,
         juvenile lingcod and greenling, gunnels, eelpouts, pricklebacks,
         cockcombs, and warbonnets.

               The significance of the subareas to the distribution of
         several selected fish species found in the study area is
         summarized in Appendix C (Tables 5 and 6). Two observations are
         noteworthy. First, the salmon and groundfish species assemblages
         are the most significant species in the study area. The region
         is not only important for those salmon that spawn in streams
         adjacent to the study area, but potentially encompasses the
         migration corridor of both juvenile and adult salmonids from
         California, Oregon, and British Columbia as well. Second, the
         analyses suggest that offshore and mid-shelf areas under
         consideration for sanctuary status (areas 1,2,3,5, and 6)
         generally are more significant for non-anadramous fishes than the
         inshore areas.

               Offshore areas 1 and 5 are the most important areas for
         commercial harvests of groundfish. More than 2/3 of annual 1987-
         88 outer coast harvests came from these areas for the following
         species: Pacific ocean perch, lingcod, English sole, Dover sole,
         Pacific cod, and sablefish. Area 5, produced the majority of
         harvests of widow rockfish. It is important to note, however,
         that four of the top ten fishes commercially harvested along the
         outer coast of Washington (chinook, coho, and chum salmon, and
         lingcod) are either estuarine-associated (i.e., they use
         estuaries during some time in their lives) or estuarine-dependent
         (i.e., they require estuaries to complete their life cycles).
         Additionally, the top four recreational species for.Washington
         (chinook and coho salmon, steelhead, and lingcod) all utilize
         estuaries, at least as juveniles.

               (e) Marine Birds

               The rocky headlands, islands, and highly productive waters
         of the Washington outer coast provide essential habitat for a
         wide variety of both migratory and resident marine birds. Beyond
         their common link to the sea, marine birds are a very diverse
         group. They differ by size, shape, feeding habits, spatial
         distribution, habitat requirements, sensitivities and a host of
         other characteristics. The complex nature of many species makes
         it difficult to group birds into neat categories and impossible
         to apply sweeping characterizations about marine bird behavior.
         There is nearly always an exception to every rule, even among
         birds of the same species.


                                        11-61









              Bird surveys-can thus be quite tedious and results may,vary
         according to the degree of difficulty in gathering information
         and the resources available to researchers. For example,
         gathering production statistics on colonial nesters that lay
         their eggs on exposed, rocky surfaces (e.g. Common murre) is much
         easier and more precise than collecting the same data on species
         that scatter into coastal forests to nest in both old  growth
         trees and concealed burrows (e.g. Marbled murrelet).   Due to such
         differences, knowledge about some species is far more  complete
         than for others.

              Nevertheless, information on marine birds of the  Washington
         coast has advanced dramatically over the past decade. The most
         comprehensive reports have been commissioned by state  and Federal
         resource management-agencies. This discussion draws heavily on
         those reports - particularly those by Strickland and Chasan,
         1989; Speich & Wahl, 1989; Wahl, 1984; SAB, 1990; and MMS Study,
         1992. These reports were produced through extensive literature
         searches and the most current survey techniques. They represent
         the best available information on Washington marine bird
         populations. Therefore, portions of these texts have been
         directly incorporated into this report. It should be noted that
         the 1992 MMS Study (cited above) was the first attempt to-date to
         describe offshore avifaunal distribution off Oregon and
         Washington using repeated, systematic sampling. Coastal
         nearshore populations have been tracked closely for two decades
         by Terence Wahl, Ulrich Wilson, and other researchers.

              Data compiled from various sources lists approximately 128
         marine bird species present off the Washington coast. Speich et
         al. (1987) reported a total of 87 species of birds observed or
         known to occur in the area between Point Grenville and Sealion
         Rock (Table 1). An additional 41 species known to occur in the
         study area and are listed in Table 2. At least eleven of these
         additional species occur regularly in the offshore waters along
         the coast, some in large numbers: black-footed and Laysan
         albatrosses, pink-footed, flesh-footed, Buller's and short-tailed
         shearwaters, red phalarope, south polar skua, Sabine's and
         glaucous gulls and Xantus' murrelet (Wahl, 1991).

              Species composition and abundance of marine birds vary by
         season in Washington coastal waters. While many species of birds
         are year-round residents, others may be summer or winter
         visitors, or migrants passing through on spring and/or fall
         migrations.

              Resident birds are present throughout the year. Breeding
         residents nest in the coastal areas of Washington. Non-breeding
         residents are represented by non-breeding individuals (juveniles
         that do not migrate) during the spring and summer periods. The
         glaucous-winged gull is a resident species that nests in coastal
         Washington, and many individual birds live their entire life in

                                       11-62










                       Table 1. Bird Species observed in Sealion Rock Study Area.
                                                   Source: Speich et. al., 1987.






                                               Common Name                  Genus/Species                             Common Name                 Genus/Species
                                          Loons                                                                  Oystercatchen;
                                            Red-throated loon               Gavia stellate                         American black                 Haemaropus bachmani
                                            Pacific loon                    Gavle pacifice                             oystercatcher
                                            Common loon                     GaVia Immer                          Shorebirds
                                          Grebes                                                                   Wandering tattler              Hateroscolus incanus
                                            Horned grebe                    Podiceps auritUS                       Sported sandpiper              ActIlls macularla
                                            Red-necked grebe                Podiceps grisegene                     WhImbrel                       Numenlus phaeopus
                                            Western grebe                   Aechmophorus                           Long-billed curlew             Numenfus americannus
                                                                               occidentalls                        Ruddy turnstome                Atenarie Interpies
                                                                                                                   Black turnsione                Arenarle melenocephala
                                          Tube Noses                                                               Surfbird                       Aphriza vigara
                                            Northern fulmer                 Fulmerus glacialls                     Sanderlings                    Calldris alba
                                            Sooty shearwater                Puffinus griseus                       Western sandpiper              Calldne mauni
                                          Storm-Petrals                                                            Least sandpiper                Calldris minutille
                                            Fork-tailed storm-petrel        Oceenodroma furcatat                   Rock sandpiper                 Calldris prilocnemis
                                            Leach's storm-petrel            Oceanadrome leucorhoa                  Dunlin                         Calidrus alpine
                                                                                                                   Red-necked phalarope           Phalaropvs lobalus
                                          Pelicans												  
                                            Brown pelican                   Pelecanus occidenfalis               Gulls and Terms
                                                                                                                   Pomarine Jaeger                Stefccrarlus parnerinus
                                          Cormorants                                                               Parasitic Jaeger               Sterecrarlus parasiticus
                                            Double-crested cormorant        Phalacrocorax surilus                  Long-tailed Jaeger             Stercoredus longicaudus
                                            Brandt's cormorant              Phalacrocorax penIcillatus             Bonaparte's gull               Larus philadelphla
                                            Pelagic cormorant               Phatacrocorax pelagicus                Heerman's gull                 Larus hearmanni
                                          Herons                                                                   Mew gull                       Latus canus
                                            Great blue heron                Ardea harodlas                         Ring-billed gull               Lerus delawarensis
                                                                                                                   California gull                Lsrus callibmicus
                                          Swans, Geese Ducks                                                       Herring gull                   Larus argentatus
                                            Tundra swan                     Cygnus columblennus                    Thayer's gull                  Larus theyed
                                            Greater white-fronted           Anser allifrons                        Western gull                   Larus occidentalis
                                            goose                                                                  Glauccus-winged gull           Larus gloucescens
                                            Snow goose                      Chen caerulescens                      Black-legged kittlwake         Fissa tridacryla
                                            Brant                           Brenta betnicla                        Caspian torn                   Sterna caspia
                                            Canada goose                    Brenta canadensis                      Arctic tarn                    Stems paradisaea
                                            Green-winged teal               Ames crecca                            Common tern                    Sterna h1rundo
                                            Mallard                         Anas platyrhynchos
                                            Northern piniall                Anes actua                           Alcids
                                            Northern shoveler               Anas clypeats                          Common murre                   Urla ealge
                                            American wigeon                 Anas americana                         Pigeon guillemot               Cepphus columba
                                            Canvasback                      Aythya vallsinerle                     Marbled murrelet               Brachyramphus marmaratus
                                            Scaup species                   Aythya species                         Ancient murrelet               Synthfiboramphus antlguus
                                            Harlequin duck                  Hisfrionicus histrianicus              Cassin's auklet                PtyChoramphus, aleuricus
                                            Black scoter                    Melanlits migra                        Rhinoceros auklet              Cerorhinca monocerals
                                            Surf scoter                     Malanitta perspIcIllsta                Tufted puffln                Fratercula clrrhata
                                            Whlia-winged scoter             Melanlita fusca                      Swallows
                                            Common goldeneye                Bucephala clangula                     Northern tough-winged          Steigidopletyx
                                            Bufflehead                      sucephala abeola                         swallow                         serripennis
                                            Common merganser                Mergus merganser                       Bam swallow                    Hirundo, rustica
                                            Red-breasted merganser          Mergus serraror                      Crows and Jays
                                            Ruddy duck                      Oxyura jamaicensIs                     Northwestern crow              Corvus caurinus
                                                                                                                   Common raven                   Corvus cotax
                                          Hawks and Eagles												  
                                            Osprey                          Pandlon haliaefus                    Starlings
                                            Bald eagle                      Hallaearus laucocephalus               European sterling              Sfulnus Vulgafis
                                          Falcons                                                                Songbirds
                                            Merlin                          Falco columbadus                       Savannah sparrow               Passerculus
                                            Paregrine falcon                Falco peregrinus                     Finches                              sandwichensis
                                          Plovers                                                                  American goldfInch             Carduells trlstIs
                                            Black-bellied plover            Pivvialls squatarole
                                            Semipalmaled plover             Chafdrius semicalmetus







                                                                                                        11-63
 









                  Table 2. Marine Bird Species Additional to those Listed                                                  

                                       Table I occurring in or near Sanctuary Boundary.
                                       Source: Speich et. al., 1987.



                                       Common Name




                                       Lords                                            Gutic and Terps
                                       Yellow-billed loan                          South Peter skus
                                       Gavis adsmati                               COthatecto skue
                                       Arctic Loan                                 Laughing quit
                                       Gavie inwr                                  Larm stricilLe
                                                                                   Gisuccus gull
                                       Tube Noses                                  Larus hyperborsug
                                       short-tailed albatross                      SLatey-backed gull
                                       Diomedea albatrus                           Larus schistisagus
                                       Laysan stbatross                            Ivory ult
                                       Diomodes immutabilis                        Pasophits eburnam
                                       BLack-foated albatross                      Red-lossed kittiwake
                                       Diomedes nigripes                           Rise& brovirostrfs
                                       Butter's shearwater                         Ross's suit
                                       Puffinus bulleri                            Rhodostethf a rosea,
                                       Flesh-footed shearwater                     Aleutian tern
                                       Puffinue   carnelpes                        Sterne steutIce
                                       Pink-footed shearwater                      Vacant tern
                                       Puffinus crestopue                          Sterne etegams
                                       Manx shearwater                             Forster's tern
                                       Puff1mus pufffnue                           Sterne forstori
                                       Short-tatted shearmater                     Sabina's quit
                                       Puffinus temuirestris                       Xeme sabint
                                       storm-PeTrEls                               ALcids
                                       Least storm-petreL                          Crested suklet
                                       Halocyptems Microsoft                       Aethis crittetj
                                       Wilson's stopm-Petral                       Least Mist
                                       OcesnItes ocesmicus                         Aethis pusitts
                                       Ashy storm-petreL                           Whiskered auktat
                                       Oceanodrame homachroo                       Aethim pygmsee
                                       Mottled petret                              KittLitz's murretst
                                       Teredrome inexpectate                       Brechyramphus brevirostrfs
                                       Sotander's petreL                           Mack guiLtemot
                                       Teredramm soLardri                          Capphug gryLle
                                       Murphyto petrel                             Parakeet auktot
                                       Teradrams uLtfma                            CycLarrhynchus paittacuta
                                                                                   Xantus' murrelet
                                       Pelicans                                    Endomychurs hypolouca
                                       American White Pelican                      Horned puffin
                                       PoLecams ethrorhynchos                      Fraturcuts cornicuLato
                                                                                   Thick-bfILed murre
                                                                                   Urfa Lewis
                                       Cormorants
                                       Red-faced  cormorant
                                       Phatocroccrax urfle

                                       Swans geese Ducks
                                       Barrows GoLdeneye
                                       BucephaLs clamgUts
                                       OLdsquaw
                                       CianguLe hyautis


                                       Shorefirds
                                       Nortern phatarope
                                       Lobipas tobatue







                                                                           11-64
 









         the area. In fact, Puget Sound and the outer Washington coast
         are the sole breeding areas for the glaucous-winged gull in the
         contiguous U.S. (SAB, 1990). The surf scoter is a resident
         species that does not nest in the area, but non-breeding young
         birds remain here during the spring and summer months, while
         adults go north to nest.

              Summer visitors are present during the spring and/or summer
         and usually absent during the winter. Summer residents may or
         may not breed in the area. Summer resident species that nest in
         the area include Leach's storm-petrel, osprey, snowy plover,
         spotted sandpiper, and Caspian tern. Summer resident species
         that do not nest in the area include sooty shearwater and
         Heermann's gull.

              winter visitors are present during the winter, and spring or
         fall, or both, and usually absent during the summer. Examples
         include the loons and grebes, swans, geese, brandt, most ducks,
         scoters, most shorebirds, herring gull, Thayer's gull, and black-
         legged kittiwake. Many species that are classified as winter
         visitors could also be classified non-breeding resident species,
         on the basis of small numbers of non-breeding individuals present
         during the summer period. Non-breeding common loons, Pacific
         loons, Western grebes, surf scoters, and black scoters are
         present in Washington coastal waters during the summer.

              migrants are generally only present during the spring or
         fall migration periods, or both. Examples include white-fronted
         geese, several shorebirds, phalaropes, pomarine and parasitic
         jaegers, California gulls, Sabine's gulls, and Arctic terns.
         Individual brown pelicans disperse up the Pacific coast from
         breeding colonies in Baja California, Mexico, and southern
         California, in late summer and fall, but by the end of the year
         nearly all birds have departed coastal Washington for southern
         waters. Heermann's gulls have an identical pattern, but it
         occurs earlier, in the summer and early fall period.

              Seven marine bird species present in Washington waters are
         listed as threatened or endangered. The short-tailed albatross,
         peregrine falcon, brown pelican, and Aleutian Canada goose are
         all on the Federal endangered species list (although the short-
         tailed albatross is not yet regarded as endangered within the
         U.S.). The bald eagle is listed as a threatened species, and
         Grays Harbor is one of two major adult concentrations on the west
         coast. The State of Washington lists the snowy plover and
         American white pelican as endangered species. The marbled
         murrelet may soon be considered as an active candidate for







                                       11-65









          listing as a threatened or endangered species.

               The marine birds of the Washington coast may be divided into
          four groups, based loosely on their geographic distribution and
          feeding habits:

                 Seabirds, such as alcids, shearwaters and gulls, which
                feed in open waters from the shoreline and estuaries to
                the open ocean. Some seabirds are strictly pelagic, while
                others prefer the nearshore environment;
               *.Shorebirds, such as sandpipers, which feed mainly along
                the intertidal and nearshore marine environment;
               * Waterfowl, such as ducks and geese, found near shore on
                the open coast and in estuaries;
               * Birds of prey, such as bald eagles and peregrine falcons,
                which breed and roost on land near water bodies, and feed
                in or near the water. (Strickland & Chasan, 1989)

               As with the other living resources of the Sanctuary, marine
          birds are often associated with specific habitats. In general,
          seabird activity is most concentrated along the Olympic coast,
          while shorebirds and waterfowl are found primarily in the bays
          and shallow waters of the southern coast. All of the major
          seabird colony sites (15 with >1000 birds) along the outer coast
          are from Point Grenville to Cape Flattery. Alternately, Willapa
          Bay and.Grays Harbor are critical as resting and foraging areas
          for several million migratory shorebirds and over one hundred
          thousand waterfowl. Birds of prey exist in very small numbers
          compared to the other marine bird categories and, though found
          throughout the study area, nest primarily on rugged terrain along
          the Olympic coast and at the mouth of the Columbia River. To
          determine bird species composition for specific habitats of the
          Washington coast, consult the species lists in Appendix C. Note
          that marine bird species interact. at several trophic levels of
          the food web. This fact makes them a vital component of the
          coastal ecosystem.

               1.   Seabirds

               The seabird colonies of Washington's outer coast are among
          the largest in population in the continental United States
          (Cummins, in Strickland and Chasan, 1989). The category
          "seabirds" refers to bird species that spend much of their
          lifecycle at sea. These birds inhabit sanctuary waters in
          greater number and frequency than any other marine birds. They
          also constitute the largest population of nesting marine birds
          within the proposed sanctuary boundaries.

               Seabirds include those that are pelagic (i.e. generally
          forage far offshore over the continental shelf, continental
          slope, and in oceanic waters) and those that feed in nearshore
          zones. Pelagic seabirds go ashore primarily to breed, and

                                        11-66









         otherwise rarely visit land. Pelagic species include the
         northern fulmar, five species of shearwaters, black footed
         albatross, arctic tern, pomarine jaeger, and fork-tailed and
         Leach's storm-petrels. The sooty shearwater is by far the most
         numerous. Huge flocks estimated to approach one million birds
         have been observed at the entrance to the Strait of Juan De Fuca
         during summer months (Strickland and Chasan, 1989). Nearshore
         seabirds feed within sight of land and include Pacific and red-
         throated loons, western grebes, brown pelicans, several species
         of gulls and cormorants, tufted puffins, common murres, and red-
         necked phalaropes.

               A recent study for the US Department of Interior (MMS, 1992)
         describes offshore seabird activity in the Northwest as follows:

                    Seabird populations were f ound to be most densely
               concentrated over the continental shelf and least so
               seaward of the continental slope (i.e., waters deeper
               than 2,000 m). During late spring through late summer,
               the shearwaters, storm-petrels, gulls, Common Murres and
               Cassin's Auklets numerically dominated the fauna. All
               these except the shearwaters nest in the study area.
               With autumn migration, the importance of shearwaters and
               petrels declined, but the number of phalaropes,
               California Gulls, and fulmars increased.       Phalaropes,
               California Gulls, and fulmars, together with other gulls,
               murres, auklets, and kittiwakes, constituted the major
               elements of the winter fauna. Although total population
               estimates have not been attempted in this report, there
               is no doubt that peak populations in Oregon and
               Washington reach into the millions of birds.
                    Every   area   over   the   shelf   harbored     dense
               concentrations of birds during the year. However, a few
               locations stood out prominently.       The major colony
               complexes were located in southern and northern Oregon
               and along the Olympic Peninsula of Washington. offshore
               of these sites, nesting birds foraged in dense
               aggregations   to   about   50 km    radius.      Petrels,
               shearwaters, and alcids heavily used the shelf-edge banks
               off central Oregon and northern Washington. The broad
               shelf area of northern Washington consistently harbored
               large populations of shearwaters, gulls, murres, and
               auklets.

         The report findings demonstrate that foraging activity is
         significant throughout the study area to the shelf break and
         beyond. Swiftsure Bank and the Juan de Fuca Canyon stand out in
         the data as intense foraging sites. The 50 km foraging range of
         nesting birds extends, within the study area, from the
         international border to the Grays Harbor/Willapa Bay area.
         Strong topographically induced upwelling is known to occur along
         the shelf of southwestern Vancouver Island, particularly at the

                                         11-67









          edge of the Juan de Fuca Canyon. Oceanic fronts, areas of strong
          horizontal property gradients, often occur at the seaward edges
          of coastal upwellings. These stratified water density layers
          trap poorly mobile zooplankton upon which some seabird species
          feed (MMS, 1992).

               The coastal rocks and islands along the outer coast are
          critical nesting and roosting sites for many seabird species (See
          Appendix C, Figure 15 for ratings of significance to several
          species). All major seabird nesting sites along the Washington
          coast have been identified. Most, are located on headlands or
          islands protected by the USFWS, the NPS, or native tribes.

               The colony site is a very critical habitat for seabirds
          because reproduction and thus continuation of species depend on
          these sites. Here, the population will reach its annual low,
          just before young are hatched, and its annual high, just after
          hatching. At other times of the year, seabirds may be able to
          avoid problems, such as disruption of food supplies and perhaps
          even large oil spills, simply by flying elsewhere, but for
          successful reproduction, they are: limited to the area in the
          vicinity of the colony.

               Colonial seabird populations in the study area are estimated
          to range from 108,530 breeding pairs (Strickland and Chasan,
          1989) to 240,000 individuals (Wahl, 1984). Approximately 75% of
          the total estimated colonial seabird population in Washington
          breed between Point Grenville and Neah Bay which is in, or
          adjacent to, subarea 4 (Figure 33). The shoreline south of Point
          Grenville, in or adjacent to subarea 7, has limited nesting
          habitat available for colonial seabirds, except for accreted sand
          islands in Grays Harbor and Willapa Bay and the rock cliff face
          at the mouth of the Columbia River (Speich and Wahl, 1989).

               Figure 34 displays the location and density of breeding
          seabirds along the Washington coast. This data reveals a
          distinct difference in profile between the breeding seabird
          populations along the Olympic coast and those of the southern
          coast (Grays Harbor/Willapa Bay). The Olympic coast is dominated
          by the more pelagic species and much higher numbers of nesters,
          while the.southern coast is primarily nesting habitat for gulls
          and terns. There is an obvious break in nesting activity between
          Ocean Shores and Point Grenville that coincides with a distinct
          change in habitat. These characteristics are also evident by the
          distribution of individual nesting colonies in Figure 35.
          The dominant species of breeding seabirds in Washington are
          Cassin's auklets, rhinoceros auklets, common murres, Leach's
          storm-petrels, glaucus-winged gulls and tufted puffins (Figure
          36). Destruction Island is home to one of the seven major
          colonies (18,000 pairs) of rhinoceros auklets in the world, and
          only one of two*major colonies of greater than 20,000 birds along
          the entire west coast (SAB, 1990). The rhinoceros auklet, Fork

                                        11-68




























                                         6%
                          18
                                         16%
                                                    .. .............................

                                                          ..............
                                                   %. ................



                              54%

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


                                                                       .............
                                                      .. ........... . .
                                          Y., YIN
                                                                               ..............
                              5 V,    X
                                                ......                  ex        N.
                                                                              X
                                                               X        ...





                                                                      *Less, than I percent











             Figure 33. Percentage of Breeding Seabirds along the Marine
                              Shorelines of Washington (Speich and Wahl, 1989).

                                                       11-69

































                                                                                                    09                  0                    0 E                  0



                                                                                                             (SOUCOA441) lp,je Gillpoo;g
                                                                   -.410



















                                                                                                                                                            94140JOWMD

                                                                                                                                                                 21SA18d




















                        Figure 34.                     Estimated Breeding Populations (numbers of
                                                       individuals) of Seabird Families (alcids, storm-
                                                       petrels, cormorants, and terms) by Region along
                                                       Coastal Washington (Strickland and Chasan, 1989 from
                                                       data in Speich and Wahl, 1989).

                                                                                                    11--70

















                                                Cassin's Aukl*t                                                        Rhinoceros Auklet












                                                                 Catalog Total                                                        Catalog Total
                          willhIriplon colonles                    87,600 b.ldS                WGIMAIlon. coloales                      450.614 46fd.

                                                                7 a eclemy 01,66                                                       a calarly Nile&



                                                    Tufted Puffin                                                             Pelagic Comorant














                                                                                                                                              -Fee
                                                                 Catalog Total
                                       colo"lls                    23.342 bifes

                                                               27M .001DAY M404









                   Figure 35. Distribution of Nesting Sites of the Washington
                                              Species of seabirds (Speich and Wahl, 1989).

                                                                                      11-71



























                                                 Double-crested Cormorant
                                                                                                                         Brandt's Cormorant













                                                                           C61616% revel                                                   Ceialog Twel

                                                                              *T" 0.0.

                                                                         -20 _- so,*-. $.Its



                                                           Pigeon Ovillomof                                               Marbled Murrelot




























                       Figure 35. continued


                                                                                                11-72






























                                                                                              Common Murre


















                                                                                       C.lw                    W )GO

                                                                                                                       -1..

                                                         Fork-td;led Storm-Pelfol                                     Loach's Storm Patrol












                                                                             Cafelso Tolal                                                C814190 total
                                                                                GIs D-0                             Calp"It,               .1s.tao -d.

















                    Figure 35. continued.

                                                                                           11-73












                                  LEACH'S STORM-PETREL
                                  3 6.7 00 (12 %)






                                                   GLAUCOUS-WINGED
                                              ...... WESTERN GULLS
                                                         3 9, 9 2 312 %
               CASSIN'S AUKLET

                 8 7.6 00 (2 9 %)




            ...........


                                                       COMMON MURRE
                                                          3 0,7 80 (10%)


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




                                                 TUFTED PUFFIN
                         ..............
                                                    23,342 (8%)
        RHINOCEROS
          AUKLET
            60,814 (20%)
                             FORK-T AILED STORM-PETREL          3878
                             DOUBLE-CRESTED CORMORANT           3296
                             BRANDT'S'CORMORANT                   554
                             PELAGIC CORMORANT                  4866
                             AMERICAN BLACK OYSTERCATCHER        334  9%
                             RING-BILLED GULL                     10a

                             CASPIAN TERN                       7918
                             PIGEON GUILLEMOT                   4270
                             MARBLED MURRELET                   2417)




           Figure 36. Populations of Breeding Seabirds and Percentages of
                       Total Aggregate Population in Washington (Speich and
                       Wahl, 1989).

                                          11-74









         -tailed storm petrel, Brandt's cormorant, and caspian tern are
         all restricted to very few nesting sites (Speich and Wahl, 1989).
         other species that breed on these coastal rocks and islands
         include terns, cormorants, black oystercatchers, ring-billed and
         western gulls, pigeon guillemots, and ancient marbled murrelets.

             Alcids are a distinctive family of seabirds present along
         the Washington coast that includes the tufted puffin, rhinoceros
         auklet, cassin's auklet, common murre ancient and marbled
         murrelets, and pigeon guillemot. They are colonial nesters, live
         long lives, and reproduce very slowly. Adults do not reach
         sexual maturity for several years, and then produce only one to
         two eggs per clutch. Also, breeding birds will not necessarily
         mate each year. Most alcids are found in shallower nearshore
         waters, especially in summer when birds are closely tied to
         nesting sites. Large colonies of tufted puffins, rhinoceros
         auklets, Cassin's auklets and common murres are present on the
         nearshore islands of the Olympic coast. Except for Cassin's
         auklets (nocturnal during breeding), birds are often seen
         roosting and gathering about the colonies. Foraging areas differ
         somewhat for each species. Cassin's auklets and tufted puffins
         are commonly found foraging over the continental slope.
         Rhinoceros auklets may forage in these areas but also regularly
         forage in closer nearshore waters, and in Grays Harbor. Common
         murres, like rhinoceros auklets, fly considerable distances to
         foraging areas up and down the coast, and are also seen from
         Grays Harbor south to the Columbia.

             The traits and sensitivities of the common murre are in many
         ways typical of species within the alcid family. Common murres
         are among the most colonial species of seabirds. They nest on
         open rock or dirt ledges of coastal islands and narrow ledges of
         vertical cliffs. A pair of common murres will produce only one
         egg per year. The oblong egg is layed on bare rock and is held
         between the legs of the parent. Common murres nest at 18
         locations alongthe Olympic outer coast and sometimes shift
         colony sites. These birds are strong fliers and are capable of
         foraging long distances from their colonies. They dive to
         considerable depths to capture fish, crustaceans, and
         cephalopods'. In late summer and fall, adult females of the
         Washington coastal population fly into Puget Sound to molt and
         winter. Meanwhile, adult males accompany their newly fledged
         chicks to sea, staying with them and feeding them for several
         weeks. The chicks fledge when small and are unable to fend for
         themselves. While migrating, the adult murres undergo a complete
         molt rendering them flightless. The males and their fledgling
         chicks swim north and enter Puget Sound through the Strait of
         Juan de Fuca.

             common murres are highly vulnerable to oil contamination,
         particularly.during the migration phase for males and chicks.
         Since these birds are flightless and completely dependent upon

                                       11-75









          marine prey, they remain in the water where they can become
          Ammobilized and encased by oil. Preening can lead to ingestion
          of oil and toxic effects. Entire colonies could be devastated by
          a local oil spill occurring at the time the birds are departing
          nest sites for the water migration to Puget Sound.    Nesting
          murres are particularly sensitive to disturbance by boats, low-
          flying aircraft, and humans on foot as well. When disturbed,
          adults flush from the colonies and may inadvertently destroy.
          chicks and eggs held between their legs. The remaining chicks
          and eggs are subject to increased predation from gulls, ravens
          and crows. Studies by B. Tschanz in 1959 concluded that murres
          can lay a second or third egg if previous eggs are destroyed in  a
          given season. However, chicks hatching later in the season are
          likely to have lower survival rates (Wilson, 1993).

               There are many threats to the populations of breeding
          seabirds in Washington. They include disturbance of nesting
          areas by recreation, military operations, and domestic animals;
          loss of habitat and/or decline in the population of prey species;
          entanglement in fishing nets, particularly gill nets; and oil
          pollution. A negative impact on seabird populations may not be
          realized immediately for several reasons. One is that seabirds
          have long life spans, commonly between 20 and 30 years. Some
          more longer lived species may even have a breeding life of 50
          years. Secondly, recruitment to breeding populations is slow  and
          delayed. Many seabirds spend at least two years, commonly three,
          and up to 9 years as non-breeders. Thirdly, clutch size is small
          (1-5), compared to land birds (7-15). Long breeding lives, low
          recruitment rates, and delayed maturity mask the detection of
          effects on successive breeding populations for several years.
          This underscores the need to monitor seabird populations
          regularly to detect impacts of chronic pollution, habitat loss,
          oil spills, and other environmental disasters (Wahl, 1984).

               The effects of disturbance are often subtle and easily
          overlooked by the casual observer, yet are often devastating to
          the birds. Impacts range from slight disruption of courtship
          behavior, incubation, and feeding of nestlings by adults, to
          outright mortality of nestlings from exposure to heat or cold,
          and induced predation by rival adult birds or by other species
          (Speich & Wahl, 1989). Each seabird species is sensitive to a
          unique set of factors and the particular timing of any
          disturbance. Some species have greater tolerance levels than
          others.

               Encroachment on seabird colonies by humans or domestic
          animals (whether for recreational purposes or otherwise) can
          cause prolonged disruption of nesting sites, resulting in
          increased mortality rates. Dogs are particularly disruptive to
          nesting,birds and can be disastrous to a colony. Marine
          recreational activities can cause repeated disruptions that may
          eventually lead to abandonment of nests or entire colony sites.

                                        11-76









         The intense activity (noise, motion, spotlights) surrounding
         search and rescue operations can frighten adults from colonies
         for several hours. The sudden loud noise of low-flying jet
         aircraft panics nesting birds from nest sites and particularly
         affects cormorants, common murres and tufted puffins.

               The above disturbances can also impact birds at favored
         foraging and roosting sites. Additional activities that may
         directly or indirectly affect foraging seabirds are physical
         alterations of the benthos (e.g. dredging, filling, dumping) and
         fishing practices. Alteration of benthic habitat can reduce the
         carrying capacity of the area for prey species important to
         seabirds. Fishing can also deplete prey abundance and directly
         damage birds that are caught in nets.

               Seabirds, especially pelagic, are particularly sensitive to
         impacts from marine oil spills. Clark (1989) effectively
         describes the impacts of oil on seabirds:

                    Unlike most other organisms in the sea, sea birds
               are harmed through the physical properties of floating
               oil, and the toxicity of its constituents is of minor.
               importance. If liquid oil (or any other surface-active
               substance) contaminates a bird's plumage, its water-
               repellant properties are lost. If the bird remains on
               the sea, water penetrates the plumage and displaces the
               air trapped between the feathers and the skin. This air
               layer provides buoyancy and thermal insulation. With its
               loss, the plumage becomes waterlogged and the birds may
               sink and drown. Even if this does not happen, the loss
               of thermal insulation results in a rapid exhaustion of
               food reserves in an attempt to maintain body temperature,
               followed by hypothermia and, commonly, death.          Birds
               attempt to free their plumage of contaminating oil by'
               preening and they swallow quantities of it. Depending on
               its toxicity, the oil may then cause intestinal disorders
               and renal or liver failure. Quite small quantities of
               oil ingested by birds during the breeding season depress
               egg-laying, and of the eggs that are laid the proportion
               that hatch successfully is reduced.             If oil is
               transferred from the plumage of an incubating bird to the
               eggs, the embryos may be killed.
                    Indirect effects of oil pollution on reproduction
               appears to be much less important than the direct
               mortality of adult birds, and most attention has been
               directed towards the latter problem. The species most
               commonly   a f f ected 'are  auks:   guillemots     (murre),
               razorbills and puffins; and some diving sea-ducks:
               scoters, velvet scoters, long-tailed ducks (old squaw),
               and eiders. These birds spend most of their time on the
               surface of the water and go are particularly likely to
               encounter floating oil, and because they dive rather than

                                          11-77









                f ly up when disturbed, they are as likely as riot to
                resurface through the oil slick, so becoming completely
                covered with oil. Furthermore, these ducks are extremely
                gregarious except when ashore for breeding, and the auks
                are gregarious at all times of the year. Thus, if there
                are casualties they are likely to be numerous. Indeed
                quite small oil slicks drifting through concentrations of
                birds resting on the sea may inf lict heavy casualties
                quite disproportionate to the quantity of oil.         Thus,
                when 230,000 t of crude oil was lost from the Amaco Cadiz
                on the Brittany coast, the known sea bird casualties
                numbered 4572; but the largest known kill of sea birds
                from oil pollution was in the Skagerrak Can arm of the
                North Sea between Denmark and Norway] in January 1981
                when 30,000 oiled birds appeared on the beaches, and this
                appears to have been caused by small amounts of oil
                discharged by two vessels. Indeed, the estimated loss of
                12,000 birds on the north-east coast of England in
                January and February 1970 from oil slicks that were never
                even identified, equals the estimated loss following the
                wreck of the Torrey Canyon (the second largest tanker
                spill to date - 860,000 barrels in 1967].

                In total, over 500,000 seabirds (juveniles included) are
           concentrated within Washington nesting colonies each year. Over
           325,000 colonial seabirds are found in subarea 4 and about 45,000
           are present in colonies in subarea 7. The remainder are found in
           inland waters (SAB, 1990). Those species for which the study
           area is particularly important are the black-legged kittiwake,
           the rhinoceros auklet, and the tufted puffin. Additionally,
           nesting colonies along the outer coast of Washington contain more
           than 50% of contiguous U.S. west coast total populations for the
           following species: Fork-tailed storm-petrel, Caspian tern,
           Cassin's auklet, and tufted.puffin.

                ii. Shorebirds

                Shorebirds do not swim, but rather wade or probe at the
           waters edge, feeding on shallow-water organisms or prey in the
           intertidal mud or sand. Shorebirds such as western sandpipers,
           sanderlings, dunlin, and semi-palmated and black-bellied plovers
           roost and forage along coastal beaches and bays during their
           annual migrations.

                While most shorebirds tend -to feed on sandy beaches or
           mudflats, several species prefer to forage on rock substrate and
           are consistently found on rocks and islands of the Olympic
           coastal region. Representatives of this group include ruddy and
           black turnstones, wandering tattler, surfbird, and rock sandpiper
           (see Trophic Level (9), Appendix F). They pass through during
           migrations, but small numbers of three species winter in these
           rocky surf areas of the coast (Strickland and Chasan, 1989).

                                           11-78









              Unlike seabirds, most shorebirds are not associated with the
         marine environment during the breeding season, but nest on
         coastal and interior wetlands. A few species nest in small
         numbers in the Grays Harbor/Willapa Bay region. These include
         the snowy plover, kildeer,,semi-palmated plover, and common
         snipe.

              Shorebirds depend upon critical staging sites along the
         coast during migrations. Coastal bays and estuaries along the
         Washington outer coast (i.e. GraysHarbor and Willapa Bay) are
         important feeding and resting areas for large concentrations of
         birds during migration and the winter season. These areas are
         the last estuaries at which many birds stop during their
         migration to Alaska. Over 12 species of shorebirds stage in the
         spring with numbers greater than 1,000,000 in the Grays Harbor
         area, and 750,000 in Willapa Bay. Approximately 30,000
         shorebirds overwinter in Willapa Bay. These are also important
         areas for the endangered peregrine falcons, which prey on many of
         the shorebirds (McMinn, 1993).

              iii. waterfowl

              Waterfowl are flat-billed birds that spend the majority of
         their lifecycle on the water. Like shorebirds, waterfowl
         typically breed on freshwater habitats, but many species move to
         shoreline and nearshore habitats when breeding is complete. Many
         species of waterfowl stage and winter in Washington's protected
         marine waters. Approximately 10,900 ducks and geese overwinter
         in Willapa Bay, with numbers swelling during migrations to
         greater than 100,000. Approximately 20,000 waterfowl migrate
         through Grays Harbor (Atkinson, 1993). Very small numbers of
         geese and ducks remain to nest in these two areas during the
         spring and summer.

              Other species, such'as scoter, harlequin, bufflehead,
         merganser, goldeneye, oldsquaw, and scaup, winter in the
         nearshore waters of the open coast. Scoters are by far the most
         numerous species of sea ducks in nearshore waters. A small
         number of sub-adult birds are found in the area during the
         summer, soon joined by large numbers of adults from northern
         continental nesting areas. The sub-adult birds pass through a
         flightless period when they molt their feathers. At this time,
         flocks numbering tens of thousands are found scattered along the
         coast. At least 100,000 and possibly up to 300,000 birds molt in
         the area between Point Grenville and Destruction Island. After
         molting is completed, many birds may disperse down the Pacific
         coast, but scoters are found in Washington coastal waters
         throughout the winter (Strickland and Chasan, 1989).

              iv. Birds of Prey

              Peregrine falcons and bald eagles nest and feed extensively

                                       11-79









          along Washington's coastal waters. The Washington Department of
          Wildlife (WDOW) Nongame Program counted 17 pairs of nesting
          peregrine falcons in the state in i991. Nine of the 17 pairs
          nested on the outer coast. Peregrines prefer steep cliffs for
          nesting. Shorebirds are a favored food source for these birds of
          prey. Large flocks of migrating shorebirds at Grays Harbor
          attract peregrines from distant nesting sites along the coast.
          Peregrine falcons continue a slow, steady recovery in Washington
          and do not show evidence of serious biochemical contamination as
          do populations in California and Oregon (WDW, 1991). Their low
          numbers require that particular attention be given to preserving
          habitat and minimizing disturbance. The peregrine falcon is
          listed as an endangered species by Washington State as well as
          the Federal government.

               A continuous band of bald eagle nests have been established
          along the entire shoreline of the study area, including the
          shoreline of the Strait of Juan de Fuca. The nesting territories
          are contiguous to one another, with nests approximately 1 mile
          apart (Taylor, 1992). The eagles patrol the coastline for fish,
          waterfowl and prey of opportunity. The bald eagle population in
          Washington appears to be in good health and is growing annually.
          The WDOW Nongame Program counted 426 active nests along western
          Washington waterways in 1991 (WDW, 1991). There are 51 breeding
          territories along the coastal boundary of the Sanctuary between
          Copalis Rock and Koitlah Point (WDW, 1993). The bald eagle in
          Washington State is listed as threatened by both the Federal
          government and the State of Washington.

                A special report by the NOAA SAB (1990) analyzed marine
          bird populations based on ecological considerations such as
          breeding sites,. staging areas, and foraging areas (Appendix C,
          Tables 7 and 8). Two observations are noteworthy. First,
          subareas 4 and 7 are most significant to the overall distribution
          of marine birds. This reflects the importance of colony sites
          along the rocky headlands in subarea 4, and the staging areas
          that serve as the last major stop-over on the Pacific flyway
          before the seabirds fly to Alaska.

               (f) Marine Mammals

               A total of 30 species of marine mammals are reported to
          occur in the coastal waters of Washington (Table 3). The
          distribution of a selected species of marine mammals in the seven
          subareas is shown in Appendix D, Table 9. Of these, seven are
          considered common: California sea lions, northern sea lions
          (although their numbers have decreased and they have become
          listed as threatened species), harbor seals, harbor porpoises,
          gray whales, Rissols dolphin, and Pacific white-sided dolphin.
          The river otter, usually associated with freshwater rivers and
          lakes, has adapted to the local marine environment. species
          which are known to breed in the sanctuary study area include the

                                        11-80










               Table 3. Marine Mammal Species Reported From The Coastal Waters
                                 of Washington (Source: Speich et. al., 1987;
                                 Strickland and Chasan, 1989; and Schmitten, 1993).




                    Order                              Species                             Occurrence             Legal Status

                 Carnivora      Sea otter, Enhydra lutris                                        R         WAC, MMPA, ESA, WSE
                 Pinnipedia,    Ca. sea lion, Zalophus californianus                             C         WAC,MMPA
                                N. sea lion, EumetopJas jubatus                                  C         WAC MMPA
                                N. fur seai, Callorhinus ursinus                                 R         WAC,   MMPA
                                Pacific harbor seal, Phoca vitulina                              C         WAC,   MMPA
                                N. elephant seal, Mirounga angusfirostris                      R         WAC,   MMPA
                 Cetacea        Ca. gray whale, Eschrichtius robustus                            C         WAC,   MMPA,     ESA
                                Right whale, Eubalaena glacialis                                 A         WAC, MMPA, ESA
                                Minke whale, Balaenoptera acutorostrata                          A         WAC, MMPA
                                Fin whale, Balaenoptera physalus                                 A         WAC,   MMPA, ESA
                                Sei whale, Balaenoptera borealis                                 A         WAC, MMPA, ESA
                                Blue whale, Balaenoptera musculus                                A         WAC, MMPA, ESA
                                Humpback whale, Megaptera novaeangliae                           R         WAC, MMPA, ESA
                                Sperm whale, Physeter macrocephalus                              R         WAC, MMPA, ESA
                                Pygmy sperm whale, Kogia breviceps                               A         WAC, MMPA
                                N. Pacific beaked whale, Mesoploolon steinegeri                  A         WAC,   MMPA
                                Hubb's beaked whale, Mesoplodon carthubbsi                       A         WAC,MMPA
                                Cuvier's beaked whale, Ziphius cavirostris                       A         WAC,   MMPA
                                Baird's beaked whale, Berardius bairdY                           A         WAC,   MMPA
                                Pilot whale, Globicephala macrorhynchus                          A         WAC,MMPA
                                Risso's dolphin, Grampus griseus                                 A         WAC,MMPA
                                Killer whale, Orcinus orca                                       R         WAC,MMPA
                                False killer whale, Pseudorca crassidens                         A         WAC,   MMPA
                                Common dolphin, Delphinus delphis                                A         WAC,MMPA
                                N. right whale dolphin, Lissodelphis borealis                    A         WAC,   MMPA
                                Striped dolphin, Stenella coeruleoalba                           A         WAC,   MMPA
                                Pacific white-sided dolphin, Lagenorhyncus obliquidens           A         WAC,   MMPA
                                Dall's porpoise, Phocoenoides dalli                              R         WAC,MMPA
                                Harbor porpoise, Phoccena phocoena                               C         WAC, MMPA, WST
                 C    Common       R   Rare     A   Accidental                      WAC - Washington Administrative Codes
                                                                                  MMPA - U.S. Marine Mammal Protection Act
                                                                                    ESA - U.S. Endangered Species Act
                                                                                    WSE - Washington State Endangered Species
                                                                                    WST - Washington State Threatened Species






                                                                      11-81
 








           sea otter, harbor seal, and harbor porpoise. Four species, the
           northern sea lion, California sea lion, northern fur seal, and
           gray whale are regular seasonal migrants along the coast.

                Marine mammals listed on the Federal threatened and
           endangered species list include gray, right, fin, sei, blue,
           humpback, and sperm whales, and the northern (Steller) sea lion
           (listed as a threatened species under the ESA by final rule on
           November 26, 1990). The sea otter is listed as a Washington
           State endangered species; the harbor porpoise is listed as a
           Washington State threatened species.

                Some species of cetaceans (whales and porpoises) are found
           along the Washington coast during the entire year. The most
           frequently observed are the harbor porpoise, Pacific white-sided
           dolphin, Rissols dolphin and California gray whale. The harbor
           porpoise is a year-round resident that often inhabits bays and
           inshore waters, however its shyness makes it difficult to acquire
           accurate popul*ation data. Aerial and ship surveys conducted
           between 1984 and 1986 estimated a population of about 45,000
           animals along the coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington
           (Osmek, 1993).

                The gray whale is primarily a coastal, nearshore species
           usually found in water depths of less than 50 meters. Its range
           extends from breeding grounds off' Baja.California to major
           feeding areas in the Bering and Chuckchi Seas. They are most
           abundant along the Washington outer coast during northward
           migration from February through April, and southward migration
           from October through December. The population of Eastern North
           Pacific gray whale is estimated to be about 21,000 animals (Jones
           et al., 1984; Reilly gt al., 1983). Annually, ten to fifteen
           individuals remain as summer residents near Kalaloch, Cape Alava,
           and Cape Flattery.

                Other cetaceans regularly observed in coastal or offshore
           waters include killer whales, Dall's porpoise and Minke whales.
           Humpback, blue, and sperm whales are seen offshore during the
           summer months, but these sightings are rare. The right whale is
           an extremely endangered species with an estimated population of
           only 200 in the entire North Pacific ocean.

                Pinnipeds (seals and sea lions) found along the outer coast
           include the California sea lion, northern sea lion, northern fur
           sea, Pacific harbor seal, and the northern elephant seal. The
           distribution of pinniped haulout sites is shown in Figure 37.
           Harbor seals are the most abundant pinniped in coastal
           Washington. They are year-round residents of both offshore and
           inshore waters and the only pinnipeds that breed in Washington.

                Harbor seals use nearshore rocks, reefs, and sand bars for
           rookery and haulout sites. They frequent logs and floating

                                          11-82












                                20f          1260            40F          20'       .1250         40'         1 20'         1240
                                                                                                            :X




                                                                                         Duntze Rock


                                                                                                                                              20'
                                                                                                                                   CANA
                                                      100                                                                               PA




                                                                                               E
                                                                                                                                              48'

                                                                                                                                INdT6N
                                                                               100


                                                                                                                                z

                                                                                                                                              40'
                                                                                                 Oestructl@m Istand     ;ea@a


                                                                                                                   U ts

                                                                                                                     a
                                                                                                      Sealion Roct
                                                                                                                      E ELI B
                                                                                                                                              20'
                                                                                                                        6U*'m**'a*U1t'4
                                                                                                                      P     F
                                                                                                                            I N ILLE
                                                      HAULOUT AREAS
                                                         Harbor Seal

                                                      13 California Sea Lion

                                                      A Northern Sea Lion
                                                                                                                                Ci
                                                                                                                        Ocean ity

                                                                                                                                                  C
                                                                                                                                              47


                                                                                                                                H
                                         PACIFIC OCEAN
                                                                                                                                p
                                                                                                                            SHOALWATER


                                                                                                                                              40'
                                                                                                                                y
                                                                                                                            IFT
                                                             DEPTHS IN FATHOMS

                                                             NAUTICAL MILES
                                                                                                                        C

                                                             0    10      20
                                                             STATUTE MILES                                                  C E.,
                                                                                                                            DISAPPOINTMENT
                                                             0   10     20                                                                    20'
                                                                                                           loo

                                                                                                                                *Columbia River






                    Figure 37. Distribution of Harbor Seal and Sealion Haulout Sites
                                              Along the Washington Coast (S. Jeffries, WDW in
                                              Strickland and Chasan, 1989).

                                                                                      11-83










          structures, shallow bays, and tidal flats near abundant food
          sources. The current harbor seal. population in Washington is
          estimated to be approximately 32,688 animals (Huber et al, 1993),
          with approximately 2,200 seals occurring from Point Grenville to
          Cape Flattery (Speich and Whal, 2.989).

               Both California sea lions and northern sea lions are present
          on the Washington outer coast. Sea lions use open water for
          feeding, and nearshore islands, reefs, and rocks for hauling out.
          California sea lions breed on islands off the coast of California
          and Mexico. After breeding, many adult and sub-adult males
          migrate northward into British Columbia. They are found in
          Washington waters from August through May. As many as 4,000-
          5,000 individuals have been estimated to migrate through the
          vicinity of Sealion Rock (Bigg, 1.985 in Speich et al., 1987).
          California sea lions prefer isolated rocky areas of coarse sand
          beaches free from human interference as haulout sites.

               Northern (Stellar) sea lion population declines have been
          documented in the core of their range in Alaska resulting in the
          species being listed as threatened under the Endangered Species
          Act. However, numbers of Stellar sea lions have remained stable
          in British Columbia, Washington and Oregon. The range of the
          northern sea lion extends around the Pacific rim from Hokkaido,
          Japan, to the Channel Islands off' the coast of southern
          California. The centers of abundance and distribution are the
          Gulf of Alaska and Aleutian Islands, respectively (Loughlin et
          al., 1987). Loughlin, Perlov, and Vladimirov (1992) estimated
          the current Stellar sea lion population range-wide at 39-48
          percent of the population estimated by Kenyon and Rice in 1961.
          The NMFS has placed the northern sea lion on the Federal list of
          threatened species due to massive population declines (63% loss
          between 1985-1989) in areas where they are most abundant such as
          the Aleutian Islands and the Gulf of Alaska (NMFS, 1992).

               While there are no known breeding areas in Washington,
          northern sea lions are found along the coast throughout the year.
          Primary haulout sites are located along the northern coast,
          especially near Flattery Rocks, Cape Alava, and Split Rock.
          Northern sea lion populations in Washington were estimated during
          the 1970's to be about 450 in winter and 600 in summer
          (Strickland and Chasan, 1989).

               Northern fur seals breed primarily on the Pribilof Islands
          in the Bering Sea. They migrate southward into the eastern North
          Pacific Ocean during the late fal.1 and early winter, reaching
          peak numbers of 86,000 off Washington in April (Antonelis and
          Perez, 1984). Northward migration begins by early spring with
          the fur seals mostly absent from the area from July through
          December. Northern fur seals prefer the open waters of the
          continental shelf and rarely come within 8 km of land.



                                         11-84









              The northern elephant seal is the largest of the pinnipeds
         in the North Pacific. They breed between January and March on
         island from central California south to Baja California. After
         the breeding season, they move into coastal and offshore waters
         with males traveling as far north as southeast Alaska. Elephant
         seals can be seen year-round off Washington though sightings are
         most common in the spring. They usually prefer waters well
         offshore but have been sighted on Tatoosh Island (Calambokidis et
         al., 1987) and are reported to occur in inland waters of
         Washington (Everitt et al., 1979, 1@980)-

              Sea otters along the Washington coast once ranged from the
         mouth of the Columbia River to Point Grenville, with fewer
         numbers found north to Cape Flattery, Neah Bay, and east into the
         Strait of Juan De Fuca. Commercial hunting for its valuable pelt
         had eliminated the species from Washington by the early 1900's.
         The last known "resident" sea otters in Washington were taken in
         Willapa Bay in 1910 (Scheffer, 1940). A total of 59 otters
         transplanted from Alaska were released at Point Grenville,and La
         Push in 1969 and 1970, forming the basis for the present
         population estimated to be 300 individuals in 1992 (Bowlby,
         1992). Sea otters currently range along 70 km of the coast from
         Destruction Island north to Point of the Arches (Figure 38).
         They prefer rocky habitats with extensive kelp beds common to the
         northern portion of the sanctuary study area, and usually feed
         within one mile of shore in waters less than 20m deep. The
         population undergoes seasonal shifts in location. The Cape Alava
         area is used all year with higher numbers there in winter and
         early spring. By summer some of the population has shifted south
         to the area of Cape Johnson (just north of La Push). These
         otters eventually return north, and by September the main
         population is back at Cape Alava. This area is probably
         preferred for winter habitat because of the extensive Macrocystis
         kelp beds, and the protection offered by Ozette and Bodelteh
         Islands. The sea otter-is on the Washington State endangered
         species list.

              River otters are land mammals usually associated with
         freshwater rivers and lakes, but have adapted to the marine
         environment. They are often mistaken for sea otters and are
         found in marine/estuarine areas along the outer coast, especially
         in the vicinity of Cape Alava. Their diet includes marine prey
         such as fishes, crabs, mussels, oysters, barnacles, and sea
         stars. other land mammals such as black bear, deer, and raccoons
         prowl the intertidal area for food.

              An analysis of the distribution of marine mammals among the
         seven subareas indicates that areas 1, 2 and 5 stand out as most
         significant to the overall assemblage of marine mammals. These
         are the areas that are furthest offshore. Also, the sanctuary
         study area provides particularly significant habitat for seven
         marine mammals: the harbor seal, harbor porpoise, killer whale,

                                       11-85












                                               20'             126'0            401              20'            1250             40'              20'             1240
                                                                                                                                                    fi



                                                                                                                      Duntze Rock


                                                                                                                                                                                       2C
                                                     500



                                                                                                              A



                                                                                                                                                                                       4L
                                                                                                                                                            WAsk
                                                                                                                                            P .ush.                   NGTON
                                                                                                                                            .... ... ...


                                                                                                                                    .g


                                                                                                                              Destruci-F      I@                                      4C
                                                                                                                                                         Clearwar   R.



                                                                                                                                                         S R

                                                                                                                                                    "'Raft A
                                                                                                                                     Sealion R Ck
                                                                                                                                                    6@A
                                                                                                                                                                                      2C
                                                                          DISTRIBUTION
                                                                         ED Current
                                                                                (1976-1987)
                                                                                Historic
                                                                                (Schefter, 1940)
                                                                                                                                                          .Ocean

                                                                                                                                                                                     41,
                                                                                                                                                            GrHay'
                                                                                                                                                                a
                                                                                                       wwo
                                                         PACI  IFIC OCEAN                                                                                  VPT.  CHEk      S
                                                                                                                                                              CAP
                                                                                                                                                               SHOALWATER


                                                                                                                                                               Wdlapa
                                                                                                                                                    A@ Bay                          40

                                                                                DEPTHS IN FATHOMS

                                                                                NAUTICAL MILES

                                                                                0     10      20
                                                                                STATUTE MILES                                                                    'P
                                                                                            -5                                                               DICS115OJNTM.
                                                                                0    10     20                       \-4p                      1                                    20
                                                                                                                                          1004

                                                                                                                                                                   Columbia River
                                                                                                                                                                 er


























                          Figure 38. Historic and Current Distribution of Sea Otters in
                                                          Washington State (Strickland and Chasan, 1989).

                                                                                                            11-86









         Pacific white-side dolphin, gray whale, fin whale, and Risso's
         dolphin. For these seven mammal species, the areas nearest to
         the coast are significant to the harbor seal, harbor porpoise,
         killer whale, and gray whale, while the other three species
         depend on the outer shelf areas. Most of the region under
         consideration for sanctuary status occurs within migration
         pathways for several species. It is noteworthy that a major
         adult summer area for the endangered fin whale occurs along the
         continental slope seaward of the study area (SAB, 1988).

              G. Sea Turtles


               Studies of sea turtle distribution and abundance in the
         North Pacific Ocean are progressing, but there are many gaps in
         the knowledge base. Pacific sea turtles nest on beaches in the
         tropics and subtropics but have been sighted in the eastern North
         Pacific as far north as the Gulf of Alaska. Many species are
         highly mobile and may migrate thousands of miles. Most sea
         turtle information to-date has been collected at nesting sites.
         Observation and study becomes much more difficult once the
         turtles leave the shore. Subsequently, very little is known
         about the life stages between hatchling and adult. Some evidence
         suggests that post-hatchling and juvenile life stages occupy a
         poorly known pelagic habitat (Eckert, 1991).

              Sea turtles live very long lives. It is believed that some
         species (e.g. loggerhead and hawksbill) require as many as 30
         years or more to reach sexual maturity. Each individual female
         will typically return to the same beach for each nesting cycle.
         In addition, nesting usually occurs at multiple-year intervals
         (often 2-4 years). Turtles are most vulnerable to predators
         (e.g. humans, birds, crabs, mammals, fish, sharks, and reptiles)
         while in the egg and hatchling stages. Adult leatherbacks are
         preyed upon by killer whales in Mexican waters and presumably
         larger sharks. Hard shell sea turtles are believed to have
         decreasing mortality rates as they mature to adulthood due to
         size and armoring. (Eckert, 1991)

              Sea turtles frequent the Washington coast but have never
         been found in the inland waters of the state. However, there was
         an unconfirmed reported sighting of a live sea turtle from Skagit
         Bay in August, 1992. The following description of sea turtle
         status in Washington waters is the best and most concise summary
         found among the available scientific literature:

                   Three state and federally listed species of sea
              turtles - loggerhead, leatherback and green - visit
              Washington waters, but rarely come ashore unless sick or
              injured. The leatherback is classified as an endangered
              species [Federal and state lists] and the loggerhead and
              green sea turtles are threatened species (Federal and
              state lists].

                                        11-87









                     The most common sea turtle off Washington,' s coast is
                the leatherback, a black f lexible-shelled turtle that can
                be six feet in shell length.       Their primary food is
                jellyfish. They are the most wide-ranging of all living
                reptiles and are more tolerant of cold waters than hard-
                shelled sea turtles.    Leatherbacks nest on beaches in
                southern latitudes. The largest known nesting area is on
                the Pacific coast of Mexico. Collection of its eggs for
                food, primarily in the western Pacific ocean, is a major
                threat to this species.
                     The green sea turtle is the most common hard shell
                sea turtle found off Washington's coast. Like many other
                tropical species, unusual warm ocean currents off our
                coast (particularly El Nino events] can bring the green
                sea turtle to our shores.     Two live green sea    turtles
                (were] found beached on the Washington coast during
                winter 1989-90...   (Green sea turtles' have been   sighted
                as far north as Admiralty Island, Alaska.] This     species
                nests on many islands in the tropical Pacific Ocean,
                including the Hawaiian and Marshall Islands, and the
                Phillipines.   While their eggs have long provided for
                subsistence harvest, recently developed markets for skin
                and other products from the turtles has led to near
                collapse of some populations.
                     The loggerhead sea turtle- is rare in temperate
                waters. Washington is as far north as this species has
                ever been found. A juvenile loggerhead was found on the
                beach at Ocean Shores in December 1990...   Adults grow to
                four feet in length. They feed on marine animals such as
                crabs, snails, clams, and shrimp. The loggerhead nests
                on beaches in the Pacific Ocean around Australia, China,
                and Japan. Recently, thousands (>100,000] of juveniles
                were discovered feeding on red crabs off Baja Mexico.
                The causes of recently observed declines at Pacific Ocean
                nesting beaches are not known.
                     The first Olive Ridley sea turtle ever found in
                Washington washed ashore near Copalis in November 1989.
                This carnivorous, hard-shelled sea turtle is abundant in
                the tropical Pacific ocean and nests in. Mexico, Costa
                Rica, Malaysia, and Thailand. Synchronized nesting may
                occur and can involve as many as 150,000 females. Some
                populations are on the verge of collapse, however,
                because of massive egg collecting (WDW, 1991b).

                Aerial surveys of California, Oregon, and Washington waters
          have shown that most leatherbacks occur in slope waters, while
          fewer occur over the continental shelf. Adult green turtles are
          benthic herbivores, subsisting mainly on algae and sea grasses.
          Their diet would seem to restrict them to the photic zones
          surrounding    islands and continents.          Loggerheads     inhabit
          continental shelves, bays, estuaries and lagoons.            They are
          generally found feeding on benthic invertebrates in hard bottom

                                           11-88









           habitats. Olive Ridleys are widely distributed in the Pacific and
           appear in both coastal and pelagic habitats.        Foraging appears
           confined mainly to tropical neritic waters, where individuals may
           dive as deep as 300 meters to feed on benthic crustaceans. (Eckert,
           1991).

                Duxbury (1992) asserts that humans pose the greatest threat to
           the survival of all sea turtles.     Turtle eggs, meat, skins, and
           shells are prized throughout the Pacific, and exploitation has been
           severe in some areas.     Habitat loss at nesting areas has also
           contributed to the decline of some sea turtle populations.
           However, turtles have never been an important component of local
           economies or cultures on the western seaboard of the United States
           (Eckert, 1991).

                Human activities that could possibly impact sea turtles in
           Washington waters are fishing operations and oil spills. Since sea
           turtles frequent the Washington coast in dispersed, low numbers,
           incidental catch by coastal fisheries poses a negligible threat to
           Pacific species.   A report by the NMFS (1990) states that, "The
           incidental involvement of sea turtles with commercial fisheries on
           the west coast is rare...    No turtles have been reported taken in
           groundf ish fisheries [of Washington, Oregon, and California]" (NMFS
           Section 7 Biological Opinion, 1990). Leatherback turtles have been
           taken in salmon seines in Alaska and experimental shark drift
           gillnets (1986-88) off California, Oregon and Washington; however,
           federal permits for the shark drift gillnet operations were not
           renewed after 1988. Sea turtles have been a frequent bycatch in
           high-seas driftnets, but United Nations action ended this fishery
           on January 1, 1993.

                The effects of oil spills    on sea turtles is unclear due to
           lack of research. Because the migration range of adult turtles is
           wide, it is unusual to have large numbers of turtles directly
           impacted by an oil spill. Spill related turtle impacts are mostly
           anecdotal and poorly documented as to cause of death. Laboratory
           studies, however, have indicated that oil contamination of eggs,
           hatchlings and juveniles may cause morphological, physiological and
           behavioral alterations or death in young sea turtles. Pelagic tar
           also seems to be harmful to sea turtles, since it can seal the
           mouths and nostrils of the animals.      A review of world-wide sea
           turtle decline by the National Research Council (1990) presents no
           conclusive data regarding oil effects on sea turtles. The report
           states that additional information is needed on the reaction of sea
           turtles to petroleum ingestion, fouling, and toxicity (NRC, 1990;
           (NMFS, 1991).

                3. Cultural and Historical Resources

                The earliest record of human life on the coast of Washington
           is that of the coastal Indians (WDOE, 1986). Five native
           American cultures occupied the coastal areas within the proposed

                                           11-89









          sanctuary: the Makah, Quileute, Hoh, Queets, and Quinault
          (Figure 39). An archaeological survey conducted by
          the University of Washington in 1.955 found a total of 19 sites in
          the coastal area of Olympic National Park (National Park Service,
          1976). A recent inventory re-located 10 shell midden sites and 2
          rock art sites (Wessen, 1989).' The most important site is the
          Ozette Archaeological Site located on Cape Alava (listed in the
          National Register of Historic Places). Here, the Ozette Indian
          Nation occupied the Ozette village into the early 1900's. Shell
          midden deposits have yielded bones and artifacts as old as 2,600
          years along with protohi'storic houses that were buried and
          preserved by a mudslide (Huelsbeck, 1983). Other primary sites
          include the Kahii Village Site at Toleak Point south of La Push,
          White Rock Village located about two miles south of Cape Alava,
          and the Sand Point site about three miles south of Cape Alava.
          There may be more undiscovered archaeological and traditional
          cultural properties in the area. Petroglyphs of unknown age are
          found at Wedding Rock, about 1.3 miles south of Cape Alava
          (listed in National Register of Historic Places).

              There are two small memorials to the crews and passengers
          that perished in shipwrecks along the coast. The Norwegian
          Memorial, found 8 mile's south of Sand Point, commemorates the 18
          people that died in the wreck of the Prince Arthur in 1903. The
          Chilean Memorial, 4 miles to the south, commemorates the 20
          people lost in the wreck of the P.J. Pirrie in 1920. Both
          memorials are in the form of small stones with the names of the
          victims, and are located just back from the beach in dense brush.
          Other recorded shipwrecks include 9 ships wrecked between
          Quillayute Rocks and Cape Alava, 5 at Destruction Island, and 4
          in the vicinity of Hoh Head (Malin, 1984).

          C. Human Activities

               1. Commercial Fishing and Aquaculture

              Washington's local water fleet is typified by small-scale
          operations with relatively small earnings per vessel. In 1987,
          ex-vessel revenues per boat averaged between $54,000 and $69,000.
          Total employment by this fleet is estimated to be approximately
          7,000 with an additional 500-700 fishermen associated with other
          fleet components and tribal fisheries. The number of vessels in
          the local water fisheries has been declining. Since 1975, troll
          permits issued in the salmon fishery have declined by over 2,000
          (NRC, 1988). These permits cannot be reinstated under the
          limited entry system established in the 19701s., In 1987, there
          were 3,525 boats participating in Washington's local fishery
          (NRC, 1988).   Over 350 boats have withdrawn from the fishery
          between 1985-1987 due to the withdrawal of approximately 372
          salmon troll permits.




                                        11-90











                              201           1260               401           20'           1250            401            20'            1240


                                                                                                                                       -w

                                                                                                Ounme Rock
                                                                                                MAKAH
                                                                                                INDIAN                 'a                                    20'
                                                                                            R@@SERVATION
                                                                                                                                                C-41VAOA
                                                                                                            "@V
                                                                                         OZETTE  SITE
                                                                             WHITE ROCK WiLLA:dE
                                                                                      NO Pdl'N+ gl@E
                                                                                                                 .. ..... .
                                                                                                                                                             48
                                                                                                                                                                  0



                                                                                            0
                                                                                                ILEUTE
                                                                                             IU                                       . . . .. ...........
                                                                                     INDIAN R
                                                                                                @SERVATIO
                                                                     d,
                                                                                                          I  IAN
                                                                                                      FESERVATTIO
                                                                                                                                                             40'
                                                                                                        Destrucdon Is!





                                                                                                                               Part R.
                                                                                                               Sealion RoCk
                                                                                                               QUINAULT CAPE ELIZA13ETH
                                                                                                                INDIAN%            Quinault..RV,11:          20'
                                                                                                            RESERVATION          PT. GRE. VILL




                                                                                                                                   OC n

                                                                                                                                                                 0
                                                                                                                                                A e   ee@
                                                                                                                                     Gray'
                                                                                    Soo                                                 Harbor
                                                                                                                                      PT. CHE ALI
                                        PACIFIC OCEAN

                                                                                                                                              AL


                                                                                                                                        wd    a
                                                                                                                                                             40'


                                                               DEPTHS IN FATHOMS

                                                               NAUTICAL MILES

                                                               0     10     20
                                                                                                                                        C kPE.
                                                               STATUTE MILES                                                           DISAPPOIKM@4f         20'
                                                               a    10    20
                                                                                                                    100
                           ri                                                                                                                 cw"Mbia Aver



                       Figure 39. Indian Reservations and Associated Archeological
                                                      sites along the Olympic coast (Illustrations,
                                                     Unlimited, 1991).

                                                                                                    11-91









               The fishery resources harvested by Washington's local water
          fleet include five species of salmon (chinook, coho, sockeye,
          chum, pink), bottomfish (including halibut, rockfish, cod,
          flatfish, sablefish, hake, green and white sturgeon), and
          shellfish (Dungeness crab, pink shrimp, clams and oysters).
          Aquaculture and mariculture operations, conducted primarily in
          Puget Sound and in estuarine areas off the coast contribute
          significantly to the local waters harvest (NRC, 1988).

               Fisheries for salmon which contribute the bulk of revenues
          for the local fleet, are influenced by the cyclical abundance of
          approximately 60 distinct stocks. Many specific salmon fisheries
          are controlled on the basis of "weak stock management" in which
          harvest limits are set to safeguard against over-harvest of the
          least viable individual stocks. In the ocean troll fishery for
          coho and chinook salmon, occurring in the oceanic waters of the
          study area, this management regime has put severe constraints on
          harvest levels. Washington's gillnet and seine salmon fisheries,
          which occur in the Strait of Juan de Fuca and in the river mouths
          entering the study area, are still highly dependent on sockeye
          salmon from Canada's Fraser River. These Fraser River sockeye
          runs are based on a four-year cycle (NRC, 1988).

               Groundfish include bottomfish which are caught mainly on or
          near the seafloor, and other marine species that are caught at
          mid-water. The harvest of groundfish species is comprised of
          over 35 varieties of rockfish, flatfish and roundfish. The
          primary species caught include many species of rockfish (Pacific
          ocean perch, widow rockfish, yellowtail rockfish, black
          rockfish), flatfish (English sole, Dover sole, arrowtooth
          flounder, Pacific halibut), and roundfish (Pacific cod, Pacific
          hake, lingcod, and sablefish). The commercial coastal catch of
          groundfish has risen from approximately 18 million pounds in 1970
          to 42.1 million pounds in 1991 (PacFIN, 1992). Groundfish are
          caught by bottom (otter) trawling, midwater trawling, longlining
          or setlining, bottom trolling, fixed pots, and hand-line jigging.
          Fishing may take place in depths ranging from 10 fathoms out to
          the canyons at the edge of the continental shelf, and beyond.
          Roundfish dominate the landed catch in this fishery. In recent
          decline are the abundance and mean size of sablefish (black cod)
          (Parks and Shaw, 1987). The most important commercial rockfish
          in the eastern Pacific is the Pacific ocean perch. Because
          stocks of this species have become severely depleted, the PFMC
          has adopted a management strategy to rebuild them to previous
          levels (Ito et al., 1987). Commercial interest has recently been
          shown in the thresher shark which migrates into Washington
          coastal waters in the spring. Both domestic and joint-venture
          catches of Pacific hake (marketed as whiting) have increased
          since the early 1980's and its stocks are currently fully
          utilized (Hollowed et al., 1988; June, 1993). Surf smelt are
          recreationally dipped as far north as the mouth of the Quillayute
          River.


                                        11-92









              Dungeness crab and pink shrimp stocks have historically been
         quite cyclical in nature. Razor clam stocks have declined
         dramatically in recent years due to the outbreak of the NIX
         virus, gill parasites and overharvesting. Only a small Indian
         fishery and recreational fishery exist for razor clams.

              The amount and value of the local catch is of great
         importance to the state's economy. In 1992, the ex-vessel value
         of the commercial landings approximated $152 million, up from the
         1981-1985 average of $92.8 million (Table 4) (NRC, 1986; NMFS,
         1992a). The salmon fishery was once the largest and most
         valuable fishery in the coastal waters. The salmon catch is now
         exceeded in tonnage by the groundfish catch; however, the yearly
         harvest of salmon is nearly three times more valuable at the
         fisherman level than the groundfish or shellfish catch (Natural
         Resources Consultants, 1986; June, 1993). The values and volumes
         for commercial harvests of selected species in Washington State,
         and in the sanctuary study area are shown in Appendix C (Tables 1
         and 2).

              The salmon and groundfish species in the study area are
         managed under Federal Fishery Management Plans (FMP's) drafted by
         the PFMC. In the FMP's, the PFMC establishes catch limits for
         groundfish and specifies the duration of the fishing season and
         catch and size limits for salmon. Commercial and recreational
         fishing gear restrictions are specified for both the groundfish
         and salmon fisheries. The Magnuson Fishery Conservation and
         Management Act (MFCMA) provides for enforcement of FMP's prepared
         by the PFMC and approved by the Secretary of Commerce after
         review by the NMFS.

              Fisheries for Pacific halibut are regulated by the NMFS
         under a treaty with Canada. The Dungeness crab and pink shrimp
         fisheries are managed by the Washington Department of Fisheries.
         The Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission is currently
         developing interstate (Washington, Oregon, and California) plans
         for the crab and shrimp fisheries under the Inter-jurisdictional
         Fisheries Act (IJFA). NMFS is funding portions of the state
         monitoring and management of these fisheries.

              The tribes are co-managers of the fisheries resources and
         are involved in plan development, monitoring, licensing and
         enforcement. The tribes are guaranteed a portion of the salmon
         and steelhead catch pursuant to the Boldt Decision of 1974 which
         allocates a portion of the anadromous fish among tribal and non-
         tribal fishers by region of origin. For the purposes of fish
         stock allocation and record keeping, local or coastal commercial
         fisheries are classified as the non-treaty commercial fishery and
         the treaty fishery.





                                       11-93





















          Table 4. Volume and Value of Washington State's Local Water
                     Catch by Fishery Type (1981-1985 average; 1990)

          FISHERY          POUNDS (Millions of lbs)     VALUE (Millions of $)
                            1981-85 (avg)    1992        1981-85 (avg)    1992

          Groundfish           78.2          33.6           13.9            10.8
          Salmon               40.6          45.1           40.0            39.8
          Shellfish            16.6          45.5           10.6            57.7

          Source: Data supplied     by Washington Department of Fisheries,
          1993 and PacFin, 1992,    Report #002.

































                                            11-94









              (a) Commercial Non-Treaty Fishery

              Salmon, bottomfish, crab, shrimp, oyster, and clams form the
         basis of the coastal non-treaty commercial fishery (Figure 40).
         Salmon caught off the Washington outer coast must be caught by
         the trolling method. other methods, such as purse seines, drift
         nets, or drift gillnets, are prohibited in ocean waters.
         Commercial trollers mainly catch coho, pink and chinook salmon.
         Since 1976, coastal trollers' salmon catch has fallen. For
         example, average landings of chinook salmon declined from 262,000
         fish in 1971-1975 to 183,000 fish in 1976-1980; only 54,600 were
         caught in 1987 (PFMC, 1988). Most of the trolling for chinook
         and coho salmon is centered around the Grays Harbor area. Pink
         salmon, which are harvested only in odd-numbered years, are taken
         primarily off the north coast from Cape Flattery to Quillayute.

              The major commercially harvested shellfish in the sanctuary
         study area and adjacent estuaries include Dungeness crabs, pink
         shrimp, Pacific oysters, and several species of clams. Although
         their abundance varies over and 8 to 10 year period, Dungeness
         crabs are the most important commercial shellfish. Pink shrimp
         are also subject to large variations in abundance. Production
         areas for shrimp harvesting are found from Cape Elizabeth north
         to Cape Flattery. The razor clam population, depleted in recent
         years by the NIX virus, gill parasites, and perhaps over
         harvesting, only supports a small restaurant trade and
         recreational fishery. The most recent commercial harvest
         occurred at offshore spits in Willapa Bay and the Quinault Indian
         Reservation (Strickland and Chasan, 1989). There is also a
         coastal commercial sea urchin harvest.

              (b) Treaty Fisheries

              The entire study area north of Willapa Bay can be considered
         a usual and accustomed fishing area for treaty tribes. Salmon
         and steelhead trout are the most important fishery resources
         available to the coastal tribes. Salmon and steelhead trout are
         harvested by either gillnets or troll gear. The treaty ocean
         troll fishery operates throughout the summer. The fishing
         activity is centered around the areas of Grays Harbor, Quillayute
         and Cape Flattery. Coho, chinook, and pink salmon are the main
         species taken by this fishery. The Makah Tribe conducts a marine
         gillnet fishery along the shore near Cape Flattery and in the
         Strait of Juan de Fuca for chinook and sockeye salmon. In-river
         treaty gillnet fisheries harvest coho and chinook salmon in the
         Queets, Hoh, and Quillayute Rivers; and chum, coho, sockeye, and
         chinook salmon in the Quinault and Ozette Rivers. In addition,
         treaty fisheries take steelhead trout in all the major rivers of
         the Olympic Peninsula.

              The coastal tribes, Makah, Quileute, Hoh, and Quinault,
         participate in a variety of groundfish fisheries. Rockfish,

                                       11-95














                                                                                           The Harves           t
                                                        Volume of Washington's Local Water Catch by Fishery Type
                                                                                  (1981-1985 Annual Average)

                                                                                                      SPECIES                                  LANDINGS
                                                                                                                               (MILLIONS OF LBS.)

                                                                                .............
                                                        ...........
                                                                                                      GROUNDFISH            ................             78.2

                                                                       ...... ... ...... .. .         SALMON         ....................                40.6
                                                                      ........ .................
                                                                              ..................
                                                                 . .... ........................
                                                           ---           ....................
                                                                                                      SHELLFISH          ..................              16.6
                                                                                                      AQUACULTURE               ..............           10.6

                                                                                                      OTHER        ......................                4.7

                                                                                                      TOTAL                                              150.7

                                                                                   Value to           Harvesters
                                                 F-x-Vessel Value of Washington's Local Water Catch by Fishery Type
                                                                                 (1981-1985 Annual Average)

                                                                                                      SPECIES               VALUE OF LANDINGS
                                                                                                                                 (MILLIONS OF Vs)

                                                                                                      SALMON        ....................                 40.0

                                                                                                      AQUACULTURE              ..............            26.7

                                                                                                        R UNDFISH           ................             13.9
                                                                                                      SHELLFISH         ..................               10.6
                                                                                                      OTHER       ......................                 1.6

                                                                                                      TOTAL                                              $92.8
                                                                  . . . .. . . ...... ...
                                                                                    Value of Products
                                                                  Wholesale Value of Products Processed from
                                                               Washington's Local Water Catch by Fishery Type
                                                                                 (1981-1985 Annual Average)

                                                                                                      SPECIES            VALUE OF PRODUCTS
                                                                                                                                 (MILLIONS OF $'s)
                                                                     . . . . . . . . . .
                                                                                                      SALMON        ....................                 80.0

                                                                    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
                                                                                                      SHELLFISH        ..................                29.4
                                                                                                      GROUNDFISH           ................              27.9
                                                                                                      AQUACULTURE             ..............             26.7
                                                                                                      OTHER       ......................                 4.0

                                                                                                                                                   $168.0
                                                                                                      TOTAL







                         Figure 40. Commercial and Recreational Fishing Areas (Strickland
                                                         and Chasan, 1989; WDF, 1992).

                                                                                                         11-96









         sablefish and Pacific halibut are the targeted species and are
         taken by longline and handline gear. These fisheries generally
         occur in the fall and spring and are centered off the north coast
         of the Olympic Peninsula. The coastal tribes have recognized
         treaty rights for halibut, and since 1986 the tribes have
         received a direct halibut allocation from the International
         Pacific Halibut Commission. In addition, the Makah and Quileute
         tribes receive a set aside of sablefish from the PFMC.

              The coastal tribes conduct a variety of fisheries in the
         nearshore area. Sea urchin, mussels, ocean clams, gooseneck
         barnacles, Dungeness crab, salmon, steelhead, rockfishes, cod,
         and smelt are harvested for subsistence and ceremonial purposes
         by the various tribes. The Quinault Tribe harvests razor clam
         for commercial purposes from beaches within their reservation.
         The Quileute Tribe conducts a small commercial fishery for smelt
         harvested from within the estuary reaches of the Quillayute
         River.

              (c) Acruaculture and Coastal Hatcheries

              Aquaculture and hatchery operations in areas adjacent to the
         sanctuary study area produce salmon, oysters, mussels, and clams
         for commercial purposes or for augmenting natural stocks. The
         importance of fish and shellfish farming to Washington's seafood
         industry is shown by the fact that fewer than 200 oyster, salmon,
         and clam farms produce 16 percent of the wholesale value of the
         state's local seafood harvest (Natural Resources Consultants,
         1986). Most of the aquaculture operations are in Puget Sound or
         Grays Harbor and Willapa Harbor. Coastal hatchery facilities
         closest to the sanctuary study area include four tribal salmon
         hatcheries located on the Makah, Quileute, Hoh, and Quinault
         Reservations. These hatcheries released approximately 8.5
         million fish in 1986, including 2 million steelhead trout (Butts,
         1988). The WDF operates  *the Soleduck, Bear Springs, Kalawa River
         Ponds, and Snyder Creek (in cooperation with a steelhead guide
         operation) hatcheries in the Quillayute drainage system. WDF
         also operates the Canyon Springs acclimation pond on the Hoh
         River in cooperation with the Hoh Tribe, and the Shale Creek
         hatchery on the Queets River. A proposed WDF facility on the
         Mathaney River is expected to be competed within a year. The
         USFWS and Quinault Tribe operate a facility on Cook Creek.

              2. Oil and Gas Activities

              The State of Washington and the Federal government have both
         conducted oil and gas lease sales in Washington's offshore
         waters. The state conducted a series of lease sales in the
         1960's in state waters in the vicinity of Grays Harbor. Union
         Oil Company drilled three exploratory wells several miles west of
         Ocean Shores. Only one well was successfully drilled, but no
         commercial quantities of oil or gas were found. The Federal

                                       11-97









           government conducted a lease sale in 1964 (Lease Sale P-2) off
           Washington and Oregon. Forty seven of the 196 tracts offered for
           lease were located off Washington. Only 27 of these tracts were
           actually leased. The highest bid off Washington was $1,785,888
           ($310.05/acre) for a tract in the Copalis Beach area between
           Gray's Harbor and Willapa Bay. Four wells (three original and
           one redrill) were drilled off the Washington coast from 1966 to
           1967: 1) nine miles west of Destruction Island; 2) nine miles
           west of Westport; and, 3) nine miles west of the northern
           entrance to Willapa Bay. While oil and gas were found, in two of
           the wells (near Westport and Willapa Bay), quantities were not
           sufficient for commercial production.

               Since the early 1900-'s, onshore exploratory wells have been
           drilled along the Washington coast. The discovery of a natural
           oil seep in the vicinity of Hoh Head at Oil City, just north of
           the mouth of the Hoh River, led to several attempts at drilling
           for oil. An attempt in 1913 was abandoned because commercial
           quantities were not found. In 1936, drilling in the same area
           led to the discovery of Washington"s first oil well that went
           into production. Production could not be sustained and the site
           was abandoned. Currently, there is no onshore production of oil
           or gas in the State of Washington.

               MMS, within the U.S. Department of the Interior, is the
           Federal agency with authority over all minerals development on
           the OCS outside of the three-mile limit of state jurisdiction.
           MMS is responsible for preparing and implementing 5-year plans
           which identify the-federal waters to be opened for offshore oil
           and gas leasing.

               MMS's current 5-year plan is entitled  Outer Continental
           Shelf Natural Gas and Oil Resource Management Comprehensive
           Program and covers the years from 1992-1997. According to the
           plan, Washington and Oregon are not scheduled for any lease sales
           and will not be until after the year 2000. However, before any
           leasing activities can take place, a series of environmental
           studies must be preformed to determine whether or not oil and gas
           development can take place in an environmentally sound manner.
           This position is based on Federal executive policy developed in
           1990 which canceled a number of lease sales around the country,
           including Lease-Sale 132 (Washington/Oregon Planning Area)
           (Figure 41). Figures 42 show "highlighted areas" which
           correspond to areas that the Governors of Washington and Oregon
           requested be deleted from the former Lease Sale #132; and areas
           within the Oregon/Washington planning area, referred to as
           "subarea deferrals", that MMS has deleted from sale #132."
           Leasing and exploration for oil and gas is not permitted in
           Washington state waters; Washington HB 2242 establishes a
           moratorium on oil and gas exploration and development in state
           waters until 1995.



                                         11-98












                                  WASHINGTON-DRE80K PLANKIKG AREA

                         1300            1280             12ee            1240            1122s


                                    U.S. Department of tm Inoww
                                    Minerals Mwwoement Servits
                           Mrs Pacific OCS Region

                                                                        ap                  .4.
                    484
                                                                       Flattery
                                                                    0,
                                  go     Ica miles
                                                                          EAG NORTH
                                                                 X
                                                                          th PARALLEL


                                                                 xx =M. - - K.
                                                                                  btrdeem
                                         It NAUTICAL MILE BUFFER laws
                                         FOR GRAY-$ HARBOR. WILLAPA
                                         DAY AND COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY          Wanh.

                               MouTm OF  COLUMBIA RIVER'AND 0-MIL BUFFER
                                           I
                                           f
                                           X                                   storia        41'
                                         on ON ISLAND NATIONAL
                                         WILDLIFE AKFUOE AND I MILE SUFFER      Illamook
                                           1////////    //
                         CASCADE HEAD AND &ALMON AIVZX Ile
                         13TUARY SCENIC F ESEARCH AREA AND 4 MILE BUFFER      LlKcoin
                                                                                City
                                            VAQUINA SAY AND 0 ILE   BUFFER
                                                                                  Ore.

                                                       [OITA I N
                            STONEWALL. PE %PETUA AND HICITA I
                   449 -                                         fi.           Florence
                                            COOS BAY AND I MILg BUFFER
                                                    1111111A p               COOS say
                                                    C UJI.   AN 3





                                                                           Gold Beach
                    420                                                                      42
                         DEFERRAL DEEPER THAN 600 METERS                        Calif.
                        I        I         I        I       I        a         1
                       1300              1280              128*              124*
                       EM SUBAREA DEFERRALS

                               HIGHLIGHTED AREAS





             Figure 41. washington/Oregon Planning Area.

                                                             11-99














                               20'         1260        40f         20'       1250        401         20'        1240
                               77                       1           1
                                                                                                Cv



                                                                                                                                20'
                                                  100


                                                                                          . . . . . . .. . . . . .
                                                                                             E


                                                                                                                                480
                                                                                                                  HINGTO:N



                                                                                                                                401







                                                                                                                                20'
                                                                                                            Ouinauft
                                                                                                                 NIVILLE

                                         Highlighted Area
                                     ro Subarea Deferral

                                                                                                            Oc
                                         Washington State Waters
                                                                                                                                47

                                                                        500-(
                                                                                                              PT. C





                                                                                                                                40'
                                                                                                                      4

                                                 DE 'I IN FA HON

                                                 NAUTICAL MILES

                                                 0    10    20
                                                                                                                CAPE
                                                 STATUTE MILES
                                                                                                                I.SAPIPOINTMN   01
                                                                                                                                2
                                                 o   to   20
                                                                                                 100

                                                                                                                           d"






                   Figure 42. MMS Planning Area for Lease Sale #132 off Washington
                                           (Strickland and Chasan, 1989).

                                                                            II-100









              MMS has evaluated the oil and gas potential of the study
         area for the proposed sanctuary. By first making an assumption
         that past geologic conditions were conducive to the formation and
         entrapment of oil and gas, it is then possible to evaluate
         existing seismic data to estimate the location and volume of
         subsurface sedimentary structures that would contain the oil and
         gas reserves. Using the limited data available, MMS has
         estimated that production resulting from the former Lease Sale
         #132 would total 58 million barrels of oil and 1.0 trillion cubic
         feet of gas over a 35 year period. The entire sanctuary study
         area (i.e., the entire continental shelf off Washington) would
         include 20% of the total estimated reserves of the Lease Sale 132
         area (MMS, 1990a). Of that 20%, 15% would be located in the area
         south of Copalis National Wildlife Refuge (which is not within
         the sanctuary boundary), with the remaining 5% distributed across
         the northern portion of the continental shelf which NOAA proposes
         to include within the Sanctuary (1.5% in zone 1, 2.5% in zone 2,
         1.0% in zone 3). Zone 4 is entirely within Washington State
         waters, and is therefore not included in these estimates (Martin,
         1990a).

              Under the previous 5-year plan (1987-1992), the Washington
         and Oregon coasts had been scheduled for a lease sale in 1992.
         In order to resolve issues surrounding the proposed lease sale,
         the states of Washington and Oregon, the Northwest Indian
         Fisheries Commission, the Columbia River Intertribal Fish
         Commission and the Department of Interior established the Pacific
         Northwest Outer Continental Shelf OCS Task Force.

              The Task Force's technical subcommittee recommended, through
         a resolution to the Secretary of Interior, a series of
         environmental studies to be completed prior to any leasing
         activities. The studies consist of the following:

         1.   Nearshore Ecosystems

         2.   Physical oceanography
              a) Estuary/coastal ocean exchange and Columbia River plume
                   dynamics
              b) Interannual Variability
              c) Support of nearshore ecosystem
              d) Cape Flattery
              e) Heceta Bank

         3.   Marine Mammal/Seabirds
              a) Supplementation of existing survey program
              b) Seabird colony research program
              c) Seabird life history research
              d) Northern fur seals
              e) Northern Sea Lion




                                      II-101









          4)   socioeconomic
               a) Expand scope of existing recreation and tourism survey
               b) Coastal community impacts
               c) Extension of basic analysis of Indian tribal
                    dependencies on coastal resources and activities
                    potentially affected by OCS development
               d) Causes and consequences of cumulative ecosystem impacts
                    relative to lease sale 132

          5.   Air Ouality

               Included in the Pacific Northwest OCS Task Force,'s
          resolution was a policy statement that precluded any leasing
          activities until after the above studies are completed. The
          Federal policy discussed above was a result of the resolution.

               In 1992, the Marine Research, Protection, and Sanctuaries
          Act was amended to prohibit any oil and gas development
          activities inside the Olympic Coast Sanctuary.

          B.   State Waters

               in 1989, the Washington State Legislature passed the Ocean
          Resources Management Act (ORMA). The Act placed a moratorium on
          the leasing of state waters for the purpose of oil and gas
          development. The moratorium will be reviewed during the 1995
          Washington State Legislative session to determine whether it
          should be continued or lifted.

               3. Commercial Shipping

               Due to the linkages between vessel traffic patterns along
          the outer coast, the Strait of Juan de Fuca, and Puget Sound,
          this section addresses shipping issues which span all of these
          areas. Vessel traffic along the Washington Coast, in the Strait
          of Juan de Fuca and Puget Sound includes tankers transporting
          crude oil and refined petroleum products, bulk carriers
          transporting non-petroleum products, barges, ferries, fishing
          boats, and pleasure craft. The general profile of vessel
          activities in the study area are that ferries and tank barge
          movements, including bunkering activities, account for the
          greatest number of vessel transits, and tanker traffic accounts
          for the greatest volume of petroleum products shipped (Chadbourne
          and Leschine, 1989). According to the Port Needs Study conducted
          by the USCG (1991), by 2010 there is expected to be a 555% and-
          81% increase in ferry/tank barge movements and tanker traffic
          transits through the Strait of Juan de Fuca and Northern Puget
          Sound, respectively (Table 5). Washington ports and harbors
          serving these vessels include the Port of Willapa Harbor, Port of
          Grays Harbor, La Push, Neah Bay, Port Angeles, the Ports of
          Tacoma and Seattle, Port of Everett, Port of Anacortes, and Port
          of Bellingham. These ports and harbors, all which are located in

                                        11-102



















         Table 5. Current and-Projected Vessel Transits in the Study
                    Area.

                        Strait of Juan de Fuca         N. Puget Sound
                               1987      2010              1987    2010
                                                change                    change

         Passenger             3,888     4,451      14%    18,380    21,374  16%
         Dry Cargo            102,808   621,309    504%   288,309   552,087  91%
         Tanker                1,056     1,568      48%     1,009     1,498  48%
         Dry Cargo  Barge Tow     796    20,859  2520%     12,574    19,636  56%
         Tanker Barge Tow         557    9,745   1649%      6,544     8,998  37%
         Tug/Tow Boat          4,855     89,261  1738%     51,455    81,503  58%

         Total                113,960   747,193    555%   378,271   685,096  81%

         Source:    United States Department    of Transportation, U.S. Coast
         Guard, Office of Navigation Safety     and Waterway Services.
         August, 1991. Port Needs Study (Vessel Traffic Service's
         Benefits), Volume II: Appendices, Part 1. DOT-CG-N-01-91-1-3,
         Pt.1; DOT-VNTSC-CG-91-2-11, Pt. 1.

























                                          11-103









          the study areas for the proposed Olympic Coast and Northwest
          Straits marine sanctuaries (except for the Port of Tacoma) handle
          predominately petroleum and wood products, and many of the ports
          and harbors have berths for fishing and pleasure crafts as well.
          While the overall density of traffic along the coast, in the
          Strait of Juan de Fuca, and throughout Puget Sound is low
          compared to other U.S. waterways, there are areas of high vessel
          concentration and restricted passageways which present risks of
          collisions and groundings. These conditions also exist outside
          the opening of the Strait of Juan de Fuca, beyond the
          jurisdiction of the Vessel Traffic Service. The sinking of the
          Tenyo Maru is the most recent example of such risk. Recent
          Federal, state, and international. management regimes and
          legislation have been developed to address these risks while
          facilitating vessel traffic.

               This section will discuss the: 1) routes and areas of vessel
          concentration; 2) nature of current and planned port-related
          activities; 3) economic significance of vessel traffic and port
          activities to Washington State; 4) vessel management regimes; and
          5) vessel contingency plans and capabilities.

               a. Routes and Areas of Vessel Concentration


               i. Tanker Traffic

               Tankers entering the Strait of Juan de Fuca or transiting
          along the Washington coast follow four major routes: 1) Valdez,
          Alaska to Washington State; 2) Valdez, Alaska to San Francisco,
          California and Panama; 3) the coastal tank vessel trade; and 4)
          foreign tanker routes (Figure 43).

               Tankers transiting through the Strait of Juan de Fuca are
          predominately domestic vessels carrying North Slope crude oil to
          the refineries in Northern Puget Sound. These vessels approach
          the Strait of Juan de Fuca from the north remaining outside of
          Canada's Tanker Exclusion Zone (TEZ). The TEZ parallels the
          Canadian coastline at 60 nautical. miles narrowing to 35 miles in
          the proximity of the international border (Figure 44). This
          zone, applicable only to U.S. vessels transiting from Valdez,
          Alaska to Puget Sound, has been mutually agreed upon by the
          American Institute of Merchant Shipping (AIMS), and the U.S. and
          Canadian Coast Guards. The southernmost point of the TEZ brings
          tankers into the Strait of Juan de Fuca on the United States side
          of the international-boundary. Compliance with this agreement
          has resulted in little or no reported violations (Pokeda, 1992).

               As North Slope oil supplies dwindle, the profile of tankers
          visiting Washington is predicted to shift to one dominated by
          foreign tankers. Since the Strait of Juan de Fuca includes
          internal waters of both the U.S. and Canada, and vessels
          transiting through the Strait are bound for both Canadian and

                                        11-104













                           1700W          1600W           1501W           140 OW         1300W          1200W
















          SOON                                                                                               600.4

















         50ON                                                                                               SOON













         4 0 ON                                                                                            40ON







                         170OW          160*W           1501W           140*W          130OW








            Figure 43.            Tank Vessel Traffic Outer Coast (Wolferstan, W.H.
                                  Oil Tanker Traffic: Assessing the Risks for the
                                  Southern Coast of British Columbia. Victoria,
                                  B.C.: ADP Bulletin 9. July, 1981).

                                                       11-105
















                                                               e








                                                                                             PRINC-
                                        S4ij-X- -Wl                                          RUpE@
                                                                                                 A T









                                                               (P
                                                      C
                                                       HARLOTq
                                                                                              r






                                                                                                 Off




                                                                     cl
                                                                                                                                 ZA





                                                                               -.77


                                                                                       -VAtIC LIV
                                                                                              L4NO




                                                                                                              4

                                                          PACfpjc
                                                         OCEA,V




                                                                                                    90
                                                                                     RA DAR







          Pigure 44.
                                     Tanke-,, Bcoju8lon Zon,
                                     1989).                                  (Canadian Coast Cuard









         U.S. ports, both countries have coordinated their environmental
         regulations.

              Tankers transiting from Valdez, Alaska to California or
         Panama.remain well offshore. The route is approximately 340
         miles offshore of the United States/Canadian border narrowing to
         approximately 125 miles from the shoreline at the
         Washington/Oregon border (Pokeda, 1992). Pursuant to a policy of
         the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA), tankers engaged
         in offshore coastal traffic carrying North Slope crude or other
         persistent oils, voluntarily remain at least 50 nautical miles
         off the U.S. coastline when not entering ports.

              Foreign tanker routes passing through the study area include
         vessels inbound from the Far East and Central and South America.
         The former remain well offshore until their approach to the
         Strait, however the latter usually operate between 10 and 40
         miles off the Washington coast.

              Tank vessels entering and transiting Puget Sound are limited
         by regulation to not larger than 125,000 dead weight tons (DWT)
         east of Port Angeles (Title 33, CFR 161.143). The average
         inbound tanker holds approximately 322,000 barrels of crude oil,
         and the average outgoing tanker carries approximately 123,000
         barrels of refined products (Chadbourne and Leschine, 1989).
         Tanker traffic accounts for most of the volume of petroleum
         shipped through the Strait of Juan de Fuca and into Puget Sound
         (77% volume; 17% transits), while barge traffic accounts for the
         greater number of transits (23% volume; 79% transits). In 1991,
         there was an average of 4.7 tanker transits/day (petroleum,
         chemical, LPG/LNG) through the Strait of Juan de Fuca (Tofino
         Traffic Service, 1991). There is no large seasonal variation of
         traffic throughout the year (Chadbourne. and Leschine. 1989).

              ii. Barges and Tug Boats

             .There are innumerable tug and barge movements along the
         coast between Grays Harbor, Willapa Bay and Puget Sound ports.
         Barges are used mainly to transport lumber and wood chips from
         Grays Harbor and Willapa Bay, and chemicals, petroleum products
         and bulk cargos from the Puget Sound area. Barges operate close
         to the shoreline when transiting through the study area,
         remaining between 3 and 15 miles offshore. However, some
         companies require their tows stay a minimum of 20-25 miles
         offshore when towing loaded petroleum barges (Scalzo, 1992).

              Barges are also used to transport decommissioned, defueled
         Naval submarine reactor plants from the Puget Sound Naval
         Shipyard to the Hanford Site on the Columbia River for disposal.
         The normal commercial shipping lanes from Puget Sound Naval
         Shipyard are used, via Rich Passage, past Restoration Point,
         northerly through Puget Sound, westerly through the Straits of

                                      11-107









          Juan de Fuca, past Cape Flattery and in a southerly direction
          down the Washington Coast to the mouth of the Columbia River
          (U.S. Department of the Navy, 1984). Barges used to transport
          the decommissioned reactor plants travel close to shore so that
          in the unlikely event that a barge carrying the reactor plants
          were to sink it can be easily recovered.

               Extensive precautions are taken to ensure that these barge
          shipments are made safely. The reactor compartment packages meet
          stringent U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Department of
          Transportation regulations for transportation of radioactive
          material, including being able to withstand such unlikely and
          unrealistic accidents as a 30 foot drop onto an unyielding
          surface. The transport barges are used solely for these
          shipments and are designed to remain stable in an upright
          position even with any two adjacent watertight compartments
          flooded. The barges would remain afloat even with over half of
          their compartments flooded, and the reactor compartment package
          is welded to the barge deck so that it would remain attached even
          if the barge capsized. A fully capable backup tugboat and an
          escort vessel accompany each bargre shipment. Reactor compartment
          shipments are not made during the, winter months or during any
          times when unfavorable weather is; forecast.

               Conflicts between barge traffic and crab fishermen have
          resulted in a "gentleman's agreement" reached in 1971 which
          identifies towing lanes for tugs and barges along a major portion
          of the West Coast, including most of the Washington coast (NOS,
          1990). The location of the lanes; are determined on a yearly
          basis. According to the agreement, crab fishermen refrain from
          putting their pots in lanes designated for tugs and barges. If
          pots are placed in designated lanes, crabbers forfeit their right
          to complain if pots are destroyed by a tug or barge. In turn,
          towboaters agree to stay within designated lanes, as weather"and
          ship safety allow. The agreement: has saved millions of dollars
          for both the fishing and towing industries. An annual meeting,
          and publication and distribution of charts depicting the agreed
          upon lanes, is organized by the Northwest Towboat Association
          (Northwest Towboat Association, 3.991). This function has been
          assumed by the Oregon State University, Extension Sea Grant
          Program.

               Barges account for the greatest number of vessel transits
          along the Washington coast and through the Strait of Juan de Fuca
          and Northern Puget Sound. Barges and tug boats accounted for 33%
          of the petroleum shipped and 79% of transits throughout Puget
          Sound and along the Washington Coast to Grays Harbor and Willapa
          Bay in-1988. This represents approximately 8.1 (81%) of the
          average 10 petroleum-related transits in the Strait of Juan de
          Fuca and Puget Sound (Chadbourne and Leschine, 1989). The number
          of transits of barge-direct activity, (i.e., barges that make
          direct passage in and out of the Strait without significant

                                        11-108









        movement within the Sound itself) varies substantially from
        month-to-month in both volume and number of transits (Chadbourne
        and Leschine, 1989). The average volume on any barge is
        approximately 22,000 barrels per transit.

             iii. Foreign Product Carriers

             Many of the vessels transiting the Washington coast are
        engaged in foreign trade. There are also many foreign flagged
        vessels that run coastal routes along the coasts of Washington
        and Oregon. The usual route for this traffic extends from Cape
        Flattery, Washington to Southern California and is concentrated
        between 3-20 miles offshore (Pokeda, 1992). These vessels are
        not subject to the voluntary policy of the WSPA that applies to
        oil tankers. However, all vessels, foreign or domestic, must
        comply with OMS' prevention and contingency plan regulations.
        Foreign vessels, while not forced to comply with some voluntary
        vessel regulations, are required to submit prevention and
        contingency plans to OMS.

             IV. Ferries

             Ferry traffic is used extensively throughout the year to
        transport passengers and vehicles to numerous destinations
        throughout Puget Sound and represents the greatest source of
        total vessel movement in the Sound (including petroleum and non-
        petroleum vessels transits). According to statistics kept by VTS
        Seattle, approximately 73% of the nearly 600 vessel transits per
        day within Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca, are
        ferries along scheduled routes (USCG, 1991).

             Two ferries cross several times per day between Port Angeles
        and Victoria, B.C. Direct ferry service also exists between
        Seattle and Victoria. Scheduled ferry service from Anacortes
        westward to the San Juan islands and to British Columbia transits
        Rosario Strait on a frequent basis. Another ferry route connects
        Kingston, on Bainbridge Island, and Edmonds and another connects
        Port Townsend and Whidbey Island (USCG, 1991). Other ferry
        routes traverse the Sound south of the boundaries suggested for
        the proposed Northwest Straits National Marine Sanctuary. All
        ferries in the Northwest Straits study area (with the exception
        of the Port Angeles-Victoria route which is privately owned) are
        operated by the Washington State Department of Transportation.

             V. Fishing Vgssels .

             Washington's fishing vessels harvest a wide variety of fish
        and shellfish including bottomfish, shellfish, and five species
        of salmon. The fishing vessels are operated by commercial non-
        treaty, treaty, and recreational fishermen. Salmon landed by
        non-treaty commercial fishermen are harvested using the trolling
        method. Purse seines, drift nets and gill nets are prohibited in

                                      11-109









           ocean waters. Most trolling for chinook and coho is centered off
           Grays Harbor. Trolling for pink salmon (harvested in odd-
           numbered years) occurs off the northern Peninsula between Cape
           Flattery and Quillayute. A major fishing area for salmon also
           exists at the entrance of the Strait of Juan de Fuca on Swiftsure
           Bank. Particularly hazardous vessel traffic conditions exist
           over Swiftsure bank during periods of low visibility, when
           commercial vessel traffic must exercise extreme caution to avoid
           collision with fishing boats which tend to defy radar detection.
           Commercial and recreational seasons for the salmon fisheries are
           set between May 1 and October 31 (PFMC, 1984).

               Bot 'tomfish are harvested by bottom and midwater trawling,
           longlining, bottom trolling, and hand-line jigging. Fishing may
           take place in depths ranging from 10 fathoms out to the canyons
           at the edge of the continental shelf, and beyond. The Pacific
           coast domestic trawl fisheries are conducted by vessels ranging
           from 30-110 feet in length, weighing under 200 gross tons.
           Trawlers based in northern Washington generally make trips of 6-
           10 days due to the greater distance to their fishing grounds.
           Vessels in the groundfish fishery operate year-round (PFMC,
           1989). While bottomfishing occurs throughout the Washington
           coast, Swiftsure Bank, off the mouth of the Strait of Juan de
           Fuca is a popular bottomfish harvesting area. Some bottomfish
           fisheries such as the hake, which are migratory in nature,
           incorporate many, much larger trawling vessels, as well as large
           processing ships operating on the fishing grounds.

               Gillnets and troll gear are used by the tribes to harvest
           salmon and steelhead trout. The Makah Tribe conducts a marine
           gillnet fishery along the shore near Cape Flattery and in the
           Strait of Juan de Fuca for chinook and sockeye salmon. The four
           coastal tribes also participate in the bottomfish fishery using
           longline and handline gear. These fisheries occur in the spring
           and fall and are centered off the north coast of the Olympic
           Peninsula.

               In summary, vessels fishing for salmon operate from May 1 to
           October 31 throughout the study area, with heavier concentrations
           in the Strait of Juan de Fuca, especially when the Treaty gillnet
           fishery is in effect, off of Grays Harbor, and on Swiftsure Bank.
           The bottornfish fishery occurs throughout the study area during
           the entire year, with concentrations over Swiftsure bank as well.

               vi. Pleasure Boats

               Pleasure boating represents a large and expanding use of
           Puget Sound waters. The highest concentrations are centered
           around the San Juan Islands. In 1989, there were an estimated
           160,000 boats registered in Washington, with over half of them
           remaining in Puget Sound (Washington Department of Health, 1989).
           There are 63 marinas located in the Strait of Juan de Fuca and


                                        II-110









         Puget Sound north of, and including, Port Townsend. By far, the
         largest concentration of marinas (44) are located in the San Juan
         Islands (WDNR, 1990).

              b.   Washington State Ports and Harbors

              i. WillaRa Harbor

              Willapa Bay is bounded on the south by a low sandy peninsula
         known as Leadbetter Point, and on the north by the sandy
         peninsula of Cape Shoalwater. Willapa River and Harbor are used
         primarily by fishing boats engaged in the salmon, shrimp, crab
         and bottomfish fisheries, and also by barges transporting wood
         chips from Willapa Harbor *to Longview on the Columbia River.
         There is an average of one barge per week entering and exiting
         Willapa Harbor (Littlejohn, 1992). There are no petroleum
         products transported by vessel into or out of Willapa Harbor.

              The COE ceased dredging the Channel in 1976, at which time
         the depth was 26 feet over the bar at the mouth of Willapa Bay,
         and 24 feet from deep water in Willapa Bay to both forks of
         Willapa River at Raymond. No deep draft vessels have entered
         Willapa Bay since 1976 (US Department of Commerce, 1988).

              Willapa Bar extends about three miles beyond a line joining
         Willapa Bay Light and Leadbetter Point. The bar channel is
         continually shifting, and depths over the bar vary seasonally.
         As a result, depths have consistently been less than the 26-foot
         project depth (US Department of Commerce, 1988). Today, the
         minimum depth of the channel over Willapa Bar is 21 feet (U.S.
         Department of Commerce, 1988).

              An interim dredge disposal site is located approximately
         three and a half miles off the mouth of Willapa Harbor.     The
         site has been used for disposal of dredge spoil from the bar at
         the opening of Willapa Bay. Although the site has not been used
         since 1976, the COE plans to utilize the site for three years,
         and then, due to the rate of shoaling, not for approximately
         another ten years. The site is currently being evaluated by EPA
         and the COE and is expected to be designated by 1994 (Findley,
         1992).

              ii. Grays Harbor

              The entrance to Grays Harbor is approximately two miles
         wide, but shoals extending south from Point Brown narrow the
         navigable channel to a width of 0.7 miles (US Department of
         Commerce, 1988). From its entrance, the bay extends eastward for
         15 miles to the mouth of the Chehalis River. The bay has many
         shoals and flats that are exposed at low water and cut by
         numerous channels. Pilotage is compulsory for all registered
         vessels (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1988).

                                       II-111









               Grays Harbor is an important outlet for the Washington State
          timber industry and represents an important lumber port in the
          foreign and domestic trade. A large number of vessels servicing
          Grays Harbor and Willapa Bay are engaged in coastwise service
          between ports in Washington, Oregon and California.

               The Port of Grays Harbor operates three marine terminals.
          They include berthing space for three ocean-going vessels and one
          shallow draft vessel or barge (Port of Grays Harbor, 1988). In
          addition to the port-operated facilities, there are more than
          seven private deep draft piers and wharves in the Hoquiam,
          Aberdeen, and Cosmopolis area. Westport Marina is a modern
          fishing boat harbor in Grays Harbor with space for 800 boats.
          The Marina supports commercial fishing, seafood processing,
          recreational fishing and tourism, and ship building and repair
          industries. Two major railroads and two major highways service
          Grays Harbor. Bowerman Airport is owned and operated by the Port
          of Grays Harbor (US Department of Commerce, 1988).

               The Port of Grays Harbor, the fifth largest deep water port
          in the State of Washington, is the only deep water port on the
          outer coast of Washington capable of handling vessels of up to a
          36 foot draft. There have been over 2,500 bar crossings in Grays
          Harbor between 1980 and 1990 representing an average of 250
          vessel crossings each year (Stevens, 19-91). In 1988, harborwide
          trade of logs, lumber, wood chips, lignin and petroleum products
          handled by the Port and private terminals (Weyerhauser, ITT
          Rayonier, and Citifor) amounted to 5.million tons (Port of Grays
          Harbor, 1988). Refined petroleum products are barged into Grays
          Harbor from refineries in Northern Puget Sound.

               In recent years there has been an aggressive effort to make
          the Port of Grays Harbor better prepared to handle an
          increasingly diversified mix of non-log cargo such as steel and'
          aluminum products, paper products, wood products, machinery,
          granite and seafood products (Barkstrom, 1992). The COE, EPA and
          the Port of Grays Harbor have invested $75 million in expanding
          and enhancing maritime activities in Grays Harbor through
          waterway dredging and port terminal development programs. This
          effort now enables the port to handle the largest ships that can
          pass through the Panama Canal. In 19911 approximately 31% of the
          cargo handled by the Port of Grays Harbor was non-log cargo. By
          1992, the amount of non-log cargo handled by the port is expected
          to reach 50%.

               Bunkering activities documented in 1988 included 14 transits
          from Tacoma to Grays Harbor by way of the Strait of Juan de Fuca
          transporting 465,658 barrels of bunker fuel. Within Grays
          Harbor, a total of 120 bunkering operations took place,
          transferring a total of 479,000 barrels of bunker fuel. The
          marketing terminal at Grays Harbor holds an inventory that
          accounts for the difference between inflow and outflow


                                       11-112









         (Chadbourne and Leschine, 1989).

              Dredge spoil disposal is deposited at three EPA designated
         dumpsites outside the mouth of Grays Harbor. The dumping of
         dredged material helps control erosion occurring at the mouth of
         the harbor (Tipton, 1991). Regulated dumping of dredge materials
         into ocean waters falls under Sections 102 and 103 of the MPRSA.
         The designation of dredge disposal sites is delegated to the EPA.
         The COE is the permitting authority for dredged material. Two
         ocean dredge spoil disposal sites outside of Grays Harbor
         recently received final designation by EPA Region 10 (Federal
         Register Vol. 55, No. 129, July 5, 1990). These include the 3.9
         mile site and an 8 mile site. The former site is used for
         disposal from the Corps' maintenance dredging program in Grays
         Harbor. It also received material from the Corps/Port of Grays
         Harbor Navigation Improvement Project (NIP) accomplished in 1990.
         The latter site only received material from the NIP in 1990, and
         has since been de-designated by EPA (Ploudre, 1991).

              iii. La Push

              La Push is a Quileute Indian village approximately one half
         mile north of the entrance of the Quillayute River. It is an
         important recreational and Indian fishing center. The river
         channel, maintained by-the Corps of Engineers, leads from the sea
         to a small-craft basin at La Push. Approximately 200 berths are
         provided in the harbor of La Push (U.S. Department of Commerce,
         1988). Dredge disposal material from the harbor at La Push is'
         deposited on land.

              iv. Neah Bay

              Neah Bay, located on the Makah Indian Reservation, is
         located about five miles east of Cape Flattery just inside the
         Strait of Juan de Fuca. The existing Federal project constructed
         by the COE at Neah Bay consists of: 1) an 8,000 ft. long
         rubblemound breakwater between Waadah Island and the westerly
         shore of Neah Bay; 2) reinforcement of the existing rock
         revetment extending approximately 2,200 feet west from Baadah
         Point; and 3) an 800 ft. extension of the revetment westward.
         The breakwater was developed to provide a harbor of refuge. The
         rock revetment protects US Coast Guard facilities and Makah
         Tribal headquarters.

               Neah Bay is used extensively by small vessels as a harbor
         of refuge in foul weather, and as a sport fishing site. There
         are also two cooperative fishing piers which have facilities for
         icing and supplying fishing boats, and a sea urchin processing
         plant. Neah Bay is a customs port of entry and customs officers
         also perform immigration duties (US Department of Commerce,
         1989).



                                      11-113









               The Makah Tribe plans to develop the harbor at Neah Bay to
          provide a protected marina to support a changing commercial
          Indian and non-Indian fishery from a one-season, one species
          activity to a multi-species, year-round endeavor. The
          preliminary project plans aim to develop a marina that
          accommodates 275 boats. The harbor would be dredged to a minimum
          depth of 15 feet below mean lower low water. Dredge spoil will
          be used to nourish reservation beaches with the remainder
          deposited on land (Simmons, 1993). An emergency response towing
          vessel stationed at Neah Bay has been recommended to OMS by the
          Regional Marine Safety Committees.

               v. Port Angeles

               The Port Angeles harbor, located 56 miles east of Cape
          Flattery, is bounded by a long narrow spit of sand known as Ediz
          Hook. Logs, lumber, plywood, newsprint, pulp, shakes and
          shingles, and petroleum products are the principal commodities
          handled (US Department of Commerce, 1988). The port currently
          owns and operates two deep-water terminals with a total capacity
          of five vessels. Port Angeles haLrbor has the capacity to handle
          2 million tons of export logs per year under existing conditions
          without significant additional costs to shippers for multiple
          shift working or vessel delays (Port of Port Angeles, 1992). In
          1988, 51 bunkering operations took place. Approximately, 10,803
          barrels of bunkering fuel was transferred per operation. Total.
          bunker fuel transported in Port Angeles amounted to 550,951
          barrels (Chadbourne and Leschine, 1989).

               A ferry terminal supports ferry traffic that transits
          between Port Angeles and Victoria, B.C. A small craft basin
          supports a fleet of 563 fishing boats and pleasure craft, with
          pleasure craft accounting for 60% of the boats. A marina in
          Sequim Bay provides 272 permanent moorage slips and an additional
          22 transient slips. The moorage will be expanded, as demand
          dictates, to a maximum capacity of 355 slips (Port of Port
          Angeles, 1992). The Port also owns and operates two airports,
          one at Port Angeles and one at Sekiu.

               A pilot is required for all vessels greater than 1600 gross
          tons transiting east of Port Angeles. Some vessels require a
          state licensed pilot, while others require a federally licensed
          pilot (See RCW 88.16.070 and 46 USC 8501). The state may grant
          an exemption to pilotage requirements to smaller passenger
          vessels and yachts under 500 gross tons or 200 feet or less in
          length. Tugs in excess of 1200 horsepower are stationed in Port
          Angeles and tugs to 7200 horsepower are available in North Puget
          Sound and from Seattle with advance notice. Port Angeles is also
          a customs port of entry (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1988). The
          Port Angeles Coast Guard Air Station is located on Ediz Hook, in
          addition to a Coast Guard VTS radar tower and radio beacon and
          fog signal (US Coast Pilot, 1988).

                                       11-114











              vi. Ports of Anacortes and Ferndale

              Large volumes of crude oil are transported to refineries in
         Anacortes and Ferndale. Refined products and petroleum coke are
         then transported by pipeline, truck, vessel and barge. In 1989,
         Anacortes and Ferndale received 41.9% and 51%, respectively, of
         the tanker transits transporting petroleum products into and out
         of Puget Sound (Chadbourne and Leschine, 1989). In 1988, nine
         bunkering operations were documented, averaging 30,662 barrels
         per operation. In Anacortes, five bunkering operations took
         place, averaging 30,251 barrels per operation (Chadbourne and
         Leschine, 1989).

              c. Economic Contribution of Vessel Activities

              Vessel traffic is intricately linked to the economy of
         Washington State, with an estimated one out of every six jobs in
         the state attributable to international trade (Kapp, 1987). On a
         local and regional level, the significance of vessel traffic to
         local economies is more profound. It was demonstrated that in
         1988, port related activities in Grays Harbor generated 7,886
         jobs (representing approximately 35% of the jobs in Grays Harbor
         County), and contributed over $21 million in county tax revenues.
         The jobs created by port activities include trucking, logging,
         yard handling, and vessel stevedoring. The average annual wage
         for these jobs is $21,085, 33% higher than the county average
         (Port of Grays Harbor, 1988).

              In 1991, approximately 165 million board feet were handled
         at the Port of Port Angeles, generating 505 direct jobs, and
         indirect employment for over 1,388 people (Port of Port Angeles,
         1992).

              The economic contribution of the Ports of Anacortes and
         Ferndale to the Pacific Northwest is highly significant. Without
         the refineries, there would be no infrastructure to supply the
         Northwest fuel demand (Weiss, 1992).

              d. Vessel Management Regimes

                   i.   Voluntary Managenent Initiatives

              Four voluntary management regimes address vessel traffic in
         U.S. waters of the Pacific Coast: 1) a WSPA agreement to keep
         coast-wise tanker traffic more than 50 nautical miles offshore
         when not entering port (Tomasovic, 1992); 2) a crabber-tugboat
         agreement to designate lanes for tugs and barges during crabbing
         season (Northwest Towboat Association, 1991); 3) the use of the
         Mukkaw Bay anchorage site off of the MaXah Indian Reservation;
         and 4) the Cooperative Vessel Traffic Management System (CVTMS).
         The first two agreements have been discussed in the sections



                                       11-115









               The Mukkaw Bay anchorage, a mutually agreed upon site by
          both Canadian and U.S. Coast Guards, is used to minimize
          haphazard movements of vessels that are either waiting for a
          pilot in Port Angeles, or directions from home ports (Pokeda,
          1992). The anchorage is not a designated anchorage and therefore
          not enforced nor maintained by the Coast Guard. However, it's
          use is monitored by Tofino Vessel Traffic Service. It is located
          just outside of the 3 mile limit of state jurisdiction, and thus
          convenient for ships to await orders, or available pilots without
          having to go through U.S. customs. The use of the Mukkaw Bay
          anchorage is monitored by Tofino Vessel Traffic Service (VTS)
          monitoring station. According to data provided by the Tofino
          VTS, approximately 35 vessels used the anchorage between May of
          1989 and May of 1990. The average duration of stay at this site
          was 3.8 days per vessel.

               The use of Mukkaw Bay as an anchorage site has created some
          management problems. One'such problem involved the recent
          presence of the Asian gypsy moths; on Washington and Vancouver
          Island beaches which has subsequently threatened coastal forests.
          It is presumed that the moth has been introduced by ships
          infested with larvae. Also, trash and low level oiling has been
          identified as a problem in the past, presumably'due to vessel
          activities at the anchorage site. These nuisances have been
          reduced in recent years with the passage of MARPOL and more
          attention by the U.S./Canadian CVTMS.

          ii.    Cooperative Vessel Traffic Management Service

               There are four aspects to the CVTMS: 1) required reporting
          by all vessels inbound to the Strait of Juan de Fuca greater than
          500 gross tons; 2) a Traffic Separation Scheme (TSS) in the
          Strait of Juan de Fuca; 3) a vessel movement reporting system
          (VMRS): and 4) radar surveillance. To reduce the conflicts
          between fishing vessels operating at the mouth of the Strait of
          Juan de Fuca and commercial vessel traffic, Tofino Traffic
          Control Center in.Canada and OMS have established a mandatory
          reporting regime where vessels greater than 500 gross tons bound
          for the Strait of Juan de Fuca report to Tofino Traffic Service
          when: 1) they are within 24 hours, of either country's territorial
          sea (vessels greater than 300 gross tons are required to report
          to OMS); and 2) when approaching 50 nautical miles of Vancouver,
          or when crossing latitude 480N inbound from the south, and
          longitude 127*00 W from the west (Figure 45). This reporting
          initiative allows enough time fox, Tofino VTS to assess language
          problems and deal with the vessels accordingly. If, during a
          pending emergency, a vessel captain can not speak english, Tofino
          is afforded enough time to explore other avenues to facilitate
          communications with the ship.

               In addition, the Coast Guard and OMS have initiated an
          educational campaign to encourage vessel companies to ensure that

                                        11-116































                                                  NOTE

                                                    ADVANCE REPORT
                                                       24 EM
                                                   PWOR TO ARRrVAL
                                                  TIMLITOIRIAT WATERS

                                        TOFINO
                                             7
                                     CVTM ZONE]


            C@                                   VANCOUVER MAND
                                                                       N
             127*W




                                       CAMMIAM
                                        pu=VrAIM                               IIA
                          TOFINO                       RANOMPIM
                        CVIMS ZONE
                         VHF 74                                                CAKAJM
                C"                         TELTITORIAL           SMEAMU       MDTIrAn=
                                             SU                  m7nm          UJL
                                                        xmmnxA   VWSA           IrA"M
                                    48 ON                 VMUT
                                                             WASHINGTON STATE
















           Figure 45.         Vessel Traffic Management Service off the Strait
                              of Juan de Fuca (CVTMS Offshore Traffic
                              Management Task Force, 1991)

                                                11-117









         captains and/or at least one Deck Officer can speak adequate
         english. A monitoring effort is documenting the success of this
         campaign (Motekaitis, 1992).

              The IMO sanctioned a Traffic Separation Scheme (TSS)
         consisting of all navigable waters of the Strait of Juan de Fuca
         and its offshore approaches (Figure 46). The US and Canada
         jointly operate the system within the waters of the Juan de Fuca
         region. The TSS is comprised of a network of one-way traffic
         lanes, and precautionary areas at the end points or where vessels
         normally join, leave, or cross the TSS. The traffic lanes are
         each 1,000 yards wide, and are separated by 500 yard wide
         separation zones. Most traffic lanes have a minimum depth of 60
         feet.

              Voluntary traffic separation schemes exist in southern
         Georgia Strait, the San Juan Archipelagos, Rosario Strait,
         Boundary Pass and Haro Strait. Two restricted areas are present
         within Puget Sound: Rosario Strait and Guemes Channel. No
         vessel over 20,000 DWT may enter these areas without VTC approval
         (33 CFR Part 161.37- Harbors, Marine Safety, Navigation (water),
         Telecommunications, Vessels, Waterways). Rosario Strait
         represents for large ships, the most difficult transit within the
         Puget Sound area. Rosario Strait is the site of the 13th Coast
         Guard District's "worst case" pollution scenario which envisions
         ï¿½ tanker grounding, with subsequent cargo tank rupture, involving
         ï¿½ major spill of crude oil. Rosario Strait is used by many small
         craft and ferries. When this type of traffic is combined with
         navigational factors such as strong tidal currents, the resulting
         hazard warrants imposition of the "one-way" Rosario Strait VTS
         rule. Hence, tankers moving through Rosario Strait are
         accompanied by an escorting tug, voluntary speed restrictions
         apply, and the Strait is regulated as a one-way channel for large
         ships (U.S. Coast Guard, 1991).

              According to conclusions reached by the Port Needs Study
         conducted by the U.S. Coast Guard in 1991, the priority for the
         existing VTS system in Puget Sound is to modernize the present
         vessel traffic control center. The surveillance and
         communications workload created by the repetitive ferry crossings
         and the channel interference caused by commercial fishing boats
         must be reduced through enforced regulation and VTS automation.
         There are a number of improvements/upgrades occurring at VTS
         Puget Sound including a Tacoma extension, a new Vessel Traffic
         Center, closed circuit TV cameras in Seattle and Tacoma,
         direction finders/weather monitors at radar sites, communications
         improvements, a new voice hotline with the Canadian VTSIs and a
         new computer data link with the Canadian VTS's (Norman, 1992).
              The Joint Coordinating Group (JCG) is the Canadian/U.S. body
         which oversees the CVTS in the Pacific Northwest. Recent issues
         addressed by the JCG,include: l)-communication problems with non-





















                                      E
                                                                                                  :5                      R,                                              U R I T 1 5 11

                                               uFr=
                                                                                                                                                                        C 0 L U   W 0 1
                    STRAIT OF GEORGIA


                         OF JUAN VE FUCA
                                                                                                   S


                                                                                                                                          o
                                                                                                                                                                              V





                                      7


                                                                                                                                                         t
                                                                                                                                                       v
                                                                                                              ':7

                                                                                                      N



                        L   7
                                                                         C   0
                                                                                                                                               V@a "i"A @i
                                       '60 e'@" M
                                              M
                                                                      J'



                                                                                                            S, lr"@
                               Z. If
                                                                                            W4.,
                                                                                                         '0-

                                                   T.-


                                    7



                                                                                                                        ZE













                      Figure 46.                           Traffic Separation Scheme in the Strait of Juan de
                                                           Fuca and Puget Sound (U.S. Coast Guard, 1987).

                                                                                               11-119









          procedures; 3) vessel routing schemes in the offshore approaches
          to minimize conflicts with fishing vessels; and 4) shortcomings
          in mariner awareness of available services. The JCG commissioned
          a task force to address these problems and initiatives have been
          developed which are now being implemented.

              60   Contingency Plans

                    i.  Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90)

              The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 creates a comprehensive
          prevention, response, liability, and compensation regime for
          addressing vessel and facility-caused oil pollution. It
          substantially increases Federal oversight of oil transportation
          by setting new requirements for vessel construction, crew
          licensing and manning; mandates contingency planning; enhances
          Federal response capability; broadens enforcement authority;
          increases penalties; and creates a new research and development
          program. A one 'billion dollar trust fund is available to cover
          cleanup costs and damages not compensated by the spiller, whose
          financial responsibility requirements are significantly
          increased.

              Six Titles apply directly to the proposed Olympic Coast
          marine Sanctuary. Title I creates a liability and compensation
          regime for tank vessel and facility-source oil'pollution. Any
          party responsible for the discharge, or the substantial threat of
          discharge, of oil into navigable waters or adjoining shorelines
          is liable for the removal costs and damages for injury,
          destruction, loss or loss of use of natural resources, including
          assessment costs, real or personal property damages, subsistence
          use, lost government revenues, and lost profits and earning
          capacity. NOAA has the responsibility of promulgating damage
          assessment regulations. Sums recovered by a trustee for natural
          resource damage will be retained in a revolving trust account to
          reimburse or pay costs incurred by the trustee with respect to
          those resources.

              Title II makes numerous amendments mandating that other
          Federal statutes conform to the provisions of the Oil Pollution
          Act.

              Title III encourages the establishment of an international
          inventory of spill removal equipment and personnel.

              Title IV is divided into three subtitles: A) Prevention; B)
          Removal and C) Penalties and Miscellaneous. Subtitle A gives
          added responsibility to the Coast Guard regarding merchant marine
          personnel, including the review of alcohol and drug abuse and
          review of criminal records prior to issuance and renewal of
          documentation. It also increases the responsibility of the Coast
          Guard to regulate the conduct of tankers by requiring some

                                       11-120









          vessels to participate in vessel traffic service systems, and
          authorize the expansion, construction, improvement and operation
          of vessel traffic systems in U.S. ports.

               More specifically, Subtitle A establishes double hull
          requirements for tank vessels. Most tank vessels over 5,000
          gross tons will be required to have double hulls by 2010, while
          vessels under 5,000 gross tons will be required to have double
          hulls or double containment systems by 2015. All newly
          constructed tankers must contain a double hull (or double
          containment system if under 5,000 gross tons), while existing
          vessels are phased out over a period of years.

               Subtitle B amends subsection 311 (c) of the Clean Water Act
          (CWA), requiring the Federal government to ensure immediate
          removal from navigable waters or adjoining shorelines of any oil
          or hazardous substance that threatens to affect natural
          resources. It also requires a revision and republication of the
          National Contingency Plan within one year which will include,
          among other things, a fish and wildlife response plan developed
          in consultation with NOAA and USFWS. Nothing in Subtitle B
          preempts the rights of States to require stricter standards for
          removal actions.


               Subtitle C alters and increases civil and administrative
          penalties for discharges and violations of regulations under the
          Clean Water Act. As well as criminal penalties, other penalties
          are included for negligent operations and failure to comply with
          Federal law on carriage of liquid bulk dangerous cargoes, load
          lines, manning,m and crew complements and requirements.
          Financial responsibility and civil penalties may be assessed up
          to $25,000 per day. All penalties are to be paid into the Oil
          Spill Liability Trust Fund.

               Title V11 authorizes oil pollution research and technology
          development, including the establishment of an Interagency
          Coordinating Committee, that is chaired by Department of
          Transportation and comprised of representatives from the
          Departments of Energy, Interior, Commerce (NOAA), EPA, Federal
          Emergency Management Agency, National Aeronautics and Space
          Administration, and the U.S. Fire Administration.

               Title XX amends the oil Spill Liability Trust Fund and
          increases from $500 million to $1 billion the amount that can be
          spent on any single oil spill incident, of which no more than
          $500 million may be spent on natural resource damages.

                    ii. State Framework for Contingency Planning

               After the spill from the Nestucca barge in 1988 off of Grays
          Harbor, Washington, the Governor of Washington and the Premier of
          British Columbia created the B.C./Washington Task Force on oil

                                       11-121









         Spills. The mission of the task force was fourfold: 1) to seek
         ways to prevent oil spills; 2) to review oil spill response
         procedures; 3) to study methods of determining compensation
         claims; and 4) to develop a coordinated plan for preventing and
         responding to spills. Following the Exxon Valdez spill in 1989,
         Alaska, Oregon and California joined the task force and it was
         renamed the B.C./States Task Force. In its final report, the
         Task Force made 46 joint recommendations involving issues of
         vessel traffic,.vessel design, personnel, enforcement, regulatory
         oversight, education, interstate cooperation, and future studies.
         The State of Washington proposed an additional nine
         recommendations for state action including efforts to reduce
         navigation conflicts (Final Report of the States/B.C. Oil Spill
         Task Force, 1990).

              The Washington State Legislature adopted several provisions
         recommended by the States/B.C. Task Force. In 1991, the State
         Legislature passed Washington ESHB 1027 which establishes the
         infrastructure for marine spill response. Included in this
         infrastructure are the WDOE, the newly created Office of Marine
         Safety (OMS), the Maritime Commission, Regional Marine Safety
         Committees, the Board of Pilotage Commissioners, University of
         Washington Sea Grant, the Marine Oversight Board (MOB), and
         existing state agencies including Washington Parks and Recreation
         Commission, WDNR, WDW, WDF, and Department of Revenue.

              The USCG (the Federal on-scene coordinator in coastal and
         tidal waters) has ultimate authority to coordinate and direct all
         Federal, state and private cleanup operations when discharges
         pose a substantial threat to the public health or welfare.

              WDOE has primary responsibility for oil and hazardous
         substance spill response and clean-up on land and water. It
         focuses, however, on land-based oil storage operations.

              The primary focus and jurisdiction of OMS is vessel oil
         spill prevention. OMS also has responsibility to ensure adequate
         spill response planning. The OMS has undertaken five initiatives
         to fulfill its responsibilities: 1) the establishment of four
         regional marine safety committees including one for the North
         Puget Sound/Strait of Juan de Fuca and one for the Outer Coast to
         address vessel operations and regional traffic patterns; 2) the
         adoption of tank vessel oil spill prevention plan rules to insure
         that individual vessels operations provide the best achievable
         protection from oil spills; 3) the adoption of cargo and
         passenger vessel screening rules to ensure that individual
         vessels do not pose a substantial risk of harm to public health,
         safety, and the environment; 4) a vessel monitoring program; and
         5) education and technical outreach programs.

              The regional committees were charged with preparing plans
         addressing the safe navigation and operation of tankers, barges,

                                       11-122









         and other vessel traffic within its specific region. The plans
         must consider tug escort requirements, speed limits, anchorage
         designations, communication systems, congestion in shipping
         lanes, navigation aids, channel design plans, routings from port
         construction and dredging projects, routing vessels during
         emergencies, management requirements for vessel control bridges,
         environmentally sensitive areas, enforcement mechanisms, and
         adequacy of the Coast Guard VTS. The plans were submitted to OMS
         in May, 1993. OMS is currently reviewing the plans and will
         submit its recommendation by December, 1993. OMS will then
         implement the recommendations over which the agency has
         jurisdiction and will pass the recommendations for issues over
         whichit does not have jurisdiction to the appropriate federal or
         state agency. The work of the committee has been ongoing and it
         will continue to make recommendations and update existing ones.

              The OMS will be establishing an emergency response system
         for the Strait of Juan de Fuca after receiving recommendations
         from the regional marine safety committee. The emergency
         response system will address emergency towing and firefighting
         capabilities, and emergency response availability. The
         subcommittee recommendations have been submitted to the regional
         committees for review as of February 10, 1993. OMS' Vessel
         Screening Program will be used to select cargo and passenger
         vessels that pose a risk to the safety of Washington waters.
         These vessels will be boarded and inspected as a part of the
         Vessel Monitoring Program. Submitted Tanker Prevention Plans
         will be used by the Vessel Monitoring Program to select and board
         the tank vessels that pose a risk to the safety of Washington
         waters.

              The Oil Spill Prevention Plan rules, effective in September,
         1993, will require tankers and tank barges transiting Washington
         waters to file an oil spill prevention plan with the OMS. The
         plan must ensure that tank vessels demonstrate the "best
         achievable protection" from oil spills. The prevention plans
         must demonstrate minimum compliance with respect to staffing,
         vessel inspection programs, spill prevention training, prevention
         technology on board, English language proficiency by at least one
         bridge officer through procedures adopted by the vessel owner or
         operator. The Oil Spill Prevention Plan program will be
         implemented in three phases involving: 1) establishment of
         standards for interim prevention plans; 2) adoption of plans
         requiring detailed comprehensive information about a vessel and
         its operations to aid in defining "best achievable protection";
         and 3) establishment of standards for achieving the best
         achievable protection. The best achievable protection standards
         are scheduled to be implemented by July, 1995. The 1993
         Prevention Plans will be effective for five years. New plans
         will be required in 1998 and best achievable protection standards
         will be revised as required.



                                      11-123









               Commercial Vessel Screening rules, addressing cargo and
          passenger vessels over 300 gross tons will result in a, data base
          of all vessels transiting Washington waters including information
          on the vessels cargo characteristics, the vessels operating
          characteristics, and operating environment, past incidents and
          human factors. All vessels are required to give 24 hour advanced
          notification of their arrival and include a safety report.

               The vessel screening data base and submitted prevention
          plans will be used by the Vessel Inspection Program to select
          vessels that pose the greatest risk to the safety of Washington
          waters. These vessels will be boarded and inspected for
          compliance with state and federal regulations. OMS is studying
          the use of tax credits and other financial incentives to
          encourage industry compliance with safe marine transportation
          practices.      I

               The Maritime Commission, established by the Legislature in
          1990, is charged with: 1) developing first response oil spill
          contingency plans for covered vessels; 2) providing emergency oil.
          spill response services for up to 24 hours of an oil spill
          incident; and 3) providing a 24-hour communication network for
          spill response notifications. Both of these functions have been
          contracted-the former to Foss Environmental and the latter to the
          Marine Exchange of Puget Sound. The Commission develops vessel
          contingency plans and is planning to maintain a database of
          vessel accidents.

               Numerous state agencies provide spill response assistance
          and planning information related to resources that may be
          impacted by a spill. Education and outreach efforts are provided
          by the University of Washington Sea Grant and Washington Parks
          and Recreation Commission. The MOB provides independent
          oversight of the actions of the federal government, industry, the
          Department of Ecology, OMS, and other state agencies with respect
          to oil spill prevention and response for covered vessels and
          facilities. The MOB is comprised of five gubernatorial
          appointees, who, acting in an advisory role report to the
          Governor, and make recommendations to agencies and the State
          legislature.

                    iii.   Response Readiness for Oil Spills

               Many of the provisions established by Washington ESHB 1027
          are similar to those promulgated by OPA90, including the
          requirement for vessels to have their own contingency plans
          approved by OMS before they are allowed to enter state waters.
          To meet the stringent contingency plan requirements of OPA90 and
          State legislation, many vessel owner/operators contract with an
          oil spill response contractor in the State which has the
          necessary equipment and trained personnel to respond to a "worst-
          case scenario" identified for their particular vessel.

                                        11-124









              While the USCG has ultimate authority over a marine
         incident, there are numerous response mechanisms and capabilities
         in the private, non-profit and government sectors to address a
         spill incident involving oil. If, at any time, the clean-up
         response effort is deemed to be inadequate, the USCG can step in
         and contract with a local resource, or call out the strike team
         in San Francisco which has large ocean lightering and pumping
         equipment and aircraft. The USCG can also call upon the
         resources of the Navy which has mobile skimmers, and pumping and
         lightering equipment. If the responsible party is taking proper
         action, the USCG and the state will monitor the events.

              When a spill occurs, the Maritime Commission is called upon
         to respond during the first 24 hours unless the vessel has its
         own contingency plan and primary response contractor, after which
         the designated responder assumes control over the incident (House
         Bill Report ESHB 102.7). Among the responders in the study area
         are one large cooperative (Clean Sound Cooperative), private
         contractors (Foss Environmental, Global Diving and Salvage Inc.,
         and the Maritime Corporation - a division of Crowley
         Environmental Services), and the soon-to-be-established Marine
         Spill Response Corporation.    A worst probable case scenario/plan
         is in place to enable all area agencies dedicated to oil spill
         response to combat a spill in Puget Sound of approximately
         1,322,000 barrels.

              Clean Sound Cooperative, organized in 1971, is a non-profit,
         regional oil spill response organization funded by its industry
         members including oil, oil pipelines and transportation
         companies. They focus on the containment of spills in open water
         up to 20 miles from shore. Clean Sound owns, maintains and
         operates a fleet of specialized oil spill response equipment and
         cleanup vessels stationed throughout Puget Sound at
         Bellingham/Ferndale, Anacortes, Edmonds, Seattle, Tacoma and Port
         Angeles. The cooperative also maintains more than 30 crew
         members and@backup contractor crews. Its crews and equipment are
         prepared for immediate response, regardless of the location, time
         of day or weather conditions. Clean Sound plans to involve
         commercial fishermen in their response efforts by equipping
         vessels with oil containment barriers designed to fit their
         existing fishing net reels (McCartan, 1992).

              Foss Environmental Services has contracted with Washington
         State's Maritime Commission to provide a first response system to
         a spill. This division also provides standby response services
         to several facilities and emergency oil spill response services
         to other potential spillers. Foss Environmental is a division of
         the tug and barge company of Foss Maritime. Foss maritime has
         approximately 65 tugs and 65 barges, although these tugs and
         barges are not dedicated vessels. Among these, there are
         approximately 15 tank barges in use in Puget Sound at any one
         time that can be called upon to assist a spill in inland waters

                                       11-125









          (Felton, 1992).

              Foss Environmental has equipment pre-staged at eight
          locations around Washington State covering all of Puget Sound,
          the Strait of Juan de Fuca and offshore waters. This equipment
          is dedicated to marine spill response incidents. Pre-staging
          locations are Bellingham, Anacortes, Everett, Seattle, Tacoma,
          Willapa Bay, Aberdeen, and Port Angeles. The equipment is pre-
          staged to respond to a spill in all State waters navigable by
          vessels 300 tons and greater (with the exception of the Columbia
          River) within two hours. Their equipment includes nine fast
          response vessels capable of speeds in excess of 30 knots and
          equipped with 1000 ft. of boom; :34,000 ft. of boom aboard fast
          response vessels for rapid deployment with recovery capacity of
          over 20,000 bbls. per 24-hr. period at a 20% efficiency rating
          (1000 feet aboard each fast response vessel and the balance
          containerized for rapid deployment over land or by air); over 100
          OSHA/HAZwoper trained response personnel and 30 standby personnel
          on-call 24 hrs./day 365 days/yr (Barton, 1992).

              Global Diving and Salvage, Inc. is a private contractor
          speciali'zing in salvage operations, and the cleanup of beaches,
          coastal and inland waterways, and rivers. They respond on a
          daily or weekly basis to incidents in harbors, ship canals and
          along the coast. Their inventory includes small coastwise tug-
          boats including a 70 ft. tug, a fleet of work boats, several
          thousand ft. of containment boom, a variety of skimmers, and a 40
          ft. barge. They have no ocean-going vessels and no ocean-going
          equipment except high-capacity lightering systems which pump up
          to 300 gallons per minute (Craig, 1992).

              The Crowley Environmental Service is a division of Crowley
          Maritime Corporation, the largest tug and barge company in the
          world. The Maritime Corporation, when approved, will concentrate
          on marine response efforts as opposed to beach clean up efforts.
          They have access to numerous barges and tugs, salvage operations,
          and are amassing booms and skimmers to operate in the marine
          environment. Due to the mandates of OPA90 and State Legislation,
          they will concentrate on Puget Sound and Washington State Waters.
          Expecting to be fully operational by the end of 1992, Maritime
          Corporation will preposition equipment in high risk areas yet to
          be determined (G. Douglas, 1992)

              The Marine Spill Response Corporation (MSRC) will be in
          operation in 1993 to address catastrophic spills of over 25,000
          barrels in open seas and 40,000 barrels in protected waters.
          Under MSRC's charter, the decision as to whether the spill
          exceeds local response capabilities will be determined by the
          USCG. MSRC is a not-for-profit organization funded by the Marine
          Preservation Association (MPA). MPA collects dues from oil,
          pipeline, and tug and barge companies. Both MPA and MSRC were
          formed on the recommendation of a task force organized after the

                                       11-126









         Exxon Valdez spill to examine existing resources for responding
         to catastrophic oil spills. MSRC is the response to the OPA90
         provisions mandating that by 1993 vessels must be able to respond
         to catastrophic spills. MSRC has five regional centers
         throughout the United States and, if needed, they can call on
         personnel and equipment from other regions to assist. This
         ability will make it the largest oil response agency in the
         world. MSRC is not intended to replace existing oil spill
         cooperatives and independent response contractors. Rather, it
         will respond when the existing infrastructure does not have
         sufficient resources to respond to a large spill (Patterson,
         1992).

             There will be three pre-staging areas where MSRC's
         equipment, and, at times, vessels and personnel will be located.
         Pre-staging areas are planned for Everett, Bellingham and Port
         Angeles, WA as well as Astoria, Oregon. MSRC will provide a
         best-effort response to major spills of persistent oil (oils that
         do not evaporate or degrade quickly) in U.S. coastal and tidal
         waters (out to the limits of the U.S. EEZ) that are beyond the
         capacity of local response organizations. In addition to its own
         equipment and personnel, a variety of subcontractors will provide
         support.

             Among the equipment inventory planned for the Seattle area
         is a 208 foot offshore response vessel, numerous smaller work
         boats, booms, skimmers and pumping equipment. A second response
         vessel will be moored at the Astoria site. Onshore facilities
         will include an 80,000 sq. ft. warehouse including administrative
         offices, a training center, test tank and a 24 hr. manned
         response center (Patterson, 1992).

             As a result of OPA90 and Washington State legislation, all
         state waters are covered by numerous vessel contingency plans.
         In Washington State, there are currently no tugs and only two
         barges exclusively dedicated to oil spill response although the
         Marine Spill Response Corporation plans to dedicate two barges
         for oil spill response. These two barges are owned and operated
         by Clean Sound Cooperative. Supporting the barges dedicated,to
         spill response, are a large number of tugs and barges in constant
         operation within Puget Sound which are available in the event of
         an emergency (Felton, 1992).

                   iv. Emergency Towing Response for Vessels and
                        Tugs/Tows Adrift

             While management of vessels into and through the Strait of
         Juan de Fuca and Puget Sound is well coordinated, and contingency
         planning has, and is, being addressed through a number of
         Federal, State, regional, private and nQn-profit initiatives, the
         very real possibility of a vessel or tug and tow losing power
         near the sensitive offshore habitats of the outer coast and


                                      11-127









          Strait has not been adequately addressed. There have been well
          publicized instances when barges and vessels have lost power
          causing, or threatening to cause, damage to coastal resources.
          Some examples in recent history include the grounding of the
          Nestucca barge in 1988 off of Grays Harbor involving a spill of
          over 200,000 gallons of oil, in addition to the Exxon
          Philadelphia and Exxon San Francisco which lost power off Cape
          Flattery in 1989.

              Although there are contingency plans in place, no response
          strategies exist to respond to such occurrences off the
          Washington Coast and in the Strait of Juan de Fuca. No vessels
          are specifically designated to respond to an emergency in which a
          vessel or tug and.tow loses power in these areas. While there
          are several major towing and salvage companies in the area, the
          time of response to an emergency occurring off the outer coast
          requiring towing would depend on both vessel availability and
          distance from the scene of the incident. Emergency response
          could be significantly delayed due to prior assignment of
          response vessels to other towing, docking, or salvage operations,
          or the remote location of an incident from available vessels.

              The United States Navy has several tugs in the Puget Sound
          area, however all are yard craft rather than ocean going vessels.,
          Further, none are dedicated, nor readily available for emergency
          response. In addition, the U.S. Coast Guard has no tugs in the
          area (COMSUBGRU 9, 1992). The initial USCG response to a
          drifting vessel or tug and tow are primarily Search and Rescue
          missions aimed at protecting human life. The Canadian Coast
          Guard operating from Victoria has five vessels: two are assigned
          primarily to search and rescue missions, and three are buoy
          tenders. In an emergency, one of these vessels might be able to
          render assistance to a small disabled commercial vessel or
          drifting tug and tow (Cheng, 1992).

              The OMS, with the benefit of recommendations from, and in
          coordination with the regional marine safety committees and the
          Marine Oversight Board, and in consultation with the province of
          British Colombia, is mandated by the legislature to establish an
          Emergency Response System for the Strait of Juan de Fuca. The
          system will address emergency towing capability for vessels in
          these waters.

              4. Military Activities

              Military activities in the-area of the Sanctuary consist of
          subsurface, offshore surface, and aerial operations.   Navy
          submarines homeported in Puget Sound conduct three types of
          operations within the sanctuary study area: 1) transit between
          Puget Sound and the undersea operating areas; 2) hull integrity
          tests and other deep water tests of 1 to 2 weeks duration, which
          are performed in a rectangular area between 7 to 30 miles off

                                       11-128









         Cape Johnson; 3) in-water testing of non-explosive torpedoes, 6-
         8 times per year, lasting from I to 4 days, in a rectangular area
         5 to 14 miles off Kalaloch; and 4) the barging of defueled
         nucleau reactor compartments from Puget Sound to the Columbia
         River.

              ongoing operations near the entrance to the Strait of Juan
         de Fuca include surveys for hidden obstacles by Navy minesweepers
         to ensure that in the event of hostilities or other incidents
         affecting national security, Navy ships would be able to pass
         safely to sea. The details of these operations are classified,
         however, they are generally limited to passive surveying and do
         not involve active sweeping or clearing. The Navy also operates
         an acoustical net off Washington, with its operations base
         located at NAS Whidbey Island.

              The Seattle Sectional Aeronautical Chart shows two Warning
         Areas (W-237A and W-237B) which are designated training and
         operating areas for the Pacific Fleet air and surface forces, two
         Military Operation Areas (MOA Olympic A and B), and Restricted
         Area R-6707 (Figure 47).

              The two Warning Areas extend from three miles off the coast
         out to a distance well beyond the sanctuary study area, from
         approximately 480091N latitude due south to approximately
         46*551N latitude. Air operations in W-237A (the southern half of
         the study area) include air combat maneuvering, air intercept,
         air refueling, air-to-air gunnery and rocketing, air-to-surface
         gunnery and missile exercises, anti-submarine warfare training,
         and other training evolutions, at altitudes from the surface to
         50,000 feet above mean sea level. In W-237B area, air operations
         are basically the same. In W-237A, ordnance is expended under
         controlled conditions that attempt to minimize threats to the
         living environment and to ensure the safety of other ships and
         aircraft that may be operating in the area. Anti-submarine
         warfare operations require the expenditure of sound receiving and
         transmitting buoys, called sonobuoys, as well as marine smoke
         markers from aircraft. Sonobuoys eventually flood and sink to
         the bottom after use.

              Surface operations in W-237 consist primarily of routine
         transit, single and multiple platform maneuvering, as well as
         live firings of guns, missiles, torpedoes, and chaff. Any vessel
         or aircraft requiring exclusive use of W-237 schedules the area
         with NAS Whidbey Island. For calendar year 1991, W-237 was
         scheduled for 2,572 hours out of a possible 8,760 hours. During
         this time frame there were a total of 575 events. According to
         Boeing and the Federal Aviation Administration, these events were
         distributed as follows: 156 Navy aircraft, 224 Air Force
         aircraft, 131 Coast Guard aircraft, 10 Navy ships, 27 coast guard
         ships, and 27 civilian aircraft.



                                       11-129


















                                                                               00,


                                                                                VANCOUVER

                 -4900014                                                                    CANADA
                                                                                                   TATEs
                                                                                       ---T--
                                                 NANOOSE                                  LTNITED


                      W-801                                                               NAS YMIDBEY

                                                                                             R-6701


                                                                  R-671                       CHINOOK A
                                   W-2378                                                        MOA
                                                                  CHINOOK 8
                                                                     MOA                      7rLE
                                                           OLYMPIC
                                                            K40A


                                        W-237A





                                                 R-6707


                                     --I@@W-460B

                                  \-CAST NORTH
                                                                                       PORTLAND





                  4500074                                         a::
                                                                  b

                             0            36.7 NMI                                         04




             Figure 47.            Zones of Military Activity off Washington Coast,
                                   (Whidbey Island Complex, West).

                                                        11-130









              The Navy operates and maintains an undersea test range
         located in Navy Operations Area W-237-B (Figure 48). This range
         is known as the Quinault Range, and is instrumented to track air
         craft, surface vessels, submarines, and various undersea vehicles
         (non-explosive torpedoes, mines, counter-measures, etc... ) for
         both the Navy and private industry. The range is available for
         operation year round, and test operations are typically conducted
         8-15 times per year, each operation lasting from 1-7 days. In
         all cases, only non-explosive testing is conducted.

              The typical test scenario in the Quinault range involves:
         1) oceanographic measurements prior to a test exercise; 2) test
         vehicle launching; 3) underwater and above water tracking of
         participating craft and test vehicles during the test; and 4)
         recovery of all test vehicles from the water surface by vessel or
         aircraft or from the seabed by vessel and remote controlled
         recovery vehicle.at the conclusion of the test exercise. The
         above-water tracking instrumentation uses standard Global
         Positioning System and radio telemetry equipment and covers the
         range and surrounding area as required to conduct operations.
         The undersea instrumentation, all located on the ocean floor,
         consists of tracking sensors connected by coaxial cable to
         junction boxes. The junction boxes are connected by fiber optic
         and coaxial cables to the range's shore termination sites at
         Kalaloch and Pacific Beach.

              The range is located approximately 7.5 miles off the
         Washington coast at Kalaloch within Military Operating Area W-237
         and its area is approximately 30 square nautical miles, centered
         at latitude 470301N and longitude 1240371W. The location and/or
         size of the undersea tracking area is adjusted from time to time
         to support specific Navy testing requirements, but it remains
         within W-237.

              There are a variety of activities that take place within the
         sanctuary area in support of Quinault Range use and maintenance.
         Testing operations are supported by a variety of surface and air
         craft. Vessels transit to the range, position and temporarily
         moor throughout the test areas, and launch and recover test
         vehicles as required to meet test objectives. Navy aircraft are
         periodically used to launch test vehicles and helicopters provide
         range surveillance and may be used for test vehicle recovery.
         Helicopter operations include staging at shore sites, typically
         Forks or Pacific Beach, and transit to.and from test areas, at
         altitudes from the surface to approximately 1,000 feet above mean
         sea level. Testing of autonomous and acoustic homing vehicles
         involve sonar searches and sonar target size measurements.
         Maintenance requires replacement of underwater instrumentation
         and cabling in the identified range area and along paths to shore
         termination sites. Maintenance activity involves using
         temporarily anchored surface vessels to support retrieval and
         placement of underwater sensors, junction boxes and cable laying

                                       11-131




















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



                                    NAVY      IESTRU
                                  OPERA77ONS   IS
                                               SLA,
                                    ARE4


                                              QUINAULT
                                               RAN




                                               CABLES






                           LENGTH:7MILES       0  10 -
                          YAM: 4.5 MILES       0  10   20
                          DEPTH: 200 FEET         SM




                                             4'
                                                                               4'







                              2-D TRACKING                      CABLE JUNCTION
                           SENSOR PLATFORMS (32)                     BOX



                                             130'
                         310'          160,       CABLE RUN TO
                                2iO'              KALALOCH DATA
                                                  RELAY STATION
                                                                      TRACKING AREA CENTERED AT.
                                             I                        LATITUDE 47*3(r N
                                                                      LONGITUDE 12C 3r W


                                  41                                  LEGEND:
                                     0   0                            49 = 2.0 TRACKING SENSOR
                                                                        PLATFORM
                         so       1  0   0   1                        [3 = JUNCTION BOX
                                                TYPICAL CABLE
                               0  0             RUNFROM
                         to       I             SENSOR
                            0                   PLATFORM










            Figure 48.          Quinault Range Tracking Area and Bottom-Mounted
                                Instrumentation.


                                                    11-132











         on the seabed.

              Navy ranging activities primarily produce the type and level
         of discharges associated with normal surface vessel traffic. On
         rare occasions some of these activities are conducted outside W-
         237 due to unique conditions or requirements such as lost/sunken
         vessels or equipment, requests for assistance by other groups,
         and classified operations. For example, the Ex-BUGARA (sunken
         submarine located off Cape Flattery) is used for Naval undersea
         test tracking operations.

              The Navy regards W-237 to be a key part of the Pacific Fleet
         offshore training complex in the northeast Pacific, which is
         essential to unit training, and overall Fleet readiness. For air
         operations, W-237 is particularly desirable from a cost
         standpoint because it is close to the coast and therefore
         requires fewer flying hours and steaming hours to reach. The
         importance of these areas is expected to increase by the mid-
         1990's with the addition of a carrier battle group at a new
         homeport in Everett, Washington. Puget Sound will become home to
         several additional Navy warships and support vessels, and the
         relatively few surface operations currently conducted off the
         Washington coast should increase, although the exact number of
         the increase is unknown. operating costs will drive the need to
         conduct routine battle group training in'W-237 and the
         surrounding operating areas.

              The Olympic MOA A and B, which are primarily over land, also
         extend three miles offshore throughout much of the sanctuary
         study area. Air operations within the Olympic MOA's include
         combat tactics, flight training, intercepts, instrument training,
         tanking, and formation at altitudes from 6,000 to 35,000 feet
         above mean sea level; but this is not to be below.1,200 feet
         above the ground. No ordnance is allowed. The MOA is scheduled
         for approximately 1,300 hours of a possible 8,760 hours per year.

              A restricted air space (R-6707) extends from the coast out
         four miles just south of Queets and north of Taholah (Figure 49).
         The following described actions conducted in this training area
         were, until recently, considered vital to national defense. With
         the downsizing of the Navy, however, this training site is no
         longer considered as vital to Fleet readiness.

              Sealion Rock, a 801 by 301 uninhabited volcanic rock, awash
         at high tide, was historically the sole target within R-6707. it
         is located at 47* 271 N latitude and 1240 241 W longitude,
         approximately 2.7 nautical miles off the coastline. This site
         was used exclusively as an alternate practice bombing range for
         Navy A-6 aircraft from NAS Whidbey Island, and from aircraft
         carriers in the North Pacific during Fleet exercises. only inert
         ordnance was dropped, and only in accordance with established
         flight procedures detailed in an approved operations Plan.

                                      11-133











                                              201              1260                401               20'              1250               40'                20'             1240


                                                                                                                                                o-4
                                                                                                                                                                                                     20'
                                                     Soo                                                                   Ai                                                        qA-N-4 DA

                                                                                                                                          CAPE ALAVA
                                                                                                                                    E      @-eae L    ake
                                                                                                                                                                                                          C
                                                                                                                                                                                                     48

                                                                                                                                                 L@Push                   WASHINGTON

                                                                                                                                                         i
                                                                                                                                                            .44
                                                                                                                                                         qoh


                                                                                                                                                                                                     40'
                                                                                                                                       Destruction Isiano           C.ear-afer Q.


                                                                                                                    R 6707 OPERATING AREA                       Ueers R..

                                                                                                                                                                 part "I
                                                                                                                                  SEALION ROCIk
                                                                                                                                                               CAPE ELIZABETH,
                                                                                                                                                                     ou,nault R.                     20'
                                                                                                                                       SPLIT ROCK
                                                                                                                                            "      t        I       PT. GReNviLLE
                                                                                                                                   WILLOUGHBY ROCK.




                                                                                                                                                                          ocean CitY
                                                                                                                                                                                     Aberdee         470
                                                                                                                                                                          r5fay's;

                                                                                                              500
                                                                                                                                                                          PT, CHEHALIS
                                                                               EAN
                                                                                                                                                                           C!AH.ALWATER

                                                                                                                                                                              "lapa                  40'



                                                                                     DEPTHS IN FATHOMS
                                                                                                                                                                          E
                                                                                                                                                                          c
                                                                                     NAUTICAL MILES


                                                                                                                                                                             CAPE
                                                                                                                                                                                          NI NT
                                                                                     STATUTE MILES                                                                           ISAPPOiNT,              20'

                                                                                                                                                      loo
                                                                                                                                                                                  Co;@,,t;ia Awer









                               Figure 49. Restricted Airspace R-6707.

                                                                                                                        11-134









         Procedures in the flight'operations plan dictated a north to
         south pass from Destruction Island to Sealion Rock. Aircraft
         were not to descend below 3,000 feet until they were two miles
         south of Destruction Island. All exit turns were to the west,
         away from the coast. Prior to practice bombing runs, a clearing
         pass was undertaken over Sealion Rock to clear the rock of marine
         mammals. If any marine mammals remained on the rock, an
         additional clearing pass was required. All clearing passes were
         below 500 feet.

              The primary and alternate routes by which Navy planes
         arrived at R-6707 is depicted in Figure 50. Prior to entry into
         the Olympic MOA, aircraft operated on instrument flight rules
         (IFR) under positive control of the Seattle Center aircraft
         traffic control at altitudes of between 6,000 and 23,000 feet
         above ground level. Within the MOA, the aircraft operated on
         visual flight rules (VFR) at altitudes ranging from surface to
         6,000 feet. Aircraft continued to fly as VFR traffic at
         altitudes ranging from SFC to 6,000 feet into R-6707 (Munsell,
         1992).

              Statistics on the number of days per month and days per year
         that A-6 aircraft originating from Whidbey Island and the Pacific
         Fleet used Sealion Rock from 1986 through 1992 is presented in
         Figures 51 and 52, respectively. Usage of Sealion Rock has
         declined from 18 to 5 days per year from 1986 to 1992. Likewise,
         the number of hours in which A-6 bombers have maneuvered over
         Sealion Rock has declined from 31.35 hours in 1986 to 9 hours in
         1992. The number of aircraft from the Pacific Fleet carriers
         that actually dropped inert ordnance on Sea Lion Rock is unknown.

              Permission to use Sealion Rock and three other coastal
         islands and rocks located in each of the three National Wildlife
         Refuges was granted to the Navy by the Secretary of the Interior
         in May, 1944. The Navy was denied permission to use a fifth
         rock, Carroll Island, because of nesting activity. The Navy's
         use of the islands was to cease six months after the end of World
         War II. In July, 1949, the permission was amended to allow the
         Navy to use Sealion Rock indefinitely, while permission to use
         the other three coastal islands and rocks was rescinded.

              The Navy funded a study conducted by the Washington
         Department of Game during 1984-85, to evaluate the impact of
         inert bombing activities on wildlife in the Sea Lion Rock study
         area which extended from near Pt. Grenville north to Destruction
         Island. It was bounded on the east by the shoreline and extended
         out to the west approximately seven kilometers. The primary
         study area was located between Pt. Grenville and Tunnel Island.

              As a result of the study, existing flight patterns were
         changed to limit all departures to the west to minimize any
         flights over adjacent islands and rocks (e.g. the flight pattern

                                       11-135





























                                           DOD
                          AREA PLANNING AP/ I B CHART
                   MILITARY TRAINING ROUTES - WESTERN US                      0,
                                  EFFECTIVE o9ol 19 SEP 1991
                                       TO 0901 Z 14 NOV 1991
                                      SCALE: V= 30 NM
                                     01FIMI MAMIG AGIWV Af%M?ACI CIMIN                         ?
                                            ftwW t'
                    ï¿½R                                       11 OcIt-61,7ir
                                                              1762 PLAN AP1001"             %


                                                                            Oj%1,04 '-Fts
                                                      vp                                                   t'
                                                                                                                        c'







                                                                 cj- 13
                                                                                                    0
                                                                                                                a   0


                                                                                                   0
                                                                                                      pwd
                                                                                                     0


                                                         c                        Id
                                                                                        '9
                                                                                                                       C4.#@
                                OR
                                                          '4'\.     V 'k      o". 0                                     4,'
                                                                                .1.                                0
                     ti                                                        0   (D                   oo         1_4,
                                                                                                                    J. @.
                                                                 ji   B s-4,
                                                                                 0        0 0



                                                                                            34
                                                                                   o",
                                                                                                s-To             Q


                                                                                                             j, 'R


                                                                                                                  .b
                                                                                                                  b






                Figure 50.              Flight Paths by Aircraft Transiting from Whidbey
                                        Island Naval Airforce Base to R-6707 (Whidbey
                                        Island Naval Air station, 1992)
                                                                    '\U IS'












                                                                11-136
















                    NAVY USE OF SEALION ROCK FROM 1986-1992 (DAYS/MONTH)



              7




              6




                                                                              1986
              5
                                                                            El 1987

              4                                                               1988

            U)
                                                                              1989

              3                                                             E] 1990



              2
                                                                              1992










                                        L           U1   A I   I
              0

                   J    F   M   A    M    J   J    A   S    0    N   D

                 Source: Whidbey Island Naval Air Station, 1992








         Figure 51.        Number of Days/Month Navy has Used Sealion Rock
                                                           n
                           From  1986-1990   (Whidbey Isla  d Naval   Air Station,
                          @ I I     i I I             -        1     1


                           1992).

                                            11-137




















                      NAVY USE OF SEALION ROCK FROM 1986-1.992 (DAYSMAR)


              2 5T

              2 0





           cn
                                                 Im

              10






               IC-86     1987       1988       1989      1990       1991      1992

                                              YEAFi
                SOURCE: Data provided by V;h!dbe-V Island 1991







           Figure 52.       Number of Days/Year Navy has Used Sealion Rock
                            from-1986-1991 (Whidbey Island Naval Air Station,
                            1992).


                                             11--138









         was altered to reduce noise levels reaching wildlife habitats on
         rocks 3.5 miles away). The study also confirmed that nearby
         Split Rock and Willoughby Rock wildlife habitat areas, 3.5 miles
         to the South of Sealion Rock, had been mistaken for the target
         sometime in the past. The study concluded that 11A-6 activities
         conducted in accordance with the Operations Plan (i.e., all
         departures are to be to the west) result in minimal, and
         apparently insignificant, impacts on wildlife."

              The study's conclusions and methodology, however, have been
         widely criticized because: 1) the study was conducted during an
         El Nino year; 2) the study should have conducted population
         studies of birds and mammals for a much longer period of time to
         account for variation in environmental conditions; 3) the study
         did not include an examination of a "no-use" alternative, and
         thus comparative analysis was absent; and 4) the researchers were
         unaware of all military overflights in the area during the study,
         and therefore total impacts of military overflights were not
         accounted for (Troutman, 1993). The environmental impact of
         bombing activities under the revised flight operations plan has
         not been investigated.

              Although the Navy agreed to certain mitigating measures
         requested by USFWS to reduce the impacts of practice bombing
         activities (increased pilot education, radar monitoring,
         consultation with the NMFS for purposes of obtaining "incidental
         takei, authorization under the MMPA and the ESA), it would not
         agree to a seasonal cessation, i.e., during the breeding season,
         of its bombing activities.

              The regional office of the USFWS and the Marine Mammal
         Commission requested that the Department of Interior either
         rescind or modify the Navy's permit to prevent bombing during the
         breeding season for seabirds. The regional office of the USFWS,
         pursuant to its responsibilities under the Refuge Administration
         Act, performed a compatibility determination and found that the
         Navy's use of Sealion Rock was incompatible with the purposes for
         which the refuge was established. Notwithstanding the regional
         USFWS office's determination of incompatibility and the Navy's
         refusal to cease bombing practice during the breeding season, the
         Director of the USFWS did not rescind the Navy's permit because
         of national defense considerations.

              On October 22, 1992, several environmental groups (Defenders
         of Wildlife, Natural Resources Defense council, Inc., National
         Audubon Society, American Oceans Campaign, the Wilderness society
         and Washington Environmental Council) filed suit in the U.S.
         District Court for the Western District of Washington against the
         Department of Interior, USFWS and the Navy to enjoin the Navy's
         practice bombing activities over Sealion Rock. Thereafter, the
         Navy announced that it would no longer use Sea Lion Rock for
         aerial target practice. On August 18, 1993 the Secretary of the

                                      11-139









          Interior rescinded the permit issued in July, 1949 authorizing
          Navy access to Sea Lion Rock for practice bombing activities. As
          a result of the Secretary of Interior's action, the Navy can no
          longer use Sea Lion Rock for practice bombing excercises.

               The Navy regards Pacific Fleet operations off the northern
          coast of Washington as essential to Fleet readiness. Navy
          environmental protection policy precludes discharge of fuel oil,
          medical wastes, plastics, and other pollutants into the water,
          and prescribes immediate containment and clean up procedures in
          the event of accidental discharge. Fuel dumping by aircraft is
          also precluded except as necessary for safety of flight, and then
          only above 6000 feet.

               5. Ocean Waste Disposal

               Regulation of dumping of materials, including dredged
          material, into ocean waters falls under sections 102 and 103 of
          the MPRSA. These sections of the law are jointly administered by
          the EPA and COE. Responsibility for designation of sites and
          permitting of disposal other than dredged material has been
          delegated to EPA Region 10. The COE, in consultation with Region
          10, is the permitting authority for dredged material.

               Management of ocean dredged material disposal sites,
          including necessary monitoring, is a shared responsibility
          between the appropriate Corps district (Portland or Seattle) and
          EPA Region 10. Dredged material proposed for ocean disposal must
          comply with criteria in 40 CFR 220-228. In February 1991, the
          COE and EPA released Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for
          Ocean Disposal: Testing Manual (the Green Book) which provides a
          framework for testing of dredged material. Many of the
          techniques described in the Green Book have been standard
          practices in Region 10 for several years. Based-on past and
          current testings of dredged material disposed in open water and
          monitoring at open water sites, no significant adverse
          environmental effects have resulted from past or ongoing disposal
          (Findley, 1991).

               The regulation of point source discharges in Washington
          through EPA NPDES permits is the responsibility of the WDOE.
          NPDES permits for tribes, however, are granted directly from EPA.
          WDOE classifies the waters of the state into different
          categories. Washington's coastal waters are classified class AA
          which is the highest water quality rating. The waters in the
          estuaries of,Grays Harbor and Willapa Bay are classified class A,
          a slightly lower water quality rating.

               Because of the undeveloped nature of land adjacent to the
          sanctuary study area, it is a relatively unspoiled area.
          Pollution from traditional sources (e.g., wastewater treatment
          plants, industry and urban runoff) is very low. Drainage areas

                                        11-140









         which eventually feed into the sanctuary study area are shown in
         Appendix C (Map 3). There are no major industrial dischargers
         within the study area.. There are seven major dischargers that
         discharge adjacent to study area 7 including two pulp mills, two
         sewerage systems, and three seafood processing plants (Appendix
         C, Figure 3, Tables CI-C4). Pesticide use is very low relative
         to other areas of the U.S. west coast (Appendix C, Figure 4).
         Except for inputs of "total suspended solids" from paper mills,
         the greatest source of suspended solids in the sanctuary
         watershed is from non-point source runoff from forest land.

              (a) Point-Source Discharges

              Based on information collected in 1985 by NOAA's National
         Coastal Pollutant Discharge Inventory Program, there are 72 point
         source discharges in the watersheds draining into the sanctuary
         study area (Appendix C, Table CI). Fifty-six of these are
         industrial or commercial dischargers; sixteen are wastewater
         treatment plants (WWTS). Five of the fifty-six
         industrial/commercial dischargers are classified as major
         dischargers. Two are large pulp and paper mills discharging to
         the Grays Harbor estuary, and three are seafood processing and
         canning plants. Two of the seafood processors discharge to
         Willapa Bay, while the other discharges to Grays Harbor.

              The two pulp mills discharging near the study area rank in
         the top half of the 21 major pulp, paper and. paperboard mills on
         the west coast with respect to pollutant discharges. They rank
         seventh and ninth out of 21 facilities with respect to volume of
         wastewater discharged, and fourth and sixth out of 21 plants with
         respect to discharge of oxygen demanding materials.

              of the nine major seafood processors discharging to the U.S.
         west coast, the plants discharging near the study area are the
         top three in terms of volume of flow and oxygen demanding
         materials discharged. The DOMSEA Farms plant in Rochester is the
         most important seafood processor on the West Coast in terms of
         discharges.

              only two of the fourteen WWTPs are classified as major
         facilities. Both discharge into the Grays Harbor watershed.
         Relative to other major WWTPs on the west coast, these are very
         small dischargers.

              A tribal sewage treatment plant on the Makah Reservation
         presently discharges primary treated wastewater into the Waatch
         River. The National  Fish Hatchery discharges recycled water into
         the Tso-Yess River.  The Makah are planning to upgrade their
         treatment facilities by either creating a lagoonal treatment
         system on land which would achieve at a minimum secondary
         treatment, and during low usage times of the year, tertiary
         treatment or.repairing their discharge pipe and discharging into

                                       11-141









          the Strait of Juan de Fuca just east of Koitlah Point.

                The sewage system at Taholah on the Quinault reservation is
          .near capacity utilization. Sewage lagoons at Queets are
          threatened with erosion from the nearby Queets River.

                Sewage disposal on the Hoh reservation is via septic tank
          and is considered inadequate. The Tribe is evaluating a more
          systematized treatment process. Solid waste is now transported
          to Sequim, east of Port Angeles. This procedure is considered
          expensive and alternatives are being sought.

                The sewage system on the Quileute Reservation is in
          desperate need of repair. The collection system consists of
          approximately 12,100 ft. of gravity sewer, 3,900 ft. of
          forcemain, and three pump stations. The treatment system is
          biological and consists of three mechanically aerated concrete
          cell/lagoons, a gas chlorination contact chamber, and discharge
          to a beach drainfield. The community sewer system is operational
          even though many of.the system components are no longer
          functional. The system is presently being operated manually as
          many of the automatic controls are non-functional. The system
          has a history of failures due to malfunctioning equipment and/or
          deterioration from salt air corrosion. Overflows have occurred
          to the boat basin and in the street. High water and rough ocean
          wave action has caused exposure of pipes in the drain field. It
          is postulated that the beach drainfield has damaged the once
          existing razor clam beds (Schaftlein, 1992).

                The Quileute Tribe is in the process of hiring a consulting
          firm to develop a wastewater facility plan. The plan will
          analyze the existing sewage system and provide recommendations
          and cost estimates for improvements to the sewage collection,
          sewage treatment, and sewage disposal systems. Particular areas
          of concern include; sludge handling and disposal, identification
          of the most appropriate sewage treatment and disposal methods,
          and reduction of present operations and management burdens.

                (b) Non-Point Source Discharges

                The greatest source of non-point source discharge is   runoff.
          from forest lands (Appendix C, Figures 5-7). The coastal
          counties adjacent to the proposed sanctuary study area (areas 4
          and 7) may be characterized as having relatively minor
          agricultural activity, with an average agricultural acreage by
          county of only 3.6%. The major crops, excluding pasture/range,
          are alfalfa, barley, corn, wheat, and peas. According to NOAA's
          National Coastal Pollutant Discharge Inventory, which maintains a
          data base of estimates of pesticide use for 28 commonly applied
          agricultural pesticides, the highest application of pesticides by
          county for areas 4 and 7 occurs in Grays Harbor county, with
          6,836 pounds (base year of 1982). This is a relatively low

                                         11-142









         amount compared to a major agricultural area such as San Joaquin
         county in California (98 percent agricultural), where an
         estimated 658,000 pounds of the 28 agricultural pesticides were
         applied. As is typical with most pesticide application,
         herbicides make up the majority of the amount applied in the
         sanctuary area. It should also be noted that Clallam and
         Jefferson counties extend inland to Puget Sound, thus the total
         amount of agricultural pesticides applied in drainage areas
         feeding the waters of the sanctuary study area is probably less
         than the estimates above which use whole county figures.

              (c) Ocean DumRing of Indugtrial and Dredge Material

             Although no ocean dumping currently takes place within the
         proposed sanctuary, the coastal and offshore waters of Washington
         have been used for the disposal of various materials. Low-level
         radioactive wastes were disposed of prior to 1970 at several
         sites over 300 miles northwest of Cape Flattery, well outside of
         the proposed sanctuary study area. This dumping was discontinued
         in 1970. Explosives and toxic chemical munitions have been
         dumped in the past at one site 66 miles and another site 34 miles
         west of Cape Flattery.

              Industrial wastes have been dumped at two sites off Cape
         Flattery. One site, located within the boundaries of the
         proposed Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary, was only 5
        .miles from shore; the other, located outside the boundaries, was
         75 miles offshore. An exhaustive search of the literature and
         records of the EPA and COE to determine exactly when and what
         materials were dumped at these sites yielded nothing more
         definitive than information included in a report prepared for EPA
         by a private contractor entitled Ocean Disposal of Barge and
         Solid Wasteg From U.S. Coastal gities (Smith and Brown, 1971).
         Although the report does not specify the types and quantities of
         wastes dumped at the site, it indicates that the wastes were
         classified as industrial, which could include refinery wastes,
         spent acids, pulp and paper mill wastes, chemical wastes, oil
         drilling wastes, and waste oil and sewage sludge. There is no
         indication as to when the wastes were dumped. However, given
         that the report only includes sites active during the period 1951
         to 1971, it can be assumed that industrial wastes were dumped
         sometime during that period.

              Information on these dumpsites from NOAA Hazmat, EPA and the
         COE is limited because much of the documentation the Corps
         maintained on marine waste dump sites in the Pacific Region was
         lost/destroyed during the transfer of the ocean dumping program
         from the COE to EPA in the early 1970s. The regional COE office
         has indicated that it is unaware of any dumping activity
         occurring off the Washington Coast between the years 1971 and
         1988.



                                      11-143









               Dredged material is the only material currently being dumped
          in coastal waters. Spoils from the maintenance dredging of Grays
          Harbor are deposited near the entrance to the harbor where they
          are flushed out by tidal currents. Spoils from dredging of the
          Columbia River are dumped at the mouth of the river and at three
          sites located two to four miles offshore. The annual average
          amount of dredged material disposed off the mouth of the Columbia
          River exceeded 5 million cubic yards per year between 1974 and
          1987. The dredged spoils from a proposed major channel deepening
          project at Grays Harbor are proposed to be deposited at three
          sites: the current maintenance site near the harbor entrance, a
          site 3.9 nautical miles offshore and to the southwest west of the
          harbor entrance (Southwest Navigation site), and a site 7.1
          nautical miles offshore and west.-northwest of the harbor (Eight-
          Mile site). These latter two sites were officially designated by
          EPA Region 10 as ocean disposal sites for dredged materials,
          effective August 6, 1990 (FR, Vol. 55. No. 129, July 5, 1990, pp.
          27635-8cv).

               6. Hard Mineral Extraction

               Under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act of 1982, as
          amended, the Department of the Interior is charged with
          administering the mineral development of the OCS. The Secretary
          of Interior is authorized to lease any minerals, other than oil,
          gas, and sulphur, on the OCS on the basis of competitive bonus
          bidding. The Secretary also has the responsibility for the
          design, implementation, and management of OCS minerals
          development. In the U.S., industry interest in OCS mining has
          been focused on eight heavy metal placers, strategic minerals,
          sand and gravel, and phosphorate. Furthermore, gold is being
          recovered in State waters near Nome, Alaska, and sand and gravel
          in New York State Waters.

               Marine mineral resources known to exist along the outer
          coast of Washington include gravel and titaniferous black sands.
          To date, there has been no production of these offshore minerals
          in either state or federal waters.

               Gravel deposits are found in Federal waters from Cape
          Flattery to Grays Harbor, with large deposits concentrated off
          Cape Flattery and offshore from -the Hoh, Quinault, and Chehalis
          Rivers. Gravel at depths of less than 50 meters can be mined
          with a suction dredge. Lasmanis (1988) estimates that at least
          144 million cubic yards of gravel exist at this depth or
          shallower, and these deposits have the highest potential of any
          offshore minerals for exploitation by the year 2000.

               Titanium and iron-rich black sand deposits are found south
          of the proposed sanctuary. Large deposits have been found from
          the intertidal areas out to two miles from shore near the mouth
          of the Columbia River and off of Willapa Bay. Sands have also

                                        11--144









         been found at Copalis and Moclips that contains minor amounts of
         gold. It is unl 'ikely that mining these sand deposits will be
         economically viable in Washington waters within the next 20
         years.

              The only mineral-related activities that have taken place in
         state waters have been the exploration for and attempted
         development of the black sands. Five companies have been
         involved in commercial activities: National Lead Company
         explored in Grays Harbor in 1949; NARECO, Inc. explored near the
         mouth of the Columbia River in 1959; Washington Mineral
         Products, Inc. and Beach Mining, Inc. explored in the Cape
         Disappointment area; and Columbia Ocean Minerals, Inc. explored
         off Benson Beach and Ilwaco in 1986.

              onshore production of gold from beach sands did occur from
         about 1894 to 1908 on a strip of beach from 10 miles south of
         Cape Flattery to 6 miles south of the mouth of the Ozette River
         (Weissenborn and Snavely, 1968). Presently, no onshore mining is
         occurring in these counties except at Twin River quarry on the
         Strait of Juan de Fuca.

              7.   overflights

              All aircraft flying over the Sanctuary can legally fly
         unrestricted. When there are military operations within the MOA
         over the Peninsula, non-military airplanes stay below 1,200 feet.
         Most aircraft that land at airports on the Peninsula (Sekiu,
         Quileute, Copalis) are small recreational airtaxi or commuter
         planes.

              The 1992 statistics compiled by the Federal Aviation
         Administration (FAA) indicate that the total number of operations
         (landings and takeoffs) at the Quileute Airport for a 12 month
         period ending July 18,1992 totalled 4,800. Included in this
         statistic is one scheduled cargo plane per day 5 days per week.
         There were.2,600 operations recorded at the Sekiu airport for the
         12 months ending March 20, 1991. Copalis Airport, located on*the
         beach is accessible only at low tide and could be closed due to
         obstruction from drift wood.   There are an estimated 300
         operations at Copalis Beach per year with most planes
         recreational or chartered flights that land on the beach for
         short periods of time.

              Other overflight activity over the Sanctuary include those
         engaged in enforcement activities (USCG) and marine mammal and
         seabird monitoring efforts conducted by the NMFS and the USFWS.

              8. Research and Education

              Although the diverse habitats and pristine nature of the
         outer coast provide outstanding opportunities for scientific

                                       11-145









          research and education, much of the area has not been studied in
          detail. The 60 mile stretch of shoreline within Olympic National
          Park is virtually unstudied despite its relative accessibility
          (Dethier, 1988).   Research programs have been and are being
          conducted by several universities, the USFWS, NPS, NOAA's NMFS,
          and the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission (NWIFC). This
          research has provided valuable baseline data on the resources
          present and on the impacts associated with recreational uses and
          potential offshore oil and gas development.

               Researchers with the NPS surveyed the invertebrate and algal
          species associated with intertidal zones, and monitored the
          recreational impacts on intertidal biotic communities at three
          sites along the Pacific Coastal Area of the Olympic National Park
          (Kendrick and Moorhead, 1986). The University of Washington has
          conducted research on the biological and oceanographic
          characteristics of the coastal and offshore waters of the outer
          coast. Dethier (1988) studied and classified the marine habitats'
          along the Pacific coastline of Olympic National Park and gathered
          baseline data on abundances and diversities of the biota in these
          habitats. Permanent transects were set up across four intertidal
          areas to allow for periodic monitoring. Landry and Hickey (1989)
          present the results of research sponsored by the Department of
          Energy (Washington Sea Grant is sponsoring the publication of
          results) on the physical, chemical, geological, and biological
          processes occurring on the continental shelf off of these two
          states.

               Western Washington University (Terich and McKay, 1988)
          researchers studied transport along the coastline of Olympic
          National Park. Using a sediment budget approach, the researchers
          studied the shoreline as a sediment system, with sediment
          sources, sinks, and exchanges.

               In anticipation of the planned Federal oil and gas lease
          sale 132, the State of Washington appropriated $400,000 to
          Washington Sea Grant and requested that they conduct studies that
          would enable the State to be better able to address the issues
          associated with potential oil and gas development off its shores.
          The resulting Ocean Resources Assessment Program (ORAP)
          synthesized existing information from past and current studies,
          including the research mentioned above. Projects funded under
          ORAP provide information on data gaps and research needs, state
          and local influence over offshore oil decisions, the oil and gas
          potential of the Washington OCS, and a conceptual framework for
          guiding future OCS research.

               The NWIFC provides technical and coordination support to the
          Washington Indian tribes in the management and preservation of
          fishery resources. The NWIFC conducts a salmon and steelhead
          tagging program, and conducts annual and long-range fish harvest
          planning and catch monitoring programs.

                                        11-146









              NPS interpreters conduct guided walks to the numerous
         tidepools at several locations in Olympic National Park,
         including Starfish Point near Kalaloch, and Hole-in-the Wall near
         Rialto Beach.

              MMS, Pacific OCS Region, has contracted for numerous studies
         to support the Environmental Studies Program. Some of the most
         recent studies, and their current status as of June,1990 are:

              Monitoring of Olympic National Park Beaches to Determine
              Fate and Effects of Spilled Bunker C Fuel Oil; Dept. of
              Energy; Active.

              Inventory and Evaluation of Washington and Oregon Coastal
              Recreation; NPS; Active.

              An Evaluation of Spawning and Recruitment Patterns of Fishes
              off N. CA, Oregon, and Washington; IA-NOAA; Active.

              Biological Impacts of Translocated Sea Otters; Univ. of
              Minnesota; Active.

              Effects of OCS Oil and Gas Production Platforms on Rocky
              Reef Fishes and Fisheries; Marine Research Specialist;
              Active.


              Potential Social and Economic Effects of OCS Oil and Gas
              Activities on Oregon and Washington Indian Tribes; Central
              Washington University; Active.

              Conference/Workshop on Recommendations for Studies in
              Washington and Oregon Relative to Offshore Oil and Gas
              Development; Bio/Tech Communications; Completed.

              Coastal Circulation Along Oregon and Washington;
              Envirosphere Company; Completed.

              Summary and Analysis of Environmental Information of the
              Oregon and Washington Coastal Zone and Offshore Areas;
              Univ. of Washington; Completed.

              Workshop: Recommendation for Baseline Research in
              Washington/Oregon Relative to offshore Resource Development;
              Research Triangle Institute; Completed.

              9. Protected Areas


              Most of the offshore rocks and islands are included in three
         National Wildlife Refuges: Quillayute Needles, Flattery Rocks,
         and Copalis. All three refuges, established by Theodore
         Roosevelt on October 23, 1907 by Executive Order 704, are managed
         and maintained by the USFWS. They were established as a place

                                      11-147









            ... reserved and set aside for the use of the Department of
           Agriculture (now Interior) as a preserve and breeding ground for
           native birds and animals.11(Executive Order 704, October 23,'
           1907).  Refuge system goals are fivefold:

                1) To preserve, restore, and enhance in their natural
                   ecosystem (when practicable) all species of animals and
                   plants that are endangered or threatened with becoming
                   endangered;
                2) To perpetuate the migratory bird resource;
                3) To preserve a natural diversity and abundance of fauna
                     and flora on Refuge lands;
                4) To provide an understanding and appreciation of fish and
                   wildlife ecology and humankind's'role in the environment,
                   and to provide Refuge visitors with high quality, safe,
                   wholesome, and enjoyable recreational experience oriented
                   toward wildlife to the extent these activities are
                   compatible with the purposes for which the Refuges were
                   established; and
                5) To support the Regional Resource Plan and Regional Marine
                   Bird Policy.

                Pursuant to the Wilderness Act of 1964 (Act of September 3,
           1964; P.L. 88-577, 78 Stat.. 890, 16 U.S.C. 1131, et seq.) the
           Refuges were designated as Wilderness areas on October 23, 1970,
           except for Destruction Island which was excluded because of Coast
           Guard facilities on the island. Additionally, most of the
           coastline within the Olympic National Park and north of the Hoh
           River was designated as Olympic Park Wilderness in 1988. The
           Quinault Indian Nation has designated most of the coastal area
           within the reservation as a Wilderness Area, which includes a
           prohibition on the development of land. Classification of areas
           as "wilderness" results from individual Acts of Congress to
           roadless lands managed by the Departments of Agriculture or
           Interior. Wilderness is the most protective form of designation
           that can be applied to Federal resource lands. The Wilderness Act
           stipulates that management of designated areas should be such as
           to "leave them unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as
           wilderness, and so as to provide for the protection of these
           areas.... go To this end, the Act generally prohibits any
           construction of roads or facilities, any use of motorized
           vehicles, motorized equipment or motorboats. The Act recognizes
           that "(a) Wilderness, in contrast with those areas where man and
           his own works dominate the landscape, is hereby recognized as an
           area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by
           man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain." The
           definition lists as one of an area's attributes that it "has
           outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and
           unconfined type of recreation." (Siehl, 1991).

                Except for the USCG, only those who have a permit from the
           USFWS may visit the offshore-islands. Pursuant to an MOU between

                                           11-148









         the USFWS and the USCG, the USCG may visit Destruction Island to
         service and maintain the lighthouse and buildings during the non-
         nesting season. Other than the USCG activities, use of the
         islands is limited to wildlife surveys conducted by the USFWS.

              Olympic National Park includes much of,the shoreline, the
         offshore refuge islands in the Flattery Rocks and Quillayute
         Needles including adjacent intertidal habitat to the lower low
         tide, rain forests, and mountains of the'Olympic Peninsula. It
         is managed by the Department of the Interior, NPS. The Park was
         designated a Biosphere Reserve by UNESCO in 1976 and as a World
         Heritage Site by UNESCO in 1981 based upon an evaluation by the
         International Union for the Conservation of Nature. The
         objectives of Biosphere Reserves are:

              1) to conserve for present and future use, the diversity and
                 integrity of biotic communities of plants and animals
                 within natural ecosystems, and to safeguard the genetic
                 diversity of species upon which their continuing
                 evolution depends;

              2) to provide for ecological and environmental research
                 including baseline studies, both in and adjacent to
                 these reserves, such research to be consistent with
                 objective (1) above; and

              3) to provide facilities for education and training.

              10. Recreational Activities and Tourism

              The rugged, pristine environment and variety of habitats
         found along the Olympic Coast with its abundant natural resources
         provides ample opportunity for recreation for both residents and
         tourists. The Washington outer coast is an isolated area that
         has always depended on its natural resources for its economy,
         including tourism. Recreational activities include fishing,
         clamming, camping, hiking, whale-watching, boating, sightseeing,
         beachcombing, and diving.

              In 1984, there were 95 public recreation areas in Clallam,
         and Jefferson counties and 78 in Grays Harbor and Pacific
         counties. Most of these areas are small areas managed by local
         governments, but the Federal government manages most of the
         acreage because of the large national parks, forests, and
         wildlife refuges. In 1984 there were over 1.2 million acres of
         public recreation land in Clallam and Jefferson counties and over
         185,000 acres in Grays Harbor and Pacific counties. over 99.6%
         of the acreage in Clallam and Jefferson counties and 92.6% of the
         acreage in Grays Harbor and Pacific counties was managed by the
         Federal government.

              Recreational fishing takes place from charter boats, skiffs,

                                       11-149









          jetties, sandy beaches, and rocky shores. Figure 41 (p. 95)
          shows the more intensively fished offshore recreational fishing
          areas for salmon and bottomfish. The ocean recreational fishery
          for salmon operates primarily out of Westport, Ilwaco, La Push,
          and Neah Bay. The charter boat industry is centered at these
          ports with Westport being the most popular location for ocean
          salmon fishing north of the Columbia River (Squire and Smith,
          1978). In 1986, the NMFS estimated that 295,000 recreational
          fishermen did saltwater fishing in the state of Washington.
          About 16% of the recreational fishing trips were taken in
          Washington, resulting in recreational harvest of over 9 million
          fish. About 11% of all trips and, 22% of all catch in Washington,
          Oregon and California takes place in Washington. Over 60% of all
          trips and catch are by boat modes.

               The decline of the salmon stocks in recent years has also
          caused a major decline in the charter fishing business. The
          number of charter fishermen has dropped from half a million in
          1977 to a low of 40,000 in 1984, while the number of charter
          boats has dropped from 228 to 60 (Strickland and Chasan, 1989).
          The charter boats remaining now emphasize bottomfishing and
          whalewatching in addition to trolling for salmon. Black rockfish
          and lingcod are the main species caught, with other species of
          rockfish, cod, halibut, and flounder also of importance. Charter
          trips for bottomfish in 1987 totalled 1,686 from Ilwaco,* 21,381
          from Westport, 452 from La Push, and 21,058 from Neah Bay
          (ibid.). The reduction in charter boat fishing is corroborated
          by the reduction if fishing trips for party/charterboats
          reported by the NMFS for all of Washington. From 1979 to 1986
          party/charter boat trips in Washington dropped about 42% (45,000
          trips in 1979 to 26,000 trips in 1986). However, total saltwater
          recreational fishing trips increased over 23% from 1979 to 1986.
          Trips by private/rental boats increased over 55%, while shore
          based fishing trips increased over 26%.

              Facilities at La Push and Westport  rent skiffs and boat-
          launching facilities. La Push is the only small-boat harbor
          along the coast between Grays Harbor and Neah Bay. Additionally,
          the harbor is the only place in the area where offshore small-
          boat fishing is possible with some degree of safety. Chinook,
          coho, and pink salmon, as well as rockfish, lingcod, greenling,
          flounder, halibut, and jack mackerel are all caught off La Push.
          The area north of La Push to near Cape Alava experiences little
          ocean and shore recreational fishing because of its remoteness
          from any small-boat harbor and lack of shore access roads.
          However'boats from Neah Bay frequent the area off Cape Alava and
          northward to reap the benefits of the coastal salmon resources.

              Sandy beach and rocky shore fishing is popular at many sites
          where access to shore is possible. Surf fishing on sandy beaches
          at places like Mukkaw Bay yield redtail and striped surfperch,
          flounder, and halibut. Surf smelt and night smelt are caught

                                       11-150









         with dip nets along the shore between Kalaloch and the Hoh River
         during the summer months. Shore fishing from rocky areas is
         excellent for rockfish, lingcod, and kelp greenling. Fishing
         from the jetties at La Push and Westport produces redtail surf
         perch, starry flounder, black rockfish, greenling, lingcod, and
         cabezon. Large numbers of coho and chinook salmon are caught
         from the south jetty at Westport (Haw and Buckley, 1971).

              Razor clams are the most important shellfish harvested
         recreationally on the outer coast. Their harvest, however, has
         dropped dramatically in recent years. An average of about ten
         million razor clams was harvested annually from 1950 to 1980.
         The harvest averaged only four million clams annually between
         1981 and 1987, with the season being closed entirely because of
         NIX virus during 1984 and 1985 (Butts, 1988). Hardshell clams
         (native littleneck and manila clams) are harvested from Willapa
         Bay, Grays Harbor, and Hoh Head. Oysters and mussels are also
         harvested: oysters from Grays Harbor, and mussels from rocky
         areas north of Moclips (WDF, 1983). Dungeness crab are taken
         recreationally by wading in intertidal lagoons along the coast,
         and by ring nets and crab pots in Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor.

              Recreational divers, primarily using SCUBA, harvest both
         shellfish and finfish. Dungeness and red rock crab are the main
         shellfish taken, while black rockfish and lingcod are the
         favorites for spearfishing (Bargmann, 1984).

              Because many of the wilderness beaches on the outer coast
         are accessible only by foot, they have become increasingly
         popular for hiking, camping, and beachcombing. The three most
         popular areas for beach hikes are between the Hoh River and La
         Push;-north of La Push to the Ozette Ranger Station above Cape
         Alava; and from Cape Alava to Shi Shi beach just south of the
         Makah Indian Reservation (Washington Public Shore Guide, 1986).

              Olympic National Park is a major tourist attraction of the
         Pacific Northwest. There were 3.36 million visits to the Park in
         1988 (Strickland and Chasan, 1989). The 60 miles of wilderness
         coast within the National Park have approximately 800,000 visits
         each year (NPS, 1989). A summer 1989 survey of the coastal areas
         of Olympic National Park (Leeworthy, Schruefer, and Wiley, 1990)
         found that 46% of the visitors to the park were out-of-state
         visitors. on average, visitors to Olympic National Park
         travelled 1,050 miles from their homes to visit the park compared
         to 452 miles for all other sites surveyed on the west coast. Per
         person trip expenditures were over $700 resulting in a direct
         economic impact associated with trips to the coastal areas of
         Olympic National Park of over $560 million in 1989.

              A major visitor/interpretive center is planned by the NPS at
         Kalaloch. The center will provide exhibits and audio/visual and
         interpretive programs that will emphasize the wilderness nature

                                       11-151









         of the coastal beaches and serve as a learning center for
         visitors and students.

              The WDNR manages beaches on the outer coast that are open to
         the public. The Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission
         manages state parks on the coast that include public camping and
         picnic areas. Public beaches and campgrounds between Grays
         Harbor and Cape Flattery are shown in Figure 25. Islands within
         the National Wildlife Refuges are closed to the'public.

              The Strait of Juan de Fuca offers popular recreational
         diving areas. A wreck located off Tongue Point is accessed by
         Clallam County Park facilities at Observatory and Tongue Points.
         Recreational divers can access the Strait directly from shore
         from these parks. The Washington Department of Natural Resources
         supports a park at the Lyre and Pyscht Rivers. Boating and
         fishing are popular recreational activities in the Strait as
         well. There are very few access points to the public beaches
         along the Strait by boat or shore.







































                                      11-152








         PART III:        Alternatives Including the Preferred Alternative




































                                                                     I











                                        Table of Contents                          PAGE


                Section: Boundary Alternatives        .........................      4
                A.    Introduction    .......................................        4

                B.    Boundary Alternative 1     .............................       7
                      1.    Geographic Scope     .............................       7
                      2.    Distinguishing Characteristics      ................     7

                C.    Boundary Alternative 2     ............................        7
                      1.    Geographic Scope   .............................         7
                      2.    Distinguishing Characteristics      ...............     10

                D.    Boundary Alternative 3     ............................       10
                      1.    Geographic Scope   .............................        10
                      2.    Distinguishing Characteristics      ...............     10

                E.    Boundary Alternative 4     ............................       12
                      1.    Geographic Scope   ...............................      12
                                  a.    Pillar Point   .......................      12
                                  b.    Low Point   ..........................      14
                                  C.    Observatory Point    ..................     14
                      2.    Distinguishing Characteristics      ...............     14

                F.    Boundary Alternative 5     ...... ; .....................     15
                      1.    Geographic Scope   .............................        15
                      2.    Distinguishing Characteristics      ...............     15

                Section:    Regulatory Alternatives      ......................     17

                A.    Introduction    ......................................        17

                B.    Oil,  Gas, and Mineral Activities      ..................     20
                      1.    Status Quo  ...................................         20
                            a.    Existing Regulatory Framework       ...........   20
                            b.    Impact to Resources     .....................     20
                            C.    Impact to Uses    ..........................      21
                      2.    Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)       ..... oo  ..... 23
                            a.    Sanctuary Action.     ...... o_  ........         23
                            bo    Impact to Resources     .... o-o-o    ...o        23
                            C.    Impact to Uses   ..... o ............    ...      23

                Co    Discharges or Deposits.......      ............   o     ....  23
                      1.    Status Quo...    ..... oo ... ooo  ...... __  .......   23
                            a.    Existing Regulatory Framework... oo      ....  oo 23
                                        (1)   Point Source Discharges...     ...  o 24
                                        (2)   Non-Point Source Discharges      ...  25
                                        (3)   Hazardous waste, oil and trash
                                              disposal..........    ........  oo..  26
                                        (4)   Ocean Dumping.    ... oo-o-oo    ...  26
                            b.    Impact to   Resources....   ....   ....      ...  26
                            co    Impact to   Uses.... .... 27

                                              III-1








                        2.    Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)        ............   27
                              a.    Sanctuary   Action......   .o...                  27
                              b.    Impact to   Resources  ... o            .......   28
                              C.    Impact to   Uses..  ....o  .... .... ooooo.ooo.   28
                                          (1)   Vessels  .......                      29
                                          (2)   Dredge Disposal Activities....        29
                                          (3)   Point Source Discharges.... o..       29
                                          (4)   Non-Point Source Discharges...        30

                  D.    Historical Resources.     ............                        31
                        1.    Status Quo-o-o-o         ... ooo_  ......               31
                              a.    Existing Regulatory Framework... 31
                              b.    Impact to Resources......     ..... o-oo.-        31
                              C.    Impact to Uses....     ..... ooo.oo ... _oooo.    32
                        2o    Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)....        ... 0.oo.  32
                              a.    Sanctuary Action... ... -oo.-         ..... o.o.  32
                              bo    Impact to Resources.................       ....   32
                              co    Impact to Uses..... .... 33

                  E.    Alteration of, or Construction on, the Seabed.         ....   34
                        1.    Status Quo.o ... o ... oo.oo.                           34
                              a.    Existing Regulatory Framework.....       ..... o  .34
                              bo    Impact to Resources.........       .....o..... o  34
                              C.    Impact to Uses..... ... o   .... o.oo.o..o.-      34
                        2o    Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)        ....... __     34
                              a.    Sanctuary Action... oo__         ... ooooo..o..   34
                              bo    Impact to Resources    ....                       35
                              C.    Impact to Uses....     .......               ...  35

                  F.    Taking Marine Mammals, Turtles, and Seabirds......            35
                        1.    Status Quo........, .... o.oooo.o   ...  oo.o ...o....  35
                              a.    Existing Regulatory Framework..       ...o.... o  35
                              b.    Impact to Resources.............       ....o ...  35
                              C.    Impact to Uses.........     .....  o..... o.o ... 36
                        2o    Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)..       ..........    36
                              a.    Sanctuary Action...    .................   o ...  36
                              b.    Impact to Resources    ............   o........   37
                              C.    Impact to Uses    .....o....................      37

                  G.    Overflights  ..........  o ...........................     o  37
                        1.    Status Quo.   ............   o................ oo..o.   37
                              a.    Existing Regulatory Framework      ...........    37
                              b.    Impact to Resources.    ...............   __      38
                              C.    Impact to Uses.... -       ....o............  o.  38
                        2.    Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)..       ..........    38
                              a.    Sanctuary Action.    ....  o..................    38
                              b.    Impact to Resources.    ..... o ...o..........    38
                              C.    Impact to Uses.....    ....................   o.  49

                  H.    Vessel Traffic...    .............. o  ............. o.....   39
                        1.    Status Quo (Preferred)     ....               .......   39
                              a.    Existing Regulatory Framework      .... o......   39

                                                111-2










                            b.    Impact to Resources    .....................      40
                            C.    Impact to Uses   ..........................       41
                      2.    Sanctuary Alternative     ........................      41
                            a.    Sanctuary Action    ........................      41
                            b.    Impact to Resources    .....................      41
                            C.    Impact to Uses   ..........................       41

                I.    Fishing, Kelp Harvesting, and Aquaculture         .........   42
                      1.    Status Quo (Preferred)      .......................     42
                            a.    Existing Regulatory Framework       ...........   42
                            b.    Impact to Resources    .....................      42
                            C.    Impact to Uses   ..........................       44
                      2.    Sanctuary Alternative     ........................      46
                            a.    Sanctuary Action    ........................      46
                            b.    Impact to Resources    .....................      46
                            C.    Impact to Uses   ..........................       46

                J.    Naval Inert Bombing Practice at Sealion Rock          ......  47
                      1.    Status Quo   ...................................        47
                            a.    Existing Regulatory Framework       ...........   47
                            b.    Impact to Resources    ..........  o ...... o...  47
                            C.    Impact to Uses   ..........................       47
                      2.    Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)        ............   47
                            a)    Sanctuary Action ...    ... o..............    o. 47
                            b)    Impact to Resources    .............   o ...o...  47
                            C)    Impact to Uses   ...............   o ..........   49

          III. Section: Management Alternative..         ............   oo  ....... 50
                A.    Introduction.... o    ............ o...... o  ......     ...  50
                B.    Alternatives....     .......... o .......o ....... o     ...  50
                      1.    Status Quo  .............    o....o................     50
                      2.    Sanctuary Management Alternative 1        ...o ..... o. 50
                      3.. Sanctuary Management Alternative 2...          ... o....  50























                                              111-3












          PART III. ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

               Part of the process for designating a portion of the Olympic
          Coast as a National Marine Sanctuary involves the analysis of
          institutional, boundary, management, and regulatory alternatives.
          These alternatives have been considered in terms of achieving
          optimum protection of the ecosystem, improving scientific
          knowledge of the area, and promoting public [email protected] of the
          value of Olympic Coast resources. The following describes and
          analyzes the major alternatives considered in the evaluation
          process.

               The  fundamental choice is between two institutional
          alternatives: (1) no action, or continuing the status guo; and
          2) the preferred alternative of sanctuary designation as a
          complementary measure to existing programs. Boundary,
          management, and regulatory options for the Sanctuary are
          -evaluated within the sanctuary designation alternative.

          I.   Section: Boundary Alternatives
               A.    Introduction

               Figure 53 shows the study area of the Olympic Coast National
          Marine Sanctuary considered in both the DEIS/MP released in July,
          1991 and as modified in this FEIS/MP. The study area generally
          follows the 100 fathom isobath at. the edge of the continental
          shelf, extending from the U.S./Canada international boundary to
          the-mouth of the Columbia River. The boundary of the study area,
          as proposed in the DEIS/MP, extended into the Strait of Juan de
          Fuca to a line drawn due north from Koitlah Point to the
          international border. The study area proposed in this FEIS/MP
          extends to a line drawn due north from Observatory Point to the
          international border. The landward boundary proposed in the
          DEIS/MP extended to the mean higher high water line, up rivers
          and streams to the point-of tidal influence, except when adjacent
          to Indian Reservations in which case the boundary was at the mean
          lower low tide line, cutting across the mouths of any rivers.
          Harbors were excluded and estuaries included in the study area.
          The landward boundary of the study area has been modified to be
          at the lower low water line when adjacent to State lands.     The
          boundary remains at the lower low water line when adjacent to
          Tribal lands, and at the mean higher high water line when
          adjacent to lands under the jurisdiction of the NPS or the    USFWS.
          The study area has been further modified to cut across the    mouths
          of all rivets and streams. Grays Harbor and Willapa Bay are not
          included within the study area since NOAA's National Estuarine
          Research Reserve System (NERRS) or EPA's National Estuary Program
          (EPA) would be better tailored to meet the needs of these
          estuarine habitats.

               The most significant amendment to the DEIS/NP was the
          addition of the Strait of Juan de Fuca in the study area of the

                                          111-4























                                           lww                L2S-Z              M5,00,              124*V               124'00'             1=30' 123'V
                                  41M.                                                                                                   ZZ@@, 4IMS'

                                                                                                        x c 0 a     9


                                                                                                                           I    L A 4 D
                                 4mv                                                                                                                 48*W


















                                                                                                                                           A





                                4-,0'                                                                                                            7 4-,@o












                               4-,00.

                                            Boundary identified
                                            in DEIS/MP








                              46-W                                                                                                                46.0'
                                             UNITED STATES- WEST COAST
                                                      WASHINGTON
                                            PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                        NATIONALMARINE SANCTUARY



                                   10' 12trow             12M                                     124'30              124W                     1=20






                    Figure 53. Study area Proposed in                                                     the DE         IS/MP and FEIS/MP.









          Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary. The inclusion of the
          Strait to Observatory Point resulted from comments on the DEIS/MP
          and an analysis of resources and uses occurring in the Strait.
          NOAA has analyzed, but rejected, -the Strait of Juan de Fuca as
          part of the preferred alternative because: 1) the public has not
          had an adequate opportunity to comment on the addition of the
          Strait in the preferred alternative; and 2) further analysis
          considering the Strait for Sanctuary status will be included in
          the DEIS/MP for the proposed Northwest Straits National Marine
          Sanctuary. If, through the fulfillment of either of these
          processes, Washington State and NOAA agree that the Strait should
          be included within the boundaries of the Olympic Coast National
          Marine Sanctuary, the Sanctuary boundaries may be amended
          accordingly.

              NOAA has developed five boundary options based upon an
          evaluation of several factors including: 1) the distribution of
          living resources and habitats; 2) geological, chemical, and
          physical oceanographic parameters; 3) human uses; 4) land use
          practices along the adjacent coastline; 5) prior site
          evaluations (e.g., NOAA1's 1983 Site Evaluation List); and 6)
          management logistics. NOAA found during its analysis of these
          factors that it was useful to consider the entire study area as
          being subdivided into eight separate areas. Each area may be
          characterized by its living resources, human uses, or any
          other factors analyzed. NOAA's Strategic and Environmental
          Assessment Branch (currently referred to as the Strategic
          Assessment Branch (SAB) analyzed each subarea to determine its
          relative significance for selected invertebrates, fish,
          invertebrates, mammals, and seabirds with respect to the
          contiguous U.S. west coast (subarea la which encompasses the
          Strait of Juan de Fuca was not included in this analysis).

              The scores are presented inAppendix C in a series of tables
          (Tables 3 through 9) that allow the reader to compare sub-areas
          according to selected assemblages of marine fauna. While these
          tables do not provide an exhaustive list of species for each
          subareal they do exemplify the general biological profile of each
          region. The results of this analysis are used in developing and
          evaluating boundary options for the Sanctuary, as well as
          assessing the potential impacts of human activities occurring in
          the area.

              Various combinations of these sub-areas result in the five
          boundary alternatives considered by NOAA. The resources and uses
          associated with each area are described in "Part II:
          Environmental Setting and Human Uses". Following is a
          description of the five boundary alternatives which are derived
          from various combinations of the sub-areas.





                                        111-6










               B. Boundary Alternative 1
                    1.    Geographic Scope

               This boundary alternative generally corresponds to the
          boundary of the "Western Washington Outer Coast" site described
          in NOAA's 1983 SEL (Figure 54). This alternative represents the
          smallest.area that would be considered for sanctuary status,
          encompassing approximately 315 nml (1,082.kml). It extends
          seaward from Koitlah Point to the edge of Washington State waters
          (3 nautical miles from shore) south from Koitlah Point to Point
          Grenville. This boundary alternative includes the nearshore
          coastal waters adjacent to Olympic National Park, and surrounding
          the Quillayute Needles, Flattery Rocks,. and Copalis National
          Wildlife Refuges and Wilderness Areas.

                    2.    Distinguishing Characteristics

               This boundary alternative includes significant intertidal
          and subtidal resources around Tatoosh Island and Cape Flattery,
          and birds and mammals which depend on the offshore rocks and
          islands. Over 60% of the colonial seabirds in Washington use the
          offshore islands and coastal cliffs in this region as nesting
          areas. This boundary, however, excludes the important seabird
          foraging areas. The boundary alternative encompasses significant
          habitat for several species of marine mammals including the sea
          otter, California sea lion, northern elephant seal, harbor seal,
          killer whale, gray whale, Right whale, Dall's porpoise, and the
          endangered Stellar sealion. Most of the sport fishery areas for
          salmon and groundfish, a portion of the razor clam beds,
          concentrations of giant octopus, spot shrimp, and fat gapers, and
          some of the commercial crabbing areas are included within this
          boundary option.

               Recreational fishing, clamming, kayaking, beach hiking, and
          nature viewing are the major human uses which are conducted
          within this sanctuary boundary option. Vessel transits within
          this boundary are primarily from ships traversing the northwest
          corner of the boundary when entering the Strait of Juan de Fuca
          from the south, and tugs and barges traversing within
          three nautical miles of the coast. The planning area for former
          Lease Sale #132 does.not include the area within three nautical
          miles of the coastline, and Washington State has placed a five
          year moratorium on oil and gas activities occurring within state
          waters (Washington State House Bill No. 2242, Section 9).

               C.   Boundary Alternative
                    1.    Geographic Scope

               Boundary alternative 2 is essentially an expansion of the
          first alternative to the 50 fathom isobath, encompassing
          approximately 1100 nM2   (3,770 kM2 ), and extending seaward from 7
          to 19 nautical miles from.the coastline (Figure 55).

                                          111-7
















                                     126* 10'     126*W                         125'30'                          125*00'                          124'30'                          124'00'                          123030'    123o 20'
                                  48'45'                                                                                                                                                                                           4845'
                                                                                                                                                                                                               Z







                                  ,ow,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   48*30'



                                                                                                                                                                                                                         AP,
                                                                                                                                                                                    z@                                     50,


                                                        00-/
                                                     0
                                                   500",
                                                                                                                                                                                                   30

                                                  I                                                 C,



                                  4WOO'                                                                                                                                                                                            wool
                                                    BOUNDARY'
                                                ALTERN IV
                                                           NO. 1











                                  47*30'
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   47'30'



                                                                                                                        NYON
                                                                                                               00










                                  4700'                                                                                                                                                                                            47W










                                                                                      AV)

                                  46*30'                                                                                        @c <                                                                                               46'30'
                                                        UNITED STATES -WEST COAST
                                                                       WASHINGTON
                                                        PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                                 NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY
                                                                           NAUTIfAL MUM


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   46*12'
                                  46*12'
                                  - 126*10'      126*00'                        125'30'                          125*00'                          124*30'                           124*00'                         123*30' 123'20'



                        Figure 54. Boundary Alternative 1.

















                                              126'10'         126*00'                                   125*30'                                     125*00'                                     124*30'                                     124'00'                                     123*30' 123*20!
                                         48*45' -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            48*45!



                                                                                                                                                                                jl@

                                                                                                                                                                                7@

                                                                                       50
                                         48'30'
                                                                                                                                                                                               0                                                                                                            48*30'

                                                                                                                                                                       7


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            bw
                                                                        200                                                                                                                                                                                      ,OC4
                                                                        ;300.
                                                                        4zV
                                                                        500
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 30--
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     Alk
                                                                                                                                    00


                                                                                                                                                            5
                                         48'00'                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             48*00'
                                                                        BOUNDARY,
                                                                        ALTERNATV@E_
                                                                               NO. 2
                                                                        LATITUn      LoBc

                                                                        4,
                                                                        2
                                                                        347*22            IN'39'26'
                                                                        44745@:           124-W 49'                                                                  4
                                                                        5      14         124*57'00'
                                                                        648-14'41         124*54'
                                                                        48*03
                                                                        7      '26:
                                                                        848'M'17'         124'W13'




                                         47*30'
                                                                                                           -4
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            47*30'



                                                                                                                                                                                     3


                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Uk









                                         47*00'
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            47'00'








                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              NV






                                         46'30' -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           '46'30'
                                                                        UNITED STATES -WEST COAST
                                                                                            WASHINGTON
                                                                        PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST                                                                                                                                                                                  X_
                                                                        NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY

                                                                               '=H
                                         46*12'                                                                                                                                                                                                            N         A   Ri                                 46*12'
                                             126*10' 126*00'                                            125'30'                                     125*00'                                     124'30'                                                                                 123'30' 12321Y



                             Figure 55. Boundary Alternative 2.

                                                                                                                                                                   111-9









          2.   Distinguishing Characteristics

               This seaward extension encompasses not only the large
          concentrations of marine resources near the coastline and
          offshore islands, sea stacks, and rocks, but also incorporates
          the commercial crab fishing grounds, migration routes for Gray
          whales and juvenile salmonids, and a large portion of the
          important commercial groundfish, salmon, and pink shrimp fishing
          grounds. It is estimated that only 5% of the potential
          hydrocarbon resources in the Sanctuary study area (or 1% of the
          total resources in the entire former Lease Sale #132) would be
          located within this boundary alternative (Martin, 1990). This
          boundary would encompass most of the routes transited by barge
          traffic and foreign product carriers.

               This boundary alternative encompasses more of the important
          foraging habitat for colonial seabirds and pinnipeds using the
          offshore Islands than does boundary alternative 1. However, the
          boundary does not extend seaward to the edge of the continental
          shelf which is the generally recognized geographic range of
          significant foraging habitat.

               D.   Boundary Alternative 3
                    1.   Geographic Scope

               Boundary alternative 3 represents an extension of the first
          two alternatives seaward to the edge of the continental shelf
          (100 fathom isobath), including the heads of submarine canyons
          which incise the shelf, and establishes a sanctuary area of
          approximately 1,805 nM2 (6,182 kM2) (Figure 56).

                    2.   Distinguishing Characteristics

               The resulting area is a homogeneous and clearly identifiable
          Sanctuary linking the nearly pristine, rugged, rocky coastal
          ecosystem with the nutrient rich offshore waters. The boundary
          includes areas of intensified upwelling occurring along the edge
          of the continental shelf, especially at heads of submarine
          canyons. The.upwelling of nutrient enriched bottom waters result
          in increased biological productivity, especially when combined
          with periods of high solar radiation.

               This boundary alternative, however, does not include the
          Juan de Fuca Canyon, nor the shallow banks bordering the
          northwest edge of the canyon known'as Swiftsure bank and "the
          Plains.". These areas are extremely productive areas and support
          intensive commercial salmon and groundfishing and millions of
          foraging seabirds.

               Many species of marine birds and mammals forage along
          upwelling fronts which occur along the edge of the shelf. The
          area over the outer edge of the shelf included in this boundary

                                        III-10
















                                               126* IV         126'00'                                  125*30'                                     125*W                                      12M,                                       124*00'                                     123'30' 123*20'
                                          48*45!                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         48*45'







                                          48*30'                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         W30'

                                                                                                                                                                       9


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               0,


                                                                     73
                                                           2)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            -30


                                                                                                                                   7                  8


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         W00,
                                          49'W -
                                                                     BOUNDARY@
                                                               ALTERN AE
                                                                               NO.         3
                                                                            LATITUnE
                                                                     I      47V745'        12ellOT
                                                                     2      7*0T4fr        ww
                                                                     8      47*35'05
                                                                     4      47*WO5   :     124*04'"W
                                                                     6      47-W I'        1?Z*WW
                                                                     6      49WO           125,19,05,
                                                                     7      4M'52:         M*14'38*                                 IJ
                                                                            4r"w           12SW501
                                                                            4M'26'         1244964 :
                                                                     10     4r&17'         124*38'13                                                   3

                                          4r3O'-                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         47*30'


                                                                                                                                                              NyoN
                                                                                                                                         ,01







                                                                                                                                                              2


                                          47*0V -                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        47*00'







                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       A
                                                                                                                                                                       %


                                                                                                                 A


                                          4M' -                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          46W
                                                                            UNITED STATES -WEST COAST
                                                                                             WASHINGTON
                                                                            PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                                                NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY
                                                                                                   ,NAUTICAL MILES
                                                                            r;T'R

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         46*1Z
                                          46*12'
                                              126*10' 126*00'                                           125*30'                                     125*00'                                    124'30'                                     124*00'                                   1W30'         12S'20'




                           Figure                      56. Boundary Alternative                                                                                   3.

                                                                                                                                                              III-11









           option is significant to pink shrimp, several seabirds (e.g.,
           northern fulmar, black-legged kittiwake, common murre, and
           rhinoceros auklet), and several species of fish (e.g., spiny
           dogfish, steelhead, Pacific cod, walleye.pollock, Pacific Ocean
           perch, widow rockfish, sablefish, lingcod, Pacific halibut,
           English sole, flathead sole, Petrale sole, Dover sole, and
           arrowtooth flounder) and mammals (e.g., northern sea lion,
           California sea lion, northern elephant seal, killer whale,
           Pacific white-sid dolphin, Baird"s beaked whale, gray whale,
           Right whale, fin whale, Risso's whale and Dall's porpoise).
           Approximately 17% of the potential hydrocarbon resources of the
           Sanctuary study area (or 3.5% of the former Lease Sale #132) are
           estimated to lie within this boundary alternative.

                E.   Boundary Alternative 4 (Preferred)
                     1.    Geographic Scope

                Boundary alternative 4 encompasses the areas described in
           boundary alternatives 1-3 with the addition of the head of Juan
           de Fuca Canyon and the relatively shallow banks (50-80 fathoms)
           surrounding the submarine canyon and the Strait of Juan de Fuca.
           This area extends seaward approximately 35-40 nautical miles from
           the shoreline. Boundary alternative 4 as proposed in the DEIS/MP
           extends into the Strait to Koitlah Point, approximatldy five
           miles from the entrance of the Strait. This original alternative
           focused completely on open ocean environments. The surface area
           of this alternative with a boundary at Koitlah Point is
           approximately 2,500 nM2  (8,577 kn2).   Various- modifications to
           the easternmost boundary in the Strait of Juan de Fuca are
           examined including establishing the boundary slightly east of
           Pillar Point, Low Point, and Observatory Point (Figure 57).
           These alternative boundaries in the Strait encompass the
           tranisitional environment from a marine to an estuarine
           ecosystem.

                           a.   Pillar Point (Pyscht River Estuary)

                Pillar Point is the easternmost point of the headland just
           east of Neah Bay. It is located approximately 20 miles into the
           Strait and concentrates most of the energy from the open ocean
           waves entering the Strait. At the base of Pillar Point, the
           Pyscht River enters the Strait of Juan de Fuca forming the most
           extensive estuary and largest saltmarsh in the Strait. There is
           access to the saltmarsh and a small park supported by the WDNR
           along the banks of the Strait. A boat ramp provides access to
           the Strait. This alternative excludes the prolific kelp beds
           that lie off the Lyre and Twin rivers and the extensive subtidal
           rocky habitat between Pillar Point and observatory Point. With
           this extension into the Strait, the area encompassed by boundary
           alternative 4A is approximately 2,635 sq. nautical miles (9,029
           sq. kilometers).


                                          111-12















                                              126* 16                   126*W                           125*30'                                      125*00'                                    124*30'                                     124*00'                                     123*30'       123'20'
                                         48o45' -                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           W45'







                                         48-30'                                        50
                                                                        +                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   W30'
                                                                                                                                                                                        14




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         6

                                                                        200                                                                                                                                                                                      8
                                                                        00                                                                                                                                                        '4A
                                                                        (400-1@O@                                                                                                                                                                          4B
                                                                        500@,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           _@7_ 40-                        4c
                                                                                            _j                                                                                                                                                                   30

                                                                                                  7



                                         WOO' -
                                                                        .BOUNDARY'.
                                                                        ALTERNAT
                                                                             NO. 4
                                                                        LATITUM
                                                                        147-0745            IWII'02'
                                                                        247ff45:            124WIT
                                                                        47`35               125*WOO
                                                                        447'40'W            I
                                                                               '@6          Z5'W'44'
                                                                        647'WOI:            125'05'4r
                                                                        647'5713'           125-29-13
                                                                        749'OTW             JM ZV                                                4
                                                                        849'14'46'          125'40'59'                             C
                                                                        948WI2:             '25-W591
                                                                        10 4M49             2YO6,04,
                                                                        4M691
                                                                                            I
                                                                        11                  124
                                                                        12 WW19-            124-W42'
                                         47*30' -                       4MW                 124.4"1*
                                                                                            *W r
                                                                        114 48TTW*          VA                                                                                                                                                                                                              47*30'
                                                                        5OWN'               124*Wla'
                                                                        1`3                 124. 05
                                                                        17 49'11'S7'        I
                                                                        WIT04'
                                                                                            24    W
                                                                        is 48616'W          M*49'U'
                                                                        19 "1".             IWO                                                               NYO
                                                                        20 48*14'09'        123*88`07
                                                                        21 48*0wor          123*WM'







                                                                                                                                                              2



                                         47*00' -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            47*00'
                                                                                                                                                  lm













                                         46*30' -                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           46*30'
                                                                        UNITED STATES-WEST COAST
                                                                                            WASHINGTON
                                                                        PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                                                        NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY
                                                                                                  .NAUTICAL MILES


                                         46*12'                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             46*12'
                                            126* iol                    126*00'                        126*30'                                      125'00'                                    12@-30'                                      124'00'                                   123'30' 123*20'



                          Figure 57. Boundary                                                                    Alternative 4 with Alternative Boundaries.

                                                                                                                                                                111-13










                           b.   Low Point

                The macrocystis kelp beds off the Lyre River are the densest
           kelp beds in the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Inclusion of this area
           would encompass some of the most significant kelp beds in the
           Pacific Northwest. This boundary extends to the head of the Juan
           de Fuca Canyon although the effects of canyon'upwelling extend
           the entire length of the Strait. This boundary alternative
           excludes the extent of subtidal rocky habitat and the historic
           shipwreck that lies between Low Point and Observatory Point.
           With this extension into the Strait, the area encompassed by
           boundary alternative 4B is approximately 2,710 sq. nautical miles
           (9,293 sq. kilometers).'

                There is a park supported by the WDNR at the mouth of the
           Lyre River which is included in this alternative. There are
           remarkable intertidal habitats along this stretch of the Strait
           supporting, among others, shorebirds, bald eagles, and colonies
           of cormorants..


                           C.   Observatory Point

                This boundary extends eastward to Observatory Point, located
           approximately 60 miles into the Strait. The boundary includes
           the easternmost extent of the functioning community
           representative of open ocean environments, characterized by
           macrocystis kelp beds, green anenone, gooseneck barnacles and
           California mussels. These organisms cease to exist eastward of
           Observatory Point as a functioning community indicating that
           Observatory Point represents the inland extent of the transition
           from open ocean to estuarine environments. Observatory Point is
           the eastern point on the most inland headland on the Strait of
           Juan.   With this extension into the Strait, boundary alternative
           4C encompasses 2,750 sq. nautical miles (9,434 sq. kilometers).

                There is a county park at   Tongue and Observatory Point.
           These Clallam County parks are   well developed with picnic areas
           and boat ramps. The ramps are    utilized by recreational SCUBA
           Divers, among others, who dive   at the wreck of an historic ship
           wreck located in approximately   130 feet of water off Tongue
           Point. The subtidal rocky and    kelp habitats of the entire Strait
           provide exceptional environments for recreational SCUBA Divers.

                     2.    Distinguishing Characteristics of Boundary
                           Alternative 4 Including the Strait of Juan de
                           Fuca to Observatory Point

                oceanographic conditions, including the upwelling of
           nutrient-rich water at the head of Juan de Fuca Canyon, result in
           enhanced biological productivity over "the plains" and Swiftsure
           banks which are considered by local fishermen to be extremely
           productive groundfish and salmon fishing areas. The Strait also

                                          111-14









         serves as a transit and migration corridor for marine birds,
         mammals and ocean organisms entering from the outer coast., Up to
         300,000 common murres may enter northern Puget Sound in any given
         year during the molting season. since molting birds are mostly
         flightless, they use the Strait to swim to their overwintering
         grounds. Changes in biota, geology, and topography all seem to
         coalesce between Crescent Rock and Observatory Point.

              The Pyscht River estuary and saltmarsh support one of the
         richest juvenile salmon habitats in the Strait. Further, the
         kelp habitats in the Strait, particularly off the Lyre and Twin
         Rivers are some of the densest and most diverse in the Pacific
         Northwest.


              This alternative includes about 25% of the estimated
         potential hydrocarbons in the Sanctuary study area (or 5%
         predicted to be in formerLease Sale #132). The Strait is     a
         corridor for fishing vessels and larger product carriers and tank
         vessels entering and exiting Puget Sound. There is a very well
         coordinated Vessel Traffic System established in the Strait and
         its approaches which is operated by the U.S. and Canadian Coast
         Guards. Radar coverage from Tofino Coast Guard Station covers
         all waters north of approximately Cape Alava and seaward 60
         nautical miles.

              F.   Boundary Alternative 5
                   1.    Geographic Scope

              Boundary alternative 5 includes the entire sanctuary study
         area, encompassing approximately 4,155 nM2    (14,249 kM2)   (Figure
         58). This alternative essentially spans the entire coastline and
         continental shelf of Washington State. This alternative expands
         upon the preferred alternative to include the large area
         (approximately 1,655 nM2,  or 5,672 km2) south   of Copalis National
         Wildlife Refuge extending seaward to the edge    of the continental
         shelf, and south to the mouth of the Columbia    River.

                   2.    Distinguishing Characteristics

              This southern area is characterized by a    coastal
         geomorphology that is clearly distinct from the area to the
         north. The shoreline consists of sandy beaches and estuaries
         (Grays Harbor, Willapa Bay) in contrast to the northern rugged,
         rocky coastline with high bluffs, pocket beaches, and rock
         islands. Land use in the southern area is more heavily developed
         than in the nearly pristine northern area. Living resources
         include oyster beds in the estuarine areas, razor   'clams along the
         sandy beaches, pink shrimp and Dungeness crab fishing areas, Gray
         whale migration routes, and commercial, tribal, and sport fishing
         areas for numerous finfish species (including the major sport
         salmon fishing areas). The coastal waters lying adjacent to
         Grays Harbor and Willapa Bay are enriched by these extremely

                                        111-15














                                                      126* 10'          126'00'                                   125*30'                                      125o00'                                       124'30'                                      124'00'                                       123*30' 123*20'
                                                 48*45!                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     48'45'






                                                 48-30'
                                                                                                -50                                                                                          4
                                                                                                                  AV                                                                                                                                                                                                        48*30'


                                                                                                                                                      )n
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          Z@

                                                                                 00
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     10




                                                                                                           8



                                                 4rOO' -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            ww
                                                                            BOUNDAR
                                                                      ALTERNAt
                                                                                     NO.           5
                                                                                                                                                          6
                                                                            1    46115100.         12AW201
                                                                            2    46'15'00          12A*WZ4*
                                                                            3    47Vr45:           12cs9w
                                                                            4    47*WO5            125*woor
                                                                            6    47'40'm'
                                                                                                   125*04'44'
                                                                            6    4TWoi             26*06'4r
                                                                            7    4r5713'
                                                                                                   125-W13'
                                                                            8    41W               125'W20r
                                                                            9    48'14'            125'40'59'
                                                                            10   481XL@            125-&59'
                                                                            11   48*27 9-          125'WO4'
                                                                            12   49W '             1w59,1r
                                                                            13                     124*W42'
                                                 47*W -                     14   44S9WW319W'       tW4341'                                                                                                                                                                                                                  4MO'
                                                                            15   4SW6W             124'WI3!
                                                                            16   WIT30-            124*01'sw
                                                                            17   49-14'W           12rw071
                                                                            is   48WO2'            12rWOT'













                                                 47*00' -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            4M'

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     G@ H.@

                                                                                                                                                                           @J'







                                                                                                                          A
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         A

                                                 4M                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         46'30'
                                                                                 UNITED STATES
                                                                                                                        -WEST COAST
                                                                                                     WASHINGTON
                                                                                 PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                                                                                                                                                                                  r
                                                                                                                                                r
                                                                       NATIONAL MARINE SAN, PUARY
                                                                                                                                            C
                                                                                                           [email protected] KIIS@,


                                                 46*12'                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     46*1Z
                                                    & 1W              126*W                                      126*30'                                      125W                                          124*30'                                       124'00'                                     123*30' 123*20'



                                   Figure 58. Boundary Alternative 5.









         productive estuarine environments. Estuaries are important
         breeding grounds for numerous species of aquatic plants and
         animals and provide food for these plants and animals either
         directly or indirectly through a complex food web.

              It is estimated by MMS that this area encompasses 20% of the
         potential hydrocarbon reserves in the entire former Lease Sale
         #132 (MMS, 1990a). Most of this hydrocarbon potential (15% of
         the total lease sale area) lies within the sedimentary basins
         south of Copalis National Wildlife Refuge which extend seaward
         from Grays Harbor and Willapa Bay estuaries.

         II. Section: Regulatory Alternatives
              A.   Introduction

              Regulatory alternatives governing different types of
         potential or current uses of the Sanctuary (oil, gas and mineral
         activities; discharges and deposits; moving, removing or injury
         of historical resources; alteration of, or construction on, the
         seabed; taking of marine mammals, turtles and seabirds;
         overflights; and vessel traffic; and fishing, kelp harvesting and
         aquaculture) were evaluated in terms of need and effectiveness
         for resource protection.

              In formulating the sanctuary regulatory regime, NOAA
         analyzed the study area with respect to: 1) the resources and
         human activities; 2) the existing regulatory regime with regard
         to protection of the resources and qualities from possible
         harmful human activities; 3) proposed alternative regulatory
         regimes, including relying on the existing regulatory regime, to
         protect the sanctuary's resources and qualities; 4) the
         environmental consequences of each regulatory alternative on
         sanctuary resources, including no additional regulatory action;
         and 5) proposed regulations based on the preferred course of
         action deemed necessary to protect Sanctuary resources and
         qualities.

              The choice of proposed regulations is based on environmental
         consequences of each action and constraints set by the MPRSA,
         which states in Section 304(c):

         (1) Nothing in this title shall be construed as terminating or
         granting to the Secretary the right to terminate any valid lease,
         permit, license, or right of subsistence use or of access if the
         lease, permit, license, or right-
              (A) was in existence on the date of enactment of the Marine
         Sanctuary Amendments of 1992, with respect to any national marine
         sanctuary designated before that date; or
              (B) is in existence on the date of designation of any
         national marine sanctuary, with respect to any national marine
         sanctuary designated after the date of enactment of the Marine
         Sanctuaries Amendments of 1992.


                                      111-17









          (2) The exercise of a lease, permit, license, or right is
          subject to regulation by the Secretary consistent with the
          purpose for which the sanctuary is designated.

               The prohibitions set forth in the Sanctuary regulations
          would not apply to (see the regulations themselves for the exact
          provisions):

               1)   Any activity authorized by any valid lease, permit,
          license, approval, or other authorization in existence on the
          effective date of Sanctuary designation and issued by any
          Federal, State, local or tribal -kutho*rity of competent
          jurisdiction, or by any valid right of subsistence use or access
          in existence on the effective date of Sanctuary designation,
          provided that the holder of such authorization or right complies
          with sanctuary regulations regarding the certification of such
          authorizations and rights (e.g., notifies the Secretary or
          designee of the existence of, requests certification of, and
          provides requested information regarding such authorization or
          right) and complies with any terms and conditions on the exercise
          of such authorization or right imposed as a condition of
          certification by the Secretary or designee as he or she deems
          necessary to achieve the purposes for which the Sanctuary was
          designated.

               Pending final agency action on the certification request,
          such holder may exercise such authorization or right without
          being in violation of any prohibitions set forth in the Sanctuary
          regulations, provided the holder is in compliance with sanctuary
          regulations regarding certifications.

               2) Any activity authorized by any valid lease, permit,
          license, approval or other authorization issued after the
          effective date of Sanctuary designation by any Federal, State or
          local authority of competent jurisdiction, provided that the
          applicant complies with Sanctuary regulations regarding
          notification and review of applications (e.g., notifies the
          Secretary or designee of information regarding the application),
          the Secretary or designee notifies the applicant and authorizing
          agency that he or she does not object to issuance of the
          authorization, and the applicant complies with any terms and
          conditions the Secretary or designee deems necessary to protect
          Sanctuary resources and qualities. Amendments, renewals and
          extensions of authorizations in existence on the effective date
          of Sanctuary designation constitute authorizations issued after
          the effective date.

               The authority granted the Director to object to or impose
          terms or conditions on the exercise of any valid lease, permit,
          license, approval or other authorization issued after the
          effective date of Sanctuary designation may not be delegated or
          otherwise assigned to other Federal official below his or her











         level.

               3)   Any activity conducted in accordance with the scope,
         purpose, terms, and conditions of a National Marine Sanctuary
         permit issued by the Secretary or his or her designee in
         accordance with the Sanctuary regulations. Such permits may only
         be issued if the Secretary or designee finds that the activity
         for which the permit is applied will have only negligible, short-
         term adverse effects on Sanctuary resources and qualities and
         will: further research related to Sanctuary resources; further
         the educational, natural or historical resource value of the
         Sanctuary; further salvage or recovery operations in or near the
         Sanctuary in connection with a recent air or marine casualty;
         assist in managing the Sanctuary; or further salvage or recovery
         operations in connection with an abandoned shipwreck in the
         Sanctuary title to which is held by the State of Washington.

               4)   Any activity conducted in accordance with the scope,
         purpose, terms, and conditions of a Special Use permit issued by
         the Secretary or designee in accordance with Sec. 310 of the Act.

               When the preferred Sanctuary action is to rely on the status
         quo to govern the activity either by including the activity in
         the scope of regulations by not regulating with designation (i.e.
         kelp harvesting, aquaculture and vessel traffic), or by excluding
         the activity from the scope or regulations entirely (i.e.,
         fishing), the activity would continue to be subject to
         regulations of other authorities.

               5)   Any activity necessary to respond to emergencies
         threatening life, property or the environment.

               6)   With regard to Department of Defense activities: All
         Department of Defense activities shall be carried out in a manner
         that avoids to the maximum extent practicable any adverse impacts
         on Sanctuary resources and qualities. The prohibitions in
         paragraphs (a)(2)-(9) of ï¿½ 925.5 of the regulations do not apply
         to existing military activities carried out by the Department of
         Defense, as specifically identified in this FEIS/MP for the
         proposed Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary. New activities
         may be exempted from the prohibitions in paragraphs (a)(2)-(9) of
         that section by the Director of the office of ocean and Coastal
         Resource Management or designee after consultation between the
         Director or designee and the Department of Defense.

               Notwithstanding the above, in no event under the Sanctuary
         regulations, would the Secretary or designee be allowed to issue
         a permit authorizing, or otherwise approve, (1) the exploration,
         development or production of oil, gas or minerals within the
         Sanctuary, (2) the discharge of primary-treated sewage within the
         Sanctuary (except for certification, pursuant to section 925.10
         of valid authorizations in existence on the effective date of


                                         111-19









           Sanctuary designation and issued by other authorities of
           competent jurisdiction), or (3) -the disposal of dredge material
           within the Sanctuary. Any purported authorizations issued by
           other authorities after the effective date of Sanctuary
           designation for any of these activities within the Sanctuary
           would be invalid.

                Each type of activity proposed to be regulated by the
           Sanctuary is stated below and described in terms of its impact to
           resources and uses. The status quo is also given in terms of
           existing laws, regulations and their impacts to the resources and
           uses of the waters off the Olympic Peninsula.

                B.   Oil, Gas and Mineral Activities
                     1.   Status Ouo
                          a.   Existing Regulatory Framework

                Pursuant to the 1992 reauthorization of the MPRSA (P.L. 102-
           587), no oil or gas leasing or pre-leasing activity shall be
           conducted within the area designated as the Olympic Coast
           National Marine Sanctuary. Thus, the preferred alternative
           regarding the regulation of oil and gas activities has been
           statutorily mandated.

                          b.   Impact to Resources

                The existing regulatory framework protects the Sanctuary
           resources from the harmful effects of oil and gas activities. It
           has been concluded that many uncertainties regarding potential
           impacts from OCS activities still exist, even in marine areas for
           which there is far more information than for the Olympic Coast
           (NAS, 1989; EPA, 1985; and NAS, 1985). However, some potential
           risks to the Olympic Coast from OCS oil and gas activities, and
           the transportation of hydrocarbon products can be evaluated.

                Offshore hydrocarbon exploration, developmenti and
           production activities, including the transshipment of crude oil
           to the mainland, may cause unforeseen and potentially substantial
           discharges of oil, both chronic and catastrophic, into the marine
           environment. The sensitive marine resources of the Olympic Coast
           may be threatened by: (1) well "blow-outs" caused by equipment
           failure or damage, or geologic hazards; (2) oil spills and
           pipeline leaks; (3) noise and visual disturbances caused by
           drilling, the presence of drill rigs or platforms, work crews,
           supply boats, and helicopters; (4) pollution associated with
           aquatic discharges; and (5) short-term pipeline construction
           upheaval. The impacts of oil and gas on the coastal and offshore
           environment may be intensified because of the remoteness of the
           area. There are very few access points along the coast.
           Further, most of the coastline is characterized by rocky
           intertidal habitat which, when impacted by oil and gas, does not
           recover for many years.

                                         111-20









              Normal hydrocarbon operations can result in unintentional,
         chronic, or small oil spillage. Since the Olympic Coast area has
         had little history of hydrocarbon production, direct evidence
         does not exist to illustrate the effects of exploration,
         development, and production spills in these waters. Petroleum
         products are, however, transported along the coast and through
         the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Two oil spills, one from the General
         M.C. Meiggs and the other from the Nestucca, have occurred
         recently in coastal waters off Washington State. Oil spilled
         from the barge Nestucca oiled beaches found within the boundary
         of the Sanctuary. The reports of damages from these incidents,
         as well as data from spills in other marine waters, serve as
         examples of the types of impacts that can result from oil related
         accidents. Known threats to marine organisms that may result
         from offshore oil and gas exploration, development, and
         production are presented in Table 6.

              OCS oil and gas activities that would take place offshore in
         Federal waters can negatively effect state territorial waters and
         coastal environments. In addition to affecting marine organisms,
         these activities can disrupt human uses of the marine environment
         and the socioeconomic structure of coastal communities (MMS,
         1990). Potential negative impacts to nearshore and coastal areas
         include: the presence of processing facilities which also
         involves problems of air pollution and disposal of processing
         wastes; interference with port operations and stress on existing
         port facility space and services; conflict with shore-based
         operations which use offshore waters (e.g., commercial and
         recreational fishing, whale-watching operations); and
         socioeconomic impacts on affected coastal communities (Mead and
         Sorenson, 1970; Cican-Sain, 1985; Freeman, 1985, MMS, 1990).

              Further, the activities associated with oil and gas
         exploration and development would introduce into the viewshed of
         the Olympic Peninsula an interference with what is known and
         valued as a nearly pristine undeveloped coastline. This value is
         what makes the Olympic Peninsula aesthetically one of the most
         magnificent natural environments remaining in the continental
         U.S.


                        C.   Impact to Uses

              The status quo prevents offshore development of the outer
         continental shelf within the Sanctuary and the introduction of I-
         2 offshore platforms into the area for the first time.
         Associated with this direct development would be numerous
         indirect increases in human activities such as increase in vessel
         traffic, either servicing the platforms or transporting oil
         (unless pipelines are used to offload the discovered resources),
         increases in overflights from helicopters, increasing levels of
         discharges, and increased urban development. Prevention of this
         development will have a positive impact on fishing, and

                                       111-21








          Table 6. Known Threats to Marine organisms from oil and Gas
          Exploration and Development.




          Activit,@/Facility     Chronic Hazzard   Episodic/catastrophic Events

          Exploration
              Seismic            Noise,                Sub-surface noise,
               Profiling          "startle effect"      concussion
              Drilling                                 Siltation,
                                                        Turbidity increase
              Boat Traffic       Sub-surface noise   and
                                 propeller hits

          Operation
           Offshore facilities
              Platforms          Intrusion
              Well head          Leakage/seepage       Blow-out
           Surmort
              Supply boats       Sub-surface noise and
                                 propeller hits
              Aircraft           Noise in the air


          Transport
              Pipelines          Leakage               Rupture
              Pumping buoys      Leakage
              Barges/Tankers     Bilge oil intrusion   Collision or grounding

          Clean-u-P
           Oil on water          Intrusion
              Skimmers
              Burn-off                                 Pollution--air
              Chemicals          Toxicity of Chemical  Pollution--water
           Grounded oil                                Pollution--sediments
               Booms             Dispersants           Disturbance to sensitive
                                                       bird and mammal
                                                       populations on beaches by
                                                       human intrusion and
                                                       aircraft activity
               Straw
               Chemicals
               Presence of crew                        Habitat destruction
               and equipment







                                          111-22










         recreational and tourist activities in the area.

              Exploration and development of oil, gas and mineral
         resources involves extensive study of the offshore ecology and
         geology.@ These studies will need to be undertaken by other
         institutions.

                   2.   Sanctuary Alternative
                        a.   Sanctuary Action (Preferred Alternativel

              Exploring for, developing or producing oil, gas or minerals
         within the Sanctuary is prohibited.

                        b.   Impact to Resources

              The resources and qualities of the Sanctuary, particularly
         the sea otters, pinnipeds and seabirds, kelp forests, rocky
         shores and offshore islands, and the high water quality of the
         area, are especially vulnerable to oil and gas activities. Only
         partial protection would be provided due to the remaining threat
         from potential oil and gas development outside of the Sanctuary
         boundary and from vessel traffic, particularly oil tankers,
         transiting through and near the Sanctuary. However, NOAA is
         working with the Coast Guard to address the threats from vessel
         traffic. A prohibition on oil and gas activities within the
         proposed Sanctuary is consistent with the prohibition on
         alteration of, or construction on, the seabed as discussed below.

              The prohibition will prevent activities in the Sanctuary
         which could result in discharges associated with petroleum and
         other mineral development potentially harmful to wildlife
         (including many endangered species) in the area. This
         alternative adds further protection than P.L 102-587 by
         prohibiting mineral development (e.g., sand and gravel
         development) which can have detrimental impacts to the benthic
         and aquatic environments.

                        C.   Impact to Uses

              There is presently no oil and gas development taking place
         in the study area. Lease Sale #132 has been canceled and no
         additional Lease Sale activity is proposed through the year 2000.
         The Sanctuary prohibition will eliminate all potential future
         direct and indirect oil, gas and mineral activities in the area.
         Activities such as tourism and fishing should benefit by the
         prohibition.

              C.   Discharges or Deposits
                   1.   Status Ouo
                        a.   Existing Regulatory Framework

              Numerous laws and regulations administered by many local,

                                       111-23









          state and Federal agencies exist governing the contamination of
          coastal and ocean waters by discharges and deposits from a
          variety of sources including point and non-point source
          discharges, discharges of oil and hazardous substances (e.g., oil
          from vessel bilges and toxic chemicals), overboard trash disposal
          (e.g., discarded fishing nets and plastic trash), and ocean
          dumping of dredge material.

               The primary Federal, state and local laws, policies and
          plans governing discharges include but are not limited to: the
          Federal Water Pollution Control Act (the "Clean Water Act", CWA);
          Title I of the MPRSA; the Coastal Zone Management Act; the Rivers
          and Harbors Act; the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships, (which
          implements MARPOL 73/78, Annexes I and II); the Marine Plastic
          Pollution Research and Control Act (MPPRCA) (which amends the Act
          to Prevent Pollution from Ships and implements Annex V of MARPOL
          73/78); the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90); the Comprehensive
          Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCIA)
          (which, together with section 311. of the CWA, provides for the
          National Contingency Plan); EPA,*s Administrative Regulations; the
          Washington State Forest Practices Act (FPA) (RCW Chapter 76.09)
          (which addresses the environmental impacts of forestry on the
          coastal zone); and the State Water Pollution Control Act of 1973
          (RCW Chapter 90.48) which implements the Federal Water Pollution
          Control Act at the state level (Many of these authorities are
          discussed in more detail in Appendix I).

               Responsible agencies for implementing appropriate
          regulations and plans include, but are not limited to, the NOAA,
          the EPA, COE, USCG, WDOE, and WDNR.

                              i. Point Source Discharges

               NPDES permits are required by all municipal and industrial
          dischargers that discharge pollutants from a point source into
          navigable waters of the U.S., the waters of the contiguous zone,
          or ocean waters. The WDOE is responsible for the protection of
          the quality of the state's waters through the development of
          water quality control plans and the issuance of waste discharge
          permits. The coastal tribes receive their NPDES permits directly
          from EPA and do not network through the State agency.

               The State of Washington is also responsible for ensuring
          that dischargers of water pollutants comply with the conditions
          of the issued NPDES permits. Thus, the WDOE works with EPA in a
          program commonly referred to as the "Compliance Assurance
          Program." Pursuant to an MOA between EPA and WDOE, each agency's
          policies and responsibilities directed to enforcing effluent
          limitations and compliance schedules for NPDES were delineated.
          The MOA sets forth the manner and extent to which the program
          elements of inspections, tracking, enforcement, and evaluation
          are carried out.


                                        111-24









                              ii. Non-Point Source Discharges

               EPA has provided Washington State guidance on implementing
          the provisions of EPA's Anti-degradation Policy (40 CFR 131.12)
          which is applicable to non-point source pollution as well as
          point source pollution. Specifically, "where high quality waters
          constitute an outstanding National resource, such as waters of
          National and State Parks and wildlife refuges and waters of
          exceptional recreational or ecological significance, that water
          quality shall be maintained and protected" (40 CFR 131.12
          (a)(3)). The non-point source provisions of the CWA 205(j), 208,
          303(e) and 319 are subject to the anti-degradation policy and EPA
          is developing additional guidance in this area.

               Washington State manages non-point source pollution through
          the FPA. The WDNR is the state agency with primary
          responsibility to implement the Act. The FPA declares that it is
          in the public interest for public and private commercial forest
          lands to be managed consistent with sound policies of natural
          resource protection and that coincident with the maintenance of a
          viable forest products industry, it is important to afford
          protection to forest soils, fisheries, wildlife, water quantity
          and quality, air quality, recreation, and scenic beauty.

               The FPA created the Forest Practices Board to adopt rules
          and regulations governing the details of forest practices
          management consistent with the provisions of the Act and the
          Forest Practices Advisory Committee. The Advisory Committee
          appointed two regional advisory committees to recommend region-
          specific rules and regulations.

               The FPA establishes a permit process governing forest
          practices on private and public forest lands in the state, except
          on Federal lands. The FPA gave counties in which forest
          practices are proposed a significant role in the process. DNR
          may not approve portions of applications concerning conversion to
          another use to which counties object, though the Department may
          appeal the county's objection to the Forest Practices Appeals
          Board which was created by FPA to hear such disputes. Both
          Clallam and Jefferson Counties have waived their right to review
          forest practices not involving conversion to another use under
          the FPA in an effort to streamline'the process.

               In terms of coastal zone management, the FPA supersedes the
          Shoreline Management Act in some cases. FPA specifies that in
          relation to "shorelines", the forest practice regulations to be
          adopted by the Forest Practices Board 11 ... shall be the sole rules
          applicable to the performance of forest practices, and
          enforcement thereof shall be solely as provided... 11 in the FPA.
          It is further stipulated that no substantial development permit
          11 ... shall be required under chapter 90.58 RCW for the
          construction of up to five hundred feet of one... road or segment

                                        111-25









          of a road provided such road does not enter the shoreline more
          than once," and except under unusual conditions. And finally,
          FPA provides that 11(a]ny powers granted by chapter 90.58 RCW
          pertaining to forest practices ... are expressly limited to lands
          located within 'shorelines of the state' as defined in RCW
          90.58.030. DNR and DOE (for water quality) are empowered to make
          an inspection after any forest practice.

                              iii. Hazardous waste, oil and trash disposal

               Discharges of oil and hazardous substances are regulated
          under the CWA, OPA 90 and CERCLA, with discharges by seagoing
          ships of oil, oily mixtures and noxious liquid substances also
          regulated under the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships. The CWA
          and CERCLA provide for the National Contingency Plan (40 CFR Part
          300), under which the Coast Guard serves as the lead agency for
          responding to discharges of oil and hazardous substances.

               Discharges by ships of plastics and other garbage is
          regulated under MARPOL by the USCG (regulations appear at 33 ï¿½
          CFR 151.51 to 151.77.

                              iv Ocean Dumping

               The COE has permitting authority, with EPA review and
          approval, over dumping of dredged material in waters lying
          seaward of the baseline from which the territorial sea is
          measured pursuant to Title I, section 103 of the MPRSA. COE also
          issues permits for discharge of dredged material into navigable
          waters in internal waters pursuant to section 404 of the CWA.
          EPA has permitting authority for ocean dumping of materials other
          than dredged materials pursuant to Title I, section 102 of the
          MPRSA.

               The regulations under Title I of the MPRSA provide for
          special recognition of nationally significant marine areas, such
          as marine sanctuaries established pursuant to Title III of the
          MPRSA.


                         b.   Impact to Resources

               Although water quality off the Olympic Peninsula is
          considered to be good, there is evidence of potential water
          quality problems in limited parts of the Sanctuary. There is
          also pressure to develop the coastline of the sanctuary. Faced
          with severe economic hardships and limited development
          alternatives, the populations in -the coastal watersheds are
          seeking ways to diversify their timber-based economies. This
          includes plans to expand harbors, build casinos, restaurants,
          hotels and other recreational facilities as well as promote eco-
          tourism. With this development comes the associated need for
          dredging and dredge disposal activities, and expanded point and

                                        111--26









         non-point source pollution.

              Further, there are some efforts to manage non-point source
         pollution from upland uses in portions of coastal watershed
         pursuant to the FPA. However, there is little associated coastal
         monitoring of the health of the kelp and eel grass beds of the
         ,Strait and coastal areas to assess the effectiveness of the
         management initiatives. There also lacks sediment standards for
         streams entering the proposed sanctuary.

              ocean dumping, municipal outfalls, and dredged material
         disposal can smother benthic biota and introduce substances into
         the marine environment, which may affect fish, bird, mammal, and
         algae resources. In addition to reducing overall water quality
         and lessening the aesthetic appeal of the area, the discharge of
         litter may harm marine mammals that sometimes ingest or become
         entangled in such litter.

              Thus, under the existing regulatory regime, the coastal
         ecosystem will continue to receive little attention due to the
         multi-jurisdictional nature of the coastal watersheds, the low
         priority assigned to it by state and Federal agencies due to its
         remoteness and assumed pristine quality, and the immediate need
         for economic development. Management efforts will continue in a
         piece-meal fashion with no coordinated comprehensive planning and
         regulatory watershed initiatives.

                        C.   Impact to Uses

              The status quo alternative would continue to provide for
         increasing development in the watersheds adjacent to the
         Sanctuary with no overall plan to minimize the impacts on the
         coastal ecosystem. Although the population is expected to grow
         very slowly, efforts are underway to diversify the economy and
         attract increased tourism to the coast.

                   2.   Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)
                        a.   Sanctuary Action

              Discharging or depositing, from within the boundary of the
         Sanctuary, any material or other matter is prohibited except:

              (i) fish, fish parts, chumming materials or bait used in
              or resulting from traditional fishing operations in the
              Sanctuary;
              (ii) biodegradable effluent incidental to vessel use and
              generated by marine sanitation devices approved in
              accordance with Section 312 of the Federal Water Pollution
              Control Act, as amended, (FWPCA) 33 U.S.C. 1322 et sea.;
              (iii) water generated by routine vessel operations (e.g.,
              cooling water, deck wash down and graywater as defined by
              Section 312 of the FWPCA) excluding oily wastes from bilge

                                       111-27









               pumping;
               (iv) engine exhaust;

               Discharging or depositing, from beyond the boundary of the
         Sanctuary, any material or other matter that subsequently enters
         the Sanctuary and injures a Sanctuary resource or quality is
         prohibited except those listed in (i-iv) above.

                        b.   ImRact to Resources

               The intent of this prohibition is to protect the Sanctuary
         resources and qualities from the harmful effects of land and sea-
         generated point and non-point source pollution, such as, but not
         limited to, trash and oil disposal by vessels and pollutant.
         loading from adjacent land use practices.
               By maintaining the high water quality of the ecosystem off
         the Olympic Peninsula, the organisms responsible for primary
         productivity at the base of the food chain, the coastal wetlands
         and estuarine habitats will be protected from the direct effects
         of pollutant loadings. Benthic biota will be protected
         especially from smothering and turbidity increases from the
         dumping of dredge material. Fish, seabirds, turtles, and marine
         mammals will be protected from direct negative impacts such as
         entanglement in discarded trash and infection from degraded water
         quality, and will benefit from the indirect effects of protected
         habitats and enhanced prey abundance.

                        C.   Impact to Uses

               overall, the impact of this regulation on human uses as well
         as the Sanctuary resources and qualities is expected to be
         beneficial. No existing human uses will be terminated with
         designation and in the long-term, many activities such as fishing
         and tourism will continue to benefit from the maintenance of the
         high water quality of the area.

               In accordance with section 304(c)(1) of the MPRSA, 16 U.S.C.
         1434(c)(1), NOAA may regulate existing permits through
         certification which may include imposition of terms and
         conditions consistent with the purposes for which the Sanctuary
         is designated. Permits issued after the date of designation are
         subject to a review process which may include added terms and
         conditions or objection to issuance, as necessary to protect
         Sanctuary resources and qualities. Any application for an
         amendment, renewal or extension to an existing permit is
         considered a new permit in which case NOAA must approve of the
         issuance of the permit.

               NOAA will work within the existing process, rather than
         create an entirely new regulatory review and approval procedure,
         governing discharge activities in the Sanctuary and coastal

                                       111--28









         watersheds. NOAA intends to minimize any additional
         administrative burden on those dischargers that are required to
         obtain a NPDES permit for discharges that affect, or may affect
         the Sanctuary, while at the same time, ensure that the existing
         process addresses the special concerns of the Sanctuary and it's
         resources and qualities. In addition, a close working
         relationship between the Sanctuary and existing authorities and
         affected users will necessitate the identification and exchange
         of information relevant to the maintenance of the area's high
         water quality, and the protection and conservation of resources
         and qualities of the Sanctuary.

              Consistent with the MPRSA primary objective of protecting
         the Sanctuary and its resources, (Section 301(b)(5) of the MPRSA,
         16 U.S.C. ï¿½ 1431(b)(5)), the Sanctuary regulations address
         discharges within the Sanctuary boundary (15 CFR 925.5(a)(2)) as
         well as those discharges outside of the Sanctuary boundary that
         enter and injure Sanctuary resources and qualities (15 CFR
         925(a)(3)).

              Specific impacts to uses of the area that involve discharge
         into the Sanctuary are discussed in more detail below.

                             i. Vessels

              The impact of this regulation on vessel operations is
         expected to be minor. Oil discharges are presently regulated
         under, e.g., the CWA, OPA 90 and MARPOL. The disposal of non-
         biodegradable and other potentially harmful trash is already
         regulated by MARPOL. The exemptions from this regulation are
         designed to allow continued use of the Sanctuary by vessels that
         do not appear to threaten Sanctuary resources and qualities.
         Thus, fish, fish parts, chumming materials and bait used in, or
         resulting from, traditional fishing operations within the
         Sanctuary (exhaust, vessel cooling waters, and approved marine
         sanitation wastes) are specifically exempted from the
         prohibition.

                             ii. Dredge Disposal Activities

              There are no dredge disposal activities occurring in, or
         near the Sanctuary at the time of designation. The regulation
         would prohibit the designation and use of any new dredged
         material disposal sites within the Sanctuary. Dredge disposal
         activities outside the boundaries of the Sanctuary that enter and
         injure Sanctuary resources and qualities are prohibited.

                             iii. Point Source Discharges

              There are no point-source discharges entering directly into
         the Sanctuary. Discharges and deposits from point sources
         entering indirectly into the Sanctuary, pursuant to any valid

                                      111-29









         permit existing on the effective date of these regulations, are
         allowed subject to all prohibitions, restrictions and conditions
         validly imposed by any other authority of competent jurisdiction,
         provided, however, that NOAA may regulate the exercise of these
         existing permits as necessary to achieve the purposes for which
         the Sanctuary was designated.

              In consultation with scientific institutions and local,
         State, Tribal and Federal governments, NOAA will consult with the
         permittees and the relevant permitting authorities to determine
         means of achieving the Sanctuary 'purposes. If additional
         constraints are necessary, NOAA will work with the permittees and
         permitting authorities to determine the necessary level of terms
         and conditions to provide adequate protection of the Sanctuary's
         resources and qualities.

              The requirement of NOAA certification of existing permits
         for, e.g., municipal and industrial sewage, will ensure NOAA
         consideration of potential impacts on Sanctuary resources and
         qualities.

              New proposals for permits, licenses, or other authorizations
         after the effective date of Sanctuary designation, e.g., allowing
         the discharge of municipal and industrial sewage would be subject
         to Sanctuary review to ensure that Sanctuary resources and
         qualities are protected from injury.

              when existing permits are submitted for renewal, they would
         be reviewed as a new permit. NO&N will evaluate the activity to
         determine whether there would be any negative effects to water
         quality or resources, whether the permittee has complied with
         permit standards, and, if necessary, decreased discharges and/or
         increased treatment standards due-td the presence of the
         Sanctuary.

              This regulation could thus result in additional costs to
         existing and future dischargers if the Sanctuary were to
         determine that a higher level of -treatment or other, more
         expensive disposal methods were preferable in order to ensure
         Sanctuary resources and qualities are protected. The requirement
         of Sanctuary certification or approval of permits for point
         source dischargers will ensure that these potentially harmful
         activities receive special consideration from the Sanctuary's
         perspective.

                             iv. Non-Point Source Discharges

              Land-based non-point source discharges within watersheds
         adjacent to the Sanctuary that drain into the Sanctuary will be
         monitored to ensure the activity is consistent with the goals of
         the Sanctuary and that Sanctuary resources and qualities are
         protected. If evidence arises that Sanctuary resources and

                                       111-30









         qualities are threatened, NOAA intends to work with existing
         regulatory agencies and responsible parties to determine
         appropriate measures to prevent the threat of injury to Sanctuary
         resources and qualities.

               D.   Historical Resources
                    1.   Status Ouo
                         a.   Existing Regulatory Framework

               Under this alternative any historical resources (as defined
         by Sanctuary Program and Sanctuary regulations to include, inter
         alia, archeological, paleontological, or cultural resources) will
         remain subject to the existing management regime. The existing
         Federal regulatory regime includes the National Historic
         Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA), 16 U.S.C. 470 et geq., the
        .Archeological and Historical Preservation Act of 1974, 16 U.S.C.
         469 et sea., the Abandoned Shipwreck Act (ASA) of 1987, 43 U.S.C.
         2101 Pt peg., and the Archeological Resources Protection Act of
         1979 (ARPA), 16 U.S.C. 470aa et secr.    Permits are issued by the
         State Office of Archeology and Historic Preservation, within the
         WDCD, for those historic resources in State waters pursuant to
         the State Historical Societies-Heritage Council-Archeology and
         Historic Preservation Act (Chapter 25-48 WAC and Title 27 RCW).

               Before any archeological excavation of a site of tribal
         significance, the State Office of Archeology and Historic
         Preservation consults with the Tribe regarding mitigation
         measures to be incorporated into the permit. Title 43 CFR Part 7
         of the ARPA requires that before issuing a permit a Federal land
         manager shall provide notice to the interested tribes, and within
         a 30-day period discuss tribal interests, including ways to avoid
         or mitigate potential harm or destruction such as excluding sites
         from the permit area. Such agreed upon mitigation measures shall
         be incorporated into the terms of the permit. The Federal land
         manager may enter into agreements with an Indian tribe to
         determine locations for which the tribe wishes to receive notice
         of permits.

               Within the framework of the status quo, any historical
         resources known to be within the proposed sanctuary, especially
         those that are on the National Register listing under the NHPA,
         will be carefully monitored by Sanctuary staff. In addition, any
         activity that could lead to the discovery of historical resources
         will be carefully monitored. The Sanctuary manager will try to
         ensure that adequate information is available regarding the
         national significance of these resources and appropriate
         management measures are in place.

                         b.   Impact to Resources

               Existing regulatory authorities provide some protection for
         underwater historical resources in the Sanctuary. Guidelines

                                        111-31









          published by the NPS assist the states and Federal agencies in
          developing legislation and regulations to carry out their
          management responsibilities regarding shipwrecks in accordance
          with the provisions of the ASA.

               The NHPA mandates that Federal agencies consult with the
          Advisory Council on Historic Preservation before engaging in any
          undertaking that could affect historic resources. Consultation
          with the expertise of this Council provides Federal agencies with
          an opportunity to ensure their proposed activities are
          technically adequate and that any plans to salvage historical
          resources take into account preservation requirements for the
          long-term protection of the resources.

               Under the state permitting process, archeological and
          historical/cultural resources can be excavated and as much as 90%
          of the value of the salvaged objects may remain in private
          ownership. The State has priority in determining which of the
          10% of the artifacts are to remain in the public domain. This
          regime provides the public access to the historical resources for
          educational or research purposes before being turned over to
          private ownership. Further, guidelines in permits granted to
          permitees ensure that the marine benthic environment is protected
          during salvage or research activities on historical resources
          within State waters pursuant to the State Environmental
          Protection Act (SEPA).

                         C.   Impact to Uses

               Salvage operations in State 'waters are subject to permits by
          the WDCD as described above. Salvors are required to obtain a
          permit after consulting with the coastal tribes (if excavations
          involved artifacts of tribal interest) and assessing the impacts
          to resources in the vicinity of the operation. The salvor may
          retain up to 90% of the value/artifacts salvaged following
          inspection by the State Archeologist. There is no coordination
          in policy for salvage operations occurring in State and Federal
          waters.

                   2.    Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)
                         a.   Sanctuary Action

               Moving, removing or injuring, or attempting to move, remove
               or injure, a Sanctuary historical resource is prohibited.
               This prohibition does not apply to moving, removing or
               inj'.ury resulting incidentally from traditional fishing
               operations.

                         b.   Impact to Resources

               Under this alternative, moving, removing or injuring or
          attempting to move, remove, or injure a Sanctuary historical

                                       111-32









         resources without NOAA approval will be prohibited (see the
         introduction to Part III). Sanctuary management of historical
         resources under the authority of the MPRSA shall be consistent,
         to the extent practicable, with the Federal archeological program
         by consulting the Uniform Regulations, ARPA (43 CFR Part 7), the
         Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for
         Archeology and Historic Preservation (48 CFR 44716, Sept. 29,
         1983) and other relevant Federal regulations. NOAA also intends
         to work closely with the WDCD and the State Historic Preservation
         Office (SHPO) regarding approval to move or remove abandoned
         shipwrecks, title which is held by Washington State.

              Management of historical and cultural resources of
         significance to the tribes will be managed so as to protect other
         Sanctuary resources and the interests of the governing body of an
         Indian tribe(s) in such historical resources. If an Indian tribe
         determines that a historical resource of tribal significance
         should be researched, excavated or salvaged, the Sanctuary
         manager may issue a Sanctuary permit if the criteria for issuance
         have been met. The terms and conditions of the permit will
         ensure that the Sanctuary program has access to artifacts and
         research results for education purposes and that the artifacts
         are placed in a location agreed upon by the interested Indian
         tribes.

              This regulation is necessary in order to protect these
         valuable resources for research and interpretation. In addition,
         during its review of a request for a Sanctuary permit, NOAA would
         consider the impacts of the proposed activity on adjacent
         Sanctuary resources and qualities such as benthic communities and
         associated fish populations.

                        C.   Impact to Uses


              Human activities that "take" a historical resource would
         require Sanctuary approval (however, see exception in regulation
         for certain fishery activities).. Such approval would only be
         given under specific circumstances such as for research or
         education purposes. Where this responsibility overlaps with
         other state and Federal agencies the Sanctuary would coordinate
         its review with the appropriate agency. Most archeological work
         being conducted is related to the culture and history of the
         coastal tribes. Shipwrecks that have occurred along the coast
         have disintegrated due to the high energy environment that
         characterizes the Pacific Northwest. As only a few uses "take"
         historical resources, the impact of this regulation on uses is
         expected to be minor.







                                       111-33










               E.   Alteration of or Construction on the Seabed
                    1.   Status Ouo
                         a.   Existing Regulatory Framework

               The-most relevant legislation pertaining to the alteration
          of, or construction on, the seabed includes Section 10 of the
          Rivers and Harbors Act; Section 404 of the CWA; Title I of the
          MPRSA; the Submerged Lands Act; the Outer Continental Shelf Lands
          Act; and the Washington State Submerged Lands Act.

               The primary Federal agencies affected include, but are not
          limited to, the COE and EPA. The WDNR is the primary state
          agency.


                         b.   Impact to Resources

               Under this alternative, the benthic resources and the
          various substrates of the Sanctuary will continue to be protected
          by the existing management regime and existing state and Federal
          regulations governing activities on the seabed will still apply.
          There will be no special consideration of the seabed as an
          environment that provides a variety of habitats that, in turn,
          support the rich colonies of kelp and other algae, benthic
          invertebrates and associated organisms dependent upon these
          habitat assemblages. .

               Activities such as sand and gravel mining and dredge
          disposal may cause loss of sediment and associated disruptions in
          benthic, kelp and algae communities from erosion of habitat and
          smothering of organisms from increased turbidity and particle
          deposition. The benthic communities off the northern Olympic
          Peninsula are rich feeding grounds for marine mammals and
          seabirds and development activities could seriously interfere
          with marine mammal and seabird ecology.

                         C.   Impact to Uses

               Harbor maintenance activities are predicted to increase,
          particularly at Neah Bay and La Push including dredging. The
          alternatives for dredge disposal sites may include ocean
          disposal. There is also interest in mining gravel deposits off
          of Cape Flattery which may result in loss of fish habitat and
          fishing grounds. These activities may diminish the ecological
          and aesthetic value of the Sanctuary.

                    2.   Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)
                         a.   Sanctuary Act-ion

               Drilling into, dredging or otherwise altering the seabed of
               the Sanctuary; or constructing, placing or abandoning any
               structure, material or other matter on the seabed of the
               Sanctuary, is prohibited except as an incidental result of:

                                       111--34









              (i) Anchoring vessels;
              (ii) Traditional fishing operations;
              (iii)Installation of navigation aids;
              (iv) Harbor maintenance in the areas necessarily associated
                   with Federal projects in existence on the effective
                   date of Sanctuary designation, including dredging of
                   entrance channels and repair, replacement or
                   rehabilitation of breakwaters and jetties; or
              (v)  Construction, repair, replacement or rehabilitation of
                   docks or piers.

                        b.   Impact to Resources

              The intent of this prohibition is to protect the resources
         and qualities of the Sanctuary from the harmful effects of
         activities such as, but not limited to, archeological
         excavations, drilling into the seabed, strip mining, laying of
         pipelines and outfalls, ocean mineral extraction (including but
         not limited to sand mining), and dumping of dredge spoils and
         offshore commercial development that may disrupt and/or destroy
         sensitive marine benthic habitats.


                        C.   Impact to Uses

              New activities, for example, development of new breakwaters,
         new applications or requests for offshore commercial development
         projects such as, but not limited to, placement of artificial
         reefs, gravel mining and dredge disposal would be prohibited. No
         new dredge disposal sites will be allowed within the Sanctuary.

              Since harbors are excluded from the Sanctuary boundary, all
         harbor activities within the exclusion zones would be excluded
         from the scope of regulations. The construction of new docks and
         boat ramps in the Sanctuary will require NOAA approval.

              F.   Taking Marine Mammals, Turtles, and Seabirds
                   1.   Status Ouo
                        a.   Existing Management Regime

              The MMPA, ESA, and the MBTA are the principal Federal
         authorities, and the Wildlife Code (RCW 77), the Fisheries Code
         (RCW 75), and the Hydraulic Code (RCW 75.20) are the Washington
         State authorities for the protection and conservation of marine
         wildlife. Agencies involved in the administration of these
         measures include the NMFS, the USFWS, WDF, and WDW.

                        b.   Impact to Resources

              Under this alternative the.MMPA and the ESA would provide
         protection to the marine mammals, turtles and seabirds of the
         Sanctuary--both prohibit the taking of specific species protected
         under those Acts. Taking is defined as meaning: 1) for any sea

                                       111-35









          turtle, marine mammal or seabird listed as either endangered or
          threatened pursuant to the Endangered Species Act, to harass,
          harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect or
          injure, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct; and 2) for
          any other sea turtle, marine mammal or seabird, the term means to
          harass, hunt, capture, kill, collect or injure, or to attempt to
          engage in any such conduct.

               The MBTA codifies a series of conventions between the U.S.
          and Great Britain, Mexico, Japan and the states that comprised
          the former USSR providing protection of the migratory birds, and
          their nests and eggs from taking, killing, possessing, selling
          and other specified forms of exploitation. Such acts are allowed
          only via permits (regarding marine mammals except sea otters, see
          the discussion of fishing for information on the five year
          incidental take exemption for commercial fishermen established by
          the 1988 amendments to the MMPA due to expire in October of
          1993). These resources will continue to be protected on a
          species basis but not under the special purview of the Sanctuary
          management regime which provides the authority to manage uses for
          the protection of the ecosystem.

                         C.   Impact to Uses

               All users of the Sanctuary are prohibited from taking any
          marine mammal or endangered or threatened seabirds and turtles
          unless in possession of a permit. For instance, incidental
          taking of an endangered species in the course of fishing is
          prohibited except under special circumstances. All taking of
          migratorybirds is prohibited by the MBTA without a permit, and
          permits are not granted for taking in the course of fishing.

                    2.   Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)
                         a.   Sanctuary Action

               Taking any marine mammal, turtle or seabird in or above the
               Sanctuary is prohibited, except as authorized by the
               National Marine Fisheries service or the United States Fish
               and Wildlife Service under the authority of the Marine
               Mammal    Protection Act, as amended, (MMPA), 16 U.S.C. 1361
               et geq., the Endangered Species Act, as amended (ESA), 16
               U.S.C.' 1531 gt geq., and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, as
               amended, (MBTA), 16 U.S.C. 703 et seg., or pursuant to any
               treaty with an Indian tribe Ito which the United States is a
               party, provided that the treaty right is exercised in
               accordance with the MMPA, ESA and MBTA.

               Taking is defined as meaning: 1) for any sea turtle, marine
               mammal or seabird listed as either endangered or threatened
               pursuant to the Endangered Species Act, to harass, harm,
               pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect or
               injure, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct; and 2)

                                       111-36









             for any other sea turtle, marine mammal or seabird, the term
             means to harass, hunt, capture, kill, collect or injure, or
             to attempt to engage in any such conduct.

                       b.   Impact to Resources

             The proposed prohibition would overlap with the MMPA, MBTA
        and ESA but strengthen protection by imposing Sanctuary fines for
        violations of the provisions of the Acts. This regulation
        includes all marine mammals, sea turtles, and seabirds in or
        above the Sanctuary.

             This regulation would not affect any users other than those
        already regulated. However, upon violation of this Sanctuary
        regulation the MPRSA (Section 307) allows NOAA to assess civil
        penalties as'high as $100,000 for each violation. The status quo
        sets maximum sanctions as follows: The MBTA sets maximum
        criminal fines at either $500 or $2,000 per violation, depending
        on the violation. The MMPA sets maximum civil penalties at
        $10,000 and maximum criminal penalties at $20,000. The ESA sets
        maximum civil penalties at $500, $12,000, or $25,000 per
        violation, depending on the violation and maximum criminal fines
        at $50,000 (the statutes also provide for imprisonment for
        criminal violations). Thus this Sanctuary regulation may further
        deter violations. In addition, since civil penalties received
        for violation of Sanctuary regulations go back into the Marine
        Sanctuary Program, more directed efforts can be implemented to
        protect these valuable natural resources.

                       C.   Impact to Uses

             As indicated above, this regulation will not affect any uses
        other than those already regulated which include fishing, whale
        watching, overflights and commercial development that may take
        marine mammals, seabirds or turtles.

             G.   Overflights
                  1.   Status Ouo
                       a.   Existing Regulatory Framework

             Overflights are regulated by the Federal Aviation
        Administration (FAA). Current FAA regulations specify minimum
        altitudes over open water, unpopulated and populated areas which
        are codified in 14 CFR Parts 91-95. The only restrictions for
        aircraft flying over the Sanctuary are minimum altitudes of 500
        feet from any person, vessel, vehicle or structure. Helicopters
        may be operated less than 500 feet from the ground if the
        operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on
        the surface. Each person operating a helicopter must comply with
        any routes or altitudes specifically prescribed for helicopters
        by the Administrator of the FAA. The FAA has established a 2000
        ft. advisory for aircraft flying over National Parks, Wildlife

                                      111-37









          Refuges and Wilderness Areas.

               Thus, all aircraft flying over the Sanctuary can legally fly
          unrestricted. When there are military operations within the
          MOA's over the Peninsula, non-military airplanes stay below 1200
          ft. Most aircraft that land at airports on the Peninsula (Sekiu,
          Quileute, Copalis-) are small recreational airtaxi or commuter
          planes.

                         b.   ImRact To Resources

               Compared to areas around more congested population centers,
          the air traffic patterns above the Sanctuary are light. However,
          the minimum altitude requirements do not prevent aircraft from
          disturbing the marine mammal, pinniped and particularly sensitive
          seabird colonies of the Sanctuary. Low level overflights of
          ecologically sensitive coastal areas are know to cause
          disturbance and even fatalities of marine wildlife. Nesting
          colonial seabirds are especially vulnerable to noise disturbance
          from overflights in that a startle reaction may result in egg
          destruction, or vulnerability of chicks to prey. Migrating and
          foraging cetaceans are also known to change their behavior
          patterns when approached by aircraft flying at low levels.

                         C.   Impact To Uses

              Under the status quo, recreational and commuter aircraft
          will continue to fly over the Peninsula and the Sanctuary. There
          will be no regulations of overflights that protect the
          ecologically sensitive habitats of the Sanctuary.

                    2.   Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)
                         a.   Sanctuary Action

              Flying motorized aircraft at less than 2,000 feet above the
          Sanctuary and within one nautical mile of the Flattery Rocks,
          Quillayute Needles, or Copalis National Wildlife Refuges or at
          less than 2,000 feet above the Sanctuary within one nautical mile
          seaward from the coastal boundary of the Sanctuary is prohibited,
          except as necessary for valid law enforcement purposes, for
          activities related to tribal timber operations conducted on
          reservation lands, or to transport persons or supplies to or from
          reservation lands as authorized by a governing body of an Indian
          tribe.


                         b.   Impact to Resources

              The prohibition on overflights below 2000 feet (610 m) is
          designed to limit potential noise impacts, particularly those
          that might startle hauled-out seals and sea lions, sea otters or
          birds nesting along the shoreline margins of the Sanctuary.
          Intrusive overflights during sensitive biological periods will

                                       111-38











        therefore be minimized. The 2000 foot minimum was chosen to be
        consistent with the already existing FAA advisory over the
        National Park and Wildlife Refuge areas adjacent to the
        Sanctuary.

                       C.   ImRact to Uses

             overflights over the Sanctuary within one nautical mile
        seaward of the offshore islands and the coastal boundary will be
        required to remain at least 2000 ft. above ground level.
        Exceptions will be allowed, if necessary, to respond to an
        emergency threatening life, property, or the environment,
        landings or takeoffs from Copalis, Quileute, or Sekiu airports,
        or for valid law enforcement purposes. Further, tribal
        operations that involve overflights to facilitate access to
        tribal lands are exempt from the regulation pursuant to treaty
        rights of access to reservation lands.

             H.   Vessel Traffic
                  1.   Status Ouo
                       a.   Existing Regulatory Regime (Preferred)

             NOAA does not propose to promulgate vessel traffic
        regulations. Vessel traffic, however, will be placed in the
        scope of regulations. This preferred alternative, to give NOAA
        the authority to regulate vessel traffic in the future, but to
        work within the existing management framework with designation,
        will enable NOAA to work with the USCG, Washington State OMS, and
        WDOE on appropriate action to protect the resources of the
        Sanctuary.

             The principal legislation and conventions governing vessel
        traffic include: OPA 90 (P.L. 101-380); MARPOL 73/78 and its
        Annexes I, II, and V; Ports and Waterways Safety Act; .
        International Convention to Prevent Collisions at Sea; and the
        Washington State Oil and Hazardous Substance Spill Prevention and
        Response Act (RCW 90.56, RCW 43.211, and RCW 88.46). The
        responsible agencies are the USCG, Canadian Coast Guard, IMO,
        Washington State OMS, and WDOE (Appendix I). The resource
        assessment discusses the roles and authorities of each agency in
        greater depth.

             There is a CVTMS in the Strait of Juan de Fuca with
        designated inbound and outbound lanes on the U.S. and Canadian
        sides of the international border, respectively. No vessel
        greater than 125,000 dead weight tons may pass east of Port
        Angeles and all tankers passing into Puget Sound must be
        accompanied by a pilot and one (and soon to be two) escort tugs.

             Outside of the Strait of Juan de Fuca there are voluntary
        agreements by maritime associations to coordinate the movement of
        coastwise tanker traffic and tank barge traffic. Under these

                                      111-39









          agreements, tankers transiting along the coast remain at least 50
          nautical miles from shore.unless entering a port of call. Barges
          follow agreed upon lanes within 5 and 10 miles from shore
          pursuant to the crabber-tugboat agreements negotiated yearly.
          The future of these agreed upon lanes, however, is uncertain.

               There are no tugs specifically dedicated for emergency
          response in Puget Sound, the Strait of Juan de Fuca or Grays
          -Harbor.  There have been a number of near misses when vessels
          have lost power either off the coast or in the Straits.
          Likewise, there have been collisions off the Strait of Juan de
          Fuca (Tenyo Maru in 1991) and barg.es punctured off the coast
          (Nestucca, 1988) which have resulted in oil spills. However, the
          Strait of Juan de Fuca Emergency Towing Vessel Task Force has
          been formed and is charged with the mission of establishing,
          maintaining, and operating an emergency towing vessel in the
          Strait of Juan de Fuca.

               NOAA has been working closely with the USCG on
          recommendations to the IMO to designate an area from the
          shoreward boundary of the Sanctuary to 25 nautical miles off the
          outer coast as an Area to be Avoided (ATBA). This ATBA will
          ensure enough time, in the event of an engine failure aboard a
          vessel or other disabling accident, for a tug to intercept the
          possibly eastwardly drifting vessel during a worst-case storm
          before it grounds on the shoreline of the Sanctuary.

               The USCG will recommend to the IMO in June, 1994 that an
          ATBA be established off the western Washington coast. ATBAIs are
          areas within defined limits in which either navigation is
          particularly hazardous or in which it is exceptionally important
          to avoid casualties, and which should be avoided by all ships, or
          certain classes of ships (IMO, 1991). Should the request to
          establish an ATBA not be forwarded to the IMO, or not approved by
          the IMO, NOAA will reconsider it0s options to address vessel
          traffic issues at that time.

               The ATBA would, in effect, create a "buffer zone". This
          zone would provide sufficient time for response vessels to arrive
          on the scene of a maritime emergency. Additionally, creation of
          such a zone would provide time for emergency teams ashore to be
          notified, contingency plans to be activated, and should there be
          a spill, some weathering to occur which would reduce the risk of
          damage to the shoreline.

                         b.   Impact to Resources

               With the projected increase in the number of vessels
          approaching the Strait of Juan de Fuca, it is only a matter of
          time before the coast experiences another vessel related
          accident. Such an event, either collision or a grounding due to
          loss of power or steering control or human error, would likely

                                        111-40









         result in a spill of hazardous material. The rocky intertidal
         areas and the productive food chain off the Pacific coast are
         extremely sensitive to damage by oil or other pollutants. This
         is an area with little coastal access and most booms are
         ineffective during common winter storms.

                        C.   Impact to Uses

              Under the Status Quo, uses will be subject to the outcome of
         the contingency and response planning initiatives by Regional
         Marine Safety Committees of the OMS, WDOE and the USCG. There
         will continue to be no restriction on vessel traffic movement
         along the coast, and barges and foreign vessels will be able to
         transit as close to shore as they choose. However, OMS requires
         all vessels to comply with contingency and prevention plan
         requirements. If a spill occurs, as it has in the past, there
         will be serious consequences to the region. Spills interfere
         with subsistence gathering of intertidal biota, as well as treaty
         and non-treaty fisheries for salmon, groundfish, halibut, and
         shellfish. There are substantial impacts to shore birds,
         seabirds' and marine mammals. Tourism to the coast will also be
         affected.

              The USCG and the OMS are studying various prevention and
         response proposals to increase marine safety in both inshore and
         offshore waters. Escort tugs for tanker traffic inside the
         Strait of Juan de Fuca, tanker free zones, contingency plans,
         etc., have all been considered and regulations have been
         implemented.

                   2.   Sanctuary Alternative
                        a.   Sanctuary Action

              NOAA will regulate vessel traffic either by prohibiting all
         vessels, or vessels carrying hazardous substances, from
         transiting the Sanctuary, or by creating defined vessel traffic
         lanes for vessels to follow when transiting along the coast.

                        b.   Impact to Resources

              Sanctuary regulations would ensure that Sanctuary resources
         are protected from vessel related incidences occurring as a
         result of domestic vessel traffic. Regulations would likely
         apply to ships carrying hazardous cargo, appropriate distances
         from shore, contingency plans, and vessel and crew standards.
         However, Sanctuary regulations would have no applicability to
         foreign vessels.

                        C.   Impact to Uses

              A prohibition on vessel traffic within the Sanctuary, or the
         regulation of vessel traffic within the Sanctuary, can seriously

                                       111-41









           undermine the ongoing efforts to address vessel safety, cause
           undue economic hardship to a point where the costs outweigh the
           benefits, or increase the risk of collisions at sea. Further,
           another management layer will cause added confusion to an already
           complicated but well coordinated vessel management regime.

               This is an alternative that highlights the delicate balance
           between too much and too little vessel traffic regulation. The
           entrance to the Strait is a highly congested area due to the
           presence of tankers, freighters, tugs and barges, and fishing
           vessels. Any regulations or management actions that further
           restrict vessel traffic on the approaches to the Strait,
           especially if promulgated by multiple authorities, will cause
           greater risk of an accident, especially given the multilingual
           profile of mariners entering the Strait.

               A prohibition on vessel traffic, or establishment of
           specific lanes along the coast will also minimize the flexibility
           of barges to negotiate the area in various weather conditions.
           At a certain point, decreasing flexibility among mariners, and
           complicating the management regime increases the risk of an
           accident and consequent damage to Sanctuary resources.

               I.   Fishing, Kelp Harvesting, Aguaculture
                    1.   Status Quo (Preferred)
                         a.   Existing Regulatory Framework

               Fishing and aquaculture are not listed in the scope of
           regulations. Principal fishing legislation and regulations
           include: Washington Fish and Game Code, Fishery Management Plans
           (FMP's) promulgated pursuant to the MFCMA (16 U.S.C. ï¿½ï¿½ 1801 et
           geg (Groundfish Management Plan, Salmon Management Plan),
           International Pacific-Salmon Treaty, and the International
           Halibut Treaty, and the Boldt Decision. The implementing
           authorities include the NMFS, the PFMC, the WDF, the WDNR, and
           the International Halibut Commission. (Appendix I). Kelp
           harvesting, however, is in the scope of regulations.

                         b.   Impact to Resources

               The fishery management regime is highly coordinated and
           extremely complex. The harvest of fish stocks are coordinated
           between Oregon, California, Alaska, Canada, and within Washington
           State, between treaty (among 23 -tribes along the outer coast,
           Strait of Juan de Fuca and Puget Sound) and non-treaty fishers
           (sport and commercial). The management regime for salmon
           allocates harvest by fish originating from specific watersheds.
           Management coordinates hatchery production and monitors the
           status of the weakest.natural runs originating from specific
           river systems.

               Currently, there is no salmon or shellfish aquaculture

                                        111-42









         occurring within the Sanctuary. However, there are numerous
         tribal and state operated hatcheries that release salmon into
         streams entering the Sanctuary.

              There is very limited kelp harvesting occurring within the
         Sanctuary. The Lummi and Klallam Tribes harvest small amounts of
         Kelp near Neah Bay for a limited herring-roe-on-kelp fishery.
         There is interest in commercially harvesting kelp in the Strait
         of Juan de Fuca and the WDNR is working on a kelp harvesting
         management plan. Sea grasses and kelp resources are under the
         jurisdiction of the WDNR.

              Fishing activities in the Sanctuary are extensive in the
         Strait of Juan de Fuca and its approaches. Commercial and
         recreational salmon and halibut fishing occurs along the coast
         and in the approaches of the Strait. Sport fishing is
         concentrated around Neah Bay, Pillar Point at the mouth of the
         Pyscht River and off Freshwater Bay at Observatory Point. Salmon
         are harvested off the coast using the trolling method and in the
         Strait of Juan de Fuca by gillnets and purse seines. Halibut are
         harvested by hook and line. Significant halibut grounds are
         located in the Strait of Juan de Fuca. The halibut quota
         established by the International Halibut Commission is divided
         among treaty and non-treaty recreational fishers. Groundfish are
         harvested by trawling.

              Invertebrates are harvested in the Strait of Juan de Fuca
         and along the outer coast in the intertidal and subtidal areas.
         Treaty members harvest barnacles, chitons, sea urchins, sea
         cucumbers and other invertebrates as part of their subsistence
         economies. sea urchins are harvested by non-treaty commercial
         divers around Neah Bay and managed by WDF through rotation of
         beds. Sea cucumbers are harvested in the Strait in the
         commercial dive, limited beam trawl, and treaty subsistence
         fisheries. Sea cucumbers are also managed through the rotation
         of beds in the Strait of Juan de Fuca.   octopus are harvested
         from the Strait subtidally by recreational divers, tribal
         subsistence fishers and incidental to other dive fisheries.
         Harvests are only permitted if done by hand, or with instruments
         that do not penetrate the skin.

              The FMP's are drafted by the PFMC. The FMP's establish
         catch limits for groundfish and specifies the duration of the
         fishing season and catch and size limits for salmon. Commercial
         fishing-gear restrictions are specified for both the groundfish
         and salmon fisheries. Trolling and trawling are the only
         permissible gear on the outer coast for salmon and groundfish and
         set nets, gill nets, trolling and purse seines are permissible in
         the Strait of Juan de Fuca for salmon, and trawling for
         groundfish. Research has shown that the impacts of these gears
         on the benthic communities is minimal since trawls are designed
         to be used on soft bottom habitats, and to roll over rocky

                                       111-43










           substrate. Pots are used to harvest crab.

                The MFCMA provides for enforcement of FMP's prepared by the
           PFMC and approved by the Secretary of Commerce after review by
           the NMFS. Fishery regulations are enforced by the USCG, NMFS and
           WDF.

                The.1988 Amendments to the MMPA established a five year
           exemption for commercial fishermen to take marine mammals (except
           sea otters) incidental to their fishing activities. Marine
           mammals, except sea otters, may be taken incidentally to
           commercial fishing pursuant to 16 U.S.C. ï¿½ 1383a until October
           1993, after which rulemaking pursuant to 16 U.S.C. ï¿½ï¿½ 1371, 1373,
           and 1374 may be required. The amendments require the NMFS to
           establish an exemption, observer, and reporting system to
           document incidental captures of marine mammals by fishermen that
           are expected to take marine mammals. Based on reports of the
           fishermen, the NMFS is to submit to Congress its recommendations
           to manage.commercial fishing activities in a way that reduces
           adverse impacts to marine mammals. The interim exemptions will
           expire in October, 1993. NMFS, the fishing industry and
           environmental groups are currently developing a permanent
           management plan. The revised management plan will address the
           Makah Tribe's treaty' right to hunt whales and marine mammals.

                The taking of sea otters was specifically excluded from the
           five year interim incidental take exemption for commercial
           fishing operations. During the interim period, intentional
           lethal taking is prohibited for Alaskan sea otters (which is the
           stock off Washington) rather than a total prohibition (which only
           applies to southern (California) sea otters) (50 CFR 229.4(b)(2)
           and 50 CFR 229.6(c)(6)).

                In general, fishing activit- is extensively regulated to
                                           Y
           ensure continuous production of fish stocks for long-term harvest
           and to reduce potential conflict with marine mammals, seabirds,
           and the benthic communities.


                          C.   Impact to Uses

                Fishing in the Sanctuary would be regulated other than under
           the Sanctuary regulatory regime by Federal and state authorities
           of competent jurisdiction. ("Fishing regulation" means a
           regulations that is directed specifically at fishing activities
           or fishing vessels. This does not include a regulation that is
           applicable to all types of vessels or activities.')

                Under the status quo fishing would continue without any
           additional regulation under the Sanctuary regulatory regime. As
           a result of other sanctuary regulations aimed at improving water
           quality and fish habitat it is expected that the Sanctuary would
           have a positive impact on fishing activities.

                                        111-44








              The Sanctuary regulations include four regulations that (if
         written without the exemption) could potentially have an indirect
         effect on fishing activities. However, each of the four
         regulations specifically exempts traditional fishing activities
         from the scope of the prohibitions to the extent consistent with
         other existing state and Federal regulations.

              The four regulations are: (1) discharges and deposits
         (including those from fishing vessels) are prohibited except for
         stated discharges and deposits including ones intended to allow
         traditional fishing activities; (2) moving, removing, or injuring
         or attempting to move, remove, or injure a Sanctuary historical
         resource is prohibited, except resulting incidentally from
         traditional fishing operations; (3) drilling through, dredging or
         otherwise altering the seabed or the Sanctuary or constructing,
         placing or abandoning any structure, material or other matter on
         the seabed of the Sanctuary is prohibited, except resulting
         incidentally from traditional fishing operations i.e., the use of
         traps and bottom trawls, and gear recovery; and (4) taking of
         marine mammals, reptiles, and seabirds is prohibited, except as
         permitted by regulations promulgated under the MMPA, the ESA, and
         the MBTA. Thus, each regulation otherwise potentially affecting
         traditional fishing activities is specifically designed to
         exclude such activities from the effect of the regulation.
         However, if in the future NOAA determines that these exemptions
         are resulting in injury to Sanctuary resources or qualities from
         aquaculture, kelp harvesting or traditional fishing activities,
         changes to the Sanctuary regulations may be undertaken pursuant
         to the Administrative Procedure Act's (APA) notice-and-comment
         rulemaking process and the applicable requirements of NEPA and
         the MPRSA.

              Aquaculture activities would also be unaffected by the
         regulatory regime. NOAA will work with the WDF and DNR and kelp
         harvesting and aquaculture user groups if new activities are
         proposed or increases in current levels to determine the impacts,
         if any, of the activity on the resources and qualities of the
         Sanctuary.

              There are many existing regulations and restrictions on
         fishing activities in the Sanctuary designed to protect the long-
         term health of fisheries and other resources and qualities of the
         region. Therefore, NOAA does not believe it is necessary to
         promulgate any additional regulations.

              In its evaluation of the issue, NOAA considered whether,
         under the present regulatory structure, sufficient protection for
         Sanctuary resources existed. NOAA has determined, after
         consultation with the USFWS, NMFS, PFMC, WDF, and DNR that
         fishing in the Sanctuary, including fishing for shellfish and
         invertebrates, shall not be regulated as part of the Sanctuary
         management regime. Fish resources of the Sanctuary are already

                                       111-45









          extensively managed by existing authorities and NOAA does not
          envision a fishery management role for the Sanctuary at this
          time. Instead the Sanctuary will provide research results and
          recommendations to existing fishery management agencies in order
          to enhance the protection of fishery and other Sanctuary
          resources.


               Furthermore, in its decision advising NOAA to proceed with
          the preparation of a DEIS/MP for the Sanctuary, the PFMC also
          recommended that the regulation of fishery resources remain under
          the jurisdiction of the State of Washington, the NMFS, the
          Tribes, and the PFMC.

                    2.   Sanctuary Alternative
                         a.   Sanctuary Action

               If NOAA were to consider regulating fishing in the Sanctuary
          it would first provide the PFMC with an opportunity to prepare
          draft regulations for fisheries within the EEZ should the need
          arise to protect Sanctuary resources and qualities from specific
          fishing activities. Any changes to Sanctuary regulations would
          be undertaken pursuant to the APA's notice-and comment rulemaking
          process and the applicable requirements of the NEPA and MPRSA.
          In the future the Sanctuary will work with fishermen and
          management agencies including the WDF, the PFMC, and the coastal
          tribes to determine any additional management measures that may
         .be necessary to protect the resources and qualities of the
          Sanctuary. Such actions will be submitted in draft for public
          review and comment on any specific measures taken to address
          threats from fishing to Sanctuary resources and qualities.
          Finally an MOA has been prepared between NMFS and NOS regarding
          fisheries and protection of Sanctuary resources (Appendix J).

                         b.   Imgact to Resources

               Actions promulgated under this authority will be targeted at
          protecting specific resources, qualities and habitats shown to be
          injured by fishing activities, aquaculture or kelp harvesting.
          Such injury could include, but is not limited to, destruction of
          benthic habitat from bottom trawling, incidental take of marine
          mammals and seabirds from gill nets, evidence of reductions in
          fish stock size,.degradation in water quality and disruption of
          the seabed from aquaculture and negative impacts to sea otter
          habitat during kelp harvesting operations.

                         C.   Impact to Uses

               Under this alternative NOAA will work with affected fishing,
          aquaculture and kelp harvesting entities to assess the level of
          impact of their activities. Actions will be taken to minimize
          negative consequences while at the same time addressing any
          threat to Sanctuary resources and qualities.

                                        111-46









             J.   Naval Inert Bombing Practice at Sealion Roc
                  1.   Status Ouo
                       a.   Existing-Regulatory Framework

             The Navy voluntarily ceased practice bombing activities over
        Sealion Rock. On August 18, 1993, the Secretary of Interior
        rescinded the permit authorizing the Navy to use Sealion Rock as
        an alternate practice bombing site. Therefore, the Navy may not
        use Sealion Rock for practice bombing exercises unless it
        receives a new authorization from the Secretary of the Interior.

                       b.   Impact to Resources

             The Navy's past bombing activities over Sealion Rock had
        the greatest impact on seabirds and marine mammals. seabirds and
        marine mammals exhibit startle reactions to the loud noise of the
        A6 bombers. When seabirds flush from their nests in a startle
        reaction they often knock their chicks from nests, leave them
        vulnerable to prey by other birds such as gulls, or in the case
        of common murres which hold their egg in their feet, drop their
        eggs. All three reactions are extremely detrimental to seabird
        populations which are vulnerable to population impacts because
        they are colonial, mature late in their development, and produce
        only a few offspring at a time. Most of the colonial seabird
        populations in the Sanctuary are showing signs of serious decline
        due to a variety of factors. Perhaps most indicative of this
        decline are the common murres, whose population has plummeted
        from approximately 30,000 in 1980 to approximately 3,000 in 1992
        (Table 7).

             Marine mammals also react in a startle response in such a
        way as to endanger the young. When startled, pinnipeds stampede
        into the water often crushing the young in the process.

                       C.   Impact to Uses

             Under this alternative the Navy may not use Sealion Rock
        without a new authorization for the Secretary of the Interior.

                  2.   Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)
                       a.   Sanctuary Action

             The Navy's use of Sealion Rock as a practice bombing target
        is determined to be incompatible with Sanctuary designation.
        Therefore, the Sanctuary will prohibit all bombing activities
        within the Sanctuary. Further, the regulations will provide that
        no exemption from this prohibition may be issued.

                       b.   Impact to Resources

             This prohibition will provide maximum protection to the
        seabirds and marine mammals by ensuring that they are undisturbed

                                      111-47













                                                                                                                                                                         0 q
                                                                                                                                                                         0 su
                                                                                                                                                                         rt-V
                                                                                                                                                                         m 1-i
                                                                                                                                                                           m


                                                                                                                                                                         0
                                                                                                                                                                         0)
                                                                                                                                                                         EQ
                                                                                     Y E A R                                                                             rt, z
                          COLONY                                                                                                                  -
                                                                                                                                                                         0
                          LOCATION          1979     1980     1981     1982     1983     1984     1985 1986         1987     1988     1989     1990                      1-t
                                                                                                                                                                           (D

                          White Rock          120                        630                                           55      --       --      450 195                  En0

                          Jagged Isl.          --       --      155       --       --       --      655       --     -800     450      480      250 2S 2S70
                                                                                                                                                                         jo0
                          Petrel Isl.         480    1600        --      .855   1200       620       --      350    1480                --        --                     rt
                                                                                                                                                                         0
                                                                                                                                                                         :j0
                          Quillayute                                                                                                                                     . z
                          Needles           1555     1590       300      900       30       --      175      450    2370     2-650    1870     2210 jq50 A120            H 9
                          Rounded
                          Isl.              2130     3435       850     2180      200      a00      300       --       --                                                %0
                                                                                                                                                                         I (D
                  I       middle Etock         --       --       --       --       --             1800       450
                                                                                                                                                                         ko
                  00      Willoughby                                                                                                                                     tj rt
                          Isl.              5300     3115      3800     5270      850                --       40       --      35       200       15 119'

                          Split Rock        9150     3075      8350   10450        --               100       --      450      50       75        -- ISO                   J.
                                                                                                                                                                           0
                          Point
                          Grenville
                          Isla.             3800     3595      1650     3640      910     1050      300     1600      450      50       75       125 qZ5'     SOO
                                                                                                                                                                           (D
                                                                                                                                                                           m
                          Grenville                                                                                                                                        a
                          Arch              8985     5825      3250     5015       --       --       50       15     5050      250      75       850 Z5        50          H-
                                                                                                                                                                           ts
                          TOTALS            3.1520   22235    18355    28940     3190     2470     3380     2905    10655     3895     3675     3900
                                                                                                                                                                           A
                                                                                                                                                                           rHCf -
                                                                                                                                                                           rt
                                                                                                                                                                           m
                                                                                                                                                                           w

                                                                                                                                                                           0


                                                                                                                                                                           rt
                                                                                                                                                                           @r
                                                                                                                                                                           m









        during the most sensitive time in their ecology.

                       C.   Impact to Uses

             This alternative.could place an operational inconvenience on
        the Navy. The prohibition on bombing activities within the
        Sanctuary will provide a more positive experience for those
        individuals living on the Peninsula or visiting the Olympic
        National Park, and Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary.

















































                                      111-49









          III Section: Management Alternatives
               A.   Introduction

               Three management alternatives were identified and considered
          in terms of (l) resource protection, research, and education
          requirements, and (2) cost-effectiveness. The Management Plan
          (Part V) includes a detailed discussion of the proposed Sanctuary
          management regime regarding resource protection, research,
          education and administration.


               B.   Alternatives
                    1.   Status Ouo

               Under this alternative protection and management of the
          Sanctuary will remain entirely under the existing regime of
          Federal, state and local authorities, and existing research and
          education facilities and programs with no NOAA presence.

                    2    Sanctuary Management Alternative 1 (Preferred)

               Under this alternative, NOAA would establish an independent
          management and administrative system for the Sanctuary in a
          headquarters that is managed and.operated directly by NOAA. The
          location of the headquarters will initially be in Seattle at
          NOAA's Sand Point Facility. Staffing will initially include a
          NOAA Sanctuary and operations manager and phase in an assistant
          manager, research and education coordinator and a joint position
          of an interpreter/enforcement official.

               The office would coordinate directly and actively with other
          state and local agencies in decision making and implementation of
          Sanctuary regulations. The priority in the first two years would
          be to establish the Sanctuary Steering Committee and initiate a
          comprehensive planning initiative to identify research, education
          and administrative priorities and siting of offices on the
          Olympic Peninsula.

                    3.   Sanctuary Management Alternative 2

               This alternative establishes Sanctuary headquarters on the
          Peninsula soon after designation (within six months) and
          immediately provides full-staffing in the positions described for
          Sanctuary management alternative 1. The priority of this
          alternative is immediate full staffing and siting of headquarters
          and satellite offices immediatel- after designation rather than
                                          Y
          immediate investment in a watershed planning initiative. The
          feasibility of this alternative depends upon the availability of
          funding.






                                        111-50









        PART IV:               Environmental Consecuences of Alternatives










                                              TABLE OF CONTENTS                   Page


                Section: Boundary Alternatives        ...........................    5
                A.    Introduction   .........................................       5
                B.    Boundary Alternative I     ...............................     5
                C.    Boundary Alternative 2     ...............................     8
                D.    Boundary Alternative 3     ..............................     14
                E.    Boundary Alternative 4     ..............................     19
                F.    Boundary Alternative 5     ...............................    31

                Section: ReOulatory Alternatives         ........................   42
                A.    Introduction   ........................................       42
                B.    Oil,  Gas, and Mineral Activities      ....................   43
                      1.    Status Quo  .....................................       43
                            a.    Consequence of Impact to Resources       ........ 43
                            b.    Consequence of Impact to Uses      .............  60
                      2.    Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)       ..............  61
                            a.    Consequence of Impact to Resources       ........ 61
                            b.    Consequence of Impact to Uses      .............  61
                C.    Discharges or Deposits     ..............................     62
                      1.    Status Quo  .....................................       62
                            a.    Consequence of Impact to Resources       ........ 62
                                  (1)   Discharges from Point Sources      ........ 63
                                  (2)   Discharges from Non-Point Sources        .... 63
                                  (3)   Hazardous Waste, oil and trash
                                        disposal   .............................    63
                                  (4)   ocean Dumping    ........................   64
                            b.    Consequence of Impact to Uses      .............  65
                      2.    Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)       ..............  65
                            a.    Consequence of Impact to Resources       ........ 65
                            b.    Consequence of Impact to Uses      .............  65
                D.    Historical Resources     ................................     67
                      1.    Status Quo  .....................................       67
                            a.    Consequence of Impact to Resources       ........ 67
                            b.    Consequence of Impact to Uses      .............  68
                      2.    Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)       ..............  68
                            a.    Consequence of Impact to Resources       ........ 68
                            b.    Consequence of Impact to Uses      .............  69
                E.    Alteration of, or Construction on, the Seabed          ....... 70
                      1.    Status Quo  .....................................       70
                            a.    Consequence of Impact to Resources       ........ 70
                            b.    Consequence of Impact to Uses      .............  70
                      2.    Sanctuary Alternative     ..........................    70
                            a.    Consequence of Impact to Resources       ........ 70
                            b.    Consequence of Impact to Uses      .............  70
                F.    Taking Marine Mammals,Turtles and Seabirds           ......... 76
                      1.    Status Quo  .....................................       76
                            a.    Consequence of Impact to Resources       ........ 76
                            b.    Consequence of Impact to Uses      .............  77
                      2.    Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)       ..............  77
                            a.    Consequence of Impact to Resources       .....  o..77

                                              IV-1









                            b.    Consequence of Impact to Uses    .............  77
                 G.    Overflights   ..........................................   78
                       1.   Status Quo   ......................................   78
                            a.    Consequence of Impact to Resources     ........ 78
                            b.    Consequence of Impact to Uses    .............  78
                       2.   Sanctuary Alternative    ..........................   79
                            a.    Consequence of Impact to Resources     ........ 79
                            b.    Consequence of Impact to Uses    .............  79
                 H.    Vessel Traffic   .......................................   79
                       1.   Status Quo (Preferred)    .........................   79
                            a.    Consequence of Impact to Resources     ........ 79
                            b.    Consequence of Impact to Uses    .............  79
                       2.   Sanctuary Alternative    ..........................   89
                            a.    Consequence of Impact to Resources     ........ 89
                            b.    Consequence of Impact to Uses    .............  89
                 I.    Fishing, Kelp harvesting and Aquaculture      ............ 89
                       1.   Status Quo (Preferred)    .........................   89
                            a.    Consequence of Impact to Resources     ........ 89
                            b.    Consequence of Impact to Uses    .............  89
                       2.   Sanctuary Alternative    ..........................   90
                            a.    Consequence of Impact to Resources     ........ 90
                            b.    Consequence of Impact to Uses    .............  90
                 J.    Navy Bombing of Sealion Rock     ........................  91
                       1.   Status Quo   ......................................   91
                            a.    Consequence of Impact to Resources     ........ 91
                            b.    Consequence of Impact to Uses    .............  91
                       2.   Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)      .............. 91
                            a.    Consequence of Impact to Resources     ........ 91
                            b.    Consequence of Impact to Uses    .............  91

           III. Section     Management Alternative Consequences     .......      ..91
                 A.    Consequences of Status Quo    ..........................   91
                       1.   Enforcement   ....................................    91
                       2.   Research and Education    .........................   94
                 B.    Consequences of Sanctuary Alternative 1     .............  94
                       1.   Enforcement  ......  ..............................   95
                       2.   Research and Education    .........................   95
                 C.    Consequences of Sanctuary Alternative 2     .............  95
                       1.   Enforcement   .....................................   95
                       2.   Research and Education    .........................   95
           IV. Section:     Unavoidable Adverse Environmental or
                            Socioeconomic Effects    ..........................   96

           V.    Section:   Relationship Between Short-term Uses of the
                            Environment and the Maintenance and Enhancement
                            of Long-term Productivity     ......................  97








                                              IV-2











         ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF ALTERNATIVES

             This section evaluates the environmental consequences of
         each boundary, regulatory and management alternatives for the
         Sanctuary including the status quo (no action). The consequences
         of each action are discussed in the context of the predicted
         impacts to the affected activities and existing jurisdictions,
         and resources and qualities of the Sanctuary.

             Appendix C evaluates each boundary alternative with respect
         to the distribution of colonial seabirds, marine mammals,
         invertebrates and fish. Because the study conducted by the
         Strategic Environmental Assessment Branch of NOAA was undertaken
         prior to the publication of the DEIS/MP, the Strait of Juan de
         Fuca is not part of the analysis presented in Appendix C.
         Pursuant to comments on the DEIS/MP, NOAA has undertaken a
         comprehensive analysis of the resources and uses of the Strait of
         Juan de Fuca. This analysis is presented in the following
         discussion of boundary alternative 4.





































                                       IV-3










          I.   Section: Boundary Alternatives
               A.   Introduction

               The five boundary alternatives analyzed will protect
          resources and attributes of the ecosystem off the Olympic Coast
          to varying degrees of aerial extent. Each boundary alternative
          is described on the basis of the resources and human uses
          encompassed by the alternative. The environmental consequences
          of each boundary alternative are discussed in the context of the
          preferred resource protection and management regime.

               B.   Boundary Alternative 1.

               Boundary alternative 1 extends from Koitlah Point just west
          of Neah Bay to Pt. Grenville and seaward to the three nautical
          mile limit of state jurisdiction. This boundary encompasses an
          area of 315 sq. nautical miles. This boundary alternative focuses
          primarily on land/sea interactions and the protection of seabird
          colonies and pinniped haul-out sites. Most of the coast between
          Cape Flattery and Point Grenville is dominated by steep cliffs
          rising abruptly from shore 50 to 300 feet above a wave-cut
          platform. Interspersed among these cliffs are pocket beaches.
          Small islands, sea stacks, and rocks dot the coastal and offshore
          waters. Most of the rocks and islands are included within the
          boundary of the National Wildlife Refuges and Olympic National
          Park.

               There is very little human development along this coastal
          boundary. The Makah, Quileute, Hoh and Quinault Tribes have
          reservations adjacent to the coastline and the remainder of the
          coastline is under the jurisdiction of the Olympic National Park
          and Washington State (between Pt. Grenville and Copalis Beach).
          The coastal area of the Makah and Quinault Reservations encompass
          the largest coastal areas of all four tribes, and their coastal
          regions adjacent to this boundary alternative are dedicated
          wilderness areas. Within the watersheds that drain into this
          coastal boundary, the two principal land uses are recreation
          associated with the Olympic Nationa*1 Park) and timbering
          operations. There is anecdotal evidence that upland forest
          practices are pressuring coastal resources such as kelp beds and
          estuarine areas. The largest sources of freshwater discharges
          are the Quinault, Queets, Hoh and Soleduck rivers.

               Many tourists visiting the Olympic National Park travel to
          the coastal areas to participate in sports fishing, birding,
          hiking, kayaking, and razor clam digging. Tourism is
          economically important to the tribes. The tribes also depend on
          the coastal and intertidal resources for subsistence hunting and
          gathering. Degradation of the coastal environments would
          severely impact tribal economies.

               Treaty and non-treaty fisheries are important human

                                        IV-4









         activities in this boundary. Treaty fishers use gillnets in the
         mouths of the coastal streams to harvest salmon returning to
         their spawning grounds. Treaty and non treaty fisheries for
         salmon, groundfi.sh and shellfish occur offshore.

              There are numerous archeological resources within this
         boundary which are significant to the coastal tribes. These
         include burial grounds, and other areas of cultural and spiritual
         significance. The Makah Archeological Museum documents some of
         the tribal archeological history of the area. Many artifacts
         recovered from the recently excavated Ozette Village are
         preserved and displayed at the museum. There have been numerous
         shipwrecks on the rocks and islands, however most have
         disintegrated from the high wave energy in this region. There is
         evidence that during the period of the last glaciation, there
         were human settlements seaward of the present day coastline.
         However, boundary alternative 1 excludes much of the region
         believed to contain offshore archeological resources.

              Boundary alternative 1 includes Sealion Rock. The Navy has
         permission from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to use Sealion
         Rock as a practice bombing target. Whidbey Island and Pacific
         Naval Fleet A6 bombers drop inert bombs on the island. While the
         Navy has voluntarily ceased their practice bombing activities
         over Sealion Rock, their ability to use Sealion Rock in the
         future depends upon the outcome of a lawsuit brought against the
         Navy and the USFWS. The lawsuit addresses the legality of the
         permit issued by the Department of Interior under which the Navy
         is authorized to use Sealion Rock.

              There is minimal vessel traffic in this region due to the
         rocky nature of the shoreline and strong wave action. There may
         be an occasional tug and barge transiting the coast close to
         shore where there are few rocks, but most are likely to traverse
         seaward of the refuges. This boundary precludes the Sanctuary
         from addressing vessel traffic which, although predominately
         outside of 3 miles, threatens the coastal ecosystem.

              The benthos off the coast is predominately sand which
         originates north of Point Grenville from sediments transported by
         the Strait of Juan de Fuca and upland drainage basins. South of
         Pt. Grenville sediments originate from drainage basins emptying
         into the Columbia River. Overlaying the bedrock along many areas
         of the coast are gravel deposits laid down by glacial streams
         during glaciation of the Olympic Mountains. The most extensive
         gravel deposits are found off Cape Flattery and just north of the
         Quinault River. Boundary alternative 1 would encompass the
         deposits off the Quinault River, but exclude those off Cape
         Flattery.

              Extensive macrocystis kelp beds extend from Koitlah Point to
         Cape Alava and into the Strait of Juan de Fuca to observatory

                                        IV-5









          Point and boundary alternative I encompasses that portion of kelp
          on the outer coast. There is anecdotal evidence that in the
          recent past the kelp beds extended further south than Cape Alava.
          High sedimentation is believed among some to be the cause of the
          decline in kelp biomass. A lack of monitoring activities along
          the outer coast makes it difficult to substantiate this
          observation. Boundary alternative 1 includes the kelp resources
          along the outer coast, but excludes the extensive and diverse
          kelp beds located in the Strait of Juan de Fuca.

               NOAA's analysis demonstrates that boundary alternative 1 is
          one of the least significant areas in the study are with respect
          to total aggregate fish resources (see Appendix C). Some
          commercial salmon, crab, and recreational groundfish fisheries
          occurs in this boundary, however significant fish resources and
          harvesting areas are excluded. Boundary alternative 1 includes
          much of the recreational fishing areas for bottomfish, some of
          the recreational areas for salmon, and excludes most of the
          halibut fishing grounds. This boundary alternative also excludes
          the seaward extent of the commercial salmon fishing grounds.

               Boundary alternative 1 rates most significant with respect
          to invertebrates (Appendix C). This analysis, however, does not
          include the Strait of Juan de Fuca which has remarkable subtidal
          invertebrate communities. In fact, the intertidal areas of the
          Olympic Peninsula represents some of the most diverse intertidal
          habitats in the world. The intertidal habitats have been studied
          extensively at Tatoosh Island by researchers from several
          Universities.

               When compared to the other boundary alternatives, Boundary
          alternative I is significant for offering haul out sites and
          rookery areas for pinnipeds, but, excludes many of the haulout
          sites in the Strait of Juan de Fuca. It is, however, one of the
          least significant boundary alternatives for marine cetaceans.
          This boundary does not encompass the foraging habitats or
          migration routes of,the marine mammals and thus is incomplete
          from an ecosystem perspective.

               This boundary alternative includes most of the colonial
          seabird nesting sites in the study area, and some of the largest
          number of seabird colonies in the contiguous United States. A
          small number of colonies exist slightly east of Koitlah Point
          outside of this boundary alternative. Boundary alternative 1 is
          limited in that it does not include the foraging areas of the
          seabirds. Seabirds such as the storm petrel forage for days at
          the shelf edge during the nesting season. Other seabirds forage
          at varying distances from the nesting sites. Thus, this boundary
          alternative offers no protection for these critical foraging and
          nesting habitats from the impacts of oil and gas exploration and
          development, or vessel traffic accidents. The coastal area of
          this boundary alternative is remote with few access points. This

                                        IV@-6









         remoteness, coupled with the extreme sensitivity of rocky
         intertidal habitat, pinnipeds, and colonial seabirds, makes this
         coastal region particularly vulnerable to impacts from offshore
         development.

              The few airstrips along the coastal boundaries of the
         Sanctuary include the Copalis Beach air strip (accessible at low
         tide when landings and takeoffs are not obstructed by driftwood),
         and an unstaffed airstrip at Quileute. One cargo plane daily
         uses the Quileute airstrip Monday through Friday. There are 40
         additional operations per week at the Quileute airport. There is
         no radar coverage below 3000 ft and therefore no statistics
         available on the number of aircraft flying over the Sanctuary.
         Most aircraft are recreational craft or small air taxis which are
         believed to observe a 2000 ft. advisory over the National Park
         and National Wildlife Refuges., There are no altitude
         restrictions over the Sanctuary waters. During the nesting and
         breeding season, low flying aircraft present a threat to
         Sanctuary resources. This boundary alternative will protect the
         colonial seabirds and mammals of the Sanctuary by prohibiting
         overflights less than 2000 ft.

              In summary, boundary alternative I surrounds some of the
         significant features that one can see from the shore, i.e.,
         seabird nesting colonies, pinniped haul-out sites, part of the
         cetacean migration corridor, some of the kelp habitat, much of
         the rocky intertidal habitats and pocket beaches. It is,
         however, severely limited in encompassing the entire ecosystem in
         that is does not protect the extent of these resources, including
         those that exist further offshore and into the Strait of Juan de
         Fuca. This larger ecosystem supports the biological features
         visible from shore. This boundary alternative also provides no
         buffer against activities that could seriously impact the coastal
         resources.


              Figures 59-62 depict boundary alternative 1 in relation to
         fisheries, marine mammal haulout sites, kelp habitat, seabird
         colonies and foraging areas, and human uses other than shipping.

              C.   Boundary Alternative 2

              Boundary alternative 2 extends the seaward boundary of
         Boundary alternative 1 to the 50 fathom isobath and the southern
         boundary to Copalis Beach. It encompasses an area of
         approximately 1100 square nautical miles. It has all the
         features of boundary alternative 1 but includes more fishing
         grounds including all the crab fishing areas, and more of the
         commercial salmon and groundfish fishing grounds. When
         considering the relative density of fish species in the study
         area, based on commercial and recreational harvests, boundary
         alternative 2 contains approximately 27% of the density of fish
         in the study area (Appendix D). There is active vessel traffic

                                        IV-7
















                                126*10' 126*0(Y                           126W                          125*00,                         124*30'                        124*00'                        123o3W 123*20'
                              48*45'                                                                                                                                                                                W45'
                                                                                                                                                                        It 11 t
                                                                      J





                              48W                                                                                                       -                                                                           48'30'
                                                                                                                                        0      -4.



                                                   00
                                                                                                                                                                                                  @_'Oo
                                             4
                                             Sao---





                                                                                                                                                                        A
                            48*00' -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                    4eW
                                               BOUN
                                           ALTERN T'IVE
                                                      NO. 1




                                                                                                                                                       J



                                                                                               -s

                            4730' -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                    47*30'



                                                                                                           (,NyoN
                                                                                                 uu'%%O@ ov@

                                                            LEGEND -
                                                    FISHING AREAS


                                                       Commercia] Finfish


                                                       Sport Finfish

                            47*W -
                                             09        Razor Clam Beaches                                                                                                                                           47W
                                                       Pink Shrimp T@awhng                                                                                              ri-,r

                                                       Crabbing


                                                       Sh.Ufh Aq.a(!.It.,,.







                            46W -                                                                                                                                                                                   46'30'
                                                  UNITED STATES-WEST COAST
                                                                WASHINGTON
                                                 PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                            NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY
                                                    1       0       NAUUQI@ Kall@'
                                                                                                                                   P    -
                           46* 12'                                                                                                                                                                                  46'1V
                               126*1V 121r00'                                                           125*00'                         124*30'                        1?,4'00'                     123*30' 123*20'




                  Figure 59. Boundary Alternative 1 in Relation to Fisheries.

                                                                                                                      IV--8
















                            126* 1V 1WW                               125*W                          ww                             1?W30'                          124*W                          123*30' 128*W
                          ,045'                                                   -777
                                                                                                                                                                                                                  045'

                                                                f,-



                                                                             J  @/'
                          48'X                           50                                                                                                                                                       48o3O'




                                                                                                                                                                    ZW                                   10,
                                                                                                                         lee.

                                               20o
                                              3oc
                                         140o
                                          soo-                                                                                                                                5o



                                                 P",


                                                                                                                                                                                                                  ww
                          48OW
                                            BOUNDARY'
                                        A
                                                  'RNAT VE
                                           LTE
                                                   NO.1











                                                                                                                                                                                                                  47*30'
                          47030' -
                                                                                         C@'       "JO   GANYO@
                                                                                              ,00


                                               MARINE MAMMALS
                                                AND KELP BEDS
                                                                                                                                                            it

                                                     Kelp Beds
                                                                                                                                                                                                                4

                                                     Distribution of Se Otters
                          47*00' -                        (1976-1987)                                                                                               so                                            47000'
                                                                                                                                                                 ooo-k-
                                                                                                                                                                   so
                                                   HAULOUT AREAS                                                                                                 4,  so    6

                                             o       Harbor Sea]


                                             0       CaUfornia Sea Lion


                                             0       Northern Sea Lion







                                                                                                                                                                                                                  46*30'
                          46'30'
                                                UNITED STATES -WEST COAST
                                                                WASHINGTON
                                               PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                          NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY
                                                                   NAUTICAL VILE8
                                                   I H H 1_@              F
                                                                                                                                                                                         Ri
                          460 Ix                                                                                                                                                                                  46*12'
                              3
                             126* IV        @00                        126*w                          126*W                           124*W                           124*00'                       123*30' 123020'



                  Figure 60. Boundary Alternative 1 in Relation to Marine Mammal
                                                      Haulout Sites and Distribution of Kelp Habitat.

                                                                                                                     IV-9















                                     126* 10' 126*W                             125*W                          m*w                             124o3O'                         124*00'                          123'W 123*W
                                4W45'                                                                                                                                                                                          48*45'
                                                                7,




                                                                 50
                                                                                                                                               V,                                                                              48*W






                                                      2.


                                                                                                                                                                                         so
                                                                                                                                                                                               x - -z:=




                               48*W -                                                                           +                                                                                                              4WW
                                                        UNDARY',
                                               A ERN
                                                          NO. 1











                                                                                                                                                                                                                               47'30'
                               47*W -                                                                                                           +
                                                                                                                  @0 r1t
                                                                                                                  CANYON
                                                                                                          ,00









                                                          SEABIRD

                                                                                                                                                                                                                               47*W
                               41MY            BREEDING COLONIES
                                                                                                             71, P                              +
                                                     (Ordered by Sim of Colony)

                                                        Less Than 100 Birds                        ?

                                                  0
                                                        100-1000 Birds

                                                        1000-10,000 Birds
                                                  0
                                                 0 Over 10,000 B
                                                                        irds
                                                                                                                        ka\
                                                                                                                                                                                   Bay
                                                                                                                                                                                                    V


                               46'W                   UNITED STATES -WEST COAST                                                                                                                                                46*W
                                                                    WASHINGTON
                                                    PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                               NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY j
                                                                        .NAUTICAL MUM
                                                                                10      1@
                               46'12'        L-7                                                                                                                                                                               46*1Z
                                  W10, 1ww                                   m1w                                                              UAW                              M.00,                          12r3O' 123*W




                     Figure 61. Boundary Alternative I in Relation to                                                                                                          Seabird Colonies
                                                       .and Seabird Foraging Range.

                                                                                                                           IV_-10













                                  126* 10'     126*W                          125*30,                         125000'                          124*30'                          124*00'                           123*30'   123* W
                               48*45'                                                                                                                                                                                           4845'







                               48-30' -                         50                                                                                                                                                              W30'

                                                                                                                                   7-

                                                                                                                                                                                                                       A131
                                                                                                                                                                                                                        so,





                                                500-                                                                                                                            _____50_
                                                                                                                                                                                                30 - --:z@





                               48-00'                                                                                                                                                                                           48*00'


                                              A
                                                          NO. 1











                               47*30'                                                                                                                                                                                           47'30'









                                                             -LEGEND-
                                                COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES


                                                             Dredged Material
                               47*00'                        Disposal Sites                                                                                                                                                     47*00'

                                                             Gravel Deposits


                                                             Highlighted Areas





                                                                                                  j                                                                             wl
                                                                                    AS
                               46*30' -                                                           L                                                                                                                             46*30'
                                                      UNITED STATES-WEST COAST
                                                                      WASHINGTON
                                                      PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                                NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUAR4
                                                                         NAU11CAL MILF
                                                                                        s'
                                                          H H

                               46*12"                                                                            _j                                                                                A        n                   46'12'
                                  126*1V       126*00'                        126'30'                          125*00'                          124*30'                           124*00'                         123*30'   123*2W




                    Figure 62. Boundary Alternative 1 in Relation to Vessel Traffic
                                                          Management Regimes, Dredge Disposal Sites, Oil and Gas
                                                          Resources and Gravel Deposits.


                                                                                                                           IV-11









          through this boundary including most of the tug and barge
          traffic, and foreign product carriers and foreign tankers. There
          are estimated to be oil and gas reserves under the Federal OCS.

               Boundary alternative 2 contains approximately 30% of the
          density of invertebrates within the entire study area (excluding
          the Strait of Juan de Fuca). Dungeness Crab, ocean pink shrimp
          and giant octopus account for the majority of invertebrates
          within this boundary alternative.

               With respect to marine mammals, boundary alternative 2 is
          only slightly more significant than boundary alternative 1.
          While it increases the area encompassing the whale migration
          routes, it fails to include the significant marine mammal
          foraging habitats and migration routes found near the edge of the
          continental shelf.

               This boundary alternative encompasses more seabird foraging
          area as well. However, as with 'mammals, this boundary excludes
          the rich neretic zone environments near the shelf and canyon
          edges significant to seabird ecology. The boundary also excludes
          the intense foraging area right outside the Strait of Juan de
          Fuca over the Juan de Fuca canyon where millions of seabirds are
          found foraging during the summer months.

               There are more vessels (tugs and barges and foreign product
          carriers) that transit the waters encompassed by boundary
          alternative 2 than boundary alternative 1. While domestic
          tankers transporting petroleum products in coastwise transit
          remain offshore well outside boundary alternative 2 pursuant to
          the voluntary agreement of the WSPA, many domestic barges engaged
          in coastwise traffic transit within boundary alternative 2. The
          Mukkaw Bay anchorage, where vessels anchor awaiting either
          available pilots in Port Angeles for entry into Puget Sound, or
          directions from home ports, is also located within boundary
          alternative 2. The Sanctuary would work with the Canadian and
          U.S. Coast Guards to undertake an educational campaign to inform
          mariners of Sanctuary status and the applicable regulations.
          This boundary alternative does not completely allow the Sanctuary
          program to address the impacts from vessel traffic since vessels
          including many tugs and barges transit further than the seaward
          extent of this boundary.

               With respect to oil and gas development, boundary
          alternative 2 adds Sanctuary control over an additional
          percentage of the estimated oil and gas reserves in Federal
          water. Since there is a prohibition on oil and gas within the
          boundaries of the Sanctuary, this boundary provides a buffer for
          the coastal resources. But it does not encompass the reserves
          that extend seaward to the continental shelf.

               In summary, boundary alternative 2 adds more resources and

                                        IV-12









         uses within the Sanctuary boundary than are encompassed by
         boundary alternative 1. Boundary alternative 2, however,
         excludes a significant amount of the coastal ecosystem and areas
         that support uses which threaten the integrity of the Sanctuary.
         The relationship of boundary alternative 2 with respect to the
         extent of resources and uses is depicted in Figures 63-66.

              D.   Boundary Alternative 3

              Boundary alternative 3 expands upon boundary alternatives 1
         and,2 by extending the seaward boundary to the continental shelf.
         It encompasses an area of approximately 1805 square nautical
         miles. While it cuts across the head of the Quinault Canyon, it
         excludes the more significant Juan de Fuca Canyon. As such, it
         is an area enriched by enhanced upwelling from the edge of the
         continental shelf and the Juan de Fuca Canyon which fuels the
         rich ecosystem over the shelf and near the shelf edge. This area
         encompasses significantly more fishing grounds including salmon
         trolling areas and groundfish trawling areas. It includes the
         productive banks that surround the Juan de Fuca Canyon along its
         southern edge. This alternative also encompasses the pink shrimp
         trawling areas near the shelf edge.

              Boundary alternative 3 includes approximately 42% of the
         fish resources (Appendix C).' Lingcod, rockfish, sablefish and
         salmon are common fish resources within this boundary
         alternative. This boundary alternative encompasses a
         significantly increased portion of the fishing grounds for sole,
         rockfish, halibut, sablefish, lingcod, hake, Pacific cod, and
         includes the entire pink shrimp trawling areas north of Point
         Grenville. It also encompasses more commercial salmon harvesting
         areas.


              Invertebrate densities (of commercial and recreational
         significance) included by the seaward extension of boundary
         alternative 3 are dominated by pink shrimp concentrations found
         closer to the shelf edge and also added Dungeness crab
         populations. This boundary alternative includes approximately
         42% of the total invertebrate density calculated by NOAA
         (excluding the Strait of Juan de Fuca).

              The seaward portion of the study area added by boundary
         alternative 3 is one of the most significant with respect to
         marine mammals. Not only does it encompass significantly more of
         the cetacean migration corridor, but it also adds an area where
         there have been sitings of such rare whales that inhabit deeper
         ocean environments such as the sperm whale and right whale, the
         latter which is the most endangered of all whales.

              Boundary alternative 3 adds significantly more colonial
         seabird foraging areas at the shelf edge, especially for the
         Leach's Storm Petrel. It also encompasses the mid-shelf and

                                       IV-13

















                                                126o 10'                  126000'                    125'30'                               125*00'                                124*30'                                124*00'                                123*30'      123* 20'
                                            48*45'                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 &45'
                                                                                                                                                                                  $1, S_-
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                C


                                                                                    50
                                            48-30'           \+
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   48*30'
                                                                                                                                                               SEE


                                                                          (200

                                                            (1500,

                                                                             Cr

                                                                                                                                                                                                                         a
                                                                                                                   'J9

                                            48*00' -                                                                                                                                                                                                                               48*00'
                                                                          BOUNDARY
                                                                          ALTERNATFk_
                                                                             NO.      2

                                                                          147W45      iWii,
                                                                          247W45'    IV
                                                                          347&48'     124*W25
                                                                          447-45' :   124'W49'
                                                                          3.03,06
                                                                          5  14      124     001
                                                                          64.'1443    124*54'22'
                                                                          74nW26      124*48'54'                                                                                                  Vt
                                                                          4M17'       IPA-&13'                                                                                                                  WA.



                                            4rr3O'                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 47'30'
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                P@


                                                                                                                                                CANYON



                                                                                   LEGEND -
                                                                          FISHING AREAS                                                                                                                          0@44

                                                                             Commercial Finfish


                                                                             Sport Finfish

                                            47*00' -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   4, 00'
                                                                             Razor Clain Beaches


                                                                             Pink Shrimp IYawling
                                                                          Fs@

                                                                             Crabbing                                                                                                                                                                       M.-
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               ur

                                                                             Shellfish Aq.ae.1t.r,



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  R
                                                                                                             A6V                                                                                                                                                k
                                                                                                             QW,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   46'30'
                                            46*30' -
                                                                          UNITED STATES -WEST COAST
                                                                                         WASHINGTON
                                                                          PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                                                          NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY
                                                                                               NAU71CAL MILES

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   Rn-
                                            46* 12'                                                                                                                                                                                                                                46*12'
                                               126* 10'                   126*00'                    li@30'                                125'00'                                124                                     1?AoW'                                123*30' 123*20'
                                                                                                                                                               1 A"@117















                              Figure 63. Boundary Alternative 2 with Respect to Fisheries.

                                                                                                                                                      iv-. 14
















                                       126* 10'       126*00'                              125*30'                               125*00'                                M'30'                                   124*00'                                123'30' 123*20'
                                   48*45'                                                                                                                                                                              -       -                                         48*45'




                                                                                                                                                                                                Q


                                   49*30'
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         48*30'


                                                                                                                                                   7


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               50

                                                                                                                                                                                          <                                       ptjcq
                                                               200
                                                               300,                                                                                                                                                                                   ob,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                            $0
                                                        500,            0'
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   30
                                                                                                                                                                                                T-,@  ,




                                   V00,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         48'00'

                                                               BOUNDARY
                                                       ALTERNATIVE
                                                                   NO. 2                                                                             V                                    V"
                                                               LATITUDF,   LONGITUD
                                                               I
                                                               47W45           IW11'02'
                                                               247*0745'       ffww                                                                                                                              'k
                                                               a47-&4r         24W                                                               4
                                                               4r45'06'        IW501"@
                                                               4                   49
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   54
                                                               648'W14'        12V5T 2W
                                                               48*14'43'       124*64' 2
                                                               6
                                                               74M26'          124*4g64
                                                               84r&17'         1241&13




                                   4rr3O' -
                                                                                                                                                                                                              7                                           t              47o3O'
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           7,


                                                                                                                                       CA11'0"
                                                                                                                            W,


                                                               MARINE MAMMALS
                                                               AND KELP BEDS


                                                                     Kelp Beds


                                                                     Distribution of Sea Otters
                                   47*00' -                                (1976-1987)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         47oOO'

                                                                   HAULOUT AREAS


                                                                     Harbor Seal


                                                               0     California Sea Lion


                                                               (3    Northern Sea Lion




                                                                                                   Aq


                                   46*30'                                                                                                                                                                                                                                46-30'
                                                               UNITED STATES-WEST COAST
                                                                                 WASHINGTON
                                                               PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          i-6W
                                                       NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY
                                                                                      NAU11CAL MILE'


                                   46* IV                                                                                                                                                                                                                                46*12!
                                       126*10'        126*00'                              125'30'                                125*00'                                124'30'                                 124*00'                               123'30' 123'20'




                      Figure 64. Boundary Alternative 2 with Respect to Marine Mammal
                                                                   Haulout Sites and Kelp Habitat.

                                                                                                                                                 IV-15















                                          126'10'      126'00'                          125*30'                             125*W                              124o3O'                            124'00'                             123*30' 123*20'
                                      48*45'                                                                                                                                                                                                     (0   4946!





                                      48-M
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      48*30'


                                                                                                                                           7





                                                                                                                                    16
                                                                                                                                                                                                                    ucA
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   io     .0-,
                                                           oo--"),
                                                                                                                                                                                                                 -3o-
                                                                                                                 61
                                                                                                             u
                                                                   00
                                                                                                                                    6
                                                                                                                                    6
                                      48*00'r
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      48*00'

                                                                           -R,
                                                                   OUN          ' @                                                                \                                                                          .
                                                        A          TER                                                                              \o.
                                                                   N       2

                                                           I       7W45'   IWII'02'
                                                                           tu'39w
                                                                   7W45'
                                                                   4 4K    124 25'
                                                           1       4 'w    124 w5O' -                                                    4
                                                                   14'     IU*57W
                                                                   49'1'43- t24*542r
                                                           7               124.1
                                                                   4m




                                      47*30' -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      47*3Y
                                                                                                                                                                         7'

                                                                                                                                 ANYON'









                                                                                                                                                       2(

                                                                   SEABIR
                                                                                  D
                                      47'00' -         BREEDING COLONIES
                                                                   (Ord@ by Size of Colmy)                                  6               N'                                                                                                        4'rOO'
                                                                                                                              '7

                                                                   Less Than 100 Birds

                                                           o
                                                                   100-1000 Birds                                'I
                                                           0       1000-10,000 Birds
                                                           0       Over 10,000 Bird.,

                                                                                                                                                                                                 WWWBay
                                                                                               Aqp)

                                      46*3(
                                                                   UNITED STATES
                                                                                             - WEST          COAST                                                                                            j                                       4M'
                                                                               WASHINGTON
                                                                   PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                                       NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY
                                                                                    NAIJT[Q@@ MILES,,
                                                                                                                                                                                                         \4                                      3ri
                                        121V10'       126-W                             li@30'                              125*00'                                                                                                                   46*12'
                                                                                                                                                               124*30'                             124W                              12a*30'     123*W




                          Figure 65. Boundary Alternative 2 with Respect to Seabird Colony
                                                                   Sites and Foraging Range.

                                                                                                                                     IV-16














                                            126* 10'        126*00'                              125*30'                                125*00'                                 124*30'                                 124'00'                                 123'30'     123* 20'
                                        48'45'                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    48*45'







                                        48'30'                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    48*30'






                                                                                '100
                                                                                ('200-
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            &e4
                                                                                300-
                                                             L400
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    so
                                                             500,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           30
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  U.& rht su@




                                        woo, -                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    WOO'

                                                                                B
                                                             ALTERN
                                                                                NO
                                                                                LATITunp.
                                                                                147ff45'
                                                                                2

                                                                                4"1". 124*5W49'
                                                                                548'"14' 124 700'
                                                                                64TI4'43' 12454'22'
                                                                                74M'
                                                                                N: M'48'54'                                                                                                          rX,
                                                                                48'21'17 I24'ffIr




                                        47'30'
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  47o3O'










                                                                                -LEGEND-
                                                             COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES

                                                                                Dredged Material
                                        47oOO'                                  Disposal Sites
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  47'00'
                                                                                Gravel Deposits


                                                                                Highlighted Areas





                                                                                                                                                                                                                       Wa-





                                        46'30' -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  46*30'
                                                                                UNITED STATES -WEST                     COAST
                                                                                      WASHINGTON
                                                                                PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                                             NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUAR4
                                                                                           NAUTICAL MILES
                                                                                                                                  25


                                        46* 12                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    146*12'
                                            126*10'        12@00'                                125'30'                                125*00'                                 124'30'                                  124oOO'                               123'30'      123'20'



                         Figure 66. Boundary Alternative 2 in Relation to Vessel Traffic
                                                                                Management Regimes, Dredged Disposal Sites, oil and Gas
                                                                                Resources and Gravel Deposits.

                                                                                                                                                 IV-17









          nearshore foraging areas. However, it still excludes those
          areas over the Juan de Fuca Canyon seaward from the entrance to
          the Strait of Juan de Fuca where one is most likely to see the
          densest concentrations of foraging seabirds. This area was
          recognized by the most recent and comprehensive seabird study of
          the West Coast, conducted by MMS, as one of the most significant
          seabird habitats off the west coast of the contiguous U.S.

               From a human-use perspective, this boundary would encompass
          an increasing aerial extent of the former Lease Sale #132 which
          adds a greater buffer from impacts of coastal development. This
          will protect the viewshed off the Sanctuary by maintaining its
          pristine quality. This boundary alternative also encompasses
          more of the vessel traffic corridor. Radar coverage from Tofino
          extends 15 miles into this boundary alternative. Figures 67-70
          depict boundary alternative 3 with respect to the areal extent of
          fisheries, marine mammal haul out sites, kelp distribution, and
          human uses other than fishing.

               E.   Boundary Alternative 4

               Boundary alternative 4 was the preferred boundary in the
          DEIS/MP for the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary.
          Pursuant to comments on the DEIS/MP, NOAA has undertaken an
          analysis of the resources, uses, and coastal development patterns
          in the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Boundary alternative 4, as it
          appeared in the DEIS/MP, includes the area of boundary
          alternative 3 and the addition of the head of the Juan de Fuca
          Canyon. The boundary includes the key fishing areas off the
          Strait, the most significant bird foraging areas, additional
          ocean pink shrimp, squid, salmon, and groundfish harvesting
          areas. This is also the area where vessels converge as they
          enter and exit the Strait of Juan de Fuca. It is a complex area
          in terms of managing human uses due to the variety of uses,
          vessel types, cargo and languages spoken by mariners. This
          complexity was most recently evidenced by the sinking of the
          Tenyo Maru which resulted in an oil slick along the coast killing
          numerous pinnipeds, birds and fish.

               NOAA's analysis of the resources and uses in the Strait
          demonstrate that the Strait is ecologically contiguous with the
          outer coast environment. The Strait of Juan de Fuca is widely
          recognized as a transition zone between the open ocean
          characteristics of the outer Washington Coast and the inner sea
          dynamics of Puget Sound proper. These characteristics include
          beach profiles, sediment types, bathymetry, salinity, currents,
          wave force, and biological resources. No study has been
          identified that specifically defines a boundary between the outer
          coast ecosystem and that of the inner sea. In any event, such a
          boundary would hardly exist in nature as a fixed line of
          demarkation but rather a band or zone where open ocean processes
          cease to predominate and inner sea processes (hereafter referred

                                        IV-18


















                                     126'10!           126'00,                      125*30'                             126*00'                             124*30'                             124'00'                              123'30' 123'20'
                                  48*45' -                                                                                                                                                                                                          48*45'







                                  48-30'                                so                                                                                                                                                                          48*30'



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           .30
                                                                                                                                                                                                'DR                                        10,

                                                             200
                                                       1400                                                                                                                                                                       @00   @019
                                                       500,      -V





                                  48*00!                                                                                                                                                                                                            wool

                                                       BOUNDARY
                                                       ALTERNAtIVP,--@@-
                                                                 NO. 3
                                                             LATITUDE LONUITUD
                                                       1     47W45-     Iwifor
                                                       2     47W46'     IWWIT
                                                             4M'05'
                                                       3                "'Zoo'
                                                       4     47*4WO5'   12A*04
                                                       6     V50'01'    I?ZW'4r
                                                       6     49'W001    1W 9!051
                                                       7     49*04'6r   iwiew
                                                       8     4M52"      mlw'T
                                                       9     @11        124*49m,
                                                       10    4M'17'     im-wir


                                  47*30'
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    4rr3O'

                                                                                                                                    z
                                                                                                                                NyON



                                                                        LEGEND -
                                                             FISHING AREAS


                                                                 Commercial Finfish


                                                                 Sport Finfish

                                  47'00'
                                                                 Razor Clain Beaches                                                                                                                                             Avl,               47'00'
                                                       FS I      Pink Shrimp T@awling                                                                                                                     N-@@-

                                                                 Crabbing


                                                                 Shellfish Aquacult.r.







                                  46'30' -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    49*30'
                                                             UNITED STATES-WEST COAST
                                                                            WASHINGTON
                                                             PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                                       NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY
                                                                        0        NAUTICAL MILES
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             e,
                                  46* 12'                                                                                                                                                                                                           14TIT
                                           10'         126'*00'                      125*30'                             125*00'                             1?A'30'                             1?A*00'                             lV30'     123'20'

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               _j

                        Figure 67. Boundary Alternative 3 with Respect to Fisheries.

                                                                                                                                    IV-19















                                                  126* 10'              126'00'                           125*30'                                   125000,                                     124'30'                                   124*00'                                   123'30' 123*20'
                                              48*45'                                  r                                                                                                                                                                                                1               48*45'





                                                                                          10
                                              Mo30'                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    48-30'

                                                                                                                                                                        9

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             @,J
                                                                                                                                                                            V.,

                                                                                      700
                                                                            '200                                                                                                  0   @2
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 -00
                                                                        r
                                                                        400-'
                                                                        @@500                                                                                                                                                                          So

                                                                                                                                    7                      8
                                                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                       N,

                                              ,0001                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    48*00'
                                                                        BOUNDARY
                                                                        ALTER NATIVE
                                                                                NO. 3
                                                                            LA,77TIlDF,  LONGITUD
                                                                            47W45-          :24'11
                                                                        2   VOT46'          IW5811V
                                                                        3   47*WO5*         26,00,00,                                                                                                  W
                                                                        4   4r4VO5'         124*04 44'
                                                                        5   47*WOI'         @25*05'42
                                                                        6   48WW'           IzV 9105,
                                                                        7   4M52'           1    38'
                                                                                            125'14'
                                                                        8   48'"52'         25.00"0:
                                                                        9   49W26'          1M'48'u
                                                                        10  4r&17'          124-&13'
                                                                                                                                                           3
                                              4730' -                                                                                                                                            +/      @j                                                                                            47*30'
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          A
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               j,g
                                                                                                                                                           c NyON
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           0
                                                                                                                                          ,010p,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               ip


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           X4
                                                                            MARINE MAMMALS
                                                                            AND KELP BEDS
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 7


                                                                                      Kelp Beds
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           ;A",
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           V

                                                                                      Distribution of Sea Otters
                                                                                         (1976-1987)                                                                                                                                 00             r"-
                                              4rrOO' -                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 4700'

                                                                               HAULOUT AREAS
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    goo

                                                                                      Harbor Seal
                                                                                                                                                           g@j,

                                                                        0             California Sea Lion


                                                                        0             Northern Sea Lion


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 as


                                                                                                                  A


                                                                                                                   IMME11,
                                                                                                                                                                          C@
                                              46'30! -                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 46*30'
                                                                            UNITED STATES-WEST COAST
                                                                                               WASHINGTON
                                                                            PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                                                        NATIONAL MARINE SANCT
                                                                                                                                           UARY
                                                                                                     NALJTICI@@ MILES"
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      9,
                                              46* 12'1                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 46*12'
                                                 1?6*10'                126*00'                           125*30'                                    125'  00,                                  124*30'                                     124*00'                                123o3O'       123*20'




                                   Figure 68. Boundary Alternative 3 with Respect to Marine Mammal
                                                                                      Haulout Sites and Kelp Habitat.

                                                                                                                                                                    iv.-20















                                          126*10' 126*00'                                      125*30'                                M*001                                  124'30'                                 124*00'                                 123'30' 123*20'
                                      48*45'                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   48*45'







                                      48*30'                                   so                                                                                                                                                                                              48*30'

                                                                                                                                                         9

                                                                                                                                                         A
                                                                                                                                                                                                                     Z@

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             C
                                                                     200
                                                                     300
                                                                     00
                                                                     20             "v'
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        30
                                                                                                                         4010

                                                                                                                       7                8


                                      48*00'                                                                     q                                                                                                                                                             48*W
                                                                     OUNDARY                                                                                       0,
                                                          A          ERNATI'@-E
                                                                      NO.
                                                                               LONCITUDE
                                                                     7-0745-     'Wil":
                                                                                 1261woo
                                                                     44 40'05'   124-04
                                                                     54 '01'     12V"
                                                                     648* 'N'    I
                                                                        '52'     lW26'194'05'
                                                                     7
                                                                                 I
                                                                     148'04'     25'138'

                                                                     10 4M"      124W'13'


                                      47*30'                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   47*30'


                                                                                                                                           G,  0yoN
                                                                                                                             ado'






                                                                                                                                               2

                                                                        SEABIRD
                                      47'00'              BREEDING COLONIES                                                                                                                                                                                                    47'00'
                                                                     (Ordered by Size of Colony)

                                                                     Less Than 100 Birds

                                                                     0100-1000 Birds

                                                                     01000-10,000 Birds
                                                                     0Over 10,000 Bi
                                                                                           rds


                                                                                                        Aj-
                                                                                 S
                                      46o3O'                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   46*30'
                                                                     UNITED STATES -WEST COAST
                                                                                     WASHINGTON
                                                                     PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                                          NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY
                                                                                           NAtMCAL MILES
                                                                                                                                                                                                                           X
                                      46'12'.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  46*12'
                                          126*10'        126'00'                               125*30'                                 125oOO'                                124*30'                                 I?A'00'                                123'30'     123W
                                                                     4


























                                                                                                         M















                          Figure 69. Boundary Alternative 3 with                                                                                                                Respect to Seabird Colonies
                                                                       and Seabird Foraging Range.

                                                                                                                                                   IV-21












                                       126'10'    126'00'                      125*30'                        125*00'                        124*3Y                         124oW                          123*30' 123*2V
                                   48*45'                            r                                                                                                                                                    48*45'





                                                                                                                      '0
                                   48-30'                            so                                                                                                                                                   48W
                                                                                                                                            ov,


                                                                                                                                                                                                                 P



                                                                     00
                                                         200
                                                         300-
                                                @_500-
                                                                                                                                                                                        __@30
                                                                                                                                                                                                             U
                                                     4@



                                   48-W                                                                                                                                                                                   wool


                                                  ALTERN@,
                                                            NO.                                        7
                                                         ,'All=      L4
                                                     I   4rCT45'
                                                     2   4rO745'
                                                     '   "W"'        Iwoo  'W
                                                     4   4r401061    124*04'4C
                                                     6   47'50'01'   125W42'
                                                     6   4SWO01      125"11.
                                                     7   4M5r        .438'
                                                     8   4M'5r       12MM
                                                     9   4M26'       124*48'54'
                                                     10  QW17'       124WtS*


                                   47'30' -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                          47'30'










                                                                     -LEGEND-
                                                  COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES


                                                                     Dredged aterial
                                                                     Disposal Sites
                                   47oOO' -                                                       163M_1_1   '?), " : @...                                                                                                47*00'
                                                                     Gravel Deposits                                                                                         -b@


                                                                     Highlighted Areas







                                                                                                                                                    %



                                   46*3W -                                                                                                                                                                                46W
                                                         UNITED STATES -WEST COAST
                                                                       WASHINGTON
                                                         PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                                  NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY
                                                                           NAUTICAL MILES


                                   46*12'1                                                                                                                                                                                46*12'
                                      126*10' 126*00'                                                         125*00'                                                        124*00'                       123*30' 123'20'




                         Figure 70. Boundary Alternative 3 in Relation to Vessel Traffic
                                                            Management Regimes, Dredge Disposal Sites, Oil and Gas
                                                            Resources and Gravel Deposits.

                                                                                                                       IV-22









          to as "estuarine") become more common. Once such a zone is
         identified, a fixed boundary may be drawn that will include the
         furthest inland approach of oceanic processes in any given
         season.


              The entire Strait of Juan de Fuca east to the San Juan
         Islands is decidedly marine in character with water salinity
         approaching that of the Pacific Ocean (29 to 21 ppt). Salinity
         is often lowest

         in the eastern and northern portions of the Strait due to the
         influence of the Fraser River and other freshwater sources.
         Surface temperatures range between 8* C and 11* C; the west
         portion of the Strait of Juan de Fuca is warmest due to the
         influence of*Pacific Ocean Water" (Long, 1983). The water column
         in the San Juan Island area is more stratified due to a large
         volume of freshwater inflow from the Fraser River. Water density
         in the Strait of Juan de Fuca is fairly homogeneous at all
         depths. The salinity and temperature regime of the Strait does
         not shift or change in any manner that would distinguish oceanic
         from estuarine processes (Duxberry, p.c., 1992).

              The center channel of the Strait exceeds 100 fathoms from
         the western entrance to the head of the Juan de Fuca subsea
         canyon (offshore of the Twin River estuary). The westward limit
         of the Juan de Fuca Canyon extends several miles off the
         Washington coast. Though upwelled water travels up the canyon,
         upwelling occurs across the width of the Strait. However, the
         distribution and density of upwelled nutrients in the Strait has
         not been systematically identified (Duxbery, p.c., 1992).

              Studies in the late 1970's conclude "that year-round net
         circulation in the Strait consists of a rigorous two-layer
         estuarine (current] pattern with seaward flowing near-surface
         currents of 20-40 cm/S and landward flowing deeper currents of -
         10 cm/S. The level of no net motion is typically between 40 and
         60 m. These studies also have shown that during non-summer
         months, the near surface (upper 15 m) circulation in the western
         Strait is dominated by the sub-tidal motions with periods of 5-30
         days which induce reversals in the estuarine flow of up to 60
         cm/S. Such sub-tidal fluctuations are strongly correlated with
         local winds, atmospheric pressure, and sea level. During a later
         winter experiment in the eastern strait, seven such current
         reversals lasting from 2-6 days with maximum upstrait velocities
         of 20 cm/s were found to depend upon the direction, strength, and
         duration of winds associated with coastal cyclonic storms.
         During current reversals, coastal water, which can be fresher
         owing to Columbia River discharge and warmer owing to summer
         heating, has been observed to intrude up to 135 km into the
         strait (vicinity of Dungeness Spit)" (Frisch et al., 1981).
         Studies have "also found evidence for the reversals to intrude
         along the southern half of the western strait first ... Details of

                                        IV-23









          the flow at the'interface between inflow and outflow were mapped
          with an HF current-mapping radar and reveal complex mixing
          circulation with diversion to the south" (Frisch et al., 1981).
          This area of mixing is located between Victoria BC, Dungeness
          Spit and Port Angeles. In addition to these surface and deep-
          water current flows, longshore flows between Cape Flattery and
          Dungeness Spit are not appreciable for the most part, but when
          existing (usually in pocket beach areas) flow in an easterly
          direction (Schwartz, 1991).

               The coastline west of the Elwha delta is composed
          predominately of bedrock. It is characterized by rocky exposed
          shorelines and intertidal areas, small estuaries, short pocket
          beaches, and high steep backshores. The armored shoreline is
          stable with a minimum of longshore sediment transport (net shore-
          drift). The coastline east of the Elwha Delta is primarily
          composed of eroded and compacted glacial till. It is
          characterized by sand spits, protected bays, gradually sloped
          beaches and mudflats (Shipman, 1992).

               The geological break at the Elwha Delta between western and
          eastern features of the Strait coincides with biological
          distinctions in the same area. West of the Elwha River delta are
          the most proliferous macrocystis kelp beds in the state (located
          near the Twin River delta). Macrocystis is described as *
          "strictly an open coast species" (Kyte, 1992) and extends into
          the Strait eastward to Crescent Rock where it abruptly ends.

               The macrocystis beds are accompanied by other organisms
          endemic to the outer coast. Three species. of oceanic sea anemone
          are found inland to Tongue Point. These are Urticina Lofotensis
          (White Spotted Tillia), Urticina Piscivora (Fish Eating Tillia),
          and Anthopleura Xanthogrammica (giant green anemone). Giant
          green anemone range eastward beyond Tongue Point but only to
          Observatory Point where their concentrations end. Though some
          are found sporadically in the San Juan Islands, no significant
          populations exist east of Observatory Point (Kyte, 1992).

               The Purple Urchin (Stronglocentrotus Purpuratus) is a grazer
          that moves among the rocks in search of kelp. Purple Urchin
          populations do not extend east of Tongue Point except for
          scattered numbers in the San Juan Islands.

               Two common oceanic invertebrates, California Mussels
          (Mytilus Californianus) and Gooseneck Barnacles (Pollicipes
          Polymerus), also share the exposed rocky habitat of the north
          Olympic Peninsula. These species are commonly found on the outer
          Washington coast. A cursory survey from the Elwha River to Slip
          Point identified mixed populations of these species between
          Observatory Point and Tongue Point in the east and between Pillar
          Point and Slip Point to the west (Goodwin, 1992). Both species
          form dense beds in the intertidal zone where wave action is


                                        IV-24









         strong. Gooseneck Barnacles are only found on vertical to near-
         vertical surfaces. Giant green anemones settle into these
         colonies during their early life stages. As the anemones mature,
         they move into the lower intertidal and subtidal zones where wave
         action makes prey available to this passive predator. Giant
         green anemones may live from 50 to 100 years and grow up to a
         foot in circumference. Also associated with the mussels and
         barnacles is the Purple or Ocher Sea Star (Pisaster Ochraceus), a
         predator to both species.

              An important element to any ecosystem is the relationships
         between the organisms found there. The organisms listed above
         interact with each other to form one example of biological
         interdependence along the shores of the Strait of Juan de Fuca.
         The rocky substrate and strong wave action from the Pacific Ocean
         create the conditions necessary for the proliferation of the
         California mussels and gooseneck barnacles. These residents feed
         on plankton that is washed in by the surf. Another resident, the
         purple urchin, grazes on the nearby kelp. As the mussels and
         barnacles colonize into dense beds, the green anemone moves in
         and waits for urchins and other organisms to be scoured from the
         rocks by strong waves and delivered into it's tentacles. This
         set of interactions has been documented by Dr. Robert Paine
         (Professor of Zoology at the University of Washington). Though
         some of the species involved may be found individually in areas
         of the San Juan Islands, these species are never found together
         as a functioning community east of Observatory Point. Since the
         community is common to the outer coastal regions of the Pacific
         Northwest, its presence in the Strait provides an indicator that
         the coastal ecosystem extends into the Strait as far east as
         Observatory Point.

              Macrocystis, as an individual species, is decidedly an open
         coast oriented kelp. The fact that rocky habitat extends east of
         Crescent Rock - Macrocystis does not - indicates that factors
         beyond mere topography are necessary for its survival beyond that
         point. Since Macrocystis thrives on the coast, some significant
         property of the coastal environment must end at Crescent Rock.
         This indicates a break between the oceanic processes of the outer
         coast and the estuarine processes of inner Puget Sound. It
         should be noted that Crescent Rock is within six miles of the
         point where the community in the previous paragraph ceases to
         function. Macrocystis also serves as a food source for sea
         urchin which in turn serve as prey for sea otters (Enhydra
         Lutris) . Macrocystis beds are a common habitat feature where
         sea otters are present.

              Sea otters have been identified inside the strait as far as
         First Beach on the eastern side of Neah Bay. "The sea   otter is
         on the list of Washington State Endangered Species. The federal
         government considers the California sea otter a threatened
         species, but not the Alaskan sea otter (the source stock of sea

                                       IV-25









          otters in Washington)" (Calambokidis et al., 1987). The Strait
          contains the greatest percentage of Washington shoreline occupied
          by kelp (Thom and Hallum, 1990). As the Washington Coast sea
          otter population expands, it is expected that otters will move
          into these prime habitat areas of the strait (Strickland and
          Chasan, 1989).

               The Strait of Juan de Fuca serves as a transit and migration
          corridor for marine birds, mammals and ocean organisms entering
          from the outer coast. Up to 300,000 common murres may enter
          northern Puget Sound in any given. year during the molting season.
          Since the birds are mostly flightless, they must use the Strait
          to access the inland waterways (Strickland and Chasan, 1989).
          Drift studies have identified oceanic species in significant
          quantities as far east as Dungeness Spit. Curt Ebbesmeypr has
          been studying currents and drift patterns in the Strait for 15
          years and estimates that 1 of every 1000 organisms on the
          Washington Coast enters the Strait of'juan de Fuca on eastward
          current flows and migrates along the north shore of the Olympic
          Peninsula. Such transfers of outer coast resources are
         .indicative of an inland extension of the coastal ecosystem.
          (Note: The 1/1000 transfer capacity of the currents is also
          Ebbesmeyer's estimate for the rate at which oil spilled at the
          Strait entrance would travel inland.)

               There is evidence that up to 15 gray whales spend the summer
          near Cape Flattery. Gray whales have often been sighted well
          inside the Strait of Juan de Fuca. "Unlike most cetaceans, gray
          whales feed on bottom animals; in Northwest 'waters, these prey
          include amphipod and mysid crustaceans near kelp beds"
          (Strickland and Chasan, 1989). A 1985-86 survey of gray whale
          presence between Cape Flattery and Pillar Point tracked a
          continuous presence of the species from December through the
          summer. Gray whales were often seen foraging in kelp beds
          between Koitlah Point and the Sekiu River (Calambokidis et al.,
          1987).

               In the above survey conducted between Cape Flattery and
          Pillar Point, "two species of small cetaceans were frequently
          seeni..Harbor porpoise were the most abundant cetacean and were
          seen primarily from 0.5 to 1.5 nm offshore. Sighting frequency
          of harbor porpoise varied by region with the greatest numbers
          seen off the Sekiu River and Kyadaka Point. Harbor Porpoise were
          present in all seasons but were most numerous in fall. Dall's
          porpoise were seen less often than Harbor Porpoise and tended to
          occur farther offshore. Dall's porpoise were seen in all
          seasons" (Calambokidis et al., 1987). A report prepared for the
          National Marine Mammal Laboratory in April, 1992 estimates harbor
          porpoise abundance for the Strait of Juan de Fuca and Swiftsure
          Bank at 2,226 animals. It is the first comprehensive report of
          harbor porpoise in the Strait. The report also listed direct
          sightings of 100 Dall's porpoise in the same*area (Calambokidis

                                        IV--26










         et al., 1992).

             California sea lions are present in the Strait and appear in
         a small concentration at Neah Bay. Harbor seals are the most
         common marine mammal in the Strait and have many haul-out sites
         between Cape Flattery and Observatory Point (Calambokidis et al.,
         1987). Migrations have been observed from the outer coast and
         eastern Strait of Juan de Fuca into the western Strait
         (Strickland and Chasan, 1989).

             The majority of strictly pelagic birds (e.g., albatrosses,
         cassin's auklets, shearwaters, storm petrels), however, do not
         enter and reside inside the Strait for any appreciable length of
         time or in large numbers. Most only appear at Tatoosh Island and
         seaward. Swiftsure Bank, at the entrance of the Strait, is a
         critical feeding area for birds (Wahl, 1992). "Huge feeding
         flocks estimated to approach one million birds (have been)
         observed at the entrance to the Strait of Juan de Fuca" where
         oceanic fronts converge (Strickland and Chasan, 1989). It should
         be noted however that no comprehensive bird studies have been
         conducted exclusively for the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Nor has
         any research been conducted to analyze bird populations within
         the Strait in the context of ecosystem dynamics.

             This analysis suggests that the ecosystem of the outer
         Washington coast extends into the Strait of Juan de Fuca as far
         eastward as Observatory Point. Changes in biota, geology, and
         topography all appear to coalesce between Crescent Rock and
         Observatory Point. The constant eastward drift and migration of
         coastal organic matter resupplies the area with new colonists and
         prey organisms. Coastal water is transported into the Strait by
         currents that break and mix north of Dungeness Spit. The dense
         kelp beds are a central factor to the productivity in the Straits
         and Macrocystis serves as a particularly strong indicator for the
         inland extent of the coastal environment.

             The human uses in the Strait include vessel traffic,
         commercial, recreational and tribal fishing, recreational boating
         and SCUBA Diving. The Strait is a heavily used corridor for
         barges, larger commercial vessels and fishing boats transiting
         between the outer coast and Puget Sound. There is a carefully
         coordinated vessel traffic system operated jointly by the U.S and
         Canadian Coast Guards to manage vessel traffic (see Part II for
         further discussion). Clallam Bay and Neah Bay are central
         locations for the charter boat industry and recreational fishing
         in the Strait is concentrated off Pillar Point, Slip Point'and
         Neah Bay. Although various types of clams are present throughout
         the Strait, recreational clam digging in the Strait is prohibited
         from April 1 through October 31 due to Paralytic Shellfish
         Poisoning. The Strait is a Usual and Accustomed fishing area for
         some of the Tribes. Gillnets are used by Tribal fishers in the
         Strait to harvest salmon.


                                       IV-27









                The kelp beds, subtidal communities, and a shipwreck off
           Tongue Point offer spectacular diving throughout the Strait.
           Most of the beaches (i.e., tidelands) in the Strait are publicly
           owned (Figure 71). Access to thesebeaches is severely
           restricted because the back beach environment is characterized by
           steep bluffs in private ownership to the extent of high tide.
           There are approximately seven access points along the entire
           Strait between observatory Point and Neah Bay. Most of the
           beaches are accessible only by boat, and then under mostly
           dangerous conditions because of submerged rocks and strong tidal
           currents. The beaches are predominately sand, gravel, cobble and
           hardpan and submerged at mean high water. Boat access ramps are
           limited to Freshwater Bay, Silver King Resort and Pillar Point
           Recreation Area.

                Clallam County has developed county parks at Observatory Pt.
           (Freshwater Bay Recreation Area) and Tongue Pt. (Salt Creek
           Recreation Area) which provide boat access ramps, shoreside
           access for SCUBA Divers, sport fishing, picnic tables and other
           outdoor recreation. The WDNR has developed a state park at the
           Lyre River with-many of the same accommodations. The Twin River
           and Pyscht River have undeveloped recreation areas. Clallam Bay
           has a harbor supporting a popula3: charter boat industry.

                Coastal land ownership patterns in the Strait adjacent to
           the beaches include reservation 'Lands (the Makah Tribe), private
           landowners (including timber companies), and county and state
           protected lands. The towns  of Joyce, Clallam. Bay, Sekiu, and
           Neah Bay are the population centers along the Strait. Their
           economies are influenced by recreational and commercial
           activities occurring in the Strait of Juan de Fuca.

                Boundary alternative 4 with a southern boundary extending to
           Copalis Beach, and eastward into the Strait to observatory Point
           encompasses what can be considered a distinct ecological system
           with intertidal communities, rookeries and haul out sites,
           foraging areas, rich fishing grounds and fish concentrations, and
           proliferous kelp beds continuous throughout this boundary.
           Vessel traffic, oil and gas exploration, fishing, minerals
           mining, and overflights, are all uses that can potentially
           threaten the resources of this still relatively pristine area.

                An extension into the Strait to Observatory Point would
           afford maximum protection and monitoring of the coastal resources
           within an identifiable ecological system. The Strait is where
           much of the population and uses are concentrated. Protection and
           monitoring of the resources would be beneficial. Further,
           coordination of Sanctuary research and education programs would
           enhance the efforts of the State, local and tribal initiatives in
           the Strait. When further opportunity is provided for public
           -comment NOAA will re-consider adding the Strait into the
           boundaries of the Olympic Coast or the proposed Northwest Straits

                                          IV-28




















                                                                                                         A, 7
                  ...... ... .





                                                                                 f Juan de
                                                                       Strait.
                                                                                              F
                                                                                               uca
                                         Beach
                                           429   Beac
                              Bay   9
                      'Nea                       429A
                       Nea
                                                     Beach
                                                      428                                   0: each
                                                            Beac@                      Ym
                                                            1427'.  Beach                        22
                                                                                                                Bea,ch
                                                                                                      4
                                                                                       Beac
                                                                           B     h
                                                                              eac
                                                                                         42
                                                                            42 5
                                                                                                     ch
                                                                                                 Bea
                                                                                 Beach
                                                                                         Beach
                                                                                 424 1            421
                                                               Pillar Pt.                                  419
                                                                                                                 Reach
                                                                                         423A
                                                              Rec. Area
                                                                                                                   416
                                                                    Silver  Ing
                                                                    Resort                     S It Creek
                                                                          Clallam CountY       R c- Area Freshwater
                                                                          Park Land                      ,,,.F3ay
                                                                                                           Boat Launct














                                                                                 Public Beach Map
                                                                                      Legend


                                                                          Public Beach   .....
                                                                          Boat Launch Site       --,71
                                                                          State Park
                                                                          Meander Line.





                                                                                     5        10     15
                                                                             0

                                                                                       Miles






              Figure 71. BeacheS Along the Strait of Juan de Fuca (WDNR,
                                   1984).


                                                                   IV-29










           Marine Sanctuaries.

                Boundary alternative 4 excluding the Strait, therefore, is
           NOAA's preferred alternative. The boundary encompasses the most
           sensitive and vulnerable habitats along the outer coast and,
           although excludes the transition corridor into the estuarine
           environment of Puget Sound, includes an ecologically identifiable
           oceanic ecosystem. The boundary will facilitate close
           coordination with Tribal, Federal, International, State and local
           initiatives. Through this coordination, the Sanctuary will
           afford greater protection to the nearly pristine environment off
           the outer Coast. Boundary alternative 4 with Respect to the
           fisheries, marine mammal haul out sites, kelp distribution,
           seabird colonies and foraging range, and human uses other than
           fisheries are depicted in Figures 72-75.

                F.-  Boundary Alternativq 5

                Boundary alternative 5 encompasses the entire study area
           from the Washington/Oregon Border to the Canadian Border and into
           the Strait of Juan de Fuca to Observatory Point. This
           alternative adds to boundary alternative 4 the sandy beach
           environments of the southern coast. Many commenters supported
           inclusion of the estuaries of Grays Harbor and Willapa Bay within
           the boundaries. However, upon further consideration, NOAA '
           believes that the estuary of Grays Harbor and Willapa Bay are
           more appropriate candidates for estuarine management regimes such
           as NOAA's National Estuarine Research Reserve System (NERRS) or
           EPA's National Estuary Program (NEP) and thus the estuaries are
           not included in the Sanctuary study area of the Final EIS/MP.
           Therefore, the coastal boundary of alternative 5 cuts across the
           mouths of Grays Harbor and Willapa Bay.

                Further, the southern portion of the study area abuts more
           populated areas and encompasses more marine development. The
           southern portion of the study area is clearly the most developed
           and populated regions of the Washington outer coast. Major
           population centers of Grays Harbor, Raymond, and Ocean Shores
           support fishing and logging industries, pulp and paper mills,
           port activities, and tourism.

                Consequently, a large.concentration of uses occur within the
           southern portion of the study area. This southern boundary
           encompasses valuable groundfish, salmon, ocean pink shrimp and
           dungeness crab fishing areas. It is'also transited by tankers
           engaged in coastwise traffic, and tugs and barges entering and
           exiting the Ports of Grays Harbor, Willapa Bay, and the Columbia
           River. The tugs and barges transport, among other things,
           refined petroleum products, chemicals and logs and wood chips.
           There has been an ongoing $75 million Federal/State/local
           partnership to diversify the Port of Grays Harbor which has
           involved the dredging of Grays Harbor channel to enable larger

                                         INF-30
















                                           126* 10'              126*00'                              125*30'                                    125*00'                                     1?4*30'                                     1?4*00'                                     128*3V =*20'
                                      48*45!                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             48*45'







                                                                                                                                                                  12
                                      49*30'                                       50
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         W30'
                                                                                                                                                                                      14    OR




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              50'

                                                                                   Aq@
                                                                 Z
                                                                        200
                                                                        3011

                                                                 500,

                                                                        4




                                      48-00'                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             wool
                                                                 BOUNDARY
                                                                 ALTERNATIVE.--
                                                                                   NO.
                                                                        TATITUDV@  LONGITUDE
                                                                 1      47W45'        124.11'W
                                                                 2      47Vr45'       124-6912'
                                                                 8      4MI'          125'WOO
                                                                 4      CNOW          12M"'
                                                                 6      41wo"         12VW42'
                                                                 6      47'5718'      MWIS,
                                                                 7      49W33'        1WN2W
                                                                 8      48*14!46'     126-40,59,
                                                                 9      48*W'1r       126'WG9'
                                                                        4SW49'        WW04'
                                                                 11     49W69'        IW5913!                                                                              d
                                                                 12     49W19'        IW50'4-
                                                                        48'29' :      124'4841:
                                      47o3O'                     1@4    48W6&0B       12413FIS
                                                                 Is     4M'17'        124-01T                                                                                                                                                                                                            47W
                                                                 16     V19'04'       JW051301
                                                                 17     49'11'37'     124'aSO'
                                                                 is     W16601        12r4934'
                                                                                                                                                          4,01
                                                                 20     48*14'0V      12r3810'r
                                                                 21     48`0902'      12MO7'


                                                                                   - LEGEND -
                                                                        FISHING AREAS


                                                                                   Commercial Finfish


                                                                                   Sport Finfish

                                      47*00' -
                                                                                   Razor Clam Beaches                                                                                                                                Z@'                                                                 47'00'


                                                                                   Pink ShrimpTrawling


                                                                                   Crabbing

                                                                 A                 Shellfish Aquaculture


                                                                                                               AW-)
                                                                                            ENO

                                      46*30'-
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         46o3O'
                                                                        UNITED STATES -WEST COAST
                                                                                         WASHINGTON
                                                                        PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                                                 NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY
                                                                                                 NILIMCAL 111LIS


                                      46'12'                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             46*12!
                                          126*10' 126'00'                                             125*30'                                    IP5.001                                     124'30'                                      124oOO'                                    123*30'       123*20'



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            ---------------

                         Figure 72. Boundary Alternative 4 with Respect to Fisheries.

                                                                                                                                                                IV-31














                                                 126* 10'          126W                             125*30'                                125*00'                              124'30'                                1?4'W                                  123'80' 123*2(Y
                                            48*4  5'                                                                                                                                                                                                                           4845'



                                                                                                                                      @o


                                                                                                                                                              71
                                                                                                                                                                  13
                                            48*W                                                                                                                          14                                                                                                   48o3O'



                                                                                                                                                                                                                     6


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         'joo
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     4


                                                                                                                              61
                                                                                              7                           0-
                                                      4e
                                            wool                   +                                                                                                                                                                                                           wool
                                                                   BOL N RX,
                                                                   ALTERN
                                                                            NO. 4
                                                                       TATITuny,
                                                                   I   47Vr45        124'11'02'
                                                                   2   47Vr45        12emlir
                                                                   3   47WO5         125'WOV
                                                                   4   4r4O'O5       125W44'
                                                                   5   47bWO1   :    us"
                                                                   6   47*57'lr      12MIT
                                                                   7   41ml.         12m                                              4
                                                                   8   49'14'46'     IW4015V
                                                                   9   49W1T
                                                                   10  49'Zr49'      1WW04
                                                                   11  48WW          IPAWIT                                                 a
                                                                   12  48W19'        124W4r
                                                                   18  48'"          lW4341'
                                            47W -                  14  IW,.          IMMIX
                                                                   15  48*Wl'r       12rmir          +                                                                                                                                                                         47W
                                                                   16  48`1 04*      124IW301
                                                                   17                124'WBV
                                                                   18  01"50,        12r49'
                                                                   19  4BW401        1231914'                                                      Yo
                                                                                     123*WO,r
                                                                   2D  01091
                                                                   21  49WO2*        12rwar

                                                                       MARINE RA4MALS
                                                                       AND KELP BEDS


                                                                            Kelp Beds                                                              2


                                                                            Distribution of Se Otters
                                            47-00' -                               (1976-1987)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               47*W

                                                                            HAULOUT AREAS

                                                                            Harbor Seal


                                                                   0        California Sea Lion


                                                                   0        Northern Sea Lion
                                                                                                                                                       \u@
                                            46W -                                                        Q174-1
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               46*30'
                                                                       UNITED STATES-WEST COAST
                                                                                        WASHINGTON
                                                                       PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                                                   NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY
                                                                                              NAIMCAL MIIE@,


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   12'
                                               1'2'6'* 10!         i@600'                         12@30'                                  125*00'                               124*30'                                124*00'                               123*30' 12V


                              Figure,73. Boundary Alternative 4 with Respect to Marine Mam-al
                                                                            Haulout Sites and Kelp Habitat.

                                                                                                                                                   IV-32















                                             126* 10'               126*00'                            125,30,                                      125*00'                                    124*30'                                      124*00'                                     123*30' 123'20'
                                         48'45'                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             48'45'
                                                                                     ?




                                         4nO'                                                                                                                       12
                                                                                                                                                                                               0,                                                                                                           V30'



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 5V
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          6 Ae
                                                                    '(200                                                                                                                                                                                           Cl                 00     00'
                                                                               300-

                                                                    00,


                                                                                                   7



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            48*00'
                                                                               OUNDARY,,                      6                                                                     0.
                                                                    A          ERNALT-
                                                                               NO,        4

                                                                    1          76MV       124*11'02'
                                                                    2          1.".       1w5gir
                                                                               '06'       12SWOO'
                                                                    4          4 40'05'   125*"44'
                                                                    5          401'       25'W42-
                                                                    6          4r 18:
                                                                    7                              Ir                                           4
                                                                                          2,1'W
                                                                    8          49*14' '   25*40'59                                             @4
                                                                    9          49W        I.,
                                                                    10         4M4        25'WO4'
                                                                    11         4MB91      2e6vl3,                                                      a                                  I
                                                                    12         48WI91     WW
                                                                    18         48WW       WaZl
                                         47*30'                     14         49'ZT501     *Wl                                                                                                                                                                                                             47*30'
                                                                    16         49WI7'       -W,
                                                                    6
                                                                    7
                                                                    18         48*1650'   12r49                                                               NyON
                                                                    19         411411     IW49'
                                                                    20         48*14'091  12rwm
                                                                    21         49WO2'     123'WO7'







                                                                                                                                                              2


                                                                               SEABIRD
                                         VOW                        BREEDING COLONIES                                                                                                                                                                                                                       V00'
                                                                               (Ordered by Size of Colony)

                                                                               Less Than 100 Birds

                                                                    o          100-1000 Birds

                                                                    0 1000-10,000 Birds
                                                                    0 0wr 10,000 Birds





                                         46*30! -                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           46*30'
                                                                               UNITED STATES -WEST COAST
                                                                                            WASHINGTON
                                                                               PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                                                    NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY
                                                                                                   NAU]71C_',@ MUM,

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         R,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            46*12'
                                             126*10'                126*W                                                                            125*W                                      124'30'                                      124'00'                                    123*30' 123*20'




                            Figure 74. Boundary Alternative 4 with Respect to Seabird Colonies
                                                                               and Seabird Foraging Range.

                                                                                                                                                                  IV-33












                                             1260 10'          126oOO'                             126*30'                             125*00'                                124*30'                                 124'00'                                123030' 123020'
                                        ,045'                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  48*45'







                                        W30'
                                                                                                                                                                             O'@                                                                                               48*30,


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   -'Pj-




                                                                     300-

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  50
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         30---
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 U
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      21         U      S@




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               '0001
                                        48*00'                 +
                                                      66 **'@

                                                               ALTERN
                                                                            NO*


                                                               2
                                                               3     47oW               '00
                                                               4     4r4O'O5       125*04!"'
                                                                     47*W01:       125*W42'
                                                                     47*5713'      125WI3
                                                               7     497r3r        125*WBD:
                                                               8     49*144T       125*4O'B9
                                                               9     4MW           IMW691
                                                               11    W2-1411             '04
                                                               @j    4MW           2e6w13*
                                                               12    49W19'        12eW42*
                                                               13    4rS           124*4341'
                                                                            1.
                                        47*3W -                14    48WS"         124-W13'                                                                                                                                                                                    47o3O'
                                                               15    4M17'         124'Z13
                                                               16    dr1q,  04'    12A*W30
                                                               17    48'1   1'87'  IWWSo-          -9
                                                               @8    49*16'50*     12r47W          6@
                                                               19    48W40         1 034'
                                                               2D    4T14'09:      12MO'r
                                                               21    4swor         12MOr





                                                                            -LEGEND-
                                                               COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES


                                                                            Dredged Material
                                        47*W -                 1*1          Disposal Sites                                                                                                                                                                                     47oW
                                                               FT71
                                                                            Gravel Deposits


                                                                            Highlighted Areas







                                                                                                       JA&
                                                                                                        mww                                              r                                                                                                                     46o3O'
                                        46*30'
                                                                     UNITED STATES-WEST COAST
                                                                                      WASHINGTON
                                                                     PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                                               NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUAR4
                                                                                           [email protected] MILE@,
                                                                                                                                                                 rt
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               46*12'
                                        46'12
                                            12'6* 10'          12@00'                              125*30'                              125*00'                                124*30'                                 124*00'                               123*3Y       1?3G20'



                            Figure 75. Boundary Alternative 4 in Relation to Vessel Traffic
                                                                            Management Regimes, Dredge Disposal Sites, Oil and Gas
                                                                            Resources and Gravel De-osits.
                                                                                                                                                               P

                                                                                                                                                    IV-34









         vessels to enter the port. Clean dredge spoil from the dredging
         project are dumped at three EPA/COE permitted dumpsites located
         off the mouth of Grays Harbor. There is also an interim dumpsite
         off the mouth of Willapa Bay and three others off the Columbia
         River all receiving dredge spoils from maintenance dredging of
         the respective ship channels. These dredge disposal sites and
         port activities would conflict with the Sanctuary regulations
         prohibiting alteration of, or construction on the seabed, and
         discharges.

              The southern addition adds approximately 46% of the relative
         density of'invertebrates harvested by commercial and recreational
         fishers in the total study area. The largest significance is
         attributed to the presence of Pacific oysters in Willapa Bay, and
         the Dungeness crab and ocean pink shrimp stocks offshore. This
         is reflected in the tables comparing the relative abundance and
         importance of selected invertebrates off Washington (Appendix C).

              The southern addition also is significant in that it
         represents approximately 43% of the relative abundance of fish
         species in the study area. Salmon, steelhead, lingcod and
         Pacific cod account for the greatest density indexes. The salmon
         and steelhead accounted for in these areas are migrating through
         from the Columbia River, Chehalis, tributaries of Willapa Bay, as
         well as from river and stream systems located in Oregon. The
         significance of this addition is skewed by the importance of
         estuaries for marine fish. During the spring when freshwater
         inflow into the estuaries is greatest, and the predominant
         currents originate from the north, the Columbia River fresh water
         plume is kept south of Point Grenville dominating a large area of
         the marine environment off southern Washington. This essentially
         extends the Columbia River estuary well offshore. The boundaries
         of the water masses support rich fishing grounds.

              The seaward portion of the southern addition is weighted as
         being very significant for marine mammals (Appendix C). This is
         due to the inclusion of the migration corridor for the right,
         minke, and humpback whales, Dall's porpoise and while-sided
         dolphins. The migration of these marine mammals are most heavily
         concentrated at the edge of the continental shelf. Gray whales
         migrate through the study area within approximately 12 nautical
         miles from shore. Appendix C reflects that the most seaward
         portions of the entire study area is significant for marine
         mammals. Hence, the extension of boundary alternative 5 adds
         little difference. The tables in Appendix C also reflect the
         significance of boundary alternative 5 because the estuaries are
         critical haulout sites for pinnipeds.

              The table comparing the estimates of seab ird populations
         within the study area indicates that only 12% of the population
         was counted in the southern boundary. The largest bird
         populations in the southern portion of the study are juvenile

                                       IV-35









          rhinoceros auklets feeding off the mouth of Grays Harbor,
          Glaucous-winged gulls and caspian, terns. Approximately four
          small colonies of pigeon guillemots are located in the jettys of
          Grays Harbor in driftwood debris at the opening of the Colombia
          River and Willapa Bay (Speich and. Wahl, 1989). The estuaries
          provide valuable habitat for migrating shorebirds whose
          populations swell in the spring and fall.

               While the resources in the southern portion of the study
          area are significant to the marine ecology of the Pacific
          Northwest, the analysis of resources and uses indicates that
          there are two separate but related ecosystems. To the north of
          Copalis Beach, the marine environment is dominated by rocky
          intertidal habitats, kelp forest subtidal habitats, and
          ecologically rich neretic zones all of which are fueled by
          upwelling from the Juan de Fuca Canyon coupled with the presence
          of the shallow offshore banks in the photic zone. This portion
          of the study area provides rich foraging areas and haul out sites
          for colonial seabirds and marine mammals. Sediments nourishing
          the benthic environment originate: predominately from the Strait
          of Juan de Fuca. The coastal environment is sparsely populated,
          with the greatest immediate threats to the resources runoff from
          timber activities in the adjacent. watersheds, and offshore
          development (vessel traffic, and potential offshore development
          of oil and gas and gravel deposits). The ability to respond to
          potential spills from offshore development are hampered by
          limited coastal access and the high energy marine environment.

               By contrast, the sandy environments south of Copalis Beach
          are much less diverse (with the exception of the estuaries) and
          are capable of rebounding from an oil spill relatively quickly
          compared to communities of rocky intertidal habitats. The
          southern boundary has already experienced heavy development and
          there are a number of point and non-point source discharges and
          dumpsites. Consequently, the southern portion of the study area
          does not have the pristine qualities of the northern areas.

               The benthic sediments in the southern portion of the study
          area originate from the Columbia River Basin reflecting the
          aerial extent and influence of the Columbia River Plume. The
          ecosystem that dominates the southern portion of the study area
          in fact extends well into Oregon and state boundaries present an
          arbitrary delineation.   Thus, while there are significant
          ecological qualities to both the northern and southern regions of
          the study area, there are notable differences in their ecology
          and human-uses that characterize these regions as distinct.
          Figures 76-79 depict boundary alternative 5 with respect to
          fisheries, marine mammal haul out. sites, kelp distribution,
          seabird colonies and foraging range, and human uses other than
          fishing.




                                         IV-36
















                                                 126* 10'         126*W                                      125*30'                                      125*00'                                      124*30'                                       124*00'                                       123*30! 123*20'
                                            48*45' -                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   48*4V







                                            48*30'                                          50                                                                  121@                   14
                                                                                                                +1                                                                             15                                                                                                                      48*W



                                                                                                                           10

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          PVC
                                                                             00                                                                                                                                                                                                                    0
                                                                             o'
                                                                             3
                                                                                                                                                                                                                           7
                                                                       400
                                                                       500,






                                            48*00'                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     '001),
                                                                       BOUNDARY
                                                                   ALTERNATIVVE
                                                                                   NO. 5
                                                                             I.ATITUny,    LONGITUDE
                                                                       1     49'   15:W         124U'20-
                                                                       2     49*15 001          124*36 '24'
                                                                       3     47V746'            I. 'W12'
                                                                       4     4MI'               125'WOO
                                                                       5     4'111'             125'04'44
                                                                       6     4rW01'             126IW42
                                                                       7     V5713!             I26*N13'
                                                                       8     48WBr              JWWW
                                                                       9     4W14'46'           125-40' 59.
                                                                       10    4rW12*             125*ZV59
                                                                       11    49W49'             125'06'14
                                                                                                JW6g]31
                                                                             49W19              124*50'4-
                                            4730' -                    14    4r&88              IW43'41'                                                                                                                                                                                                               4730'
                                                                       1:    0271":             124'W18*
                                                                             4T rW              IWO113W
                                                                       17    49'14! '           IM'WO7'
                                                                       I
                                                                       8     WW02'              123-A'07*
                                                                                                                                                                C   @yoN



                                                                                           LEGEND
                                                                                   FISHING AREAS
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     7

                                                                                   Commercial Finfish


                                                                                   Sport 1@infish
                                            47'00' -                               Razor Clam Beaches                                                                                                                                                                                                                  4'rOO'


                                                                                   Pink Shrimp Ti-awling
                                                                       IS

                                                                                   Crabbing


                                                                                   Shellfish Aquacult..
                                                                                                @e svl@
                                                                                                    112KI
                                                                                                                      00
                                            46*W -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       46o3O'
                                                                             UNITED STATES -WEST COAST
                                                                                                    WASHINGTON
                                                                             PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                                                       NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY
                                                                                                           NAUrIC@,L MILEs,


                                            46*12"                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     46*12'
                                                 126* 10'          126*00'                                   125t3O'                                       125'00'                                      124*30'                                        124'00'                                     123'30! 1?3'W



                               Figure 76. Boundary Alternative 5 with Respect to Fisheries.


                                                                                                                                                                         IV-37















                                                126*10' 1WOO'                                                                                         125'00'                                     1?A*30'                                     124*00'                                      123'30' 123*20'
                                           48*45'                                   r                                                                                                                                                                                                                          48*45'






                                           48*30'                                                                                                                        13
                                                                                                                                                                                  34
                                                                                                                                                                                          16




                                                                                                                        to                                                                                                                     Z@                          A


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   7
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        100,
                                                                           00








                                           48*00' -

                                                                      BOUNDARY!
                                                                                                                  7
                                                                                                                  7
                                                                                                                  7
                                                                ALTERNA,@
                                                                                    NO.
                                                                                                                                                  6
                                                                           LATMIDE LONG
                                                                      1    46*1'          IWW20@
                                                                      2    49616'00*      124'MW
                                                                      a                   JW68,w
                                                                      4    47WO6'         Wwool
                                                                      6    4r41Y()6'      IW'04'44r
                                                                      6    4rW01,         12M4r
                                                                      7    4r5T1W         I25W13`
                                                                                          WSS'2V
                                                                      8    4RVT3r
                                                                      9    wbrlw          IW40'W
                                                                      10   49WIr          12=69'                                                         4
                                                                      11   4SW491         m.W04'
                                                                                              ,6V
                                                                      12   48WW           I?A    Ir
                                           47*W -                          48W19*         124-W
                                                                      1134 49-29W         124*434WI
                                                                           48WW           124.W                                                                                                                                                                                                                47*30'
                                                                      16                         18
                                                                      16   4S* 7W         L24TI'MY
                                                                      I
                                                                      7    48*14'091      12rWO'r
                                                                      18   4SWOr          12rWOr
                                                                                                                                                               Nyu



                                                                           MARINE MAMMALS
                                                                           AND KELP BEDS


                                                                                    Kelp Beds


                                                                                    Distribution of Sea Otters
                                           47*W -                                         (1976-1987)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               47*00'

                                                                                    HAULOUT AREAS
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         *so           .0

                                                                                    Harbor Seal


                                                                      0             Califomia Sea Lion


                                                                      0             Northern Sea Lion



                                                                                                                                                                                                            S


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  0

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               46*30'
                                                                           UNITED STATES -WEST COAST
                                                                                               WASHINGTON
                                                                           PROPOSED OLYMPIC CO
                                                                                                                                          AST
                                                                 NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY
                                                                                                    NAU71CAL      MILES                                         J,
                                                                                    rR-R-P===r-
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         'j-

                                           46* 12'l                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            46*1@
                                               126*1V           126*00'                                   125*30'                                     126*W                                        124*3W                                       124*00'                                   12*30' 123*20'



                              Figure 77. Boundary Alternative 5 with Respect to Marine Marrmal
                                                                                    Haulout Sites and Kelp Habitat.

                                                                                                                                                                     IV- 3 8
















                                          126* 10'                            126*W               125*30'                                   125'00'                                   1?4*30'                                    124*00'                                   12a'8V 123*20'
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               48465'



                                                                                                                                            00



                                      48*30'                                      50                                                                                           15
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               48*W




                                                                                                               10                                                                                                                                                                   50'

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    P"C4
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                -,sp
                                                                              300
                                                                              0                                                                                                                                                               so
                                                                              00
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     30-



                                      48*00'                                                                                                   +                                                                                                                                               WW
                                                                              OUNDARY                   7                                                                  0.
                                                                              AERNATIV-.F,--
                                                                              NO. 5
                                                                                                                                        6
                                                                              6.15,00.  LONGITUD
                                                                              I       124'W20:
                                                                              216,00, 1
                                                                                      24W24
                                                                              8445    1N*68'12'
                                                                              44'n"   126'WOD'
                                                                              547' 0'05 IW04'44'
                                                                              647' 0' 126*W42'
                                                                              747*67 :125-018-                                          "15
                                                                              V07'    26*38`20'
                                                                              948' 4' 6W40' 9'
                                                                              10W     25V 591                                                   4
                                                                              11 N4
                                                                              49'     25'06'W.
                                                                              48:                                                         _\@@
                                                                              120     24*59'13'
                                                                              I48.W19
                                      47'30' -                                134
                                                                                                                                                                                         +                                                                                                     47*30'
                                                                                         1'30
                                                                              11 4EA"'W 123  17'
                                                                              IS      I.,                                                         C. Nyo-









                                                                              SEABIRD
                                      47'00'                                  BREEDING COLONIES                                                                                                                                                                                                V00'
                                                                              (O,de,,d by Si,e of Colony)

                                                                              Less Than 100 Birds

                                                                              0100-1000 Birds

                                                                              01000-10,000 Birds
                                                                              00@er 10,000 Birds





                                      46*30' -                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 46*30'
                                                                              UNITED STATES-WEST COAST
                                                                                        WASHINGTON
                                                                              PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                                                              NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY
                                                                                              NAUTICAL MILES
                                                                              I F-i H F-------I

                                      46* 12                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   46*1Z
                                          126"* 10'                           12@1)0'              125*30'                                                                              124*30'                                    124*00'                                  1V30' 123*20'



                             Figure 78. Boundary'Alternative 5 with Respect to Seabird                                                                                                                                                                                    Colonies
                                                                              and Seabird Foraging Range.

                                                                                                                                                              IV-39










                                                   126* 10!             126'00'                                125'30'                                      125OW                                        124*30'                                       124*00'                                      123*30' 123*20'
                                              48*45'
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         48*45!





                                             4nO'                                          '50                   7V                                              IZ@
                                                                        +                                        _@j
                                                                                                                                                                                           B@                                                                                                                            49*30'






                                                                             2-00
                                                                        '(300                  q
                                                                        400
                                                                        500-                                                                                                                                                                                                30-



                                            wool                        +                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                W001
                                                                        B
                                                                        ALTERN
                                                                                        NO.
                                                                             LATITUDE
                                                                        1    49' WOW
                                                                        2    W151
                                                                        3    47*07'          124
                                                                        4    4rWO5           125WOO*
                                                                        5    47*40'05               '44
                                                                        6    4r5W01'                '42
                                                                        7    47*5713'        125`W13
                                                                        8    W0733'          12VW20
                                                                        9    411' -          125'4C'591
                                                                        10   48-Xlr          125-&59
                                                                        11   48*2749'        125*WN
                                                                        12   49W591          12ASWI3,
                                                                        13   4EW19,          tWW42*
                                            4MO'                        14   49WW            12rIW11'                                                                                                                                                                                                                    47*30!
                                                                        IS              '5@. 124*WIS'
                                                                        "    4S'ITSD'        114'01'
                                                                        17   41..'           123*39
                                                                        18   4SW02'          12M0O7r






                                                                                        -LEGEND-
                                                                        COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES


                                                                                        Dredged Material
                                           47'00'                                       Disposal Sites                                                                                                                                                                                                                   47*00'
                                                                                        Gravel Deposits
                                                                        Ln


                                                                                        Highlighted Areas






                                                                                                                      A!. ft-61


                                           46*30'                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        46'30'
                                                                             UNITED STATES-WEST COAST
                                                                                                 WASHINGTON
                                                                             PROPOSED OLYMPIC COAST
                                                                        NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUAR4
                                                                                                       NAUTICAL MILES
                                                                                           0           5         '0


                                          46'10                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          46*1V
                                                126*10' li6*00'                                                                                           126*W                                         124*30'                                       124'W                                       M*30' 123*20'



                              Figure 79. Boundary Alternative 5 in Relation to Vessel Traffic
                                                                                        Management Regimes, Dredge Disposal Sites, Oil and Gas
                                                                                        Resources and Gravel Deposits.


                                                                                                                                                                          IV-40









         Section II:    Regulatory Alternatives
              A.   Introduction

              This section analyzes the environmental consequences of the
         eight activities included within the scope of the Sanctuary
         regulations. For each activity the preferred Sanctuary
         regulatory action is identified along with an analysis of the
         impact to natural resources and human uses of both the Sanctuary
         regulatory alternative and the status quo. There are also two
         regulations proposed (preferred Sanctuary action) whose purpose
         is to facilitate enforcement of the other Sanctuary regulations:
         the regulations prohibiting possession of resources and
         interference with enforcement.

              Overall, the proposed final regulations and designation are
         intended to: (1) improve resource protection by instituting new
         regulatory measures and by supplementing present surveillance and
         enforcement actions; (2) minimize negative impacts to human uses,
         particularly to those deemed consistent with the purposes of the
         Sanctuary and; (3) provide for a manageable area including such
         factors as its size, its ability to be defined as a discrete
         ecological unit, its accessibility, and its suitability for
         monitoring and enforcement activities.

              It is important to note that in promulgating these
         regulations, NOAA must work within the constraints of Title III
         of the MPRSA. Specifically, section 304(c) states that while
         NOAA cannot terminate valid leases, permits, licenses or rights
         of subsistence use or access existing as of the date of Sanctuary
         designation, NOAA can regulate the exercise of such
         authorizations and rights consistent with the purposes for which
         the Sanctuary was designated.
























                                       IV-41











          B.   oil, Gas and Mineral Activities
                    1.   Status Ouo
                         a.   Consecruence of Impact to Resources

               There is presently no oil and gas development taking place
          in the study area. Under the most recent Five-Year Plan for OCS
          oil and gas leasing activities developed by the MMS, an OCS lease
          sale on the Washington OCS was scheduled for the spring of 1992.
          However, the reauthorization of the MPRSA (P.L. 102-587) mandates
          a permanent prohibition on oil and gas pre-leasing or leasing
          activities within the Sanctuary.

               Currently, state law prohibits oil and gas activities in
          state waters. Also, Washington state has requested that MMS
          delete from any lease sale the portion of its planning area that
          lies north of the 47th parallel, and the area within 12 nautical
          miles of the Grays Harbor, Willapa Bay, and Columbia River
          estuaries.

               Scientific evidence concerning the potential impacts of oil
          and gas activities on the.natural resources of the Olympic Coast
          is not conclusive, and the studies planned by MMS and the Pacific
          Northwest OCS Task Force will address several critical questions.
          A recent National Academy of Sciences study (NAS, 1989) as well
          as past EPA (1985) and NAS (1985) studies, have examined whether
          there is adequate information available to determine the effects
          of oil and gas activities on the marine environment. It has been
          concluded that many uncertainties still exist, even in marine
          areas for which there exists far more information than exists for
          the Olympic Coast. However, it is still possible to evaluate
          some of the potential risks to the Olympic Coast from OCS oil and
          gas activities, and the transportation of hydrocarbon products.

               Offshore hydrocarbon exploration, development, and.
          production activities, including the transshipment of crude oil
          to the mainland, may cause unforeseen and potentially substantial
          discharges of oil, both chronic and catastrophic, into the marine
          environment. The sensitive marine resources of the Olympic Coast
          may be threatened by: (1) well "blow-outs" caused by equipment
          failure or damage, or geologic hazards; (2) oil spills and
          pipeline leaks; (3) noise and visual disturbances caused by
          drilling, the presence of drill rigs or platform, work crews,
          supply boats, and helicopters; (4) pollution associated with
          aquatic discharges;   and (5) short-term pipeline construction
          upheaval.

                Normal hydrocarbon operation can result in unintentional,
          chronic, or small oil spillage. since the Olympic Coast area has
          had little history of hydrocarbon production, direct evidence
          does not exist to illustrate the effects of exploration,
          development, and production spills in these waters. Petroleum
          products are, however, transported along the coast and in and out

                                        IV-42









         of the Strait of Juan de Fuca.   Two oil spills, the General M.C.
         Meiggs and the -Nestucca, have occurred recently in coastal waters
         off Washington State.   Oil spilled from the barge Nestucca
         soiled beaches found within the boundary of the Sanctuary. The
         reports of damages from these incidents, as well as data from
         spills in other marine waters, serve as examples of the types of
         impacts that can result from oil related accidents. Known
         threats to marine organisms that may result from offshore oil and
         gas exploration, development, and production are presented in
         Table 6 (page III@19).

              Even though OCS oil and gas activities may take place
         offshore in Federal waters, the activities can negatively effect
         state territorial waters and coastal environments. In addition
         to effecting marine organisms, these activities can disrupt human
         uses of the marine environment and the socioeconomic structure of
         coastal communities. Potential negative impacts to nearshore and
         coastal areas include: the presence of processing facilities
         which also involves the problems of air pollution and the
         disposal of processing wastes; interference with port operations
         and stress on existing port facility space and services;
         conflict with shore-based operations which use the offshore
         waters (e.g., commercial and recreational fishing, whale-watching
         operations); and socioeconomic impacts on the affected coastal
         communities (Mead and Sorenson, 1970; Cican-Sain, 1985;
         Freeman, 1985; MMS, 1990a).

              (a) Sources of Oil Spills and Potential Impacts

              Inputs of petroleum into the marine environment come from a
         variety of sources. Less then 2% (50,000 tons of a total
         estimated 3.2 million metric tons) of the annual input of oil
         into the world oceans is from offshore production activities.
         The largest input, accounting for approximately 45%, is from
         transportation related incidents including tanker operations,
         .spills at terminals and dry docks, bilge and fuel oil flushing,
         tanker and other ship or barge accidents. Municipal and
         industrial wastes, and runoff account for 36.5% of the oil
         entering the world oceans. other sources include natural seeps
         (7.7%), and atmospheric deposition (9.2%) (NRC, 1985; Boesch and
         Rabalis, 1987). Due to the near absence of industrial and
         municipal discharges along the Olympic Coast, it is clear that
         the major threat of oil contamination in this area currently is
         from tanker and barge operations.

              Accidents, natural disasters, and human error can lead to
         situations which result in the release  of oil into the marine
         environment. Chronic discharges, well   blowouts, barge and tanker
         accidents, pipeline breaks and leaks, and equipment failures
         cause spills. The large majority of spills involve relatively
         small amounts of oil, usually less than 1000 gallons (24 barrels)
         (MMS, 1986; 1987). Small spills, defined by MMS as less than

                                        IV-43









          1,000 barrels, account for almost all spill incidents in U.S.
          waters, but only 28% of the total volume of spilled oil. One to
          two barrels, on average, are spilled during routine operation for
          every million barrels of oil produced from offshore platforms
          (MMS, 1986). The cumulative long-term impact of many small
          spills and chronic discharges is not well understood and requires
          further study.

              Well blowouts and tanker accidents can result in large,
          acute oil spills (greater than 1,000 barrels) that may have
          severe, long-term impacts on marine environments (MMS, 1984). In
          addition to blowouts, platform spills can result from leaks and
          small releases of fuels and lubricants. Offshore production also
          carries with it the risk of spills from pipelines; 95% of oil and
          gas produced offshore is transported by pipeline. For both
          Federal and state waters, the loss of oil from major spills
          ranges from 0.15-1 barrel of oil spilled for every million
          barrels produced (MMS, 1986) (note: these figures were calculated
          prior to the Exxon Valdez spill and other spills occurring in
          1987-88).

              Blowouts were the cause of sixty-five percent of oil spills
          associated with drilling and production from 1964 through 1980.
          During these 17 years, a total of 102,382 barrels were discharged
          into marine waters as a result of blowouts at offshore wells in
          the Gulf of Mexico, while about half that amount, 55,213 barrels,
          was spilled as a result of non-blowout associated incidents (The
          Futures Group, 1982). Massive spills caused by well blowouts
          have been highly publicized, but such spills are rare. The OCS
          spill-rate for platform spills of more than 1,000 barrels is one
          per billion barrels produced (MMS, 1986).

              Most blowouts have been relatively minor, especially in
          recent years. From 1964 to 1981, 99.5% of the spill volume
          caused by blowouts in the Gulf of Mexico was spilled in the years
          1964 through 1971. After 1971 the volume of blowout-produced
          spills was negligible, yet there was no reduction in the number
          of blowout spills (The Futures Group, 1982). The OCS spill-rate
          for small platform or pipeline spills is 379 spills per billion
          barrels produced or transported. Ninety-nine percent of these
          spills are less than 50 barrels, and 89% are less than one barrel
          (MMS, 1986).

            Although the offshore oil.industry has been successful in
          reducing the volume of oil spills, the record indicates that if
          oil development were to take place in the area of the Olympic
          coast, spills from blowouts, platform accidents, and
          transportation of crude oil to shore are likely to occur. MMS
          (1'986) has estimated that during the 35 year life span of lease
          sale #132 a total hydrocarbon equivalent of 243 million barrels
          of oil (58 million barrels of oil and 1.043 billion cubic feet of
          gas) would be retrieved by a single platform drilling 30 wells.

                                       IV-44









         Using a high-case and low-case production scenario, MMS has
         estimated rates of oil spillage off the Washington/Oregon coast
         should the lease sale #132 area be developed. Employing the low
         case scenario (58 million barrels produced) with tanker
         transhipment, MMS projects that 0.23 large spills would occur,
         with a 11% probability of a large spill occurring. The high case
         scenario (180 million barrels produced) estimates are 0.51 large
         spills projected and 16% probability of one or more large spills
         occurring. A cumulative scenario, which adds in the effects of
         oil transhipment along our coast of oil produced elsewhere
         changes the projected figures to 3.16 spills over the life of the
         field, with a 96% probability of occurring.

              These MMS projections indicate that OCS oil and gas
         activities would increase the risk of hydrocarbon contamination
         along the Olympic Coast, but that the major threat is from tanker
         or barge oil spills. From 1974 to 1981, there were 81 tanker or
         barge related oil spills of more than 1,000 barrels in U.S.
         waters. Only six of these were on the West Coast--three in port
         and three at sea (The Futures Group, 1982). In 1988 and 1989
         there were six significant oil spills resulting from tanker or
         barge accidents. Three of these tanker oil spills occurred on
         the east coast and three on the west coast.

              The largest of the three east coast spills occurred on June
         24, 1989 when Uruguayan oil tanker Presidente Rivera ran aground
         near Philadelphia, releasing 800,000 gallons of oil into the
         Delaware River. On June 23, 1989, the Greek-registered World
         Prodigy grounded on Brenton Reef near Newport in Narragansett
         Bay, Rhode Island dumping 300,000 gallons of oil. Also on June
         23, 1989, the tanker Rachel B. collided with a barge resulting in
         6,000 gallons of oil spilling into the Houston Ship Channel.

              Other spills occurred off the west coast: the tanker Puerto
         Rican near San Francisco in 1984, the Oil barge Nestucca off
         Grays Harbor, Washington in 1988, the General M.C. Meiggs off
         Cape Flattery, Washington, and the Exxon Valdez near Valdez,
         Alaska in March 1989. The Exxon Valdez ran aground on Bligh Reef
         off of Valdez, Alaska and spilled 242,000 barrels (over
         10,100,0000 gallons) of crude oil onto the shores of Prince
         William Sound. This was the largest oil spill to date in U.S.
         waters. The Exxon Valdez disaster has received much publicity
         and scientific investigations are currently underway
         investigating the long-term effects of the spill and possible
         future management measures (CMC, 1989).

            The tanker 'Puerto Rican broke apart approximately eight miles
         seaward of the Golden Gate Bridge after becoming disabled by on-
         board explosions. The tanker released 48,000 barrels of
         hydrocarbons into the ocean and of this amount, only 1,460
         barrels were recovered during cleanup operations (USCG, 1985).
         This spill killed an estimated 2,874 seabirds, and caused

                                       IV-45









         additional damage to water quality, fishery resources, marine
         mammals, and human uses. For comparison, in February, 1986,'the
         tanker barge Apex Houston spilled some 600 barrels of oil along
         the central California coast killing an estimated 9,817 seabirds
         within the Gulf of the Farallones National Marine sanctuary.

              The Nestucca and Meiggs spills occurred off the Washington
         coastline, and the oil spilled affected coastal areas found
         within the boundaries of the proposed sanctuary. These accidents
         demonstrate the seriousness of potential hazards to the proposed
         sanctuary resources and environment from spilled oil, regardless
         of its source.

              On December 22, 1988 the barge Nestucca was struck by its
         tug the ocean Service. The barge released 231,000 gallons of NO.
         6 fuel oil into Grays Harbor and coastal waters polluting the
         shoreline from-Grays Harbor to Cape Flattery. In addition, oil
         polluted beaches inside Grays Harbor and along the western
         shoreline of Vancouver Island, in British Columbia, Canada. The
         resulting oil slick covered over 800 square miles and more than
         110 miles of the Washington coastline. Cleanup response was
         started immediately and actual cleanup efforts were underway by
         December 23, 1988. As of August 1989, very little visual
         evidence of the spill remains on the beaches, though long-term
         impacts to marine biota are not known.

              An assessment of damage resulting from the oil spill has not
         yet been completed, although short-term impacts are known. Over
         10,300 oiled waterfowl (mostly murres and grebes) were collected
         (WDOE, 1989). Although No. 6'fuel is a relatively low toxicity
         oil, it is highly viscous, maintains large slicks on the water
         surface, weathers slowly, and kills by physical contact and
         smothering.

              Of the 10,300 birds collected after the Nestucca spill,
         approximately 9,300 were dead or died at the bird rescue center.
         It is likely that this number of dead birds represents only a
         small portion of those birds affected because many oiled birds
         were not collected because of sinking, predation, hiding, and
         burying.

              Another example of an oil spill accident in the vicinity of
         the proposed Olympic coast sanctuary is the General M.C. Meiggs.
         While under tow, the unmanned troopship broke loose and grounded
         10 miles south of Cape Flattery in January, 1972 spilling
         approximately 55,000 barrels of Navy special fuel oil.
         Prevailing winds blew oil globules onto beaches where the oil
         became incorporated into the sediment. For the period of a five-
         year study, oil persisted in the intertidal area of a
         contaminated cove, causing the intertidal organisms to be
         continuously exposed to the oil. Some primary observations of
         the study were that hydrocarbons taken up by mussels persisted in

                                       IV-46










          their systems for five years after the spill, and 70% of
          surviving sea urchins lost their spines (Clark et al., 1978).

              These oil spill events demonstrate a number of concerns
          related to oil spills in general:

          1.  The size of the spill does not necessarily correlate with
              the resulting damage to the environment.

          2.  For many oil spill incidents, exemplified primarily by the
              two spills in California and the Valdez disaster, the
              existing capability to contain and clean up the spill is not
              sufficient. The areas affected are coastal marine waters,
              and to be effective clean-up equipment requires less
              turbulent conditions than normally encountered in the waters
              off the Olympic Coast.

          3.  Mitigating measures alone may not be sufficient to ensure
              adequate protection of sanctuary resources.

              These oil spill incidents, especially those occurring off
          the Washington coast, illustrate the vulnerability of the
          Sanctuary environment and resources to the potential impacts from
          oil and gas activities and hydrocarbon transportation. Lack of
          sufficient baseline information collected on the Olympic Coast
          makes it impossible to determine or predict the full extent of
          potential impacts. Some research in the Olympic Coast area has,
          however, shown that negative impacts from oil and gas activities
          (including seismic surveys and exploratory drilling) on the
          highly valued fisheries; vulnerable stocks of sea otters, fur
          seals, and seabirds; and other coastal marine resources are
          potentially great (Wahl, 1984; EPA, 1985; Felleman, 1985;
          Battelle, 1987; Bowlby et al., 1988; Grader and Laychack, 1989).

              Seasonal sensitivity of certain species to a possible oil
          spill must also be considered. In the Olympic Coast area certain
          species of marine mammals and birds are seasonally present in
          numbers representing an ecologically significant percentage of
          their entire population (as discussed in Part II Section 2).
          Potential harm to marine organisms would be magnified if an oil
          spill were to occur during a period of high density or during a
          breeding season. The concept of seasonal susceptibility has been
          highlighted by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (1979) in
          regard to the marine resources surrounding the Northern Channel
          Islandst off Santa Barbara, California.

              Consideration of the physical oceanographic dynamics is
          important in protecting sanctuary resources from possible
          contaminants transported by currents and eddies. oil spill
          trajectory models have not been developed for the Washington
          coast primarily due to the limited amount of detailed current and
          wind data that is available. Studies recommended by MMS and the

                                        IV-47









          Pacific Northwest OCS Task Force would allow for the development
          of trajectory models. Available data for mean wind, wave, and
          currents, however, indicate that the sanctuary area is vulnerable
          to spills occurring outside the proposed boundaries. On the
          average, surface currents over the shelf travel northward and
          shoreward in the winter months and southward.and seaward in the
          summer, with transitional periods in the spring and fall.
          Coastal upwelling occurs during the summer months, bringing deep
          water to the surface, while downwelling occurs in the winter.
          Prevailing wind direction is northward in the winter, and
          southward in the summer with a strong shoreward component during
          all seasons. Wave directions are shoreward over the entire year,
          and mean flow along the bottom is northward during all seasons.


               (b)  Effects of.Hydrocarbons on Living Marine Organisms

              Although most spilled crude oil initially floats,
          approximately 1% - 5% of the volume of a surface slick will occur
          in the water column as a result of dissolution, dispersion,
          sinking, or sedimentation in the vicinity of the spill.
          Additional oil may be retained in the water as the result of a
          lesser known mechanism, the formation of a subsurface oil plume.
          Because the oil in such a plume remains below the surface it may
          have a different chemistry than the surface slick and be more
          toxic to marine organisms. In the case of the IXTOC blowout,
          which occurred in June, 1979 in Mexican waters of the Gulf 'of
          Mexico, it was found that a subsurface plume of oil droplets,
          extending from the wellhead and generally aligned with the
          surface slick, contained high concentrations of low molecular
          weight aromatics, alkyl benzenes and naphthalene compounds which
          are acutely toxic to marine organisms (MMS, 1986).

              The toxic effect of oil on organisms can be short-term,
          long-term, lethal or sublethal. Toxic effects on different
          organisms vary and depend on a number of factors including:
          chemical composition of the oil; environmental factors such as
          temperature, salinity, and viscosity; the level of feeding and
          reproductive activity by the organism; and differences in
          susceptibility among species,and among life cycle stages within
          the species. The sublethal effects of hydrocarbons on marine
          organisms include: the disruption of normal feeding behavior,
          breeding, and locomotion; interference with thermo-regulation;
          reduced resistance to stress; and diseases caused by the intake
          of carcinogenic or potentially metagenic chemicals (MMS, 1986).
          At the tissue level, lesions may develop on the skin, gills, or
          intestine (Hawkes, 1977). Some organisms, however, may have the
          ability to compensate for minor toxic stress and may thus be able
          to tolerate low concentrations of toxic hydrocarbons.

              A large amount of research has been com pleted showing the
          sensitivity of commercially important fish, shellfish and non-

                                       IV-48









         commercial invertebrates. Effects to these organisms are
         summarized by Strickland and Chasan (1989).

             Sublethal and long-term hydrocarbon impacts on ecosystems
         are associated with low oil concentrations in marine environments
         which may result from the evaporation, degradation, and
         dispersion of hydrocarbons following a large spill or from
         chronic, low-level, small spills (less than 1,000 barrels). Of
         the two, chronic small spills may pose a greater hazard to marine
         ecosystems than isolated large spills. The damage resulting from
         the Nestucca, Apex Houston and Puerto Rican spills illustrate
         that even small spills, in the short term, can kill a large
         number of individual birds or other marine organisms. oil can
         directly affect living marine organisms biochemically or
         physically (see, for instance, Boesch et,al. 1973; Michael, 1977;
         National Research Council, 1985; EPA, 1985; MMS, 1987; Boesch &
         Rabalais, 1987).

             The greatest damage to the marine environment occurs under
         any of the following circumstances: (1) The oil is spilled into
         or reaches a confined, shallow body of water, such as an estuary;
         (2) the oil is refined oil, such as home heating oil or diesel
         oil; (3) storms or heavy surf cause the oil to be churned into
         the bottom sediments. In many instances, it does appear that the
         marine ecosystem can recover from the damage occasioned by oil
         spills although the rate and completeness of recovery remain
         subject to dispute.

             Petroleum hydrocarbons can also have sublethal or indirect
         lethal effects on marine organisms through the destruction or
         alteration of food supply, through chemical interference with
         reproductive success, synergistic effects which may reduce
         resistance to disease, and other stresses which alter behavioral
         patterns such as feeding. The physical damage resulting from the
         coating of marine organisms (e.g., feathers of marine birds, fur
         of marine mammals, and respiratory apparatus of fish) with oil is
         well documented (see, for instance, U.S. Bureau of Land
         Management, 1979). Below is a summary of the impacts of oil
         spills on the biological resources and uses of the Olympic coast
         and offshore waters.

         Oil Spill Impact on Pinnipeds and Sea Otters:

             Floating oil can foul the fur or skin, and irritate the eyes
         and membranes of pinnipeds and sea otters, and cause harm when
         the oil is ingested or inhaled (U.S. Bureau of Land Management,
         1980; Geraci and Smith, 1977). Oil contamination can cause loss
         of buoyancy, and impairment of normal thermal regulation. Of the
         two, impairment of the body's insulation properties is probably
         more damaging, particularly for fur seals and sea otters which
         depend primarily on the fur for insulation (U.S. Bureau of Land
         Management, 1980).

                                       IV-49









               Although northern fur seals depend only partially on their
          fur for thermal protection, oiling could depress their
          thermoregulatory abilities, which could lead to hypothermia and
          death (Kooyman, gt al., 1977). Studies by Kooyman, et al.,
          (1977) indicate that among sea mammals, the most proTou-nd effects
          of oiling may be on the sea otter pup: its thermal conductance
          increased by 2.1 times after oiling, indicating a significant
          loss of insulation capacity. The results of Kooyman's later
          studies confirm that even a light oiling could have marked
          detrimental effects on the thermoregulatory abilities of otters
          (Kooyman and Costa, 1979). The limited migratory abilities and
          lack of a blubber layer make sea otters even more vulnerable to
          oiling (Strickland and Chasan, 1989).

               The sea otters which inhabit the nearshore areas within the
          proposed sanctuar.y are a Washington state endangered species and
          their distribution is localized to a specific stretch of the
          coastline. The sea otters were reintroduced to the area in the
          1970's after being hunted to extinction before 1910. The
          localized distribution of this sea otter population makes them
          even more vulnerable to the effects of spilled oil than other
          more established sea otter populations. one oil spill could
         .eliminate the entire population.

               Phocid seals rely on blubber and vascular mechanisms for
          thermal regulation and are thus more resistant to thermal loss
          caused by contact with oil (Geraci and St. Aubin, 1980). Phocid
          seals of the Olympic Coast include the northern elephant seal and
          harbor seal.

               The ingestion of oil by pinnipeds is most likely to occur
          during feeding or as the animals clean their coats. The impact
          of such ingestion depends upon the amount ingested, its toxicity,
          and the physical condition of the pinnipeds. The long-term
          effects on pinnipeds of various levels of hydrocarbon
          bioaccumulation are largely unknown. Longer-term effects may
          result from subtle changes in habitat and intrinsic stressors
          within the environment rather than direct mortality (Boesch &
          Rabalais, 1987).

          Oil Spill Impacts on Cetaceans:

               Effects of oil on cetaceans include: damage to skin or eyes
          upon contact, the fouling of baleens, and physiological effects
          of ingestion, and inhalation. Because the skin of cetaceans is
          smooth and furless, oil is unlikely to adhere to it, although it
          may adhere to the callosities that occur on right and humpback
          whales. In a study of bottlenose dolphins to determine the
          effects of direct skin contact with spilled oil, it was found
          that exposure to crude oil for periods of up to 45 minutes
          produced short-term, morphological, and biochemical changes to
          the skin. Recovery appeared to be rapid following the oil

                                        IV-50










        exposure (Geraci and St. Aubin,.1982). Since whales depend on
        blubber rather than fur for thermal regulation, oil would
        generally not affect their ability to thermoregulate. How
        cetaceans react to an oil spill on many variables including the
        species type, time of year, and severity of the oil spill.

             Although the effects of oil on cetaceans have not been
        carefully investigated, scientists hypothesize that oil could
        cause short-term and long-term harm. Scientists hypothesize that
        cetaceans may suffer eye irritation as the result of contact with
        oil, and that Baleen whales, such as the gray whale which migrate
        through Olympic coast waters, are subject to baleen fouling as a
        result of exposure to spilled oil. The southern migration
        includes pregnant females, and the return migration to arctic
        waters includes females accompanied by calves. Both pregnant
        females and calves may be more susceptible to oil pollution than
        male adults.


             The bioaccumulation of oil in both baleen and toothed
        cetaceans can occur as the result of eating contaminated food
        supplies. There is little likelihood that oil would be inhaled
        through the blow-hole, although it is possible the whales might
        inhale small quantities of toxic fumes (Geraci and St. Aubin,
        1980). Although the effects of hydrocarbon accumulation in
        cetaceans are unknown, one can assume that the longer an animal
        is exposed to spilled oil, the more likely it is to suffer
        adverse effects. Prolonged exposure is most apt to occur when
        feeding grounds are contaminated. For example, because baleen
        whales are filter feeders, they may ingest oil or oil-tainted
        substances. Gray whales that migrate through the sanctuary area
        are susceptible to contamination since they feed on nearshore
        bottom organisms.

             Oil can destroy fish eggs which in turn can upset the
        delicate balance of the food web, and thereby diminish an
        important local food source for some species. In addition, oil
        effects may reduce a mammalls.ability to find food, flee from
        predators, and care adequately for their young. Although
        bioaccumulation can occur, there currently is no data available
        showing that accumulation of oil through the food chain will
        result in a biomagnification effect on cetaceans.

             In general, little is known about the ability of cetaceans
        to avoid oil spills. Humpback whales, however, have been
        observed feeding in oil-slicks without apparent immediate ill
        effects (NOAA, 1979). Other cetaceans such as the bottlenose
        dolphins can detect and will avoid thick oil accumulations, but
        not thin oil sheens (Geraci and St. Aubin, 1982, 1983).
        Experiments have also shown that dolphins can detect oil and,
        under certain circumstances, will avoid oil (Boesch & Rabalais,
        1987). The likelihood of prolonged exposure is diminished if the
        slicks are avoided and even if certain species move through at

                                      IV-51










          normal speeds.

          Oil Spill Impact on Marine Birds:

               Oil spills can seriously harm or kill seabirds, which are
          one of the most vulnerable animals to oil spills. The impacts on
          seabirds from the Nestucca spill clearly demonstrated this fact.
          Over 10,000 seabirds were killed in the days and weeks following
          the Nestucca spill. The major cause of immediate mortality among
          seabirds contaminated by oil is fouling of the feathers, which
          reduces flying and swimming ability and results in a loss of
          buoyancy and thermal insulation. It is generally assumed that
          most birds that are oiled as a result of a major spill will die
          (Hunt in MMS, 1989). The ingestion of toxic hydrocarbons,
          sometimes by preening contaminated feathers, can produce
          physiological stress which may eventually result in death. If
          non-fatal contamination occurs during the breeding season it may
          lead to reproductive abnormalities and failures. Birds that have
          ingested toxic elements may produce inviable eggs, and birds
          whose feathers are contaminated may transfer oil to eggs or
          chicks, thus reducing hatching or fledgling success. Other
          laboratory and field studies have shown that the ingestion of
          petroleum products can cause physiological damage and potential
          disruption of reproductive function (Hunt 1987; Fry 1987 in MMS,
          1989).

               A number of factors influence the vulnerability of different
          species of birds to contact with spilled oil. Species which have
          a tendency to form large, dense flocks on the water, spend
          considerable time swimming on the water, or dive when alarmed are
          extremely vulnerable, as are species which exist in small,
          isolated populations (U.S. Bureau of Land Management, 1980).

               Diving birds and species that spend a considerable amount of
          time resting on the water are especially vulnerable to contact
          with spilled oil. The alcid seabirds, which dominate the
          population of seabirds on the Olympic coast (e.g., compose 86% of
          the nesting seabird populations), are also vulnerable due to
          their concentration in dense colonies. Dominant species in this
          group are Cassin's auklets, common murres, rhinoceros auklets,
          and tufted puffins. Destruction Island hosts one of the seven
          major colonies of rhinoceros auklets in the world. The Copalis
          Rocks Refuge contains 82% of the Brandt's cormorants, 77% of the
          common murres, and 39% of the rhinoceros auklets breeding in the
          state of Washington.

               Local populations of cormorants and waterfowl are vulnerable
          because they represent a large portion of the local total
          population, the populations are low, and they would most likely
          recover slowly (Strickland and Chasan, 1989). Shearwaters and
          terns are also vulnerable but less so than diving birds. Marbled
          murrelets (which are being considered by USFWS for inclusion on

                                        IV-52









         the threatened species list) have the highes t oil/bird
         vulnerability index of any seabird because they feed in local
         concentrations close to shore.

             Catastrophic oil spills, like the 1971 Golden Gate spill,
         generally result in extremely high marine bird mortality. Other
         major oil spills, such as England's Torrey Canyon incident in
         1967, have affected far larger numbers of birds than did the
         Golden Gate spill and have resulted in very high bird mortality
         (Holmes and Cronshaw, 1977) Attempts to clean oiled birds often
         prove unsuccessful and may occasionally cause even more stress
         than light oiling.

             oil pollution threatens bird populations beyond immediate
         mortality from ingestion of oil or fouling of feathers. Because
         of their direct dependence on nearshore food sources, long-term
         contamination of foraging grounds could cause major alterations
         in marine reproductive capabilities. As with marine mammals,
         birds may be adversely affected by the ingestion of oiled
         invertebrates. The potential long-term, cumulative impacts of
         nearby oil and gas development on marine bird habitat areas and
         feeding grounds in the Olympic coast area remain largely unknown.

             oil spill treatment and cleanup operations (including the
         adverse effects of human intrusion) can also have serious impacts
         on marine birds and marine mammals. Often the emulsifiers used
         and the associated human activity during cleanup procedures have
         been more harmful than the oil (MMS, 1987). Because many new
         generation dispersants, which are supposed to be no more toxic
         than oil, have not yet been fully evaluated, their environmental
         effects remain largely unknown (MMS, 1987). Mechanical cleanup
         and containment devices, such as booms, pose no toxic threat to
         marine birds, however, the extensive human activity associated
         with deployment can cause social disturbances within the marine
         bird and mammal populations. As with oil spills themselves, the
         impacts of cleanup operations would be particularly severe at
         times when marine birds and mammals were highly concentrated,
         e.g., during breeding or feeding activities.

         Oil Spill Impact on Fish, Planktonic and Benthic Biota:

              Oil spill impacts on the fish stocks and benthic fauna of
         the Olympic Coast waters would depend largely upon the type of
         oil involved (solubility, toxicity, etc.), the timing of the
         spill with respect to reproduction and larval development,
         migration patterns, and prevailing weather conditions.

             Both lethal and sublethal effects of petrochemical pollution
         have been noted in fish (Hawkes, 1977; Patten, 1977; Sniderman,
         1979, 1982). Observed sublethal effects range from visible
         physical abnormalities to subcellular defects. Some fish exhibit
         severe anatomical deformities such as curvature of the spine. At

                                       IV-53









           the tissue level, lesions may develop on the skin, gills, or
           intestine (Hawkes, 1977; Sinderman, 1982). In addition to any
           possible health hazards from the consumption of contaminated fish
           by humans, these sublethal effects are aesthetically displeasing
           and increase the difficulty of marketing fish for human
           consumption.

                Patten (1977) and Sinderman (1978) discuss changes in
           behavior, metabolism, locomotor and activity patterns, growth,
           feeding and reproduction. Laboratory research, for example, has
           demonstrated deleterious effects on the survival and growth of
           .eggs and larvae during spawning conditions due to short, low-
           level hydrocarbon exposures (Whipple et al., 1978). These
           laboratory results do not necessarily predict the effects of open
           ocean exposure to hydrocarbon discharges, where levels of
           contaminants may differ.

                The lethal toxicity of oil ranges from .1 to 100 parts per
           million of soluble aromatics for adult marine organisms. Larvae
           are usually 10 to 100 times more sensitive than adults.
           Sublethal effects have been demonstrated with aromatic compounds
           in concentrations as low as 10 to 1,000 parts per billion
           (Johnston, 1979). The impact of a spill is thus apt to depend on
           the magnitude of egg and larval mortality. Because the early
           life stages are often pelagic, they are more susceptible to the
           effects of a surface slick. Heavier hydrocarbon elements are
           characterized by aromatics of higher molecular weight and lower
           water solubility. These elements may.be avoided by adult
           finfish, but benthic organisms are highly susceptible to the
           lethal effects.

                Although offshore production in general may be compatible
           with healthy fisheries in some areas, studies following past oil-
           tanker spills demonstrate some long-term damage from crude oil in
           the near shore area. Studies plaice, centered on breeding
           grounds and estuarine habitat, show 27 months after the spill,
           recovery of the fishery, although improved, was still not
           complete (Neff and Haensl , 1982).

                A large oil spill in, or close to, valuable fishing areas
           poses a potentially serious threat to Washington State's valuable
           sport and commercial fisheries, including aquaculture. Oil
           spills or chronic exposure can affect fisheries through loss of
           fishing time or gear, tainting of fish, and direct destruction of
           the fishery. The most serious long-term effect is lingering
           tainting of stocks (Michael, 1977). Although direct toxic
           effects on an entire fishery of finfish whose populations cover
           large areas are not probable, smaller fishery segments can.be
           seriously harmed. Generally, fisheries are most vulnerable
           during the reproductive and juvenile stages. Many species
           concentrate in small geographic areas during these stages
           increasing the potential for serious ecological consequences as a

                                         IV-54










        result of contaminant concentrations.

             In the waters of the Olympic coast, salmonids are very
        important to both the commercial and recreational fishery. They
        are susceptible to spills which could occur near estuaries and
        river mouths. Some lethal and sublethal effects of adult salmon
        exposed to oil in laboratories include tissue damage, narcosis,
        and reduction in the ability to sense "home" waters. Tainting of
        the salmon flesh, which can spoil the catch's marketability,
        poses a serious threat to the commercial fisheries. A large
        potential risk from spilled oil exists for juvenile salmon during
        their migration into salt water from rivers and estuaries.
        Groundfish are also vulnerable to spilled oil at all life cycle
        stages; the groundfish catch off the Washington coast has
        exceeded that of salmon (Strickland and Chasan, 1989).

             Shellfish, particularly Dungeness crab, pink shrimp, razor
        clams and oysters are also important fisheries of the Olympic
        coast region. Crab and shrimp eggs and larvae float in the water
        and are extremely sensitive to lethal and sublethal effects from
        hydrocarbon exposure. Razor clams and oysters are particularly
        susceptible to the effects of oil because they are immobile
        filter feeders (Strickland and Chasan, 1989).  A major oil spill
        could cause significant long-lasting damage to the production of
        clams and oysters along the Washington coast.

             The effects of oil and gas activities on kelp are serious
        particularly because kelp is a critical habitat for many species
        of fish. It is generally believed that the susceptibility of
        kelp and other plants to oil pollution varies with life stage,
        and that the adult kelp generation has an outer mucilage covering
        which appears to protect it against oil toxicity (U.S. Bureau of
        Land Management, 1979). While there appears to be little
        evidence to indicate that kelp is harmed by oil, the fish and
        fauna which live in the kelp may be harmed by ingesting, or
        coming into contact with,'the oil trapped in the fronds.

             Drilling and production platforms may form an artificial
        reef environment which could have short-term benefits for some
        fishery species. 'The fishery habitat remains in existence only
        during the life of the field and disappears once the platform is
        removed. This limited enhancement must be balanced against
        threats posed by oil and gas production.

        Oil Spill Impacts on Estuaries, Wetlands, and other Critical
        Coastal Habitats:

             The intertidal area is an important breeding, spawning and
        feeding ground for many marine organisms; the area also provides
        substrate and suitable habitat for many other species. oil in
        the intertidal zone can affect the benthic biota by smothering,
        fouling, or directly poisoning organisms (Michael, 1977). As a

                                      IV-55









          result of the Valdez and Nestucca spills, for example, a
          significant amount of oil washed up on beaches, rocky shorelines
          and bays.    A tanker collision spill, which occurred at the
          Golden Gate Bridge in 1971, provides an example of oil
          contamination in mussel beds located on the high rocks at
          Duxberry reef. Although comparison of pre-oil and post-oil
          transects showed a significant short-term decrease in marine life
          after the oil spill, the visible signs of oil passed rather
          quickly with no long term damage documented (Chan, 1977). Oil
          spills, however, pervaded the upper tidepool waters almost a year
          following the accident and there was selective evidence of
          marginal organism recruitment.

               Wetlands and estuaries are critical coastal habitats for a
          number of the species discussed in Part II. These areas are
          highly productive'areas that are important in sustaining offshore
          oceanic biota with nutrient resources as well as habitat for part
          of their life-cycles. Estuaries are critical rearing areas for
          juvenile flatfish and other groundfish, salmonids, crab and other
          significant species.

               The estuaries of the Washington coast are poorly flushed
          soft-bottom embayments which can retain harmful oil residues and
          delay biological productivity. Once in the sediments of an
          estuary, oil can remain for years and destroy the entire
          ecosystem (MMS, 1987). If the substrate is heavily oiled,
          erosion can increase by 24 times (MMS, 1987) and thereby
          permanently alter the morphology and physical fluid dynamics of
          the estuary.    Finally, according to MMS (1987) it is extremely
          difficult to protect estuary mouths by sealing them off if they
          are larger than 100 m. The openings to both Grays Harbor'and
          Willapa Bay are greater than 100 meters in width and are
          therefore especially vulnerable to oil spills.

          (c) Impacts From Discharges (other than oil) From OCS Activities

               A wide variety of pollutant discharges are normally
          associated with OCS oil and gas development: drill cuttings and
          muds, sewage and trash, formation (or produced) waters, marine
          corrosion products, and air pollutants (e.g. petroleum aerosols
          and exhausts). Hazards to living resources from oil development
          operations can result from the on-site discharge of drill
          cuttings and drilling muds. These materials may adversely affect
          benthic biota as well as fishery resources, seabirds, and marine
          mammals. Drilling muds consist of naturally occurring minerals
          such as barite, simple chemicals such as sodium hydroxide and
          potassium chloride, and complex organic compounds such as
          lignosulfonates and formaldehydes. Department of the Interior
          OCS Order Number 7 forbids the discharge of drilling muds
          containing toxic substances into ocean waters.

               In 1983, the Marine Board of the National Research Council

                                          IV-56









         conducted a study of drilling discharges. The study found that
         these discharges present minimal risk to the marine environment.
         The Marine Board did note, however, that drilling discharges do
         have an impact on the immediate benthic environment (National
         Research Council, 1983). However, more recent research (EPA,
         1985) has shown significant benthic impacts from platform
         discharges up to two miles from a drilling site. Rocky reefs and
         hard-bottom areas off the Washington coast are susceptible to
         impacts from drilling fluids and muds.

               Fluids and the lighter elements in drilling discharges
         rapidly disperse in the water column. The heavier elements, over
         90 percent of the discharged material, settle to the bottom,
         usually in a plume extending in the direction of prevailing
         bottom currents. The potential impacts on marine organisms
         resulting from the discharge of drilling muds and cuttings are:
         1) decreased primary production caused by increased turbidity
         which reduces light levels; 2) interference with filter feeding
         caused by high particulate loads; 3) burial of benthic
         communities; and 4) injury resulting from the acute or chronic
         toxic effects of drilling mud constituents.

              Air pollution discharges normally associated with
         hydrocarbon activities (e.g. nitrogen and sulfur dioxides, carbon
         monoxide, particles, and organic fumes) can affect and
         potentially degrade local air quality. The discharged gases
         originate from a number of activities directly associated with
         oil and gas development including: flaring of excess gas, motor
         emissions from the platform, vessel traffic, onshore facilities,
         and petroleum fume releases from normal operational spills.
         Impacts on air quality from these gases depends on local
         meteorology and wind conditions. MMS projects possible impacts
         to the Puget Sound area, and minor impacts to the coastal area.

              (d) Acoustic and Visual Disturbances

              Oil and gas platforms, rigs, and related activities create
         both a visual intrusion on the scenic qualities of the area's
         seascape, and disturbances from construction activities and the
         sound and movement of boats and helicopters (U. S. Bureau of Land
         Management, 1979). Seismic survey equipment can interfere with
         fishing activities. In December, 1980 more than 1200 crab pots
         were caught in the airgun array of a vessel conducting a
         geophysical survey in Federal waters off Washington, causing in
         excess of $100,000 damage to fishing gear alone. As these pots
         were rendered irretrievable, they continued to catch crab. The
         Washington Department of Fisheries estimated a 5% loss of the
         offshore crab resource and untold opportunity costs as a
         consequence of this incident alone. The acoustic signals used
         during surveys have been shown to decrease catches of some
         rockfish species, kill fish eggs and larvae that are present near
         the generating apparatus, and alter swimming behavior in gray

                                       IV-57








          whales. The continuous human activity associated with oil and gas
          development and the steady stream of crew and supply boats create
          visual impacts and noise which may disturb marine birds and
          marine mammals, particularly during sensitive nesting, pupping,
          and migration seasons. Pinniped stampeding or sudden flights by
          nesting birds can occur if these disturbances occur very close to
          shore (U.S. Bureau of Land Management, 1979). During critical
          breeding periods, such reactions could result in increased
          mortality rates in young marine birds and marine mammals (U.S.
          Bureau of Land Management, 1979). The Washington Department of
          Ecology is funding an analysis of probable biological impacts
          from seismic testing to be completed in the summer of 1990.

              Due to the undeveloped nature of the Olympic Coast area, the
          presence of an oil rig offshore would detract from the wilderness
          experience derived from visiting the beaches along the sanctuary
          shoreline. MMS (1989) stated that platform construction will
          create unavoidable adverse impacts to the visual resources, and
          that these impacts would last the life of the projected OCS,
          activity.

          (e) Socioeconomic Impacts

              The socioeconomic consequences of prohibiting oil and gas
          activities within the sanctuary include effects on local
          communities and industries such as tourism and fishing.
          Prohibiting oil and gas development wit'hin the sanctuary will
          result in net positive effects on the local communities by
          reducing threats to the natural resource based economies.

              Most of the revenues produced from oil and gas development
          would flow to the oil industry, while most of the impacts would
          be borne by the local communities and state government. If oil
          and gas development were to proceed, local communities might
          experience the short and long term effects of the boom-bust
          phenomenon.. The local communities'along the Olympic coast have
          traditionally relied on natural resources (e.g., timber, pulp,
          and fish) for the basis of their economy. The economy of these
          communities is chronically-depressed and unemployment has been
          higher than the Washington state average. The expected
          employment benefits for the local communities is minimal. MMS's
          low case'scenario predicts that 1,176 jobs would be created at
          the development stage. Estimates indicate that at the
          development stage a platform would employ 105 people per 12 hour
          shift and 175 people per 7 hour shift. Most of the skilled jobs
          located on the drilling rigs would be filled by non-local
          workers. The influx of outside workers could produce some
          problems in small communities. Past experiences dictate that
          increased population could increase: housing prices, certain
          types of crimes, traffic, demand for social services, and need
          for government spending.


                                        IV-58









             Construction work might be made available to the local
         residents, although there is no guarantee that the lessee would
         hire locally. Even though a very small amount of jobs may be
         created, the minimal employment might have a significant short
         term benefit to the smaller communities. After the production
         stage the work force would rapidly decrease and eventually
         diminish completely.

             Offshore oil and gas activities may also significantly
         affect fishing activities with or without consideration of a
         major oil spill. The impacts on fish populations following a
         major spill have already been addressed above. It must also be
         recognized that OCS oil and gas exploration and development may
         create spatial conflicts with fishermen, both offshore and at
         dockside. At the exploration stage, the gear employed during
         seismic surveys could become entangled with crab pots and other
         fixed gear, and have in the past off Washington. Placement of a
         platform could cause similar but more severe space use conflicts
         since the platforms would remain offshore for the life of the
         lease. While platforms can serve as artificial reefs, which
         could enhance the fishing from charter or privately owned fishing
         boats, commercial trawlers may suffer economic losses by having
         to avoid the platforms. This, of course, would depend on whether
         the rig was placed within a popular fishing area. There is also
         potential for conflicts between supply boats and fishing vessels
         over harbor space for docking or anchoring. This dockside
         spatial conflict has occurred in the Gulf of Mexico where oil
         companies and the fishing industry compete for dockside
         facilities.


                        b.   Conseauences of Impact to Uses

             Under the status quo, no oil or gas will be developed within
         the Sanctuary. This action adds further protection to the
         coastal resources and fishing and tourist industries-from the
         potential impacts of oil and gas development. This action also
         maintains the undeveloped viewshed. Further, there will be no
         social impacts of oil and gas development on coastal communities.
         The impacts of the industry on coastal communities may be both
         positive and negative. Development would bring economic
         development to coastal communities suffering from unemployment
         and seeking new opportunities for economic growth. The oil and
         gas industry, however, tends to employ individuals with
         specialized skills and would likely import labor. The
         importation of labor to develop oil and gas resources off the
         coast may result in cultural conflicts with the existing
         population, and overly stress the existing community
         infrastructure which is insufficient to handle such growth (MMS,
         1990).





                                       IV-59









               2.   Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)
                    a    Conseauence of Impact to Resources

               NOAA is implementing through Sanctuary regulations the
          Congressionally mandated prohibition on oil and gas exploration
          and development within the boundary of the Olympic Coast National
          Marine Sanctuary. Further, the Sanctuary regulations prohibit
          all mineral development and exploration within the Sanctuary.
          This prohibition will protect the significant natural resources
          and qualities that are especially sensitive to potential impacts
          from outer continental shelf oil and gas activities. In
          particular, the sea otters, sea birds, and pinnipeds that use the
          haul-out sites, kelp forests, and rocks along the Olympic
          Peninsula and the Sanctuary's high water quality are especially
          vulnerable to oil and gas activities in the area. MMS rates the
          Washington/region planning area as the area of the continental
          U.S. (outside of Alaska) in the current Five Year Leasing Plan
          that is highest in rank on a broad index of marine productivity
          and environmental sensitivity. It has a higher environmental
          productivity and sensitivity ranking, and lower hydrocarbon
          potential, than the Monterey Bay, California Sanctuary planning
          area which was recently closed off to OCS oil and gas activities
          by Presidential Proclamation. A prohibition on oil and gas
          activities within the Sanctuary boundary will help protect
          Sanctuary resources and qualities.

               This prohibition does not completely protect the Sanctuary
          from the potential impacts from oil and gas development.
          Development activities can occur south of the Sanctuary boundary,
          and if an accident were to occur during the winter months, the
          spill would be carried by the currents northward into the
          Sanctuary. NOAA will have some control over any future
          exploration or development activity through the Sanctuary
          prohibition on discharges that enter and injure Sanctuary
          resources from outside Sanctuary boundaries.

                    b.   Conseguences of Impact to Uses

               NOAA's prohibition on oil and gas exploration and
          development within the Sanctuary boundary will eliminate the
          potential for increased noise and human activity in coastal and
          offshore waters. It will also eliminate the need for additional
          supply boats to enter the nearshore waters and overflights of
          helicopters that may incidentally approach nesting or resting
          marine mammals or birds. This prohibition will eliminate the
          development pressures on shore to support such activities.

               Given the wealth of sensitive renewable natural resources
          within the proposed Sanctuary, the high tourism and commercial
          fishery value of the area, and the present indications of low
          national oil and gas resource potential, it is NOAA's judgement
          that the net economic effect resulting from a restriction on

                                        IV-60









        hydrocarbon operations is most likely positive. The net economic
        effect of the regulation depends largely on the amount of
        hydrocarbon reserves foregonel dollar value of the oil, the
        estimated value of the renewable resources, and the economic
        value of the tourist industry.

             NOAA believes that the regulation will have positive long-
        term economic impacts by contributing to the preservation and
        health of renewable sources of income, such as fishing and
        recreation, due to the long term protection of such activities
        from potential oil spills, discharges and visual and acoustical
        disturbance. In addition, the Sanctuary research and education
        programs would have long term benefits by enabling natural
        resource managers to make better informed decisions regarding the
        preservation, enhancement and possible additional economic
        benefits of the areas's natural resources and uses. This
        regulation will however eliminate any use of the area by the oil
        and gas industry.

             Boundary alternative 4 encompasses an estimated 5%.of the
        reserves estimated to be in former Lease Sale #132. Since the
        exploratory activities have been cursory, there is no accurate
        indication of the amount of oil and gas reserves within this
        Lease Block. Therefore, it is impossible to determine the exact
        economic impact of the prohibition on oil and gas development
        within the Sanctuary.

             It is possible that the proposed prohibition would reduce
        U.S. Treasury income from offshore lease sales and leasing
        royalties. The total amount of lost revenue estimated by MMS
        from these conditional resource estimates may be modified by the
        results of petroleum development pursuant to actual drilling
        associated with some future Lease Sale, as well as an analysis of
        economic feasibility and environmental and regulatory
        constraints. Economic feasibility is determined solely by the
        oil industry based on lease sale costs at the time of sale,
        current oil prices, proposed project costs, and environmental
        reviews and mitigation costs. oil development costs and expected
        returns per investment are considered confidential information by
        the oil industry. Once again, environmental and regulatory
        constraints are impossible to identify due to the lack of
        experience of the Washington/Oregon planning area with offshore
        oil and gas development.

             C.   Discharges or Deposits
                  1.   Status Quo
                       a.   Consequence of Impact to Resource

             with increasing human uses in the ocean and adjacent
        watersheds, discharges and deposits into the proposed Sanctuary
        can be predicted to increase, further threatening the resources
        and qualities of the area, particularly in the coastal zone, and

                                      IV-61








          human uses such as fishing and recreation that depend upon high
          water quality.

               Under the status quo, discharges will continue to pressure
          the resources of the coastal zone. It is believed that the
          cumulative impacts of point and non-point source pollution has
          already begun affecting the quality of the kelp beds and benthic
          communities along the Strait and outer coast. Without a
          coordinated approach and goal for protecting the coastal
          resources, the impacts may continue to degrade under the pressure
          of coastal development.

                              i. Discharges from Point Sources

               The Tribes receive their NPDES permits directly from EPA
          rather than obtaining them through the WDOE.

               The only point source discharges from the U.S. along the
          outer coast and Strait of Juan de Fuca occur from Tribal
          treatment plants. The Makah and the Quileute Tribes are the only
          Tribes that are permitted by EPA to discharge wastewater into the
          marine environment. The Makah's have an inadequate sewage
          treatment plant and are in the process of upgrading their
          treatment system. Under consideration is restoration of an ocean
          outfall pipe which has not been in use for years, but is
          permitted by EPA. This ocean outfall would discharge into the
          Strait of Juan de Fuca sewage having received primary treatment.
          To rehabilitate the outfall would require a Clean Water Act
          (Section 301(h)) waiver from EPA. The Makah's are considering
          building a lagoon to treat their wastes which-would achieve the
          equivalent of secondary treatment during peak season and tertiary
          treatment during the off season.

               The Quileute Tribe have been plagued with costly mechanical
          failures and erosion of the drainage field which drains their
          treatment plant. They too are planning to upgrade their
          treatment plant.
                              ii.   Non-Point Source Discharges

               Non-point source discharges result mainly as a consequence
          of timber practices in the coastal drainage basins. There is
          anecdotal evidence that the kelp beds have been negatively
          impacted by increasing sedimentation over the past 20 years. The
          Pyscht River estuary, supporting the largest saltwater marsh in
          the Strait of Juan de Fuca, has experienced severe sedimentation
          which is degrading important juvenile salmonid habitat and is
          likely representative of other small estuarine environments
          adjacent to the boundaries of the study area.

                              iii. Hazardous waste, oil and trash disposal

               There is an unknown quantity of pollutants and trash which

                                        IV-62









        enters the Olympic Coast area from the open ocean. These
        discharges and deposits may have been transported far distances
        by ocean currents or may have come from vessels. In addition to
        reducing overall water quality and lessening the aesthetic appeal
        of the area, the discharge of litter may harm marine mammals that
        sometimes ingest or become entangled in such litter. In areas of
        the northern Pacific Ocean as many as 8,000 fur seals become
        entangled in such debris annually (Haley, 1978). The incidence
        of the mortality associated with this type of mammal disturbance
        remains unclear.

             The MPPRCA of 1987 amends MARPOL, by prohibiting the
        disposal by ships of plastics, such as fishing lines and bags..
        This protects marine animals and seabirds from ingesting these
        wastes while foraging, or becoming entangled in them, possibly
        leading to illness or death. The MPPRCA regulations also
        prohibit, for example, the disposal by ships of paper, rags,
        glass, metal bottles, crockery and similar refuse less than 12
        nautical miles from the nearest land; the disposal of dunnage
        lining and packing materials that float less than 25 nautical
        miles from the nearest land; and the disposal of victual waste
        less than 12 nautical miles from land (if ground, 3 nautical
        miles).

             Discharges, such as cooling waters from boat engines and
        fish wastes, used in, or resulting from, fishing vessels during
        traditional fishing operations are unlikely to harm the resources
        of the Sanctuary. Discharges resulting from military activities
        in the area, such as smoke markers, sonobuoys and ordinance, are
        slight and do not appear to pose a threat to the resources and
        qualities of the proposed Sanctuary. In addition, Department of
        Defense vessels are required to be equipped with oil-water
        separators. The water effluent from these devises must meet
        standards of 20 parts per million (ppm) oil within 12 nautical
        miles from land, or 100 ppm beyond 12 nautical miles from land.
        The oil portion is retained on board for shore disposal.

                             iv. ocean pumping

             Ocean dumping, municipal outfalls, and dredged material
        disposal can smother benthic biota and introduce substances into
        the marine environment, which may affect fish, bird, and mammal
        resources. However, all ocean dumping need not meet the
        standards established by Title I of the MPRSA.

             Currently, the dredge disposal sites in Washington are
        located off Grays Harbor, Willapa Bay and the Columbia River. No
        dredge disposal sites are located north of Grays Harbor. There
        are plans to expand the marina at Neah Bay and dredge disposal is
        planned to be used for beach nourishment near the marina and
        disposed at upland sites.


                                       IV-63











                          b.   Conseguence of Impact to Uses

                Most regulatory decisions pertaining to dischargers are
           determined on a case-by-case basis with the primary intent of
           facilitating the use rather than protecting the environment. The
           Juan de Fuca Canyon and important benthic habitats would not be.
           given special consideration when deciding upon permits.
           Therefore from the Sanctuary's perspective, certain gaps remain
           in the regulatory framework.

                2.   Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)
                     a.   Conseauence of Impact to Resources

                The proposed final regulations prohibiting discharge or
           deposit of materials or other matter (with certain limited
           exceptions) without NOAA approval complements the existing
           regulatory system'. and would enhance the area's overall
           recreational and aesthetic appeal, maintain the present good
           water quality in the Sanctuary, and help protect Sanctuary
           resources. By maintaining high water quality off the Olympic
           Peninsula and regulating discharge and deposit activities from an
           ecosystem-wide perspective the impact of this regulation is
           predicted to protect the resources and qualities of the Sanctuary
           above that of the status quo.

                Although the Sanctuary would not be terminating any existing
           uses that discharge or deposit into the Sanctuary, it is expected
           that this discharge prohibition would have a positive impact on
           Sanctuary resources through the restriction and possible
           prohibition of future discharges that threaten the resources and
           qualities of the Sanctuary. By serving as the steward for
           Sanctuary resources, the Sanctuary intends to monitor the status
           of coastal resources and impacts from point and non-point source
           discharges. There is currently, no comprehensive protection and
           monitoring of those resources, despite the fact that they
           represent some of the most diverse and prolific intertidal and
           subtidal communities in the Pacific Northwest, and indeed, the
          .world. Protection of these resources from point and non-point
           source discharges will ensure continued use of the resources for
           subsistence harvest, recreational diving, and recreational,
           commercial, and treaty fisheries. @The Sanctuary program will
           coordinate with watershed management initiatives and agencies
           with management jurisdiction in the coastal watersheds to monitor
           and protect the coastal resources.

                          b.   Conseauence of Impact to Uses

                The impact of these regulations is expected to be beneficial
           to the users of the Sanctuary. The requirement of Sanctuary
           review of permits for municipal outfall disposal ensures that
           these potentially harmful activities receive special
           consideration from the Sanctuary's perspective. The Sanctuary

                                         IV-64










         will ensure the continued use from such activities as
         recreational diving, fishing, tourism, research, aquaculture and
         others that depend on high water quality.

              Another positive effect of the regulations would be that by
         working within the existing regulatory process NOAA will provide
         and coordinate data from existing studies that can be used to
         make better informed management decisions by all agencies
         including the Sanctuary. For example, there are a few site-
         specific watershed planning initiatives that are underway on the
         Peninsula to minimize point source pollution in the coastal
         watersheds. Yet, because there is little or no monitoring of the
         coastal resources, it will be difficult to evaluate the
         effectiveness of watershed plans and the means by which to fine-
         tune them if necessary. NOAA can facilitate the process by
         coordinating these initiatives and helping to set standards for
         discharges  that will ensure the future protection of the coastal
         resources.


              Those  that discharge into the Sanctuary would not be
         prohibited  from, pursuant to existing permits, conducting their
         activities  following designation. Discharges and deposits are
         subject to  all prohibitions, restrictions and conditions validly
         imposed by  any other authority of competent jurisdiction. NOAA
         may regulate the exercise of existing permits or other
         authorizations (but not terminate them) to achieve the purposes
         for which the Sanctuary was designated.

              NOAA will also review applications for new permits and other
         authorizations. Applicants must provide timely notice of the
         filing of the applications and any additional information NOAA
         deems necessary. NOAA will either approve them, approve them
         with terms and conditions, or disapprove them to ensure Sanctuary
         resources and qualities are protected.

              Activities conducted by Tribes pursuant to an existing
         treaty shall not be terminated by the Sanctuary program. Tribal
         activities authorized by an existing Treaty may only be regulated
         if all other possible alternatives have been exhausted with no
         resulting benefits to the resources, or in emergency situations.

              NOAA intends to consult with scientific institutions and
         local, State and regional organizations, as well as with the
         holders of, or applicants for, any authorization or right and the
         relevant permitting authorities of these activities to determine
         means of achieving the Sanctuary purposes. If additional
         conditions are necessary, NOAA will work with the permittees and
         permitting authorities to determine the necessary level of
         conditions to provide adequate protection of Sanctuary resources.
         Procedures to ensure efficient administration of NOAA
         certification and other processes are explained in the proposed
         final Sanctuary regulations. In general, NOAA intends to work

                                        IV-65









          with existing authorities to formalize the oversight and
          management role of the Sanctuary and increase Federal, state,
          tribal and local cooperative efforts to achieve the agencies
          mutual goals.

               For example, the requirement of NOAA certification of
          existing permits for municipal sewage outfalls will ensure,NOAA
          consideration of potential impacts on Sanctuary resources and
          qualities. The NOAA certification process will be coordinated
          with EPA, the state and tribal governments. NOAA approval of
          future permits for municipal sewage outfalls is necessary to
          exempt such outfalls from Sanctuary regulatory prohibitions.
          NOAA participation in the permitting process will ensure
          protection of Sanctuary resources and qualities.

               The requirement for new permits of secondary treatment or
          greater, as necessary depending on the risk to Sanctuary
          resources and qualities, is expected to minimally impact the
          coastal economy. The Quileute Tribe is currently planning
          improvements to their wastewater treatment facility and the Makah
          are planning upgrades of their facility as well. Both are
          currently discharging primary treated effluents; however, their
          improvements are expected to attain secondary treatment.

               In reviewing existing or future permits, licenses,
          approvals, or other authorizations, NOAA intends to encourage
          best available management practices to minimize non-point source
          pollution entering the Sanctuary. Sanctuary review of discharge
          activities will be done in coordination with EPA, the state and
          the tribes. No disposal sites may be permitted within the
          Sanctuary.

               D.   Historical Resources
                    1.   Status Ouo
                         a.   Conseauence of Impact to Resources

               The most significant cultural resources are tribal areas of
          cultural and/or historical significance. The tribes have
          inventoried the sites that are significant. Many are rocks,
          paths, islands with burial grounds, etc.. that dot the entire
          Washington Coast. There have also been numerous shipwrecks along
          the coast, most have been a result of groundings on the offshore
          rocks. The wave energy, however, has resulted in the
          disintegration of most of the shipwrecks. There are records of
          shipwrecks further offshore but none have been excavated due to
          the low economic value of the cargo transported by these vessels,
          and the technical difficulty in accessing the shipwrecks. There
          is one shipwreck in.130 feet of water off Tongue Point in the
          Strait of Juan de Fuca which is a popular dive spot. The mast of
          this ship, located in-130 feet of water, reaches to a depth of 80
          ft.



                                        IV-66









             A recent MMS study of the geologic makeup of the offshore
        continental shelf indicates that there were probably human
        settlements along the submerged continental shelf dating back to
        the last glaciation. studies using satellites and radar imagery
        are needed to locate artifacts submerged in the offshore
        continental shelf.

             The Washington State Office of Archeology in the WDCD is
        responsible for maintaining an inventory of marine archeological
        resources in Washington State waters. The tribes are consulted
        during the permitting process for activities resulting in the
        excavation or disturbance of tribal archeological resources in
        state waters. Pursuant to the State Environmental Protection
        Act, the process for permitting research activities accounts for
        ecological impacts on the marine environment.

                       b.    Conseauence of Impact to Uses

             Current activities will continue under the status quo
        without any special protection to historical sites beyond state
        waters There would be no special requirements for private sector
        uses such as treasure salvors and recreational divers or public
        sector agencies such as the Navy, to consider the historic value
        and ecological consequences of their uses from a Sanctuary
        perspective.

                   2.   Sanctuary Alterngtive (Preferred)
                        a.   Consequence of Impact to Resources

             Historical resources are defined as resources possessing
        historical, cultural, archaeological or paleontological
        significance, including sites, structures, districts, and objects
        significantly associated with or representative of earlier
        people, cultures, human -activities and events. Thus any
        inundated prehistoric aboriginal sites and associated artifacts,
        as well as shipwrecks would be included in the resource
        protection regime of the proposed Sanctuary.

             This regulation is aimed at protecting historical resources
        NOAA's policy regarding historical resources is fairly congruent
        with existing state policy. NOAA intends to extend this policy
        to Federal waters. The regulations provide for the issuance of a
        NOAA permit for various reasons, e.g., research or to further
        salvage or recovery operations in connection with an abandoned
        shipwreck in the Sanctuary (title to which is held by Washington
        State).

             NOAA will thus be able to ensure that all parties affecting
        historical resources within the Sanctuary conduct their
        activities according to recognized archeological procedures.
        NOAA will also be able to ensure that the activity is conducted
        consistent with the NHPA and that the proposed user consult with

                                       IV-67









          the Washington State Historic Preservation Officer.

               As part of the Sanctuary management regime NOAA intends to
          research the number and type of historical resources within the
          boundaries of the Sanctuary, building on the research of others
          in the area, and at other Sanctuary sites along the west coast.
          This research will further our understanding of human
          populations, their use of the marine environment, and how to
          protect these resources so that they are available to future
          generations.

               NOAA will also seek National Register listing of appropriate
          identified resources located'in the Sanctuary under the NHPA.
          Listing would make available grant and survey funds from the
          Secretary of the*Interior (Heritage Conservation and Recreation
          Service) to be'used to identify resource distributions and assess
          their significance. Placement on the National Register also
          ensures careful review of proposed Federal activities which could
          adversely affect identified resources. However, listing does not
          prevent removal or damage of the resource by non-Federal
          entities.

               Historical resources in the marine environment are fragile,
          finite and non-renewable. This prohibition is designed to
          protect these resources so that they may be researched and
          information about their contents and type are made available to
          the public.

                         b.   Consequence of Impact to Uses

               The proposed final regulation is not likely to significantly
          affect existing activities within the Sanctuary. Users such as
          Navy salvage operations, recreational divers and treasure salvors
          would have to obtain a Sanctuary permit if their proposed
          activity would violate the Sanctuary prohibition.

               The current management regime for excavating archeological
          resources allocates up to 10% of the value (economic value or
          artifacts) of an excavation after having an opportunity to
          examine all of the resources prior to falling into private
          ownership. The Sanctuary will require that the sanctuary program
          has access to all archeological resources for educational
          purposes, including those ultimately destined for personal
          possession pursuant to state law.

               NOAA can also impose penalties of up to $100,000/violation
          for infractions of the Sanctuary regulation addressing
          historic/cultural resources. This regulation does not apply to
          moving, removing or injury to historical resources resulting
          incidentally from aquaculture or traditional fishing operations.




                                        IV-68










              E.   Alteration of, or Construction on the Seabed
                   1.   Status Ouo
                        a.   Conseauence-of Impact to Resources

              Currently, the only activities that involve altering or
         constructing on the seabed are the placement of hydroacoustic
         sonobouys and cable by the Navy within a 25 square nautical mile
         subsurface torpedo range off of Kalaloch. However, commercially
         valuable sand and gravel deposits off of Cape Flattery and the
         Quinault River have the potential of being commercially
         developed. This mining could potentially have severe impacts on
         the benthic environment disrupting habitat for the valuable crab
         and groundfish fisheries, and gray whale foraging areas (Table
         8).

                        b.   Conseguence-of Impacts to Uses

              The status quo will allow dump sites to be established
         within the Sanctuary pursuant to EPA and COE permits. Also,
         gravel deposits will be available for development. These
         activities will be pursued without protection from a Sanctuary
         perspective.

                   2.   Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)
                        a.   Conseauence of Impact to Resources

              The Sanctuary prohibition on alteration of, or construction
         on the seabed will ensure the continued integrity of the benthic
         habitat which is critical to the support the marine fish, mammal
         and seabird populations. Effects of marine mining include
         emissions of gaseous or particulate matter to the atmosphere,
         changes in water quality such as red tides, increased turbidity,
         and storm induced slides, major geologic impacts in the coastal
         zone where wave energy is a dominant force, changes in current
         patterns inducing erosion or deposition, and introduction of new
         habitats which may cause the loss of feeding areas for marine
         mammals and other organisms in the food web.

                        b.   Conseguence of Impact to Uses

              The Sanctuary regulation ensures that the integrity of the
         entire-ecosystem of the Sanctuary does not degrade through the
         cumulative impacts of development projects. These impacts
         threaten to diminish the value of the region for fisheries,
         recreation, wildlife, and spiritual benefits.

             . Currently, dredging of harbors within the preferred boundary
         (La Push and Neah Bay) occurs rarely and clean dredge spoils are
         deposited to renourish beaches and stabilize jetties. These
         harbor maintenance activities will not be impacted by the
         Sanctuary since harbors are excluded from sanctuary boundaries.
         The planned expansion of the marina at Neah Bay will necessitate

                                       IV-69













                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       1-3

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       tr

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       M



                                           Resource and
                                            Environment
                                                                                                                     Significant Findings                                                             Salient References'

                                     AIR OLIALITY
                                                                    Emissions of gaseous or particulate matter to the atmosphere are of greatest potential concern. Principle                   LISDOI. MMS (1988b)                            0
                                                                    emissions are nitrous oxides and residual (reactive) organic compounds. During exploration and test mining.                 OTEC publications
                                                                    emissions are expected to have little effect on onshore air quality except offshore California where high
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               0
                                                                    background pollution already exists. Emissions from marine mining sources are expected to be qualitatively                                                                 (D
                                                                    and quantitatively similar to oil and gas related sources. In the deep ocean, some gases might be released                                                                 (n      0
                                                                    from seawater brought to the surface from the seabed via hydraulic dredging; information on this effect is
                                                                    sparse. Noise from non-explosive seismic exploration activity is generally dismissed as insignificanL In terms
                                                                    of global or regional effects of marine mining, there is only limited literature on this subject. Effects are                                                                      M
                                                                    generally examined on a she-specific level. No significant problems or priority areas for research are rioted.                                                                     0
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               M       <
                                     WATER QUAL17Y                                                                                                                                                                                             0 H-

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               (D      0
                                        Natural Effects             In general, the natural effects of environmental change are easily recognized. Phenomena such as red tides,
                                                                    mega-plumes resulting from seabed hydrothermal activity. and storm- or eadhquake-induced slides may
                                                                    result in Significant but temporary changes in water quality.                                                                                                                      M
                       H                                                                                                                                                                                                                               Z
                                        Induced Effects             Induced effects (e.g.. turbidity. nutrient or trace metal endchment) may result in secondary effects throughout                                                                    471"
                       -C@                                                                                                                                                                                                                     U)      IV
                        I                                           the trophic web.                                                                                                                                                                   @.J
                      0                 Deep Ocean and OCS          Impacts are difficult lo assess. The capacity for assimilation of plumes increases in deep water. however                   Aurand and Mamontav (1982)
                                                                    other factors (e.g.. presence of a thermoctine, low velocity benthic currents) may prolong the effects of                   Cruickshank et al. (1987)
                                                                    plumes compared to shallow coastal waters. Effects should be examined on a site-specific basis. Dilution of                 de Groot -(I 979b)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               Li      M
                                                                    a discharge to low concentrations is rapid (i.e.. reduced to 1,000 ppm within 2 min of discharge; to 10 ppm                 Drinnan and Bli3s (1986)                               C
                                                                    within I h). The affected zone typically extends 1.000 to 2.000 m down current Field studies of drilling muds               ECOMAR (1963)                                          Ct
                                                                    and other discharges indicate that pollutants are rapidly reduced to background levels. Long-term, chronic                  Evans et al. (1982)
                                                                    effects of these discharges have not been observed. Mining discharges we subject to the same settling and                   Gillis and IO* (1980)
                                                                    dilution factors as oil and gas related discharges. Turbidity from resuspended sediments may be detected                    Hirsch et al. (1978)                                   0
                                                                    down current over many km: direct effects and indirect effects (e.g., nutrient or trace metal enrichment                    Middleditch (t981)
                                                                    increased biological or chemical oxygen demand) are limited to Om immediate area of operations. Petroleum                   Neff (1981. 1985)
                                                                    spills from marine mining activities would be limited to fuels (during transfer) and tanker loss.                           U.S. Congress. Office of
                                                                                                                                                                                                Technol. Assess. (1987)
                                                                                                                                                                                                Zippin (1988)
                                        Coastal and                 Marine mining would affect water circulation and water quality proportionally to the level of activity, Large               U.S. Congress. Office of
                                        Onshore                     stockpiles of marine minerals or mining wastes could be usefully maintained or disposed of at convenient                    Technol. Assess. (1987)
                                                                    sites near to shore: impacts from these activities can only be assessed by analysis of she-specific conditions.
                                                                    The shallow and confined nature of many coastal waters makes them susceptible to perturbation or
                                                                    pollutants. Turbidity is generally not considered a problem (e.g., sand and gravel mining operations are
                                                                    discontinuous; deposits rarely contain large amounts of silt-sized material). Good management practices are
                                                                    critical to eliminate potential impacts. A very low potential exists for release of chemicals normally associated                                                            LQ
                                                                    with harbor and channef dredging (e.g.. PCBs. trace metals).























                                             Resource and
                                              Environment                                                           Significant Findings                                                          Salient References'
                                          Terrestrial Sites          Impacts on water quality at shoreside facilities are attributed to gaseous, liquid, of solid waste emissions.           Ellis (1987, 1988, 1989)
                                                                     Potentially serious problems include the dumping of mined tailings and processing wastes into adjacent                  Ellis and Hoover (1990)
                                                                     waterways. The nature of the effect will be influenced by the characteristics of the dumped material, the
                                                                     nature of the waterway, and its ecosystem.
                                       GEOLOGICAL                    The primary effect Is the removal of the ofe: additional secondary effects may include alteration of the value of
                                      .RESOURCES                     remaining mineral resources (grade depletion) and alteration of the seabed.
                                          Mineral                    Mineral deposits removed by mining result in an irretrievable transfer of the mineral from a resource base to a
                                                                     consumptive use.
                                          Other                      Major geologic Impacts of marine mining result from activities in the coastal zone where wave energy is a               Chansang (1968)
                                                                     prime factor. The effects of large excavations or shoaling resulting. for example, from the mining of mineral
                                                                     sands will depend on location. Changes in wave or current patterns induced by altered conditions can cause
                                                                     changes in shoreline equilibrium. causing erosion or deposition. Possible effects from sub-seabed fracturing
                       _,4                                              ing conventional or other type explosives are not well discussed in the literature;    di      s   y
                                                                     us                                                                                     ad tional tud and
                        I                                            observation Q.e.. in offshore areas susceptible to stumping. in deep water) was suggested. Coral reef growth
                       -4                                            may be severely affected by siltation. altering the supply of coral sands to adjacent beaches.
                                       BIOLOGICAL                    Most biological impacts are secondary. attributed to some alteration in existing physical, chemical. or trophic         Cruickshank etaL (1987)
                                       RESOURCES                     equilibria. Impacts In the coastal zone have a greater tendency to be significant because of higher energy
                                                                     levels. Physical changes which may induce biological effects include changes in temperature. current
                                                                     patterns, amount of particulates present. nature of the substrate, and introduction of new habitats. Significant
                                                                     chemical changes include changes in the presence of nutrients, trace elements, or toxics. Trophic changes
                                                                     Include removal or alteration of indigenous species. Biological impacts are the major enigma of impact
                                                                     assessment Criteria upon which significant biological changes we based are typically arbitrary.
                                                                     Generalizations rarely allow meaningful prediction of the effects of specific mining operations. Biological
                                                                     studies should be directed on a case-by-case basis to respond to specific needs. Effects of turbidity,
                                                                     sedimentation. explosives. light and noise on marine biota have been reviewed. Other data sources were
                                                                     noted from deep seabed mining, OCS oil and gas. and academic research.
                                          Birds                      Large oil spills which have the potential to kill numerous sea birds and shore birds we not anticipated from            USDO1. MMS (1983b. 1991)
                                                                     marine mining operations. Effects of small spills tend to be localized and short-lived.
                                          Mammals                    Effects of operations may include loss of feeding areas. uptake of heavy metals. and noise. Oil spills we not           Gales (1962)
                                                                     considered significant because of the low risk. Mining activities located away from known migratory pathways            Geraci and SL Aubin (1980)
                                                                     and calving or leeding grounds are unlikely to adversely affect marine mammal populations although                      USDOC. NOAA (1981)
                                                                     individual transient animals near mining shes may be startled or show avoidance behavior. Limited research              USDOI. MMS (1983a.b)
                                                                     suggests habituation to low-level noise.






















                                                        Resource and
                                                        Environment
                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Salient References,
                                                    Marine and                    Both adverse and beneficial impacts have been noted. Beneficial impacts include              the attraction of fish to           Aurand and Mamontov (1982)
                                                    Aquatic Fauna                 offshore structures: enhancement of substrate habitats by alteration of the texture; enhancement of substrate                    Bigham et al. (1982)
                                                                                  habitats by the presentation of new surface nutrients by mixing and replacement of the benthos; thermal                          Blaxter (1980)
                                                                                  stimulation of growth; and introduction of nutrients by mixing of water masses and enhancement of                                California Department of Fish
                                                                                  phytoplankton growth. Adverse effects include direct lethal toxic effects (e.g., abnormal growth, reduced adult                  and Game (1977)
                                                                                  fecundity, behavioral changes, etc.) and disruption of community and ecosystem structure (e.g.. changes in                       Chan and Anderson (1981)
                                                                                  diversity aM abundance via food web disruption, changes in predator-prey relationships, etc.). Analyses of                       Clark (1988)
                                                                                  potentlail impacts requires a knowledge of the pre-operating populations ancl their natural cycles, allowing a                   Cfessard (1981)
                                                                                  differentiation between natural fluctuations and impact response. Adequate knowledge of pre-operating                            Cressard and Augri3 (1982)
                                                                                  conditions (baseline) is debatable. Difficulties arise in the selection of indicator species. Effects of marine                  Cruickshank (1974a,b, 1987)
                                                                                  mining operations occur from turbidity, smothering, and pollutants (from mined formations). Turbidity effects                    Dawson (1984)
                                                                                  may not be a concern if dilution rates are high and sensitive communities are not proximal to the mining site.                   de Groot (1979a,b)
                                                                                  Numerous studies have been conducted regarding the effects of turbidity on indigenous fauna, especially                          Drinnan and Bliss (1986)
                                                                                  fishes. The exposure of free-floating organisms (e.g.. plankton) to high turbidity concentrabons will be limited.                Ellis and Hoover (1990)
                                                                                  Turbidity impacts from aggregate dredging operations on sensidve benthic organisms will be far less #=                           Gillis and lrjrk (1980)
                                                                                  placer mining. Smothering of bottom dwelling organisms is due to the settlement of suspended sediments                           Glasby (1985)
                                                                                  and associated depletion of oxygen in surrounding waters. Coral reefs and seagrass beds are particularly                         Hanson et al. (1982)
                                                                                  sensitive. Smothering is perceived as being of greatest concern in placer mining operations. Pollutants may                      Hirota (1981)
                                                                                  affect growth and reproductive rates. The effects of pollutants on the physiology of marine fauna has                            Hu (1981)
                                                                                  received only limited study. Effects on marine phytoplankton are observed in response to decreased                               ICES (1979)
                                                                                  illumination in the laboratory. but these shading effects are not expected to be a problem in open waters. In                    Kawamura wW Hera (1980)
                                                                                  the benthos. some species will likely be more affected than others because of feeding mods (filter feeders),                     Levin (1984)
                                                                                  life habit (surface dwellers), degree of mobility (tube dwellers). or sensitivity of life stage (larvae). Areas that             Lunz at M. (1984)
                                                                                  may not be able to withstand slight increases in sediment deposition include cotal reefs and ar"s used by                        Matsumoto (1984)
                                                                                  bottom spawning fish. In cases where a majority of the banthic community has been adversely affected.                            NRC (1965)
                                                                                  recolonization will occur from populations outside the disturbed area. Benthic organisms may serve as                            Pfitzenmeyer (1970)
                                                                                  indicators of pollutants and the structure of the benthk: community may be Indicative of a stressed or                           U.S. Army Engineer District
                                                                                  disturbed environment.                                                                                                           (1974)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   U.S. Congress. Office of
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   Technol. Assess. (1987)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   United Nations (1981)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   USDOC. NOAA (1981)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   USDOI, MMS (1988b)

                                                    Flora                         Effects on flora are not regarded as a major concern.
                                                    Sensitive                     In sensitive arem (e.g.. Arctic waters). particulwly in shallow water. or in the deep seabeds, slow regrowth of                  Dunton et al. (1982)
                                                    Habitats                      affected communities is expected. Areas of hydrodwmal venting along mid-ocean ridge crests support                               USDOC. NOAA (1981)
                                                                                  unusual benthic colonies. Draft regulations have provided for avoidance of such environments.                                    USDOI. MMS (1983a)





















                                               Resource and
                                                Environment                                                          Significant Findings                                                          Salient References'
                                            Threatened and             Impacts were discussed under respective biotic resource categories., Impacts are associated with noise
                                            Endangered                 (marine mammals, birds). accidental oil or fuel spills. and increased turbidity.
                                            Species

                                          SOCIAL AND                   Most actions resulting in environmental query are triggered on the basis of some social or economic need.
                                          ECONOMIC                     Such aspects are built into the scoping process for respective environmental documents. The literature is
                                          RESOURCES                    voluminous and scattered.

                                            Human Resources            Effects on human resources include health. employment. and infrastructural needs. For processing plants                USDOI. MMS (1988a.b)
                                                                       and mining operations conducted from platforms or seabed mining operations carried out in the hard rock.
                                                                       extended periods of relative isolation create impacts on mining personnel. The social environment is
                                                                       extremely variable and widely described, but not specifically for marine mining. Disturbances must be
                                                                       weighed against beriefirs. The ranking of multiple uses is potentially highly subjective. From a legal
                                                                       perspective. national laws are not adequate for many minerals and international laws regarding the mining of
                                                                       the seafloor are still not well-defined. In many instances. national and international laws have lagged behind
                                                                       rapid social change. Several aspects have a significant effect on planning and conduct of operations,
                                                                       including the exhaustible nature of mineral resources. resource conservation, and multiple uses of mineralized
                                                                       areas.

                      W                     Commercial and             Literature from Europe is more extensive on this subject than in the U.S. Modern European prospecting                  Nunny and Chillinï¿½worth
                                            Recreational               operations cause little disturbance to the marine environment and do not interfere with other activities at sea;       (I 9W)
                                            Fisheries                  no formal government consultations procedure exists for a prospecting license, however. the permitting                 Pasho (1986)
                                                                       process is substantive. As a resource. standing fishery stocks are affected by various factors (e.g.. turbidity,       Zippin (1988)
                                                                       pollutant loading. physical disturbance). Direct effects of oil or turbidity are limited due to the mobility of fish.
                                                                       Indirect effects include damage to eggs, larvae. and juveniles; sublethal uptake of hydrocarbons and
                                                                       pollutants: loss of prey: loss of habitat; and reduced reproductive success. Marine mineral activities may
                                                                       interfere with fishing activities and compete for space at sea and in port Space use conflicts between
                                                                       fishermen and vessel operators have occurred with entanglement or severing of net and trap lines.
                                                                       Coordination efforts between the two industries have helped avoid most vessel conflicts. Recent research
                                                                       interest has included assessment of the potential for marine geophysical surveys to reduce catchability of fish
                                                                       and damage to fish eggs and larvae. Long duration. spatially concentrated use of seismic energy sources
                                                                       can disturb the spatial distribution of fish in the water column and reduce catchability. It is expected that
                                                                       there has been some loss of individual income through lost catch opportunity or gear loss and increased cost
                                                                       of port space.

                                            Regional                   Impacts from resource disturbance will be measurable on the economy. The extent of the economic impact                 Sorensen and Mead (1969)
                                            Economies                  resulting from a given acfion is affected by varkxis factors. A determination of a prospect's feasibility must
                                                                       consider the net rate of return on the investment.

                                            Local Economies            Local economies are site-specific. driven by many factors.
























                                    Resource and
                                     Environment                                              Significant Findings                                           Salient References,
                                  Cultural              Effects are particularly difficult to quantity because intangible cultural systems are subject to the historical and Cruickshank (1974a)
                                  Resources             contemporary changes induced by all human activities. A comparison of alternatives using serni-quantitative
                                                        methods of factcw analysis might be valid. Archeological resources may be significant and should be
                                                        protected.
                                  Technical             Major impacts on technology appear In the form of disturbances to the system due to materials failure
                                  Resources             ptimarily effected by motion. pressure. corrosion. and biological fouling. Impacts on the environment we
                                                        relatively small.
                                     Salient references indicate key sources: several reference listings (e.g.. Marine and Aquatic Fauna) have been pared, given tabular space constraints.









         the disposal of dredged material outside sanctuary boundaries.
         Inside the Sanctuary, activities associated with harbor
         maintenance including the installation of navigation aids are
         exempted from the Sanctuary regulatory prohibition. The
         Sanctuary program is supportive of the marina expansion and will
         work with the Makah Tribe to pursue appropriate disposal
         alternatives. The Makah Tribe plans to use the dredge spoil for
         beach nourishment and upland projects.

              Commercial mining of sand and gravel deposits off the coast
         is prohibited within the Sanctuary. This prevents the public
         from receiving economic benefits from these potential commercial
         endeavors.

              The regulation prohibits placement of any structure or other
         matter on the seabed, such as, but not limited to, artificial
         reefs, pipelines and outfalls, unless relevant permits are
         reviewed and certified or approved by NOAA. The prohibition also
         includes placement or abandonment of any structure or other
         matter on the seabed, which includes vessels. that run aground.
         This helps ensure that owners and operators are responsible for
         the removal of their vessels.

              The activities exempted from this regulation would be
         monitored by the Sanctuary manager, based on information supplied
         by the EPA, COE and the WDNR. If the data collected demonstrate
         that a greater degree of Sanctuary oversight is appropriate,
         amendments to the regulations could be proposed.

              F.   Taking Marine Mammals, Turtles and Seabirds
                    1.   Status Ouo
                         a.   Conseauences of Impact to Resources

              The current regulatory regime under the U.S. Departments of
         the Interior and Commerce gives each Department the authority to
         designate and protect oceanic habitats if found to be "critical"
         for species listed as "endangered" under the ESA (ESA). The MMPA
         and the ESA prohibit the "taking" of marine mammals and
         threatened or endangered species. The MBTA prohibits the taking,
         killing, possessing, selling and other specified forms of
         exploitation or migratory birds. The term "taking" is defined
         broadly under the ESA and MMPA and has been interpreted by the
         administering agencies, so that the ESA and MMPA provide
         considerable protection. However, the potential threats to
         marine mammals and endangered species range from direct injuries
         to a specific animal or population to indirect or cumulative
         degradation of their habitats. Neither the MMPA nor the ESA
         fully prevent such degradation of habitats. Section 7(a) of the
         ESA does provide protection against actions which jeopardize
         endangered species or their critical habitats, but this section
         applies only to activities authorized, funded or carried out by
         Federal agencies, not to private or state actions. There is'no

                                        IV-75









          explicit provision for the designation or protection of marine
          mammal habitats under the MMPA. Thus the MMPA, ESA and'MBTA
          together provide considerable protection to the marine mammals,
          turtles and seabirds of the Sanctuary by prohibiting the taking
          of specific species protected under those acts, but fail to focus
          particular attention on the habitats of the species covered by
          the Acts.

              Further, no Federal authority currently exists to identify
          and protect localized marine habitats of exceptional importance
          to non-endangered species. While the MMPA and the MBTA proscribe
          the hunting and taking of marine mammals and migratory birds,
          they do not protect their habitats from potentially adverse uses.
          Such program deficiencies have left certain valuable marine
          habitats largely unprotected. If current uses intensify and
          seriously threaten resources, the lack of suitable management
          authority to intervene could allow undesirable environmental
          impacts to the seabirds, marine mammals and turtles of the area.

                   b.    Consequence of Impact to Uses

              Currently the status quo addresses the taking of marine
          mammals and seabirds under relevant legislation. Marine mammals
          (except sea otters) may be taken incidentally to commercial
          fishing pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 1383a until October 1993, after
          which rulemaking pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 1371, 1373 and 1374 may be
          required. Fishing activities that potentially take marine
          mammals are required to have observers and/-or logbooks on board
          to monitor the extent of takings. Researchers studying marine
          mammals are required under the MMPA to obtain a permit for their
          activities.

                   2.    Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)
                         a.   Conseauencg of Impact to Resources

              The proposed regulation would overlap with the MMPA, MBTA
          and ESA, extending protection consistent with the intent of the
          MPRSA to protect the Sanctuary resources on an environmentally
          holistic basis. The proposed regulation would include all marine
          mammals, sea turtles and seabirds in or above the Sanctuary. The
          Sanctuary regulation would also allow for the imposition of
          greater penalties, i.e., $100,000 per violation.

                         b.   Consequence of Impact to Uses

              The regulation would not preclude a number of current
          activities from continuing. For example, scientific research on
          marine mammals and seabirds that aKe Sanctuary resources is
          encouraged as part of the*Sanctuary mandate. To facilitate this
          research the proposed final regulations allow the issuance of
          Sanctuary permits for research. If the research is on Federal or
          state designated endangered species or on marine mammals, the

                                        IV-76









         researchers are already required to obtain permits from the
         relevant management agency and would not have to obtain a
         Sanctuary permit or other approval under the proposed final
         regulation.

              As another example, NOAA will work with existing fisheries
         management agencies as well as National and local fishery
         organizations including the PFMC to ensure that the incidental
         taking of seabirds, sea turtles and marine mammals in commercial
         fishing nets is minimized.

              Finally, rehabilitation of injured seabirds, and studies on
         dead seabirds and marine mammals,-would be permitted under these
         Sanctuary regulations in response to an emergency threatening
         life, property, or the environment or pursuant to a research
         permit.

              G.   Overflights
                   1.   Status Ouo
                        a.   Conseguence of Impact to Resources

              There are a few small airports and-landing strips along the
         coastal portions of the Sanctuary including a beach landing strip
         at Copalis, an unstaffed airport at Quileute, an airport at Sekiu
         and one at Port Angeles. Most of the airplanes utilizing these
         airports are recreational aircraft or airtaxis. There is a cargo
         plane that lands daily at Quileute Monday through Friday.
         Airtaxis to Sekiu are used largely to taxi sports fishermen to
         Neah Bay for recreational fishing excursions. A radar tower on
         the peninsula monitors air traffic above 3000 feet above ground
         level (AGL). A military operating area extends over the Olympic
         Peninsula and Sanctuary waters above 1200 feet AGL. When in use,
         other planes must stay below this altitude.

               Over Sanctuary waters, there are no restrictions on
         aircraft with respect to the altitude they may fly,. There is a
         2000 ft. advisory over the Olympic National Park and USFWS
         offshore refuges. Most aircraft are believed to observe these
         advisories, but compliance is not mandatory.

              Low flying aircraft threaten the safety of the seabirds and
         mammals that use the offshore islands and coastal habitats. The
         noise startles birds and mammals resulting in egg destruction,
         vulnerability of chicks to predation by raptors and gulls, and
         stampedes of pinnipeds causing the crushing of young mammals.

                 . b.   Conseguence of ImDact to Use

              Although only a few charter airplanes fly over the
         Sanctuary, the uses may intensify as tourism increases
         potentially as a result of the expansion of the Neah Bay marina
         and the presence of the marine Sanctuary.

                                       IV-77









               2.   Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)
                    a.   Consequence of Impact to Resources

               This prohibition is intended to protect marine birds and
          mammals from the disturbance and harassment of low-flying
          aircraft and to be consistent with the'FAA's 2000 ft. advisory
          adjacent over protected areas adjacent to the Sanctuary.

                    b.   Consequence of ImRact to Uses

               This regulation will require aircraft to remain above 2000
          feet AGL within one mile seaward of the coastal boundary of the
          Sanctuary unless responding to an emergency threatening life,
          property, or the environment or necessary for valid law
          enforcement purposes. Department of Defense practice bombing of
          Sealion Rock will be prohibited from March 1 through October 31.
          Helicopters involved in timbering operations on-tribal lands, and
          transporting researchers and tribal members to tribal lands will
          be exempted from this prohibition as well to be consistent with
          treaty-secured rights of access of tribal members to tribal
          lands.

               Aircraft flying below 2000 ft. within the regulated zones
          for research purposes would need to obtain a Sanctuary research
          permit. The application would be processed expeditiously to
          ensure that while Sanctuary resources and qualities are
          protected, there would only be a minimal administrative burden on
          the applicant..

               H.   Vessel Traffic
                    1.   Status Quo (Preferred)
                         a.   Impact to Resources

               With the projected increasing number of vessels approaching
          the Strait of Juan de Fuca (see Part II) it is likely that there
          will'be a vessel related accident. Such an event, either by
          collision or grounding due to loss of power or steering control
          or human error would likely result in a spill of hazardous
          material. The rocky intertidal areas and the productive food
          chain off the Pacific coast are extremely sensitive to damage
          from oil or other pollut*ants. This is an area with little
          coastal access, and most booms are ineffective during common
          winter storms.

               The implementation of an ATBA will offer significantly
          increased levels of protection by building in a safety net of
          time -:o allow emergency response vessels to respond to an
          emerg,tncy off the outer coast.

                         b.   Impact to Uses

               NOAA will rely on the existing management regime to manage

                                        IV-78









         vessel traffic rather than promulgate regulations. However, NOAA
         will work closely with the USCG, the Washington State OMS and the
         vessel traffic industry on matters relating to vessel traffic
         through the Sanctuary. Vessel traffic will remain in the scope
         of the Sanctuary's regulations.

              There is a Coordinated Vessel Traffic Management System in
         the Strait of Juan de Fuca with designated inbound and outbound
         lanes on the U.S. and Canadian sides of the international border,
         respectively. No vessel greater than 125,000 dead weight tons
         may pass east of Port Angeles and all vessels greater than 300
         gross tons passing into Puget Sound must be accompanied by a
         pilot. All tankers must be accompanied by one (and soon to be
         two) escort tugs.

              Outside of the Strait of Juan de Fuca there are voluntary
         agreements by maritime associations to coordinate the movement of
         coastwise vessel and barge traffic.     Under these agreements,
         tankers transiting along the coast remain at least 50 nautical
         miles from shore unless entering a port of call. Barges follow
         agreed upon lanes within 5 and 10 miles from shore pursuant to
         the crabber-tugboat agreements negotiated yearly. The future of
         these agreed upon lanes, however, is uncertain.

              There are no tugs specifically dedicated for emergency
         response in Puget Sound, the Strait of Juan de Fuca or Grays
         Harbor.   There have been a number of near misses when vessels
         have lost power either off the coast or in the Straits.
         Likewise, there have been collisions off the Strait of Juan de
         Fuca (Tenyo Maru in 1991) and barges ho  led/damaged off the coast
         (Nestucca, 1988). However, the Strait of Juan de Fuca Emergency
         Towing Vessel Task Force has been formed and is charged with the
         mission of establishing, maintaining, and operating an emergency
         towing vessel in the Strait of Juan de Fuca.

              NOAA has worked with the USCG and maritime industries in
         Washington State to analyze the time it would take for a vessel
         or barge travelling along the outer coast to ground once power
         was lost. This analysis was used to recommend preventative
         measures to minimize the chance of a spill of hazardous material.
         Following is the analysis upon which NOAA has recommended a
         strategy for addressing the risks presented by vessel traffic in
         the Sanctuary. -

                         ANALYSIS OF VESSEL/BARGE BUFFER AREA OFF
                              THE NORTHERN WASHINGTON COAST

              The following are three actual incidents that occurred in-
         Washington state waters. Two resulted in spills of contaminants.
         While the third did not result in a spill, it illustrates that
         response time is critical in order to avert an accident.



                                        IV-79










               1.   On December 22, 1988 the barge Nestucca was struck and
         punctured by its tug, the ocean Service while attempting to
         retrieve the barge following the parting of the towline. The
         barge released 231,000 gallons of fuel oil into Grays Harbor and
         the surrounding coastal waters, polluting the coastline from
         Grays Harbor to as far north as Vancouver Island.

               2.   In January, 1972 the General M.C. Meigs broke free  from
         its tow during a winter storm and went adrift approximately 9.5
         nautical miles (nm) west of Cape Flattery. The tug was unable to
         retrieve the ship. Eight hours later, the ship grounded near
         Portage Head, just south of Cape Flattery. The incident resulted
         in a major oil spill.

               3.   A recent.near-miss was reported by The USCG's Puget
         Sound Vessel Traffic Service (PSVTS) as follows:

               "A 13,946 DWT tanker, loaded with caustic soda and other
         chemicals, lost all power off Cape Flattery and requested
         immediate assistance. Within minutes, PSVTS located the nearest
         lite tugs, and had them underway to the scene at top speed.
         PSVTS kept local, national, and Canadian interests informed with
         real time information throughout the incident. The tanker was
         retrieved and towed safely to anchorage for repairs."

               What follows is a hypothetical scenario describing a
         maritime emergency off the western Washington coast. Its purpose
         is to assess current emergency response capability to a drifting
         barge or a disabled and drifting vessel in waters along the
         western Washington coast.

               This scenario was developed by a former commanding officer
         after consultation with members of the commercial towing
         community, local meteorologists and weather forecasters, members
         of the USCG and the United States Navy, and personnel with
         experience in oil spill trajectory analysis. It graphically
         depicts the fact that response time is critical in the event of a
         maritime emergency.

               Estimates for times of arrival of assistance tugs were
         obtained from the Emergency Response subcommittee of the Strait
         of Juan de Fuca/Northern Puget Sound Regional Marine Safety
         Committee.

               The meteorological conditions described in the scenario
         colild occur at any time during the period October through March.
         Th..s specific scenario was developed by a veteran forecaster from
         NO,A's National Weather Service Forecast Office in Seattle,
         Wa!;hington.

               The United States Coast Pilot for the Pacific Coast:
         California, Oregon, Washington, and Hawaii (26th edition) makes

                                        IV-80









         the following note about weather in    the vicinity of the western
         Washington coast near La Push, WA: "In the late fall and winter,
         the low pressure center in the Gulf of Alaska intensifies and is
         of major importance in controlling weather systems entering the
         Pacific Northwest. At this season of the year, storm systems
         crossing the Pacific follow a more S path striking the coast at
         frequent intervals... Gale force winds are not unusual."

              The hypothetical incident involves a tug and petroleum barge
         on a December transit from a refinery in Anacortes to a port on
         the Columbia River. During this month, the following average
         weather can be expected (Director, Naval Oceanography and
         Meteorology, 1976):

              1)    Visibility of less than 1 nm along the Washington coast
              can be expected for approximately 1.7% of the time or 0.5
              days.

              2)    Winds in excess of 34 knots (kts) can be expected for
              approximately 7.7% of the time or 2.4 days.

              3)    A westerly wind component with an average speed of 18
              kts can be expected for approximately 10% of the time or 3.1
              days.

              4)    Wave heights averaging 10-12 feet can be expected for
              11.9% of the time or 3.7 days.

              5)    A current with an average speed of 1.0 knot setting to
              the north along shore can also be expected.

              These are average conditions. In severe conditions,
         sustained winds in excess of 40-45 kts can be expected with
         accompanying seas of over 20-25 feet (U.S. Department of
         Commerce, 1990). .

                                    THE SCENARIO

         Wednesday A.M (1000 Local Mean Time (LMT))

              The ocean-going, twin-screw tug, North Wind (fictitious
         name) has just taken in tow a petroleum barge loaded with 30,000
         barrels of Marine fuel oil. The tug and tow are bound from
         Anacortes to a port on the Columbia River. Anticipated speed
         over ground is 8.0 kts. Estimated time of arrival at the
         Columbia River bar is approximately 30 hours.

              Current weather is moderate. A slight chop covers Puget
         Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Visibility is 3-4 nm. The
         sky is overcast with occasional drizzle. Winds in the Strait are
         easterly at 10-15 kts. The forecast is for an offshore,
         deepening 1000 Millibar (Mb) low pressure system to move onto

                                         IV-81









          northern Vancouver Island during the next 24 to 36 hours. Winds
          along the western Washington coast are currently SE at 15-20 kts.
          Seas are reported 6-8 feet and building due to the approaching
          storm.

               The captain of the tug considers all factors and decides he
          can clear Cape Flattery and be well southbound before the system
          comes ashore. Further, he concludes that conditions at the mouth
          of the Columbia River in 30 hours will be moderate enough to
          safely cross the bar upon arrival.

               The tug and tow clear Anacortes and proceed outbound.


          Wednesday P.M. (2200 IMT)

               Twelve hours after departure from Anacortes, North Wind and
          its barge round buoy "J" at the entrance to the Strait of Juan de
          Fuca. The trip through the Strait has been uneventful. The
          weather, however, has begun to deteriorate. The barometer is
          falling. Wind speed is now a steady 20-25 kts SSE with
          occasional gusts to 30-35 kts. Wave height is increasing rapidly
          with the increasing wind.

               To save time and in an attempt to beat the approaching
          system, North Wind takes up a southbound course using the
          published "Towboat-Crabber" traffic lane. This lane is a
          north/south route passing approximately 7 nm west of Cape Alava.

               Although the North Wind's parent company has established a
          policy of voluntary adherence to a trackline 10-30 nm offshore
          when towing a loaded petroleum barge, this practice will not be
          followed today due to unfavorable weather conditions offshore.
          Further, due to sea state and wind being encountered, North Wind
          slows to 6 kts to reduce the beating on both tug and tow.

          Thursday A.M. (0230 IMT)

               North Wind's position is approximately 6-7 nm SW of Cape
          Alava, in the "Towboat-Crabber Lane," proceeding southbound.
          NOAA weather radio reports that the low pressure system is still
          moving toward Vancouver Island but is "rapidly deepening" at a
          rate of I Mb/hour. Pressure at the-center of the low is now 980
          Mb. Frontal passage is expected shortly. Winds are steady SSE
          at 30 kts with gusts to 40 kts. Seas are 12-15 and building.
          The barometer is falling. North Wind slows to 4.0 kts.

          Thursday A.M. (0300 LMT)

               With the front rapidly approaching the coast, winds
          accelerate to SSE 50 kts, with gusts to 65 kts. Seas are now 20
          feet with some exceeding 30 feet. During a period of

                                        IV-82









        exceptionally high sea and swell combinations, the towline parts.
        The petroleum barge is now adrift. Recognizing the danger, the
        captain notifies the Coast Guard of the situation and begins
        attempts to recover the barge.

             After frontal passage, the wind begins veering to SW 30 kts
        with gusts to 50 kts. The result is a confused sea with 20 foot
        swells from the SSE and building 15 foot waves from the SW. The
        barge is drifting generally NE at approximately 0.9 kts (USCG,
        1991a).

             Initial efforts at recovering the barge are thwarted by the
        fact that the insurance wire (an emergency pick up line) from the
        barge is fouled and laying along the lee side of the barge.

             The tug begins attempts to retrieve the tow by using the
        emergency barge retrieval system (a second backup retrieval
        device). During one attempt at retrieval, the tug passes too
        close to the barge and a collision occurs. The North Wind
        sustains damage to its hull and begins taking water in its engine
        room. on further inspection, one rudder is also found to be
        damaged. No further attempts can be made at retrieving the barge
        and the crew begins efforts to control the flooding and repair
        the rudder.


        Thursday A.M. (0400 IMT)

             North Wind immediately issues a Mayday call and notifies the
        Coast Guard that she is drifting and taking on water. The
        captain reports that he will be able to control the flooding and
        remain afloat. However, the petroleum barge is adrift and North
        Wind will be unable to regain control of it. In the darkness,
        with high winds and seas and poor visibility, the tug loses sight
        of the barge and is no longer able to identify it on the radar
        screen among the sea and rain clutter. The barge is, in effect,
        lost.

             There are no vessels of opportunity in the area able to
        respond to the Mayday call. The Coast Guard initiates a search
        and rescue operation but has no vessels capable of taking either
        the tug or barge under tow. There are,however, two tugs in
        Anacortes. The Mayday call has been relayed to them and they
        have notified the Coast Guard and North Wind that they will
        respond. A smaller, twin screw tug in Grays Harbor has also
        heard the call and will respond.

        Thursday A.M. (0500 LMT)

             The responding tugs from Anacortes were conducting a docking
        evolution but concluded operations within an hour and were
        underway at 0500 LMT to render assistance. Estimated time of
        arrival at buoy "Jig is 1300 IMT. Arrival on scene is estimated

                                       IV-83










           to be 1500 LMT, Thursday afternoon - 12 hours after the incident.

               The tug from Grays Harbor was also underway within an hour
           but will only be able to make 8-10 kts in the heavy weather.
           Estimated time of arrival for the Grays Harbor tug is between
           1330 - 1400 LMT. The forecast for the scene at time of arrival
           of the responding tugs is for westerly winds at approximately 20
           kts with gusts to 30 kts.

               The tug and barge began drifting while approximately 6.5 nm
           WSW of Cape Alava. The tug is able to maintain steerageway and
           hold position but is still taking on water. The barge, however,
           is being affected by the wind (i.e., drift downwind at 3% of the
           wind speed) and a 1.0 kt (approximate) northerly current
           (Director, Naval Oceanography and Meteorology, 1976).

               Although conditions aboard the North Wind are uncomfortable,
           the crew is making repairs, staying ahead of the water and the
           tug is not in danger of foundering. Due to sea state, wind,
           visibility, and low ceiling, the Coast Guard decides that the
           safest course of action to preserve human life will be for its
           rescue vessels to remain on scene and also attempt to locate the
           drifting barge. Coast Guard helicopters and rescue vessels will,
           however, react immediately should rescue of the tug's personnel
           be required.

               The petroleum barge continues to drift. The   responding tugs
           are 8.5-10 hours away. Using data obtained from Landry and
           Hickey (1989) to predict the combined effects of wind and
           current, personnel from NOAA's Office of Ocean Resources
           Conservation and Assessment in Seattle estimate that the barge
           will probably ground in the area of Waatch Point in 6-7 hours
           (1000 LMT). The barge, however, could go aground near Portage
           Head in 4 hours (0700 LMT) or near Cape Flattery in 8 hours (1100
           LMT) due to local variations in wind and current.

           Thursday P.M. (1400-1500 LMT)

               Responding tugs arrive on scene. North Wind is taken in
           tow. The barge is aground and breaking up. Over 30,000 barrels
           of marine fuel oil are now at risk of being spilled.

                              SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS

               As noted earlier in this FEIS/MP there are now no
           specifically designated emergency response towing vessels in the
           Strait of Juan de Fuca, along the western Washington coast, or in
           Puget Sound. There are several major towing and salvage
           companies in this area but, in the event of an emergency that
           requires towing, time of response would be based on both vessel
           availability and distance from the scene of the incident.
           Emergency response could be significantly delayed due to prior

                                         IV-84









        assignment of response vessels to other towing, docking, or
        salvage operations, or the remote location of an incident or
        emergency from available vessels (Knight, 1992). Further, severe
        weather might prevent an emergency response vessel from leaving
        the Strait of Juan de Fuca or, if it did, prevent operations from
        commencing when it arrived on scene.

             In a separate scenario developed by members of the Strait of
        Juan de Fuca/North Puget Sound Regional Marine Safety Committee,
        vessels responding to an emergency near the entrance of the
        Strait of Juan de Fuca would depart from Cherry Point,
        approximately 2.5 nm north of Lummi Bay. From there, they
        estimated it would take approximately 8 to 9 hours to reach Buoy
        "J" at the entrance to the Strait of Juan de Fuca.

             NOAA has been working closely with the USCG on
        recommendations to the IMO to designate an area within 25
        nautical miles off the outer coast as an ATBA. This 25 nautical
        mile ATBA will extend from the southern boundary of the Sanctuary
        north a line directly seaward from the designated lane entering
        the Strait of Juan de Fuca. This 25 nautical mile ATBA will buy
        enough time, in the event of an engine failure aboard a vessel,
        for a tug to intercept the eastwakdly drifting vessel during a
        worst-case storm event before it grounds on the shoreline of the
        Sanctuary.

             The USCG will recommend to the IMO that an ATBA be
        established off the western Washington coast. ATBA's are areas
        within defined limits in which either navigation is particularly
        hazardous or in which it is exceptionally important to avoid
        casualties, and which should be avoided by all ships, or certain
        classes of ships (IMO, 1991).

             This action would, in effect, create a "buffer zone". This
        zone would provide sufficient time for responding vessels to
        arrive on the scene of a maritime emergency. Additionally,
        creation of such a zone would provide time for emergency teams
        ashore to be notified, contingency plans to be activated, and
        should there be a spill, some weathering to occur which would
        reduce the risk of damage to the shoreline.

             The idea of establishing an ATBA is consistent with already
        existing voluntary vessel management practices. U.S tankers
        approaching the Strait of Juan de Fuca from the south are now
        voluntarily remaining 40-50 nm offshore until turning inbound to
        enter the Strait. Additionally, Canada has instituted a tanker
        exclusion zone affecting all U.S. tankers engaged in the
        transportation of crude and processed oil originating from
        Alaska. Several towing companies based in the Northwest region
        currently adhere to self-imposed plans requiring their captains
        to remain anywhere from 10-30 nm offshore while transporting
        petroleum products.

                                      IV-85









               In the worst case scenario described above, the fictitious
          tug, North Wind, chose to use the "Towboat-Crabber Lane." As
          exemplified in the scenario, the distance offshore provided by
          this lane was insufficient in the face of conditions described to
          allow sufficient time for response vessels to arrive on scene.

               Using the drift rate for wind (3% of wind speed) previously
          cited, the weather conditions of our scenario, and the abetting
          1.0 kt. near shore current, the average direction and speed of a
          disabled and drifting vessel or barge would be approximately NNE
          at 1.3-1.8 kts. With this, if tanker free zone limits were set
          at 10, 15, 20, 25, or 30 nm offshore, times to grounding would be
          as follows (Time of grounding = Distance offshore/speed of
          drifting vessel):

                    Distance Offshore (nm)         Time to Grounding Mrs)
                          10                            5.5-7.7
                          15                            8.3-11.6
                          20                            11.1-15.4
                          25                            13.9-19.2
                          30                            16.6-23.1

               Due to the shape of the Washington coastline and the
          unpredictable variables of weather and current, the calculations
          shown are approximations. For example, using data from Landry
          and Hickey (1989) personnel from NOAA's Office of Ocean Resources
          Conservation and Assessment Group estimate that in the conditions
          described, if an incident occurred further south, 20 nm west of
          La Push, it might be 24 hours before the barge or vessel came
          ashore north of Cape Alava, near Portage Head, WA.

               The establishment of a 20-30 nm buffer zone within the
          sanctuary would alter the most direct route from the Straits of
          Juan de Fuca to ports such as Grays Harbor or those along the
          Columbia River. Five tracklines from Buoy "J" at the entrance to
          the Strait of Juan de Fuca to the entrance of Grays Harbor were
          examined to determine the extent of these differences. The
          tracklines were as follows:

               1.   Direct Route-a nearshore route covering the minimum
                    distance possible between Grays Harbor and the Strait
                    of Juan de Fuca.

               2.   10 nm offshore utilizing the existing traffic lanes
                    into and out of the Strait of Juan de Fuca.

               3.,  20 nm offshore utilizing the existing traffic lanes
                    into and out of the Strait of Juan de Fuca.

               4.   30 nm offshore utilizing existing traffic lanes into
                    and out of the Strait of Juan de Fuca.



                                         IV-86









              5.    "Towboat-Crabber Lane"-established by agreement.

         The following tables illustrate the difference in using these
         lanes. The variability in distance between the routes to and
         from Grays harbor is due to the use of the already established
         traffic lanes at the entrance to the Strait of Juan de Fuca.

                              Grays Harbor to Buoy 11J11

              Route           Distance (nm)        Additional
         Direct Route               102
         10 nm Offshore             105                  3
         Towboat-Crabber            109.5                7.5
         20 nm Offshore             114.5                12.5
         30 nm Offshore             123.5                21.5


                              Buoy  11J11 to Grays Harbor

         Direct Route               105.5                -----
         10 nm Offshore       110                  4.5
         Towboat-Crabber            113                  7.5
         20 nm Offshore             120                  14.5
         30 nm Offshore             133                  27.5


              The above  tables demonstrate that the establishment of a
         tanker free zone 20 nm offshore would add 12.5 nm to a transit
         from Grays Harbor to Buoy "J" and 14.5 nm to a transit from Buoy
         "J" to Grays Harbor. If the distances travelled by transiting 20
         nm offshore are compared to the already existing "Towboat-
         Crabber Lane", the differences are even smaller, i.e., 5 and 7
         nm, respectively. The additional time and distances required by
         using a 30 nm zone are greater but offer the option of having all
         petroleum and hazardous material barges remain completely outside
         of the sanctuary boundaries until taking up a course inbound to
         the Strait of Juan de Fuca.


              It would not be wise to have a traffic lane further out than
         30 nm as the conflict with larger and faster tanker traffic would
         increase the risks of collision between vessels.

              From the foregoing analysis, NOAA has requested that the
         USCG establish a zone requiring vessels or barges transporting
         petroleum or other hazardous materials to remain a minimum of 20-
         30 nm offshore and also to begin the process for establishing an
         ATBA off the western Washington coast.

              If the ATBA is adopted by the IMO, the impact to uses will
         be minimal. The 25 nautical mile zone is fairly consistent with
         customary barges and vessel traffic routes. According to the
         analysis above, the proposed ATBA will add approximately 17
         nautical miles on a vessel or barge's northbound transit, and
         approximately 21 nautical miles on the southward transit. The

                                         IV-87









           increased protection of coastal resources will benefit the tribes
           who depend on coastal resources for their subsistence, and the
           entire local economy which depends largely on tourism.

                     2. Sanctuary Alternative-Regulation of Vessel Traffic
                          a. Conseauence of Impact to Resources

               Regulation of vessel traffic at the present time would
           undermine existing management initiatives that are well
           coordinated between the State of Washington, and the U.S. and
           Canadian Coast Guards. A well coordinated management and
           regulatory environment for vessels entering and exiting the
           Strait of Juan de Fuca offers a safer environment for mariners.
           This minimizes the chance for vessel accidents that can harm the
           environment. Therefore, NOAA believes that the Sanctuary is best
           served by working within the existing management framework.

                          b.   Consequence of ImRact to Uses

               Additional regulation of vessel traffic will create
           confusion among mariners in a very congested and complex
           environment. Further, regulations promulgated by NOAA without
           the approval of IMO will have no effect on foreign vessels.
           Exclusion of foreign vessels from a vessel traffic management
           regime does little to minimize the risk of a vessel traffic
           accident and may result in competitive disadvantage for the
           domestic shipping industry.

               I.   Fishing, Kelp Harvegting and Aquaculture
                    1.    Status Quo (Prgferred)
                          a.   Consequenge of Impact to Resources

               What little data exists shows that there are some impacts to
           the benthic resources from roller trawling depending on the
           substrate (Loverich, 1990; WDF, 1985). Impacts of trawling on
           soft bottom include an increase in turbidity within a 24 hour
           period, a depression in the substrate 2-3 inches deep, and
           crushing of shellfish beneath the otter boards. When trawling
           occurs on hard bottom, there are no noticeable impacts on the
           benthos. The greatest impacts of trawling are noticed when
           trawling occurs in kelp and eelgrass beds. There is no
           commercial kelp harvesting occurring within the Sanctuary. A
           small herring-roe-on-kelp fishery is pursued by the Lummi and
           S'Klallam Tribes and kelp from near Neah Bay is harvested for
           this fishery. The Department of Natural Resources is currently
           working on a kelp harvesting management plan for the Strait of
           Juan de Fuca.


                          b.   Consequenge of Impact to Uses

               Fishing activities are predicted to benefit from designation
           of the Sanctuary. Fishing in general has benefitted from

                                         IV-88









         Sanctuary status at other sanctuaries in the program due to the
         protection provided to the industry and fish stocks from the
         impacts of ocean dumping, offshore oil and gas development,
         seabed mining and water pollution. Fishing in the Sanctuary is
         heavily regulated by other Federal and State authorities.

              NOAA evaluated the possibility of proposing some additional
         Sanctuary regulation of fishing. However, the existing
         management authorities, the WDF, WDNR, NMFS, PFMC, and the Tribes
         have comprehensive management authority of these resources. The
         management regime is highly complex and well coordinated with
         Canada and other west coast states through the International
         Pacific Halibut Convention and the Pacific Salmon Treaty.
         Sanctuary regulation of fishing would undermine the existing
         international and regional regime. The species are highly
         migratory and direct Sanctuary management of fishing would have
         no foreseeable ecological benefits.

              Notwithstanding the above, the absence of specific fishing
         regulations does not absolve fishermen from obeying not only
         existing State and Federal regulations but also Sanctuary
         regulations of general application, which are designed to protect
         Sanctuary resources and qualities.

              NOAA may support research on the Sanctuary's marine finfish,
         shellfish, and algae resources, and strengthening the present
         enforcement capabilities of the WDF and other enforcement
         entities including the NNFS and the USCG.

                   2.   Sanctuary Alternative
                        a.   Consequence of Impact to Resources

              Sanctuary regulations at the time of designation would be
         intended to protect identified resources at risk from the threat
         of fishing activities. Such regulations would require extensive
         consultation with affected parties and agencies. Furthermore, no
         major threat has yet been identified. There does not appear that
         any major benefit to the environment would arrive with
         promulgation of Sanctuary regulations on fishing with
         designation.

                        b.   Conseauences of Impact to Uses

              Sanctuary regulations would add another set of restrictions
         on the currently complicated, intricately coordinated and heavily
         regulated fishing industry. Aquaculture and kelp harvesting
         remain unregulated by the Sanctuary. Any future action would be
         done in cooperation with relevant Federal and state agencies,
         particularly the WDW, the WDNR and the WDOA.





                                       IV-89









               J.   Navy Bombing of Sealion Rock
                    1.   Status Ouo
                         a.    Conseauence of Impact to Resources

               Figure 80 compares the Navy's use of Sealion Rock from 1986
          through 1992 with the use of offshore rocks and islands by
          nesting colonial seabirds. It is evident that the Navy's use of
          Sealion Rock coincides with the particularly sensitive colonial
          seabird breeding events. Under the status quo, the Navy will not
          be permitted to use Sealion Rock as a practice bombing target for
          A6 jets unless the Secretary of the Interior issues a new
          authorization.


                         b.    Conseauence of Impact to Uses

               Under the status quo, there will be no impact from Sanctuary
          regulations on the Navy's use of Sealion Rock.

                    2.   Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred)
                         a.    Conseauence of Impact to Resources

               By prohibiting practice bombing exercises, NOAA is extending
          maximum protection under the authority of the MPRSA to seabirds
          and mammals in the Sanctuary.

                         b.    Conseguence of Impact to Uses

               This alternative will have no impact on the Navy since the
          authorization to use Sealion Rock for bombing practice exercises
          has been rescinded.

          III. Section: Management Alternative Consecruences
               A.   Conseguences of Status Ouo

               Under the status quo alternative, protection and management
          of the proposed Sanctuary area will remain entirely under the
          existing regime of Federal, state, tribal and local authorities.
          No single agency will be the steward for the marine resources and
          ensure that all users and agencies are coordinated to protect the
          resources of the Sanctuary area.

                    1.   Enforcement

               A reliable and effective enforcement capability by both the
          Federal Government, the State of Washington, and the tribes is
          necessary to ensure that regulations are observed. The WDF has a
          total of 14 officers available to patrol offshore waters, with
          five actively assigned to the Olympic Coast (Westport-two; Port
          Angeles-two; and Clallam Bay-one). During the razor clam season,
          all 14 are likely to be patrolling the Olympic Coast beaches.
          WDF operates a 55 ft. patrol boat that enforces fishery
          regulations in state and Federal waters off the Olympic Coast

                                         IV-90














                                  BREEDING CHRONOLOGY OF COLONIAL SEABIRDS NESTING
                                           IN THE MARINE WATERS OF WASHINGTON


                                         J    F      M   A     M J        J    A     S    0     N     D


                  Pelagic Cormorants                                                   .. .......
                                                                                         7779

                  Double-crested Cormorants

                  Brandt's Cormorants

                  Rhinoceros Auklets                                            .7".77.7., 77
                                                                               177 7777 1                 Adults present F
                  Tufted Puffins                                                                              Egg-layingED
                  Common Murres                                                                               Fledging
                  Pigeon Guillemots                                                                        Egg-laying /
                                                                                                              fledging

                                         J    F     M    A     M J       J    A     S     0     N    D



                                            NAVY USE OF SEALION ROCK FROM 1986-1992 (DAYS/MONTH)


                                      7




                                      6


                                      5                                                                          01986
                                                                                                                 EJ 1987

                                      4                                                                              1988

                                  cc                                                                             01989

                                      3                                                                              1990

                                                                                                                 EJ 1991


                                                                                                                     1992









                                      0

                                          J     F    M     A    M     j     J     A    S     0     N    D

                                        Source: Whidbey Island Naval Air Station, 1992




               Figure 80. Analysis of Navy overflights and.Breeding seabird
                                      ACtiVity.

                                                                       IV-91








          during the commercial fishing season, and is on call during the
          rest of the year. There is also a 45 ft. patrol boat patrolling
          the Strait of Juan de Fuca which is available to patrol offshore
          if the need arises. WDF officers are deputized to enforce NMFS
          regulations in the exclusive economic zone.

               The WDW does not routinely patrol in the area of the
          proposed Sanctuary; however, six officers are available to assist
          WDF in emergencies or when no WDF officers are available.

               The USCG has primary enforcement and Search and Search and
          Rescue presence (personnel, boats and aircraft in the area of the
          Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary. Station offices
          (employing between 25-50 personnel on call to respond to
          emergencies) are located at Quileute River, Cape Disappointment
          Grays Harbor, Neah Bay and Seattle. Group offices (with over @;o
          personnel offering administrative support services relevant to
          the area of the proposed Sanctuary) are located in Seattle, Port
          Angeles and Astoria, Oregon. The district office is located in
          Seattle, Wa.

               The USCG has six large patrol boats, two large buoy tenders,
          three helicopters and two jets available for search and rescue
          and law enforcement operations. One medium endurance cutter with
          helicopter capability is patrolling the waters off the coastlines
          of Northern California, Oregon and Washington at all times. The
          locations of the six patrol boats stationed in the vicinity of
          the proposed National Marine Sanctuary are: 1) Port Angeles (210
          ft. and 110 ft.); 2) Astoria (210 ft.); 3) Anacortes (82 ft.); 4)
          Port Townsend (82 ft.); and 5) Everett (82 ft.). The tow ocean
          going buoy tenders are located in Seattle (175 ft.), and Astoria
          (180 ft.). There are 14 smaller boats, between 40-45 ft., on
          call for search and rescue (three at Quileute River, five at Cape
          Disappointment, four at Grays Harbor and two at neah Bay). These
          smaller boats proceed at a maximum of 10 knots and have 50 mile
          offshore capability. There are three helicopters at both Port
          Angeles and Astoria with over 120 mile offshore capability, and
          two jets stationed at Astoria.

               The Makah, Quileute, Hoh and Quinault Tribes have an
          enforcement presence within the boundaries of the Olympic Coast
          National Marine Sanctuary. There are 12 Tribal fishery officers
          in total (Hoh-1; Quinault-4; Quileute-4; and Makah-3). In
          addition, the Tribes operate five patrol boats in the area
          (Quinault-23 ft. patrol boat with radar; Quileute-23 ft. and 19
          ft. boat; and Makah-44 ft. and 24 ft. boat).

               The NPS employs seven full time employees to patrol the
          beaches along the Olympic Coast (one at Ozette; tow at Marra; two
          at Kalaloch; and two assistants from the Hoh Tribe). During the
          summer, there are five additional rangers patrolling the coastal
          beaches. The NPS has one zodiac available for search and rescue


                                        IV-92










         missions.

              The USFWS undertakes aerial surveys approximately five times
         per year during the spring and summer. In addition, a biologist
         conducts surveys in a 19 ft. zodiac three or four times per year
         to gather information and undertake surveillance. The USFWS and
         the NPS have entered into a cooperative agreement enabling the
         NPS rangers to provide the USFWS with information concerning
         violations of USFWS regulations.

              The NMFS has no enforcement personnel, boats nor aircraft
         patrolling waters in the vicinity of the proposed Sanctuary.
         Enforcement of their regulations have been deputized to the WDF.

              Upon consideration of available State, Federal and Tribal
         enforcement staff it appears that enforcement of Sanctuary
         regulations can be adequately addressed by the existing
         enforcement presence.

              2.  Research and Education

              The existing management system contains no mechanism for
         maximizing the areas research value, e.g., by means of a
         comprehensive or extended program framework. A variety of
         organizations conduct significant research in the nearshore
         waters of the Olympic Coast. The establishment of the Olympic
         Center linking the terrestrial and marine ecosystems of the
         Olympic Peninsula has been authorized by the legislature. The
         National Park, USFWS and the University of Washington continue to
         conduct resource studies along the coast.   To date, however, no
         coordinating entity exists to identify regional research
         information needs or to design strategies for filling them.

              There are no marine oriented information centers on the
         outer coast. Thus, tourists, recreational fishermen and nature
         enthusiasts who visit the area have little or no knowledge of its
         geology or of the complex communities of biota that inhabit the
         canyon and surrounding waters and the intertidal habitats. Nor
         do they realize the value of the oceanic waters to the mammals
         and birds that feed there or pass through in transit.

              B. -Conseauence of Sanctuary Alternative I

              This alternative slowly phases in the necessary management
         structure in parallel to the growing presence of the Sanctuary
         and the demands of its users. Pursuit of this alternative will
         not capitalize on the present momentum of the local community in
         support of the Sanctuary. Further, fewer staff will be able to
         network and coordinate research, education, monitoring and
         management policies programs.




                                       IV-93











                    1.   Enforcement

               Gradually NOAA would provide an enhanced enforcement regime
          by providing additional boats, personnel and equipment for on the
          water surveillance and enforcement. See the Management Plan for
          possible additional enforcement measures provided by the.
          Sanctuary.

                    2.   Research and Education

               Research and education programs would not develop to their
          fullest potential for many years due to the lack of staff.
          Therefore, this alternative would not facilitate resource
          protection and management because the research and education
          components of resource protection will not be realized.

               C.   Conseguences of Sanctuary Alternative 2 (Preferred)

               This alternative supports full time staffing and immediate
          NOAA presence with siting of an office on the Peninsula. Given
          the limited NOAA budget in FY93, this would occur at the expense
          of specific projects. The emphasis of the staff would focus on
          coordination and planning with other agencies, programs and
          governments on the peninsula. NOAA believes that a fully staffed
          Sanctuary would facilitate coordination with other programs in a
          more rapid manner than if staffing were phased in over time.

                    1.   Enforcement

               The impact of enhanced surveillance and enforcement efforts
          focused on Sanctuary resources would be unnecessary at the
          present time. Given the extensive Federal, State and Tribal
          enforcement presence along the coast, and the minimal human uses,
          added enforcement is not the highest priority within the first
          year of the Sanctuary's existence.

               Eventually, NOAA envisions a State-Federal-Tribal
          cooperative enforcement system involving the WDF, WDW, the four
          coastal Tribes, the USCG, the USFWS, the National Park Service
          and the NMFS. Since the proposed Sanctuary would include both
          State and Federal waters, and adjacent to Indian Reservations,
          close coordination between State and Federal authorities would be
          required.

                    2.   Research and Education

               This alternative provides full staffing, including a
          manager, education coordinator and research coordinator. The
          manager would oversee the establishment and operations of the
          Sanctuary Advisory Committee. The research and education
          coordinators would benefit from the direction provided by the
          Sanctuary Advisory Committee. Implementation of interpretive and

                                        IV-94









        research projects and coordination with the many agencies with
        programs in the area would commence fairly rapidly.
        Establishment of a strong and complete infrastructure will
        provide positive momentum to the program.

        IV. Unavoidable Adverse Environmental or Socioeconomic Effects

             Specific environmental and socioeconomic effects of each
        proposed regulation are included throughout the environmental
        consequences section of the preferred alternative and in Part I
        of the FEIS/MP. The net environmental and socioeconomic effects
        of designating the Sanctuary and implementing the Sanctuary
        Management Plan and regulations are estimated to be positive.
        While such effects are difficult to quantify, the goals of the
        Sanctuary in part will be to maintain water quality, fisheries,
        aesthetics and tourism without causing any adverse effects.

             The final Sanctuary regulations would allow all activities
        to be conducted in the Sanctuary except for a relatively narrow
        range of prohibited activities (subject to all prohibitions,
        restrictions and conditions validly imposed by any other
        authority of competent jurisdiction, and subject to the liability
        established by Section 312 of the Act). The procedures proposed
        in these regulations for applying for National Marine Sanctuary
        permits to conduct otherwise prohibited activities, for
        requesting certifications for existing licenses, permits, other
        authorizations or rights authorizing the prohibited activity, and
        for notifying NOAA of applications for authorizations to conduct
        a prohibited activity, would impose a cost in time and effort on
        the part of applicants for such permits or certifications.
        However, NOAA will keep such costs to a minimum by working
        closely with State and Federal regulatory and permitting agencies
        to avoid any duplication of effort and setting guidelines for
        expeditious review of applications.

             The regulations prohibiting discharges and deposits and
        alteration of or construction on the seabed may require permit
        holders or applicants for such activities to seek other areas of
        disposal or apply higher levels of treatment. All measures,
        terms and conditions applied to existing activities will be done
        in consultation with the affected party and the appropriate'
        management agency.

             Estimates of revenue foregone by the prohibition of oil, gas
        and mineral activities within the Sanctuary boundary has been
        presented in detail under the socioeconomic consequences for this
        proposed final regulation. Balancing the foregone revenue would
        be the adverse environmental and socioeconomic effects avoided by
        the proposed prohibition. For example, the proposed prohibition
        may alleviate or remove matters ranging from costs to local
        communities for developing on-shore facilities to political and
        legal action resulting from public controversy and apprehension

                                      IV-95









           concerning proposed oil and gas activities.

                It is not possible to quantify the positive socioeconomic
           effects of prohibiting OCS oil and gas activities. The recent
           NAS study (1989) on the Adequacy of Environmental Information For
           Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Decisions: Florida and
           California found that "few data have been collected by MMS or
           anyone else to address the social and economic impacts of OCS
           activities."

           V.   Section:   Relationship Between Short-term Uses of the
                           Environment and the Maintenance and Enhancement
                           of Long-term Productivit

                Sanctuary  designation emphasizes the importance of the
           natural and historical resources on the Olympic Coast area.      The
           marine waters off the Olympic Coast is relatively pristine and
           the healthy and diverse natural ecosystem is relatively
           unaltered. Designation will-enhance public awareness of the area
           and provide long-term assurance that its resources will be
           available for future generations. Implementation of the
           preferred alternative ensures that changes in use patterns evolve
           in a manner that protects the quality of the natural environment.

                The education, research, and resource protection programs
           will provide information, management and protection that develops
           a foundation for wise public use of the area and results in long-
           term productivity. Similarly, information collected in the
           research program will assist marine resource managers in making
           better management decisions that will result in mitigation of use
           conflicts and adverse effects of human activities.




























                                          IV-96










          PART V                                          MANAGEMENT PLAN










                                               TABLE OF CONTENTS                    PAGE


                        I:   Introduction   ................................         1


                        II:  Resource Protection     .........................       3
                             A.    Introduction   ...........................        3
                             B.    Goals ..................................          3
                             C.    Sanctuary Regulations     ..................      4
                             Do    Contingency Plans    ..............   o.....  o.  4
                                   1.    Existing Capabilities     ... o.:..o...  .. 5
                                   2o    Sanctuary Action    ..... o.o .. .......    6
                             Eo    Compatible Uses of the Sanctuary        .......   7
                             F.    Surveillance and Enforcement,       .........  o  8
                                   1.    Sanctuary Action and Coordination
                                         With Existing Agencies     ......   o.....  8
                                   2.    Public Education and Information..         10
                                   3.    Planning and Modifying
                                         Enforcement Program       ....o     o .... 10

                       III: Research   ..............   o .....................     11
                             A.    Introduction   ...... o ......  o.............   11
                             B.    Goals ..................................         12
                             C.    Framework for Research     ...  o..........  o.. 13
                                   1.    Baseline Studies    ...   o..............  13
                                   2.    monitoring   ........................      15
                                   3.    Analytical/Predictive Studies       .....  15
                             Do    Selection and Management of Research
                                   Projects   ................     o......... o..o. 16
                                   1.    Preparing an Annual Plan      ..........   16
                                   2.    Monitoring Progress       ....o..........  17
                                   3.    Information Exchange      ..............   17

                       IV. Education     ..................   o    ................ 18
                             A.    Introduction   .................    o .........  18
                             B.    Goals ................    o..............    o.. 18
                             C.    Educational Opportunities       .....o ........  19
                                   lo    Site Visitor Programs     .......   o..o.. 19
                                   2o    Information Center Programs      ....  o.. 20
                                   3.    Outreach Programs... o    .............    21

                      V.                                                            22
                             A.    Administrative Framework        .........o...... 22
                                   1.    Sanctuaries and Reserves Division.         22
                                   2.    Sanctuary Advisory Committee        ....  o. 23
                                   3.    Federal Agencies    ............    o..... 23
                                         a.    United States Coast Guard       .... 23
                                         b.    United States Fish and
                                               Wildlife Service    .............    24
                                         C.    National Park Service      ........  24
                                         do    Environmental Protection
                                               Agency   .......................     24
                                         e.    Army corps of Engineers       ..... o 24

                                                V-i









                                       f.    Department of the Navy    ....... 25
                                 4.    International, Tribal, State and
                                       Local Agencies   ....................   25
                           B.    Resource Protection: Roles and
                                 Responsibilities    .......................   25
                                 1.    Sanctuaries and Reserves Division.      25
                                 2.    Sanctuary Manager  .................    26
                                 3.    United States Coast Guard     ......... 26
                                 4.    Washington State   ..................   26
                           C:    Research: Roles and Responsibilities..        27
                                 1.    Sanctuaries and Reserves Division.      27
                                 2.    Sanctuary Manager  .................    28
                                 3.    Sanctuary Advisory Committee     ...... 28
                           D.    Education/Interpretation: Roles and
                                 Responsibilities    .......................   28
                                 1.    Sanctuaries and Reserves Division.      28
                                 2.    Sanctuary Manager  .................    29
                                 3.    Sanctuary Advisory Committee     ...... 29
                           E.    General Administration   ..................   29
                                 1.    Sanctuaries and Reserves Division.      29
                                 2.    Sanctuary Manager  .................    30
                                 3.    Washington State   ..................   30
                                 4.    Sanctuary Advisoriy Committee     ..... 30
                           F.    Staffing Levels   ........................    31
                           G.    Headquarter and Visitor Center
                                 Facilities  .............................     31
                                 1.    Port Angeles   ......................   31
                                 2.    Neah Bay  ..........................    32
                                 3.    La Push  ...........................    32
                                 4.    Forks .............................     33











         Section I: Introduction

              The Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of
         1972, as amended, and its implementing regulations (15 CFR Part
         922) require that a management plan be prepared for each proposed
         Sanctuary. Once the Sanctuary is designated, the plan will be
         implemented. The management plan focuses on Sanctuary goals and
         objectives, management responsibilities and guidelines for the
         resource protection, research, education and administration
         programs.

              The plan establishes an administrative framework which
         addresses the need for cooperation and coordination to ensure
         effective management. The Sanctuaries and Reserves Division
         (SRD), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), is
         responsible for management of the site. Variable funding for
         staff and program development over the next several years may
         affect specific aspects of Sanctuary management described in this
         plan. Modifications to the scope and scale of the programs may
         have to be made because of such unforeseeable changes in the
         level of funding. The goals and objectives of the plan will,
         however, remain unchanged.

              Sanctuary goals and objectives provide the framework for
         developing the management strategies. The goals and objectives
         direct Sanctuary activities towards the dual purposes of resource
         protection and compatible public use and are consistent with the
         intent of the National program. No actions taken by NOAA in
         administering the sanctuary shall infringe upon Native American
         treaty rights unless the action is absolutely necessary to
         protect the resources from extinction and no other protective
         measures are available.

              The management strategies planned for the proposed Olympic
         Coast National Marine Sanctuary (OCNMS) are directed to the goals
         and objectives outlined below. The management plan is designed
         to address the first five years following sanctuary designation,
         after which time it will be revised. Although the plan offers
         guidelines for the sanctuary manager, there are four important
         tasks identified as having high priority immediately following
         designation which, when completed, will set in motion progress
         towards fulfilling the objectives of the plan. These four tasks
         are:


              (1) Establish liaisons with the appropriate agencies to
              ensure-the Sanctuary mandate can be carried out through a
              cooperative management strategy. Sanctuary staff will meet
              with other agencies and institutions operating in the area
              to familiarize them with the Sanctuary mandate and staff,
              and determine appropriate working relationships and mutual
              agendas. These meetings will include, among others, the
              Washington Departments of Ecology, Natural Resources,

                                        V-1









                Fisheries, Agriculture, and Wildlife, th  e.U.S. Coast Guard,
                Canadian Coast Guard, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
                National Park Service, the four coastal Tribes, local
                businesses, towns, counties, timber and fishing
                representatives, and research and education institutions.

                (2) Create an Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary
                Advisory Committee (SAC) which will be proactive and
                reactive in its service to the sanctuary manager. It is
                intended that the SAC will: a) create subcommittees to
                assist in developing programs in research, education,
                resource protection and administration for the Sanctuary;
                and b) advise the manager on policy issues. Thus the SAC
                will play a key role in advising on what the management
                priorities should be, and coordinating Sanctuary actions
                with those of other agencies. The SAC will consist of
                appointed representatives of government agencies, research
                and education groups, and commercial and environmental
                interests.

                (3) Coordinate with the U.S. Coast Guard to Conduct an
                emergency response drill to assess the state of preparedness
                to respond to an emergency within, or in close proximity to
                the sanctuary, and generate a plan to address inadequacies.

                (4) If the IMO reject's the U.S. Coast Guard's request for
                an Area To Be Avoided, the sanctuary manager should work
                with the Canadian and U.S. Coast Guards to generate a vessel
                traffic management plan for the sanctuary.

                Besides the four priority tasks which should be revisited
          with every management plan revision, the management plan calls
          for on-going resource management, research, and education
          initiatives. The manager will review development or management
          proposals that will impact upon the marine resources, provide
          policy advice to other agencies working in the proposed Sanctuary
          area, and make presentations to appropriate levels of government.

            The sanctuary will support management-related research and
          monitoring through funding, staffing, and other means that may be
          available and appropriate. It is the highest priority of the
          research agenda to complete a site profile within the first five
          years following designation. Completion of the site profile will
          be critical to refining the sanctuary contingency plan.

                The-eduication-program. calls for coordination with, and
          support of, existing interpretive and education programs, such as
          those of the National Park Service and the Seattle Aquarium. The
          general public and interested organizations on the Olympic
          Peninsula and in Washington State, will play important roles in
          attaining resource protection goals in the Sanctuary.
          Interpretive p7rograms fostering public understanding and, hence,

                                           V-2









         support for management objectives, are inherent in the plan's
         concept. High priority communication tools will include
         publications, exhibits, school curriculum, and special events
         that convey the significance of the Sanctuary's resources to both
         the in-state and out-of-state public. The management plan will
         highlight the linkages between the health of the Sanctuary
         resources and upland uses and habitats.

              Information exchange, sharing of facilities and staff, and
         the coordination of policies and procedures for resource
         protection will be features of all programs, including research
         and education. The sanctuary management plan is designed to
         guide management of the proposed Sanctuary for the first five
         years after implementation. During this period, management
         initiatives will generally fall into four basic programs:
         (1) Resource Protection; (2) Research; (3) Education; and (4)
         Administration. The remainder of this section describes goals,
         guidelines and initiatives for each program.

         II. Resource Protection

              A.   Introduction

              The Sanctuary resource and quality protection program
         includes: (1) a statement of Sanctuary resource and quality
         protection goals; (2) Sanctuary regulations, including procedures
         for working with existing regulatory authorities in cases of
         overlapping jurisdiction; (3) contingency and emergency response
         plans; (4) encouragement of compatible use in the Sanctuary; and
         (5) identification of surveillance and enforcement plans.

              B.   Goals

              The highest priority management goal for the Sanctuary is
         the protection of the marine environment, resources and qualities
         of the Sanctuary. Sanctuary goals are therefore designed to:

              1.   Reduce threats to Sanctuary resource and qualities;

              2.   Ensure that the water quality of the Sanctuary is
                   maintained at a level consonant with Sanctuary
                   designation;

              3.   Promote public awareness of, and voluntary compliance
                   with, Sanctuary regulations and objectives, through
                   education-and interpretive programs stressing resource
                   sensitivity and wise use;

              4.   Encourage participation by interested agencies, tribes,
                   and organizations in the development of procedures to
                   address specific management concerns (e.g., monitoring
                   and emergency-response programs);

                                        V-3










               5.    Ensure that research results and scientific data are
                     made available to management agencies.to improve
                     resource protection strategies;

               6.    coordinate activities of management and regulatory
                     agencies to resolve conflicting or duplicative
                     regulations, policies and enforcement procedures.

               C     Sanctuary Regulations

               Existing regulations and proposed Sanctuary regulations are
          presented in Part III of this document. The proposed Designation
          Document (Appendix _) includes the consolidated Sanctuary
          regulations and activities subject to regulation now or in the
          future.

               To ensure protection of Sanctuary resources and qualities
          and conservation of its valuable habitat, NOAA proposes seven
          regulations that govern: (1) oil, gas and mineral activities;
          (2) discharges and deposits from within Sanctuary boundaries;
          (3) discharges and deposits from outside Sanctuary boundaries;
          (4) uses that may injure historical resources; (5) alteration of
          or construction on the seabed; (6) uses that may injure marine
          mammals, sea turtles and seabirds; and (7) overflights. Two
          additional regulations are proposed to aid-faciliEate enforcement
          of Sanctuary regulations: 1) a prohibition on possession of
          Sanctuary resources not exempted by pre-existing treaties; and 2)
          a prohibition on interference with enforcement operations.
          Vessel traffic may be regulated in the future if consultation
          between SRD and the U.S.  'Coast Guard reveal a significant threat
          to Sanctuary resources from current vessel traffic conditions.
          SRD and the U.S. Coast Guard are working toward the establishment
          of an Area to Be Avoided (ATBA) off the northern Olympic
          Peninsula, extending 25 nautical miles from the shoreline, for
          all vessels transporting hazardous materials. Implementation of
          this ATBA is pending IMO approval. For details.on the proposed
          ATBA, see Part III of the FEIS.

               Kelp harvesting has also been included within,the scope of
          possible future regulation. While very little kelp harvesting is
          occurring at the present time, inclusion of kelp harvesting
          within the scope of future regulation is necessary to preclude
          overharvesting of kelp in the future. overharvesting of kelp
          could threaten the integrity of the kelp habitat so important to
          the entire coastal ecosystem.

               D.    Contingency Plans

               The resources of the Sanctuary are susceptible to natural
          and human-related changes. Many of these changes are gradual and
          can be detected only through long-term monitoring of
          environmental and biological indicators. However, certain sudden

                                           V-4









         and catastrophic changes in conditions (due to an accidental oil
         spill or vessel grounding, for example) could seriously damage
         resources and present severe health and safety hazards.

                   1.   Existing capabilities

              In 1991, the State Legislature passed Washington ESHB 1027,
         pursuant to the recommendations of the BC/States Task Force,
         which identified the response parties for marine spill prevention
         and response at the state level. The 1991 and subsequent
         legislation has established a network of agencies for marine
         spill prevention and response that includes the Washington
         Department of Ecology (WDOE), newly created Office of Marine
         Safety (OMS), Maritime commission, Regional Marine Safety
         Committees, Board of Pilotage Commissioners, University of
         Washington Sea Grant, marine oversight Board, and existing State
         agencies including Washington Parks and Recreation Commission,
         Department of Natural Resources, Department of Wildlife,
         Department of Fisheries, and Department of Revenue.

              The Coast Guard (the federal on-scene coordinator in coastal
         and tidal waters) has ultimate authority to coordinate and direct
         all federal, state and private cleanup operations when discharges
         into the marine environment pose a substantial threat to the
         public health or welfare.

              WDOE is the state agency with primary responsibility for oil
         and hazardous substance spill response and clean-up on land and
         water. However, the agency is more familiar with land-based
         spills. The OMS has responsibility for vessel response plans,
         barge cable standards, bunkering and lightering operations, and
         review of federal vessel inspection programs. The OMS has
         established three regional marine safety committees including one
         for the North Puget Sound/Strait of Juan de Fuca and one for the
         Outer Coast. The committees will prepare regional plans
         governing vessel traffic, including consideration of tug escort
         requirements, speed limits, navigation aids, vessel conflicts,
         environmentally sensitive areas, and the Coast Guard VTS.

              The OMS will review the plans and implement those
         recommendations over which the state has authority. By the end
         of 1993, the OMS plans to implement an extensive Tanker
         Prevention Plan and Commercial Vessel Screening Requirements.
         The plan will require tankers and barges transiting Washington
         -waters to file a spill prevention plan verifying that they pose
         no risk to-State waters. The prevention plan will address issues
         related to vessel quality, procedures and crew training
         standards. Commercial Vessel Screening Plans, will require all
         cargo vessels over 300 gross tons and commercial passenger
         vessels to give OMS advanced notification of their vessel
         characteristics and cargo prior to arrival in state waters. The
         OMS is mandated to establish an emergency response system for the

                                        V-5








         Strait of Juan de Fuca based on recommendations from the regional
         marine safety committees. The OMS is currently reviewing the
         recommendations submitted by the committees.

              The Maritime Commission, established by the Legislature in
         1990, is charged with: 1) developing first response oil spill
         contingency plans for covered vessels; 2) providing emergency oil
         spill response services for up to 24 hours following an oil spill
         incident; and 3) providing a 24-hour communication network for
         spill response notifications. The latter two of these functions
         have been contracted to private companies-the former to Foss
         Environmental and the latter to the Marine Exchange of Puget
         Sound. The Commission develops vessel contingency plans and
         maintains a database of vessel accidents.

              Numerous State agencies-provide spill response assistance
         and planning information related to resources that may be
         impacted by a spill. Education and outreach efforts are provided
         by the University of Washington Sea Grant and Washington Parks
         and Recreation Commission. The Department of Revenue is charged
         with studying tax incentives for spill risk reduction through
         coordination with WDOE and the Department of Trade and Economic
         Development. The Marine Oversight Board is an independent
         citizen review of Federal, State and industry actions. The Board
         is comprised of five gubernatorial appointees, who, acting in an
         advisory role report to the Governor, and make recommendations to
         agencies and the State legislature.

              A detailed description concerning equipment and procedures
         for emergency response can be found in Part II of the FEIS.


                   2.   Sanctuary Action

              one of the first-management actions of the Sanctuary will be
         to conduct an emergency response exercise for an oil spill in the
         Sanctuary boundary. The intent of this exercise will be not only
         to test the adequacy of existing plans and*the availability and
         effectiveness of the equipment allocated but also to provide an
         opportunity for existing emergency response agencies and
         personnel to work with the Sanctuary and to define roles and
         responsibilities.

              The Sanctuary program is preparing a National Plan with
         additional site specific plans, such as for the Olympic Coast,
         that will address needs for Sanctuary staff training, appropriate
         equipment necessary to respond to a large-scale emergency
         requiring long-term response and clean-up capabilities, and NOAA
         policies regarding use of dispersants.

              To provide further protection to the Sanctuary resources and
         qualities, the Sanctuary-staff will assess the state of

                                        V-6









          preparedness of the relevant parts of the contingency plans as
          they relate to the Sanctuary. This action will entail exchanging
          information with government and industry response teams and
          seeking their support in assessing detection and clean-up
          capabilities that can be used to protect Sanctuary resources. In
          addition, and consistent with the National Marine Sanctuary
          Program Regulations (15 CFR Part 22), NOAA will provide the
          necessary resources and impetus to develop and implement a site-
          specific contingency and emergency-response plan designed to
          protect the Olympic Peninsula's offshore resources. The plan
          shall contain alert procedures and actions to be taken in the
          event of an emergency such as a shipwreck or an oil spill. The
          plan will specify the role of the Sanctuary and the action items
          with which the Sanctuary has lead responsibility versus providing
          assistance when requested by another lead agency.

               An SRD-level contingency and emergency-response plan has
          been prepared for the Channel Islands and Key Largo National
          Marine Sanctuaries. A similar plan for the proposed Olympic
          Coast National Marine Sanctuary will be created that will:

                    Describe emergency-response procedures and coordination
                    requirements for SRD and Sanctuary staff;

                    Define SRD policy regarding use of dispersants;

                    Provide a geographic information system depicting
                    resources at risk which will build upon the GIS
                    developed by the State Department of Natural Resources;

                    Outline procedures for emergency research; and

                    Provide damage assessment guidelines.

               In conjunction with this plan, agreements may be formulated
          to improve spill detection programs and augment containment
          capabilities (i.e., with additional equipment, staff, and
          deployment plans).

               E.   Compatible Use of the Sanctuary

               An important aspect of the resource program is to encourage
          the private and public uses of the Sanctuary, not prohibited
          pursuant to other authorities, in ways that are compatible with
          the primary objective of resource protection. Thus the Sanctuary
          will:

               1.   Develop educational Materials and programs aimed at
               enhancing public awareness of the Sanctuary's resources and
               characteristics and their need for protection.

               2.   Provide relevant information about Sanctuary

                                          V-7









              regulations and use policies;

              3.   Collaborate with public and private organizations in
              promoting compatible use of the Sanctuary;

              4.   Monitor and assess the levels of use to identify and
              control potential degradation of resources and minimize
              potential user conflicts; and

              5.   Consult with other agencies on policies and proposals
              for the management of activities which may affect protection
              of Sanctuary resources and qualities;

              Monitoring and information exchange programs are discussed
         under research (Section III). The development of materials is
         discussed under education (Section IV).

              F.   Surveillance and Enforcement

                   1.   Sanctuary Action and Coordination with Existing
                   Agencies

              A primary feature of the resource protection program is the
         surveillance of sanctuary waters and enforcement of applicable
         regulations. Although a detailed enforcement plan has not been
         developed, NOAA currently envisions a State-Federal-Tribal
         cooperative enforcement system involving the State of Washington,
         U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine
         Fisheries Service, National Park Service, and coastal American
         Indian Tribes. Because the proposed sanctuary includes tribal,
         state, and federal waters, close coordination between tribal,
         state, and federal authorities is required.

              cooperative agreements between state and federal authorities
         exist at other sanctuary sites. For example, under a cooperative
         agreement with SRD, the California Department of Fish and Game
         (and other federal agencies including NPS, NMFS, and USFWS)
         enforces living marine resource regulations within the Gulf of
         the Farallones Sanctuary and state enforcement officers are
         deputized to enforce sanctuary regulations. As discussed below,
         the Washington Department of Fisheries (WDF), through an
         agreement with National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), enforces
         fishing related laws and regulations in state and federal waters
         off the coast of Washington State. opportunities exist to
         coordinate enforcement efforts between SRD and WDF. The current
         regime for'enforcing-relevant laws and regulations within the
         boundaries of the proposed sanctuary is summarized below.

              The USCG has broad responsibility for enforcing all federal
         laws in navigable waters under U.S. jurisdiction. Where these
         laws regulate fishing harvests, the USCG works closely with the
         NMFS and WDF.


                                        V-8









              Sanctuary designation would have the effect of broadening
         USCG enforcement responsibilities to include the enforcement of
         sanctuary regulations. Neither NOAA nor the USCG has the fiscal
         resources to conduct systematic surveillance and enforcement
         operations to ensure compliance with sanctuary regulations.
         However, both the USCG and the state conduct operations in the
         area. The USCGwould provide limited surveillance in conjunction
         with multi-mission, surface, or aerial operations.

              WDF is the state agency with primary enforcement
         capabilities in the area of the proposed sanctuary. With the
         exception of traffic laws, WDF fisheries patrol officers have
         full police power permitting them to enforce all criminal laws of
         the state of Washington. There are currently nine Fisheries
         Patrol Officers who could be available for sanctuary enforcement
         (a sergeant at Montesano; two officers at Westport; two
         officers at Ocean Shores; one officer at Forks; one sergeant and
         one officer at Port Angeles; and one officer at Clallam Bay).
         WDF officers are cross-deputized with NMFS, and enforce
         Washington fishing regulations in state territorial waters (0-3
         miles offshore), and federal fishing regulations in the Exclusive
         Economic Zone (3-200 miles offshore). WDF conducts no
         enforcement patrols on the sixty miles of shoreline in Olympic
         National Park between Queets and Neah Bay.

              Five permanent NPS law enforcement rangers with full federal
         commissions are stationed along the coastal strip of the Olympic
         National Park year around: 2 at Kalaloch, 2 at Mora, and 1 at
         Ozette. During the summer, 5 more seasonal law enforcement
         rangers are stationed on the coast. In addition, 18 full time,
         commissioned rangers are stationed in other parts of the Park
         with 13 more commissioned seasonal rangers on duty in summer.
         These numbers fluctuate somewhat from year to year. Enforcement
         of federal regulations within the portion of the sanctuary that
         overlaps the Park can be performed by these rangers. Authority
         for law enforcement in other portions of the sanctuary would have
         to be specifically granted to the Park by NOAA.

              USFWS staff make occasional visits to the Refuges along the
         coast for biological surveys. Enforcement authority is limited
         to the islands. Incidental observation can be made of the
         surrounding waters.

              Each of the four coastal tribes is an independent, self-
         governing, sovereign entity, with administrative and management
         authority-6Ver their'own lands. In addition, as federally
         recognized co-managers of the fishery resources tribal
         enforcement authority extends out into the adjacent waters  of the
         north coast region. In aggregate, the four coastal tribes   and
         North West Indian Fisheries Commission employ more natural
         resource management personnel to work on environmental
         protection, habitat enhancement, and fishery management issues in

                                        V-9









          the north coast area than do the corresponding state or federal
          agencies.

               NOAA plans to rely on such observers from other agencies And
          cooperating organizations, including excursion and service boat
          operators, to provide the surveillance information needed for the
          enforcement program. Suspected violations will be reported to
          the sanctuary manager, who will investigate the reports and take
          appropriate action. The enforcement program is expected to be
          sufficiently strong to deter widespread violation of sanctuary
          regulations.

               In the event that analyses of use patterns after sanctuary
          designation indicate that additional surveillance is required,
          NOAA will provide for more intensive enforcement to protect
          sanctuary resources. The effectiveness of sanctuary enforcement
          operations will be evaluated two years after sanctuary
          designation, and annually thereafter.

               2.   Public Education and Information

               An emphasis will also be placed on public education efforts
          to preclude the need for a large-scale enforcement program.
          Interpretation and education programs will therefore be important
          for gaining voluntary compliance with sanctuary regulations.
          Because the most effective enforcement is prevention, the
          sanctuary interpretive program will make every effort to inform
          people about wise sanctuary,use and enjoyment. It is essential
          that all users of the sanctuary be provided with easily
          understood materials which explain the regulations, their
          rationale, and the shared government responsibility for their
          enforcement.

               Some first step actions directed toward this effort include:
          (1) developing and distributing brochures explaining sanctuary
          regulations and their intent; (2) posting sanctuary regulations
          at appropriate locations (e.g., marinas, sailing clubs, public
          docks, waterfront recreation sites and restaurants); and (3)
          establishing contact with industry, and recreational and
          commercial groups (e.g., fishing and shipping industry) to
          present and explain the regulations. Discussions with various
          groups will help determine appropriate educational materials for
          promoting compatible use of the sanctuary.

               3.   Planning and Modifying Enforcement Program

               Information obtained from the research program and from
          surveillance-enforcement activities on Sanctuary visitor use
          patterns, frequently occurring violations, and potentially
          sensitive resources, will be reviewed in periodic meetings
          between the Sanctuary Manager, the Sanctuary Advisory Committee
          and enforcement agency personnel to determine the adequacy of

                                        V-10











         surveillance levels and methods.


         Section III:   Research


              A.   Introduction

              Effective management of the Olympic Coast National Marine
         sanctuary requires the development of a coordinated and focused
         research program. Research conducted within marine sanctuaries
         is designed to improve knowledge of the sanctuary's environment
         and resources and provide data and information that is most
         useful to the sanctuary manager and decision-makers. The
         research conducted within sanctuaries contributes to the general
         body of scientific knowledge, and the management-specific focus
         of the research provides useful information for application in
         other marine and coastal areas. Sanctuary researchers, managers
         and education directors should coordinate their efforts to ensure
         a strong link between management/education needs and research
         projects. The research agenda should also be coordinated with
         the research agendas of the other marine sanctuary's on the west
         coast to maximize the benefits of research results.

              Research conducted within the sanctuary will focus
         specifically on those management issues that relate to the
         protection of significant sanctuary resources. The highest
         priority for research is generation of a "site profile" which
         will form the foundation for the contingency plan, regulatory
         regime, and education and research programs on natural resource
         abundance, characteristics, and processes for the area.     Past
         resource data will be utilized as well as ongoing monitoring and
         research results. The monitoring program should be both species
         specific as well as examine questions involving communities and
         the entire local ecosystem. Management directed research will
         address practical, use-oriented or "cause-and effect" studies.
         Long-term monitoring and the resultant data base will provide the
         foundation for interpreting or predicting natural or human-
         induced events in the sanctuary and adjacent areas. General
         directions and priorities for additional research are provided in
         this section as a guide for identifying and selecting future
         appropriate research projects.

              The sanctuary will work cooperatively with other
         institutions whenever possible in conducting research. Federal,
         tribal, state, and local agencies, and universities in Washington
         State, have important capabilities that could aid in meeting
         sanctuary objectives-. In particular, the Washington legislature
         established a new Olympic Natural Resources Center, to be located
         on the western side of the Olympic Peninsula, to conduct research
         and education in forestry and ocean management. This new Center,
         a unit of the University of Washington, would be an ideal partner
         to work with sanctuary staff on ocean issues and educational
         programs.

                                        V-11











              B.   Goals

              The purpose of Sanctuary research activities is to improve
         understanding of the resources and characteristics of the marine
         environment off the Olympic Peninsula to resolve specific
         management problems, and to coordinate and facilitate information
         flow between the various research institutions, agencies and
         organizations. A major emphasis of the research program will be
         to encourage studies that investigate the natural processes at
         the land-sea interface. Research results will be used in
         education programs for visitors and others interested in the
         Sanctuary, as well as for resource protection. The strategies to
         be employed in the research program are to:

              Establish a framework and procedures for administering
              research to ensure that research projects are responsive to
              management concerns and that results contribute to improved
              management of the Sanctuary;

              Incorporate research results into the interpretive/education
              program in a format useful for the general public;

              Focus and coordinate data collection efforts on the
              physical, chemical, geological and biological oceanography
              of the Sanctuary;

              Encourage research that examines biodiversity within the
              habitats of the Sanctuary;

              Encourage studies that integrate nearshore and open ocean
              research findings for a more complete understanding of
              processes affecting both zones;

              Initiate a monitoring program to assess environmental
              changes as they occur due to natural and human processes;

              Identify the range of effects on the environment that would
              result from predicted changes in human activity or natural
              phenomena;

              Assure that research activities do not harm or diminish
              Sanctuary resources;
              Encourage information exchange among all the organizations
              and agencies undertaking management-related research in the
              Sanctuary to promote more informed management;

              Evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the research
              program and its integration with resource protection and
              education objectives.





                                        V-12











              C.   Framework for Research

              Research projects will be directed to three basic management
         questions.

              Baseline studies to determine the features and processes of
              the natural environment; the abundance, distribution, and
              interaction of the living resources; the distribution and
              status of historical resources and the pattern of human
              activity in the Sanctuary from prehistoric times to the
              future;

              Monitoring to document changes in environmental quality, in
              ecology, and in human activity; and

              Predictive studies to assess the causes and effects of
              environmental and ecological changes.

              Each of these categories is described in more detail below.

         (a)  Baseline-Studies

              Baseline studies will be designed to obtain a better
         understanding of the physical oceanography and ecology of  the
         Sanctuary. They generally refer to studies of abundance,
         distribution, and movement of species, and selected chemical,
         physical, and geological parameters. In the area of the proposed
         Olympic Coast sanctuary, the basic characteristics of many
         important species populations and habitats are not known.
         However, there is an indication that there has been a loss of
         habitat and species in recent years. Inventories of selected
         species, particularly threatened or vulnerable species within
         these populations, represent an important direction for research.
         Some baseline studies will focus on the inventory and description
         of sanctuary habitats. over the long term, there may be a need
         for a detailed inventory of the intertidal and subtidal habitats
         of the sanctuary that build on previously conducted surveys, and
         personal observations.

              Since there are barges and vessels carrying hazardous
         substances through and near the Sanctuary, the Sanctuary manager
         will need sound information on water circulation. This
         information would be used to improve understanding of the
         dispersion pattern of possible oil spills and land-source and
         ocean-source discharges in the waters within or adjacent to the
         Sanctuary,--and as part of the Sanctuary's contingency planning
         efforts.

              Basic physical oceanographic studies should focus on local
         circulation patterns offshore and in the Strait of Juan de Fuca,
         upwelling processes, and the interchange of water masses such as
         the Columbia River Plume and more saline open ocean water masses.

                                       V-13








         To accomplish-this goal of understanding regional.circulation the
         Sanctuary could assist with the development and dissemination of
         information from.existing monitoring stations such as NOAA tide
         gauges, current meters, thermistor chains and satellites (i.e.,
         the NOAA polar orbiting satellites with Advanced Very High
         Resolution Radiometer instruments that can image sea surface
         temperature). Process oriented studies can use resident,
         indicator species to identify local water mass movement and
         elucidate key productivity areas or areas of high diversity.
         Results can then be incorporated into an understanding of food
         web relationships and predator-prey foraging dynamics.

              Comprehensive knowledge of the distribution of organisms and
         their dependence on environmental factors is needed for
         interpretation as well as for resource protection. At
         representative depths and locations, the environment should be
         characterized by the collection of additional baseline data on
         water temperature and salinity, light penetration, upwelling
         circulation and nutrient-load. This information should be
         correlated with data on the abundance and distribution, by depth
         zone and location of species populations living within and
         transiting the Sanctuary. Data of this type have been collected
         at particular points along the shoreline by the numerous research
         institutions in Washington State, but due to the remoteness of
         the area and limited access points, there are many gaps in our
         knowledge of the marine ecology off the Olympic Peninsula,
         particularly land-sea interactions.

              The interaction of physical oceanography with biological
         studies will assist in developing an understanding of the ecology
         of the region and the general health and productivity of the
         Sanctuary. The research and education programs in general will
         emphasize a multi-disciplinary approach to basic and applied
         scientific issues. The geographic location of th .e proposed
         Sanctuary.provides an excellent opportunity to integrate research
         on the effects that human uses in the watershed and in the marine
         environment have on marine resources. This data would be
         invaluable in estimating the effects, if any, of present and
         future land-use practices on the marine environment.

              Additionally, a historical context study, including a
         general literature search building on existing work, will be
         conducted to identify probable historical sites (including
         cultural, archeological and paleontological sites) within the
         Sanctuary. This research will be followed by a field
         reconnaissa'-nce-type remote sensing survey and archeological
         assessment to locate and evaluate the extent to which historical
         resources are based in the Sanctuary. These baseline historical
         resource studies will provide the fundamental information
         necessary for developing a historical resource management
         strategy and education/interpretation program for the Sanctuary.


                                        V-14









              The recently developed Maritime History Museum will provide
        a new maritime museum in Seattle. Coordination with facilities
        adjacent to the Sanctuary and in larger population centers will
        enhance public awareness of Sanctuary efforts to protect and
        research important historical resources.

              2.  MonitoK "n

              Effective management requires an understanding of long-term
        changes to the status of the resources and human uses effecting
        those resources. Monitoring activities provide for the planned
        systematic collection of data on selected parameters to detect
        trends in ecosystem populations, communities, habitats, and
        processes. A well designed monitoring program can help detect
        natural cycles and trends, as well as unusual changes, and then
        relate them to one or more sources of probable disturbance. A
        monitoring program may help to distinguish between trends related
        to natural and human-induced activities. Over the long term, a
        monitoring program should indicate the health of the sanctuary
        ecosystem and its important resources.

              Marine resource monitoring programs can be costly and
        complex. For these reasons, the selection of parameters to
        monitor is an important scientific and management question. SRD
        will continue to seek advice from and coordinate with other
        agencies and scientists who conduct marine monitoring, and
        provide technical and other support where possible. Additional
        programs may also be initiated for important species or habitats
        of special concern not covered by existing programs. The
        research subcommittee of the SAC will be instrumental in
        directing the monitoring program.

              Overall, the monitoring program will assist in our
        understanding of the general health of the Olympic Coast and
        surrounding waters. The program could help discover sources of
        pollutants and assist in the establishment of cause and effect
        relationships as part of long-term toxicological evaluations.
        Monitoring could also elucidate any problems or changing patterns
        that had not been previously identified. Ultimately, the
        monitoring program will address the application of the findings
        to basic science as well as applied management purposes.

              Sanctuary staff will also monitor vessel traffic in
        coordination with the U.S. Coast Guard to assess the needs of
        additional preventative strategies.

              3.  Analytical/Predictive Studies

              In addition to baseline research and monitoring, the
        Sanctuary research program will continue studies, as needed, to
        analyze the causes and consequences of ecosystem changes and
        predict their effects on new and more intense human activity in

                                       V-15









          the area. Unlike the monitoring program these predictive studies
          are envisioned to be more short-term and directly targeted to an
          immediate management issue. Studies could be made to determine
          the effects on marine mammals of possible increases in boating
          activity if heightened interest in whale watching and fishing
          excursions results from Sanctuary establishment. A knowledge of
          these effects would enable management to provide information to
          Sanctuary users to avoid disturbing these animals unnecessarily.

               Other studies of whales, pinnipeds and seabirds in the
          Sanctuary could be initiated to determine their range, their
          migration patterns, and their dependance on the food resources of
          the Sanctuary. One such study, for example, might be an
          investigation to determine (1) whether the decrease in Stellar
          sea lions can be attributed to a decline in prey availability
          and compare the results to a similar study on the relatively
          stable-Stellar sea lion population on Ano Nuevo; and (2) the
          importance of the fish stocks in sustaining the Stellar sea lion
          population and (3) the interaction of fishing on pinniped,
          mammal, and seabird populations and vice-versa.

               D.   Selection and Management of Research Projects

               Projects considered for funding by the SRD should be
          directed to the resolution of sanctuary management issues and
         .concerns. The sanctuary manager, Sanctuary Advisory Committee,
          and SRD will follow procedures developed by SRD to ensure that
          each sanctuary's research program is consistent with the national
          program policies and directions. These procedures include
          preparing an annual Sanctuary Research Plan (SRP), and monitoring
          the progress of research in the sanctuary.

                    1.   Preparing an Annual Operating Plan (AOP)

               Eachyear the sanctuary manager will prepare a Sanctuary
          Research Plan (SRP) with support by the SAC. The AOP is a brief
          description of the goals for each fiscal year and a justification
          of how these goals fit into the guidelines of the approved
          management plan. SRD will then incorporate the SRP into a
          national plan that includes annual plans for each sanctuary.
          Steps involved in the annual planning process include:
               * Identifying management concerns for the sanctuary with
               supporting evidence or rationales.

               * Thd-sanctuary manager, in cooperation with the SAC and
               SRD, establishes research priorities based on the
               identification of management concerns. The most important
               factors to be considered in establishing annual research
               priorities will be:

                    (1) Immediate or evolving management issues that may be

                                         V-16








                  resolved through directed research projects;

                  (2) The prospects of research already in progress; and

                  (3) The availability of funds, equipment, and
                  instruments for research support.

                Research workshops are held on an occasional basis to
             facilitate the identification of research problems. After.
             the management issues and research priorities are developed,
             a draft SRP is prepared.

             * An SRP is prepared that includes documentation of how
             each project meets the national selection criteria. The
             final SRP is then incorporated by the research coordinator
             at program headquarters into a National Sanctuary Research
             Plan. The highest ranking research projects are selected
             from the national plan and a procurement schedule is
             prepared.

                A research announcement and request for proposals (RFP)
             is prepared. The announcement discusses management concerns
             and summarizes past and on-going research. Its purpose is
             to solicit proposals from the scientific community that
             satisfy the criteria specified in the SRP.

             Occasionally, research proposals may include activities that
        are prohibited by sanctuary regulations (e.g., taking of marine
        mammals). In such cases NOAA may review the proposal and issue a
        permit allowing the activity to proceed. The permit review
        process for research is outlined in Appendix _ ).    NOAA may
        also determine that all or part of the research should be
        conducted outside of sanctuary boundaries. Research focusing on
        protected or endangered species may require additional research
        permits from other agencies.

             2.   Monitoring Progress

             The sanctuary manager will monitor the performance of
        research projects and keep records of ongoing research, equipment
        being used on site, frequency of researchers' visits, and project
        progress. In order to ensure conformance to schedules outlined
        under the terms of the research contract, the researchers must
        prepare progress reports and final reports for review by SRD and
        the sanctuary manager. Scientists and resource managers may
        review final reports*before approval by SRD. Additionally, SRD
        will publish outstanding project reports in its Technical Report
        Series.

             3.   Information Exchange

             Direct SRD funding for research is limited. To augment

                                       V-17








          directly funded research, SRD will encourage other funding
          sources to support research that complements sanctuary management
          goals. In the process of soliciting research projects from other
          agencies and private institutions, SRD will make available
          current sanctuary resource data obtained from past and ongoing
          projects.

          Section IV.     Education


               A.   Introduction

               The interpretive program for the Olympic Coast National
          Marine Sanctuary will focus on improving public awareness of the
          sanctuary program and providing information about the Olympic
          Coast sanctuary resources, ecological linkages with terrestrial
          habitats, and regulations. The program will target, among
          others, local governments, businesses, citizen groups, the
          tribes, the timber industry, fishermen, tourists and educational
          institutions. The program is designed to promote understanding
          of the natural and human resource values of the Olympic Coast
          sanctuary, to enhance the stewardship responsibilities of the
          users in the coastal watersheds. Where possible, these programs
          will be coordinated with already existing programs and
          facilities, such as the local school systems in the watersheds
          bordering the sanctuary.

               B.   Goals

               The education program will be directed at improving public
          awareness and understanding of the significance of the Sanctuary
          and the need to protect its resources and attributes. The
          management objectives designed to meet this goal are to:

               Provide the public with information on the Sanctuary and its
          goals and objectives, with an emphasis on the need to use these
          resources wisely to ensure their long-term viability;

               troaden support for the Sanctuary and Sanctuary management
          by offering programs suited to visitors with a range of diverse
          interests;

               Provide for public involvement by encouraging feedback on
          the effectiveness of education programs and collaborate with
          other organizations to provide interpretive services, including
          extension and outreach programs and other volunteer projects
          complementAry-to the"Sanctuary program;

          *    Establish extension and outreach services through
          collaborative efforts with school and volunteer programs;

               Incorporate research results into the interpretive/education
          program in a format useful for the general public;

                                        V-18








             Use research opportunities as an educational tool by
        establishing research assistantship and citizens monitoring
        programs; and

             Create public awareness of the entire Nation-wide Sanctuary
        Program, its purposes and intent and the role of the Olympic
        Coast NMS as part of a regional and national system.

             C.   Educational Opportunities

             opportunities for interpreting the Olympic Coast NMS fall
        into two broad categories; 1) education for local residents and
        visitors, and potential users of the Sanctuary, including
        schools, fishermen, hikers, campers, nature viewers , etc., as
        well as visitors at local information centers and at the
        Sanctuary headquarters; and 2) interested groups not visiting the
        site but who desire to learn more about the Sanctuary's resources
        and unique characteristics. Below is a description of the
        educational programs that the Sanctuary will develop to maximize
        these opportunities.

             1.   site visitor Programs

             The Olympic Coast includes intertidal areas that can be
        readily observed from land. At Kalaloch, Highway 101 parallels
        the shoreline for approximately 10 miles allowing access to the
        coastline and enabling disabled or less active visitors to view
        the sanctuary area from scenic overlooks. Access by road also
        exists at La Push, Mora Campground, a point south of Neah Bay,
        and at Lake Ozette where a three mile trail leads to the coast.
        The unique wilderness setting and the diversity of habitats along
        the Olympic shoreline present excellent opportunities for school
        field trips, field seminars, local community programs (e.g. beach
        clean ups, whale and bird watching), and university level
        research projects. visitors and users of the offshore area
        include kayakers, fishermen and viewers on whale-watching boats.
        Brochures and interpretive materials will be available to provide
        information about sanctuary regulations, wildlife, and the
        sanctuary environment.

             The proximity of the proposed sanctuary to the shoreline
        enables visitors to have a field experience either by walking
        along the shoreline or by going out on the water. The intertidal
        areas of the proposed sanctuary are also part of the Olympic
        National Park and are managed by the National Park Service (NPS).
        NPS conducts beach-walks, sponsors nature seminars, and maintains
        interpretive signs at beach overlooks. SRD plans to establish a
        cooperative program with the Park Service to reach those visitors
        who go to the coastal area of the marine sanctuary. The beach
        overlooks are also excellent locations to establish signs and
        displays describing the proposed sanctuary. These interpretive
        signs will provide visitors, residents, and users of the

                                       V-19








          sanctuary with a brief description of the sanctuary's resources
          and uses. On-site educational materials will consist largely of
          written and visual materials describing the sanctuary and
          explaining its regulations. This information will be available
          to the wide variety of recreational users and tourists that visit
          the area.


               2.   Information Center Programs

                Many people who would not normally walk the beaches or go
          for an open-water cruise will be able to visit sanctuary
          headquarters and other visitor and information centers in the
          state. The educational exhibits and brochures available at the
          centers enable visitors to learn about the Olympic Coast area,
          and gain a greater appreciation of the marine environment.
          There are a number of other educational/interpretive centers
          around the Peninsula and in western Washington cities that may be
          willing to host sanctuary exhibits and coordinate educational
          programs. These include:

               Olympic National Park: The Olympic National Park recently
               obtained Congressional approval to build a Visitor Center at
               Kalaloch, but construction is not expected to begin for
               several years. The Olympic Park Superintendent has offered
               the National Marine Sanctuary Program exhibit space in the
               new facility. Since Kalaloch is located on the coastline,
               visitors can combine an on-site beach walk with an
               educational experience at the visitors center. The Olympic
               Park operates a number of.ranger/informational centers on
               the Olympic Peninsula. An agreement may be reached by which
               SRD can distribute brochures and other interpretive
               information at these locations. The Park also hosts
               "Olympic Field Seminars" sponsored by the Olympic Park
               Institute.. Arrangements can be made to hold a seminar on
               the sanctuary environment and resources. The Olympic
               National Park also organizes programs for schools and
               community groups. Designation of a marine sanctuary
               provides the opportunity to organize cooperative programs
               with the Park, schools, local community groups, and coastal
               tribes.

               U.S. Fish and Wildlife Headauarters. Olympia: USFWS
               distributes a brochure on the Refuges, has created visual
               panels on the*coast in conjunction with the NPS, and is
               interested in developing additional cooperative projects
               with NOAA and-NPS.

               Arthur D. Feiro Marine Laboratory, Port Angeles: Owned by
               the City of Port Angeles and located on the City Pier, the.
               lab is operated by Peninsula College both as a center for
               marine interpretation (largely for tourists) and as a center
               for teaching and research.

                                         V-20









             Olympic Natural Resources Center (ONRC). University of
             Washington: The 1989 Washington legislature established the
             Center as a unit of the University of Washington with a
             broad mandate for research and education regarding forestry
             and ocean resources. A development plan is now being
             written and will be submitted to the legislature in 1991.
             The ONRC will be based at U.W. in Seattle but the law
             requires that a facility be built on the western side of the
             Olympic Peninsula; planning for that facility is now
             underway.

             Sea Grant Extension Officeg. Montesano:    There is a Sea
             Grant Extension Office at Montesano, Washington.
             Informational brochures and other materials about the
             sanctuary may be distributed from this office.

             Seattle Acruarium, Seattle: It is anticipated that several
             cooperative projects involving exhibits and field excursions
             will be developed with the Education and Exhibits division
             of the Aquarium.

             New Maritime Center, Seattle: A maritime center combining
             features of an interpretive center, science and technology
             museum, and cultural institution is being proposed for
             Seattle's central waterfront on Elliott Bay. It is
             estimated that the Center will not be completed for at least
             seven years.

             Grays Harbor Historical SegDort Authority, Aberdeen:
             Written materials concerning sanctuary resources could be
             made available at the Seaport, and cooperative efforts to
             develop exhibits may be appropriate.

             Makah Museum, Neah bay: The Makah Museum, home to 500-year-
             old Ozette artifacts, is managed by the Makah Cultural and
             Research Center which has become a focal point for Makah
             tribal culture since it was founded'in 1979. It contains
             the world's single-largest collection'of Northwest coast
             artifacts dating back to before the times of the non-Indian
             explorers.

             Aside from Port Angeles, the major population centers on the
        Peninsula (Aberdeen, Forks) do not operate.marine oriented
        information centers. These communities, which are suffering from
        a declining economy, may benefit from sanctuary designation.
        Establishmdht-of a-sanctuary may increase tourist traffic to the
        region and thereby benefit the local economy through direct
        expenditures within the tourist related industries.

             3.   Outreach Programs

             The OCNMS educational/interpretation program will try to

                                       V-21








          reach persons.who are unable to visit the Olympic Coast area, as
          well as those living in the watershed. outreach programs may
          benefit groups with a specific interest in the coastal region and
          groups that are not aware of the importance of the marine
          environment. The outreach agenda will identify and contact
          specific groups and school systems and target the needs for
          marine education and outreach programs. Efforts will then focus
          on providing educational materials, curriculum and programs about
          the sanctuary and the marine environment. If interest is strong
          enough, a slide presentation, mobile exhibit, documentaries and
          other media may be developed for use with schools and private
          groups.

          Section V.    Administration

              A.   Administrative Frame-work

              This section of the management plan describes the
          administrative roles of the agencies that will be involved in
          Sanctuary management, proposes strategies to coordinate their
          activities, and provides for periodic evaluation of the
          effectiveness of the management plan. Administration oversees
          all other functions of sanctuary management including resource
          protection, research, and education, and establishes the roles of
          the relevant players in implementing specific programs. The
          administrative framework ensures that all management activities
          are coordinated.

              The Sanctuary and Reserves Division (SRD) is responsible for
          the overall management of the proposed Sanctuary. The SRD will
          coordinate on-site activities through cooperative agreements with
          the State of Washington, NPS, USFWS, USCG, EPA, and NMFS.

              1.   Sanctuaries and Reserves Division

              The National Marine Sanctuary Program is managed by SRD.
          SRD prepares a site-specific management plan for each sanctuary
          to ensure that on-site activities in resource protection,
          research, and education/interpretation are coordinated and
          consistent with sanctuary goals and objectives. SRD is
          responsible for implementing this plan through interagency
          agreements and funding of on-site operations.

              SRD, in collaboration with the sanctuary manager, develops a
          general budget projecting expenditures for program development,
          operations,--and staffing. Funding priorities will be reviewed
          and adjusted annually to reflect evolving conditions in SRD's
          budget, the sanctuary, and the priorities and requirements of the
          National Marine Sanctuary Program. SRD also establishes policies
          and procedures in response to specific issues in each sanctuary.
          Detailed SRD responsibilities are listed under the resource
          protection, research, and education sections which follow.

                                        V-22









             The Sanctuary manager serves as the primary spokesperson for
        the OCNMS, and reports directly to, and represents, the SRD. The
        manager's headquarters will preferably be located on the west
        side of the Olympic Peninsula, in close proximity to the
        sanctuary site. The final decision regarding the location of
        headquarters and satellite offices will be made after
        consultation with the SAC.

             2.   Sanctuary Advisory Committee

             A Sanctuary Advisory Committee (SAC) will be established to
        enable agencies, interested groups, and individuals to actively
        contribute to the management of the OCNMS. The SAC will consist
        of representatives ,of those groups affected by sanctuary
        designation, and include federal, state, local, and tribal
        government authorities, users of the area such as vessel
        operators and fishermen, and local community, and tribal members.
        These groups will be consulted to ensure that their ideas and
        concerns are made available to and considered by the sanctuary
        manager.

             The SAC will serve in both a proactive and reactive manner.
        It will be instrumental in producing annual operating plans by
        identifying education/outreach, research, and resource protection
        priorities. The SAC will keep the manager informed about issues
        of concern, offer suggestions on solutions to conflicts, and
        assist the manager in achieving the goals of the sanctuary
        program. The SAC will also be solicited to comment on ideas and
        approaches to issues that the sanctuary manager raises.

             The structure, composition, and role of the SAC will be
        determined by SRD in conjunction with representatives of the
        State of Washington. In addition, SRD will appoint members to
        the committee and define the roles between the manager, the SAC,
        and SRD headquarters. A broad based constituency will be sought
        to ensure that a range of views and expertise are made available
        to the sanctuary manager. The experience and expertise of the
        SAC will be available to the manager on an ad hoc basis and
        during regularly scheduled meetings. In order to function
        efficiently in an advisory capacity it may be beneficial to
        subdivide the SAC into subcommittees that correspond to the
        resource protection, research, education and general
        administration issues. Detailed SAC responsibilities are listed
        under the resource protection, research, education and general
        administration sections which follow.

             3.   Federal Agencies

             A.   United States Coast Guard (USCGI

             The USCG is responsible for enforcing Federal laws in waters
        under U.S. jurisdiction. This mission includes the enforcement

                                       V-23








          of sanctuary regulations promulgated for the sanctuary. The USCG
          also manages operations for the control or removal of oil and
          hazardous substances resulting from offshore spills. In addition
          to enforcing fishing and vessel discharge regulations, the USCG
          is also responsible for regulating vessel traffic, maintaining
          boater safety, and coordinating search and rescue operations.

               B.   United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)

               The USFWS maintains enforcement jurisdiction over the
          Flattery Rocks, Quillayute Needles, and Copalis National Wildlife
          Refuges. Because the boundary of these three island refuges is
          from mean high water landward, there is no overlapping
          jurisdiction between the USFWS and SRD. The refuges do, however,
          lie within the waters of the proposed sanctuary. It is
          anticipated that an interagency agreement will be developed to
          establish-a method for joint management of the resources.

               C.   National Park Service (NPS)

               The NPS is responsible for managing the Olympic National
          Park. Sixty miles of coastline and the offshore rocks and
          islands (including the intertidal zones) are included within the
          boundary of the Olympic National Park. The landward boundary of
          the proposed marine sanctuary extends to mean high water, cutting
          across the mouths of streams and rivers, except along Indian
          reservations where the boundary extends to the lower low water
          mark. NPS and SRD share jurisdiction over the intertidal zone in
          those areas where the landward boundary of the proposed Sanctuary
          extends to mean high water, and around the offshore rocks and
          islands. Existing National Park Service standards and policies
          cannot be diminished or diluted by any "shared" jurisdiction with
          SRD. For example, the large majority of the intertidal area of
          the park is Congressionally designated Wilderness and must be
          managed to that standard. SRD and NPS will develop an
          interagency cooperative agreement to ensure the most efficient
          use of program funding and manpower in achieving the goals of the
          sanctuary,and park.

               D.   Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

               The EPA has regulatory responsibilities with regard to
          sewage outfalls, ocean dumping, and non-point source pollution.
          While EPA has delegated permitting authority to the State
          government, the tribes receive their permits directly from EPA.

               E.   Corps of Engineers (COE)

               The COE grant permits that are based on EPA guidelines for
          the discharge of dredged materials into State waters and the
          waters beyond. The Corps also issues permits for construction,
          excavation or fill in any navigable waters of the United States.

                                        V-24










             F.   Department of the Navy

             The Department of the Navy conducts military training and
        surveillanceactivities in the proposed Sanctuary area.

             4.   International, Tribal, State, and local agencies

             A large portion of Washington State waters is included
        within the boundary of the proposed sanctuary. The Washington
        State Departments of Ecology, Natural Resources, Fisheries, and
        Wildlife have management responsibilities within state waters off
        the Olympic Peninsula. Ecology also administers the Washington
        State Coastal Zone Management Program. The state has an
        efficient infrastructure for coastal resource management and
        enforcement.

             It is NOAA's intent to work closely with the state to ensure
        full federal-state cooperation, and to coordinate the sanctuary
        program with the existing local, state and regional management
        framework. This cooperation will involve the establishment of
        Cooperative Agreements, Memoranda of Understanding and
        deputization of officials for enforcement purposes.

             NOAA will work closely with the Makah, Quileute, Hoh and
        Quinault tribes and the other tribes with treaty rights within
        the sanctuary, Clallam and Jefferson Counties, the City of Forks,
        and Canadian authorities such as the Canadian Coast Guard and
        Canadian Park Service to coordinate research, education,
        monitoring and resource protection initiatives.

             To facilitate the administrative procedures regarding
        certification/approval of leases, licenses, permits, approvals,
        rights or other authorizations (as described above, Part II,
        Section III, B.2. Designation Document and Regulations), NOAA
        will work closely with the owners or holders of, or applicants
        for, leases, licenses, permits, approvals, rights or agencies.

             B. Resource Protection: Roles and Rel2onsibilities

        1. Sanctuaries and Reserves Division

             (a)  Approves priorities for funding for resource
                  protection;

             (b)  Monitors the effectiveness of interagency agreements
                  fo*r-surveillance and enforcement and negotiates changes
                  where required;

             (c)  Develops contingency and emergency-response plans and,
                  based on these plans, negotiates applicable interagency
                  agreements;


                                       V-25








                (d) Monitors the effectiveness of existing sanctuary
                    regulations, and manages the process to implement
                    changes in regulations where necessary; and

                (e) Coordinates efforts to protect and manage sanctuary
                    resources with other federal agencies, tribal
                    governments, and other public and private
                    organizations.

          2. Sanctuary Manager

                (a) Recommends to SRD priorities for allocating funds
                    annually for resource protection;

                (b) Assists in the coordination of surveillance and
                    enforcement activities by providing liaison with the
                    USCG and other agencies;

                (c) Reports regularly to SRD on surveillance and
                    enforcement activities, violations, and emergencies;

                (d) Provides information for use in training sanctuary
                    enforcement officials;

                (e) Monitors and evaluates the adequacy of emergency-
                    response plans and procedures in the sanctuary;

                (f) Maintains a record of emergency events (e.g., oil
                    spills) in and around the sanctuary;

                (g) Evaluates overall progress toward the resource
                    protection objectives of the sanctuary program, and
                    prepares semi-annual and bi-monthly progress reports
                    highlighting activities for SRD; and

                (h) Establishes the Sanctuary Advisory Committee.

          3. U.S. Coast Guard

                (a) Holds broad responsibility for enforcing all federal
                    laws throughout the sanctuary waters;

                (b) Ensures enforcement of sanctuary regulations; and

                (c) Provides on-scene coordination and Regional Response
                    Center facilities under the National Contingency Plan
                    for the removal of oil and hazardous substances in the
                    event of a spill that threatens the sanctuary.

          4. State of Washington

                (a) Owns and manages aquatic lands, manages living

                                         V-26









                   resources, and enforces state laws and regulations
                   within state waters of the sanctuary;

              (b)  State enforcement personnel may be deputized to enforce
                   specific federal laws throughout the sanctuary (e.g.,
                   the Endangered Species Act);

              (c)  Evaluates progress towards management objectives for
                   resource protection, and adjusts annual priorities
                   accordingly;

              (d)  Monitors the effectiveness of state regulations within
                   the sanctuary and considers recommended changes to
                   state regulations through the State Legislature and
                   Governor's Office;

              (e)  Monitoring and surveillance of fisheries resources;

              (f)  Provides on-scene coordination of state clean-up
                   response in the event of an accidental spill of oil or
                   hazardous materials, which threaten the state's fish
                   and wildlife resources.

              (g)  Regulates recreational and commercial fishing
                   activities in state waters.

         C. Research: Roles and Responsibilities

         1. Sanctuaries and Reserves Division

              (a)  Prepares annual Sanctuary Research Plans (SRP's) for
                   each sanctuary;

              (b)  Prepares an annual National Research Plan (NRP) and
                   budget, based on the SRP's of individual sanctuaries
                   and in accordance with priorities determined at the
                   national level;

              (c)  Sets dates for procurement based on the NRP;
                          I
              (d)  Administers interagency agreements and contracts for
                   research;

              (e)  Reviews all interim and final research reports
                   submitted by the sanctuary manager; and

              (f)  Reviews permits for research activities, considering
                   the recommendations of the sanctuary manager, to ensure
                   consistency with sanctuary regulations and provide
                   additional technical review where necessary.




                                       V-27









          2. Sanctuary-Manager

               (a)  Recommends broad areas of research to resolve
                    management issues;

               (b)  Develops the Sanctuary Research Plan;

               (c)  Reviews research documents and progress reports
                    submitted by contractors;

               (d)  Prepares assessments of research needs and priorities
                    based on management requirements and research
                    continuity;

               (e)  Prepares recommendations for SRP's;

               (f)  Implements the SRP's;

               (g)  Coordinates research'and monitoring activities with
                    other federal, state, tribal, and local agencies in the
                    sanctuary in consultation with SRD, the Sanctuary
                    Advisory Committee and other interested parties; and

               (h)  Coordinates an on-site process for reviewing and
                    evaluating research proposals and permit requests,
                    considering the views of SRD, the Sanctuary Advisory
                    Committee, concerned individuals and interest groups.

          3. Sanctuary Advisory Committee

               (a) Provides advice to the sanctuary manager on review of
                    research proposals, interim, and final reports;

               (b) Provides advice to the sanctuary manager on approval of
                   .proposals for research in the sanctuary; and

               (c) Provides advice to the research coordinator and the
                    sanctuary manager on priority research needs.

          D. Education/Interpretation: Roles And RgsRonsibilities

          1. Sanctuaries and Reserves Division

               (a)  Reviews and approves the list of annual priorities for
                    education and the annual education budget prepared by
                    the-sanctuary manager;

               (b)  Reviews and approves design proposals for all
                    educational facilities; and

               (c)  Evaluates progress toward accomplishing objectives for
                    education and adjusts long-term priorities accordingly.

                                        V-28










         2. Sanctuary Manager

              (a)  Recommends annually to SRD a list of priorities and an
                   annual budget for education;

              (b)  Prepares and circulates as required Request for
                   Proposals (RFP's) for educational projects;

              (c)  Supervises the design and production of educational
                   materials and facilities for the sanctuary;

              (d)  Provides training for staff assigned to the sanctuary;

              (e)  Encourages local and regional organizations to
                   participate in sanctuary education;

              (f)  Disseminates information about the National Marine
                   Sanctuary Program and the OCNMS; and

              (g)  oversees the development of any education facilities
                   constructed for the sanctuary, reviews site analyses
                   and design specifications, awards construction and
                   maintenance contracts.

         3. Sanctuary Advisory Committee

              (a)  Provides advice to the sanctuary manager and education
                   coordinator on raising public awareness of the
                   sanctuary and advises on the development of a local
                   constituency by means of brochures, presentations,
                   structured events articles for publication, and other
                   activities consistent with the management plan.

         E. General Administration: Roles and ResDonsibilities

         1. Sanctuaries and Reserves Division

              (a)  Ensures that the sanctuary is operated in a manner
                   consistent with established national program policies
                   and with applicable national and international laws and
                   provides guidance to the sanctuary manager;

              (b)  Identifies, analyzes, and resolves sanctuary management
                   problems and issues;

              (c)  Formulates-comprehensive, long-term management plans
                   for the sanctuary and revises the management plan as
                   necessary;

              (d)  Directs and assists the sanctuary manager in the
                   implementation of the management plan;


                                        V-29








             (e) Coordinates sanctuary management with other federal and
                 state agencies, tribal governments, and private
                 organizations;

             (f) Evaluates the effectiveness of sanctuary management and
                 regulatory measures;

             (g) Prepares a program budget for the sanctuary; and

             (h) Provides funding for overall sanctuary management and
                 administration.


        2. Sanctuary Manager

             (a) Coordinates on-site efforts of all parties involved in
                 sanctuary activities;

             (b) Reviews the management plan periodically and recommends
                 changes to SRD as needed;

             (c) Assists SRD in preparing the annual budget for the
                 sanctuary;

             (d) oversees day-to-day operation of the sanctuary,
                 including administrative functions such as bookkeeping,
                 purchasing and keeping records of visitor activities;

             (e) Supervises sanctuary staff and other personnel,
                 including enforcement and interpretive employees
                 assigned to the sanctuary; and

             (f) Represents the sanctuary viewpoint on local issues and
                 at public forums.

        3. State of Washington

             (a) Assists in the preparation and implementation of a
                 comprehensive, long-term management plan for the
                 sanctuary; and

             (b) Assists in the periodic review of the management plan.

        4. Sanctuary Advisory Committee

             (a) Provides advice on the specific plans for sanctuary
                 developments;

             (b) Provides advice on all proposals for activities within
                 the sanctuary;

             (c) Provides advice to the appropriate federal, state,
                 tribal, or local government on proposed actions, plans

                                    V-30









                  and-projects in areas adjacent to, or affecting the
                  sanctuary;

             (d)  Enhances communication and cooperation among all
                  interests involved in the sanctuary;

             (e)  Advises on rules and conditions for all forms of public
                  recreation; and

             (f)  Advises on an overall plan for the use, development and
                  maintenance of sanctuary lands and buildings.

        F. Staffing Levels

             Due to limited funding, the sanctuary will begin with a NOAA
        manager, and an operations coordinator. The sanctuary staff will
        work closely with the USCG, NPS, FWS, and other state, tribal,
        and federal agencies in providing enforcement and surveillance in
        the area of the sanctuary. The SAC will be established during
        the first year and planning will begin to identify research,
        education, resource management and administrative priorities for
        the first five years following designation. The priorities for
        further staffing will be determined as a result of the planning
        initiative.

        G.   Headauarters and Visitor Center Facilities

             Sanctuary headquarters and administrative offices will be
        established at a suitable location on the Olympic Peninsula.
        NOAA has undertaken a preliminary assessment of alternatives for
        a main office and satellite offices. However, the final
        decisions on the siting of administrative offices will be made
        during the sanctuary planning initiative when the priorities for
        the first five years after designation for education, research,
        and resource management are clarified. Thiswill also allow time
        for the mission and programs of the Olympic Center and the soon
        to be established Willapa Science Center to be identified.
        Siting considerations will be contingent upon available funding.

             NOAA explored options for siting of offices in Port Angeles,
        Forks, Neah Bay and La Push. Following is an analysis of
        locations identifying some of the advantages and disadvantages of
        each alternative.

             1. Port Angeles

             The advantages of locating an office in Port Angeles are
        that: 1) it is the center of communications and transportation on
        the Olympic Peninsula where regional offices of the Coast Guard,
        National Park Service and other federal and state offices are
        located; and 2) should the Northwest Straits National Marine
        Sanctuary become designated, this location would be convenient in

                                       V-31









          coordinating the operations of both sanctuaries.

               The main disadvantage of siting the administrative office in
          Port Angeles is that it is removed from the population centers on
          the Olympic Peninsula and it may promote the perception and/or
          reality that the program is out of touch with the needs and
          interests of the population living adjacent to the Sanctuary.

               2.   Neah'Bay

               Neah Bay offers many opportunities with respect to
          facilities, research, and education. It is located adjacent to
          both the Strait of Juan de Fuca and the Olympic Peninsula, and as
          such, is centrally located adjacent to the entire sanctuary.
          Facilities exist to support a research vessel and tug. The Coast
          Guard station has a 600 foot dock with lift and launch
          capability, and is planning to upgrade the dock and its
          facilities which is expected to be completed by 1995-96. This
          may present an opportunity for cooperative funding by NOAA to
          provide fixed, permanent space for SRD vessels. The station
          would be a natural place to store a vessel ashore because there
          is a heavy lift crane which can lift vessels of up to twenty tons
          from the water. There is also an enclosed maintenance shed which
          may be available to SRD as well. Both security and maintenance
          would be much simpler if SRD were able to use the Coast Guard
          facility.

               From the standpoint of research, much research has been
          occurring at Tatoosh Island by the University of Washington's
          Friday Harbor Lab. The presence,of the Sanctuary in Neah Bay can
          support and augment this research.

               From the standpoint of education/outreach, and research on
          cultural and historic resources, Neah Bay offers the Makah
          Archeological Museum and draws a large number of tourists which
          can be targeted by the Sanctuary program. The Makah Tribe is
          making long-range plans to improve the harbor at Neah Bay, add on
          to the museum, construct a marina and convention center and build
          an adjacent shopping center. In addition., because it is located
          on a tribal reservation, the education program can become more
          directly involved with the education needs of the coastal tribes.

               3.   La Push

               There is a small port at La Push which supports the fishing
          fleet of-the Quileute Tribe. However, there is a bar that must
          be negotiated at the entrance and in heavy weather is dangerous
          and, at times, impassible. Therefore from the perspective of
          facilities such as access to the sanctuary by vessels, this is an
          undesirable location. However because of its coastal location,
          it is a site where the Sanctuary would ensure that there is
          adequate contingency planning equipment, and bird and mammal

                                        V-32










          rescue facilities. There is a Coast Guard station at La Push.

               There is also a small village that supports a tribal school
          and recreational opportunities in the summer. Siting an office
          in this location will enable the sanctuary program to become
          integrated in the educational program of the tribe and research
          linkages between upland uses and the health of the coastal
          environment.


               4.   For s

               Forks is the center of the timber industry and the
          commercial center for the Olympic Peninsula. It is located
          approximately 12 miles from the coast. It will be the location
          of the Olympic Center which will offer an opportunity to
          coordinate research focusing on the linkages between upland uses
          and the coastal ecosystem. The location offers access to
          tourists and upland users of the watershed and a central location
          for the entire population on the Olympic Peninsula. A main
          office of the National Forest Service and an office of the state
          Department of Natural Resources are also located in the Forks
          area.













































                                           V-33









         PART VI:                  List of Preparers and Acknowledgements



I











         PART VI:   LIST OF PREPARERS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

         Mr. Joseph Flanagan - Environmental Protection Specialist, ocean
         Minerals and Energy Division, NOAA. Mr. Flanagan contributed to
         the synthesis of information and narrative for Part II which
         describes the resources and uses of the Olympic Coast area. His
         academic background includes a Bachelors Degree in Geology and
         Chemistry from the University of Miami, Florida; and a Master's
         Degree in Environmental Systems Management from American
         University, Washington D.C.

         Ms. Nina Garfield - Program Specialist, Sanctuaries and Reserves
         Division, NOAA. Ms. Garfield was responsible for assisting in
         the final data analysis, writing, editing, and preparation of the
         draft EIS/MP, and the overall supervision and preparation of the
         Final EIS/MP and regulations. Her academic background includes a
         Bachelors Degree in Sociology and Psychology from Kalamazoo
         College in Kalamazoo, MI; a Masters Degree in Marine Affairs at
         the University of Rhode Island; course work in Chemistry and
         Physics at the University of Pittsburgh and Mariculture at the
         Marine Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole, Ma.

         Ms. Karen Holtz - Sea Grant Fellow serving as a Program
         Specialist for the Sanctuaries and Reserves Division, NOAA. Ms.
         Holtz was responsible for collecting information and making many
         of the Federal, tribal, state, and other individual contacts
         necessary for the preparation of this document. Ms. Holtz wrote
         the first complete draft of the DEIS/MP and developed the initial
         regulatory alternatives for this project. Her academic
         background includes a Bachelor's Degree from Colby College,
         Maine', and a Masters Degree in Marine Policy from the Institute
         for Marine Studies, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.

         Mr. Scott Kathey - Graduate Intern, Sanctuaries and Reserves
         Division, NOAA. Mr. Kathey has significantly modified the
         natural resources section for Part II of the FEIS, contributed to
         preparation of response to comments, and prepared Appendix F and
         J of the FEIS/MP. Mr. Kathey is a senior graduate student at the
         Graduate School of Marine Affairs of the University of Washington
         in Seattle. He received a Bachelors Degree in International
         Affairs from the George Washington University, Washington, D.C.

         Mr. Rafael Lopez - Pacific Regional Manager, Sanctuaries and
         Reserves Division, NOAA. Mr. Lopez was responsible for
         overseeing the Sanctuary designation process following the
         release of the DEIS/MP. Mr. Lopez received his Bachelors of
         Science Degree in Physical Oceanography from the Florida
         Institute of Technology in Melbourne, Florida.

         Ms. Linda Maxson - On-site Liaison for the Sanctuaries and
         Reserves Division, NOAA. Ms. Maxson has served as the SRD
         contact person for the Olympic Coast project, offered policy

                                       VI-1









          guidance on the project, contributed to the preparation of the
          response to comments and management plan, and edited the FEIS/MP.
          Ms. Maxson received a Bachelors Degree from the University of
          California, Davis and a Masters of Science Degree from the
          University of New Hampshire in Education.

          Mr. Chris Ostrom - Senior Project Manager, Sanctuaries and
          Reserves Division, NOAA. Mr. Ostrom was responsible for the
          preparation of the DEIS/MP and regulations. His academic
          background includes a Bachelor's Degree from the University of
          California at Santa Barbara, and a Master's Degree in Biological
          oceanography from the Florida State University Graduate School of
          Oceanography, Tallahassee, Florida.

          CDR. Larry Simoneaux - NOAA Corps Officer, Sanctuaries and
          Reserves Division, NOAA. CDR. Simoneaux spearheaded the
          development of the analysis for NOAA's proposal to the Coast
          Guard of an Area to be Avoided in Part V of the FEIS/MP. In
          addition, CDR. Simoneaux served in a liaison capacity with the
          vessel traffic industry and Washington State in matters related
          to vessel traffic, and contributed to preparation of response to
          comments. CDR Simoneaux received a Bachelors of Science Degree
          from the United States Naval Academy and a Masters of Science
          Degree in Fisheries Biology and Statistics from Louisiana State
          University in Baton Rouge, IA.

          Mr. Glen Tallia - Legal Counsel, General Counsel, Office of
          Coastal Resource Management, NOAA. Mr. Tallia provided legal
          guidance and support throughout the development of the DEIS/MP
          and FEIS/MP. Mr. Tallia received a Bachelors of

          Acknowledgements

               The preparers would like to offer special thanks to the
          office of oceanography and Marine Assessment (now called the
          strategic Environmental Assessments Division, ORCA/NOS/NOAA),
          headed by Mr. Daniel Basta and directed by Eric Slaughter (Ron
          Wolitera, Peter Wiley, Anthony Pait, Dan Farrow, Samuel Orlando,
          Diane Bowen, Elizabeth Archer, Marilyn King, Tom LaPointe, Tim
          Goodspeed, Tom Culliton and Tracey Gill) for preparing Appendix 2
          of the DEIS/MP: "A Proposal for the Olympic Coast National
          Marine Sanctuary: Site Evaluation Report."

               In addition the preparers would like to thank Paul Crawford
          (National Park Service) Bill Hesselbart (U.S. Fish and Wildlife
          Service), Craig Bowhay (Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission),
          and Dave McCraney, Terry Swanson, and Pam Miller (Governor's
          Ocean Policy Work Group), Bill Simmons, Shari Schaftlein, and
          Christian Penn for providing invaluable input into the
          development of the sanctuary proposal and preparation of this
          document. Rob McMahon, Ocean Issues Coordinator for the
          Washington State Coastal Counties, kept us in touch with local

                                        VI-2








         concerns. Tom Peeling, Ben West, Lt. Kirby Nelson, Elsie
         Munsell, and Chris Nelson of the Navy provided information on
         Naval activities for the FEIS/MP. Special thanks is extended to
         Margie Hegy of the U.S. Coast Guard, Margie Smitch of the
         Washington State Office of Marine Safety, CDR. Stan Norman of the
         U.S Coast Guard and CDR. Ken Lilly of the NOAA Corps (retired),
         and Dick Lauer of Sause Brothers Marine, Inc. for their support
         in the analysis for the proposal of the Area to be Avoided to the
         Coast Guard. Our gratitude is also offered to Fred Felleman and
         Rick Malsed for enthusiastically supporting our efforts.

              Further acknowledgement is extended to George Galasso for
         his research on industrial dumpsites; Enid, Tina, Jennifer and
         Lauren Berger, and Brady Phillips for their editorial and
         secretarial support.











































                                       VI-3









             PART VII:      List of Agencies, Organizations, and Persons
                               Receiving Copies











         PART VII: LIST OF AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND PERSONS RECEIVING
                   COPIES

         Federal Agencies

         Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
         Department of Agriculture
         Department of Commerce
         Department of Defense
         Department of Energy
         Department of Health and Human Services
         Department of the Interior
         Department of Justice
         Department of Labor
         Department of Transportation - U.S. Coast Guard
         Environmental Protection Agency
         Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
         Marine Mammal Commission
         Nuclear Regulatory Commission
         Pacific Fishery Management Council

         Congressional
         Members of the U.S. House Committee on Merchant Marine and
         Fisheries
         Members of the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and
         Transportation
         Honorable Slade Gorton, United States Senate
         Honorable Patty Murray, United States Senate
         Honorable Maria Cantwell, U.S. House of Representatives
         Honorable Norman D. Dicks, U.S. House of Representatives
         Honorable Thomas S. Foley, U.S. House of Representatives
         Honorable Jay Inslee, U.S. House of Representatives
         Honorable Mike Kreidler, U.S. House of Representatives
         Honorable James A. McDermott, U.S. House of Representatives
         Honorable Al Swift, U.S. House of Representatives
         Honorable Jolene Unsoeld, U.S. House of Representatives
         Honorable Jennifer Dunn, U.S. House of Representatives

         Washington State Government and Agencies
         Clallam County Commissioners
         City of Aberdeen
         City of Hoquiam
         City of ocean Shores
         Department of Agriculture
         Department of Ecology
         Department of Fisheries
         Department of Community Development, Office of Archeology and
               Historic Preservation
         Department of Natural Resources
         Parks and Recreation
         Department of Treasury
         Department of Trade and Economic Development

                                       VII-1









         Department of Wildlife
         Energy Office
         Grays Harbor County Commissioners
         Island County Commissioners
         Jefferson County Commissioners
         Pacific County Commissioners
         Parks and Recreation Commission
         Puget Sound Water Quality Authority
         San Juan County Planning Department
         Washington Coast Chamber of Commerce
         Whatcom County Planning Department

         Tribal Governments and Agencies
         Quinault Indian Nation
         Hoh Indian Nation
         Quileute Indian Nation
         Makah Indian Nation
         Point No Point Treaty Council
         Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission

         National, Regional and Local Interests
         Admiralty Audubon
         American Association of University Women
         American Bureau of Shipping
         American Cetacean Society
         American Fisheries Society
         American Gas Association
         American Littoral Society
         American Petroleum Institute
         American Oceans Campaign
         Amoco Production Company
         Arthur Farrell Marine Lab
         Atlantic Richfield Company
         Bay Watchers
         Black Hills Audubon Society
         Boating Industry Association
         BP Oil Company
         Bullet Foundation
         Cascadia Research Collective
         Coastal Washington Marine Research
         Center for Law and Social Policy
         Center for Marine Conservation.
         Chevron U.S.A., Inc.
         Citizens Against Litter
         citizen's Organized Rally Against Leasing (CORAL)
         Clean Air Now
         Clean Water Action
         Coalition of Washington ocean Fishermen
         Coast Alliance
         Columbia-Pacific Resource Conservation Development Council
         Columbia River Crab Fisherman's Association
         Conservation Foundation


                                       VII-2









        Continental Oil Company
        The Cousteau Society
        CZM Newsletter
        Defenders of Wildlife

        East Lake Washington Audubon Society
        Edison Electric Institute
        El Paso Natural Gas Company
        Elma Chamber of Commerce
        Environmental Policy Center
        Environmental Defense Fund, Inc.
        Environmental Law Institute
        Exxon Company, U.S.A.
        Fisherman's Marketing Association
        Friends of the Coast
        Friends of the Earth
        Friends of the San Juans
        Friends of the Sea Otter
        Grays Harbor Chamber of Commerce
        Grays Harbor Economic Development Council
        Grays Harbor Regional Planning Commission
        Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce
        Greenpeace, U.S.A.
        Gulf Oil Company
        The Human Race
        Inland Waters Coalition
        Inverness Association
        Kitsap Audubon Society
        Lake Sammish Community Association
        Lakewood Junior Women's Club
        Marine Technology Society
        The Marine Wilderness Society
        Mayr Bros. Logging Co., Inc.
        Mobil oil,Corporation
        mountaineers
        National  Association of Counties
        National  Audubon Society
        National  Campers and Hikers Association
        National  Coalition for Marine Conservation, Inc.
        National  Federation of Fishermen
        National  Fisheries Institute
        National  Ocean Industries Association
        National  Recreation and Park Association
        National  Research Council
        National  Wildlife Federation
        Natural Resources Defense Council
        Natural Resources Law Institute
        No Oilport!
        North Pacific Fishing Vessel Owner's Association
        North River Protection Association
        North Sound Sea Kayaking Association
        Ocean Park Chamber of Commerce


                                       VII-3









            Olympic Environmental Council
            Olympic Park Associates
            Olympic Peninsula Economic Research Association
            Olympic Waters
            Pacific Coast Federation of Fisherman's Associations, Inc.
            Pacific Conservation District
            Pacific States Marine Fisheries commission
            Pacific Salmon Sportfishing Commission
            People for Puget Sound
            Port of Grays Harbor
            Port of Ilwaco
            Port of Port Angeles
            Port of South Bend
            Port of Raymond
            Port of Tacoma
            Port of Port Townsend
            Port of Willapa Harbor
            Port Townsend Marine Science Center
            Protect the Peninsula's Future
            Puget Sound Alliance
            Puget Sound Steamship Operators Association, Inc.
            San Juan Marina
            Seattle Audubon Society
            Sierra Club-Cascade Chapter
            Sierra Club-Willapa Bay Chapter
            Soundwatch
            Southwest Washington Anglers
            Sport Fishing Institute
            Tahoma Audubon
            TESC/Environmental Resource Center
            Texaco USA
            To Protect the Peninsula's Future
            Trout Unlimited
            Union Oil Company
            United States Naval Institute
            University of Washington Law Society
            Vancouver Audubon
            Washington  Contract Loggers Association
            Washington  Dungeness Crab Fishermen's Association
            Washington  Environmental Council
            Washington  Public Ports
            Washington  Trollers Association
            Washington  Wilderness Coalition
            Water Pollution Control Federation
            Westport Charters, Inc.
            The Whale Museum
            Whatcom County Planning Department
            The Wilderness Society
            Willapa Bay Water Resources coordination Council
            World Wildlife Fund-U.S.
            'Yakima. Audubon



                                             VII-4










            Part VIII:                                           References







             I












                                     REFERENCES

         Antonelis, G.A. and M.A. Perez. 1984. Estimated Annual Food
              Consumption by Northern Fur Seals in the California Current.
              Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Report, Vol. XXV, 1984.

         Baker, E.T. and B.M. Hickey. 1986. Contemporary Sedimentation
              Processes In and Around An Active West Coast Submarine
              Canyon. Marine Geology, 71 (1986) 15-34.

         Ballard, R.L. 1964. Distribution of Beach Sediment Near the
              Columbia River. University of Washington Department of
              oceanography, Technical Report No. 98, 82p.

         Battelle 1987. Effects of Sounds From A Geophysical Survey
              Device on Fishing Success. Pacific 6CS region of the
              Minerals Management Service, U.S. Department of the
              Interior, Los Angeles, CA. Contract No. 14-12-0001-30273.

         Bargmann, Gregory G. 1984. Recreational Diving in the State of
              Washington and the Associated Harvest of Food Fish and
              Shellfish. Washington Department of Fisheries, Technical
              Report No. 82.

         Barlow, Jay. 1988. Harbor Porpoise, Phocogna Rhocoena, Abundance
              Estimation for California, Oregon, and Washington: I. Ship
              Surveys. Fishery Bulletin, Vol. 86, No. 3, 1988.

         Barton, Stephanie. 1992. Manager, Marketing and Sales, Foss
              Environmental Services. Seattle, WA. Personal
              communication.

         Beach, R.J., A.C. Geiger, S.J. Jefferies, S.D. Treacy, and B.L.
              Troutman. 1985. Marine Mammals and their Interactions with
              Fisheries of the Columbia River and Adjacent Waters, 1980-
              1982. Washington Department of Game, Wildlife Management
              Division, report to National Marine Mammal Laboratory, NMFS,
              Seattle, Wash.

         Bigg., M.A. 1985. Status of the Stellar Sea Lion (Eumetopias
              jubatus) and California Sea Lion (ZalORhus californianus) in
              British Columbia. Can. Spec. Publ. Fish. Aquat. Sci.
              77:20 p.

         Boesch, D.F., et al. 1973. Oil Spills and the Marine Environment.

         Boesch, D.F. and Rabalais, N.N., 1987. Long Term Environmental
              Effects of Offshore Oil and Gas Development. Elsevier
              Applied Science, London and New York.

         Bowlby, E.C., B.L. Troutman, and S.J. Jefferies. 1988. Sea
              Otters in Washington: Distribution, Abundance, and Activity

                                      VIII-1









                Patterns. Final Report Prepared for National Coastal
                Resources Research and Development Institute. Newport, OR,
                133 pp.

          Briggs, J.C. 1979. Marine Zoogeography. McGraw-Hill Series in
                Population Biology.                                   I

          Bureau of the Census. 1988. County and city data book, 1988.
                U.S. Department of Commerce. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
                Government Printing Office. 797 pp. + appendices.

          Bureau of the Census. 1989. Current population reports,
                population estimates, and projections. Series p-26,   No. 88-
                a. County population estimates: July 1, 1988, 1987, and
                1986. U.S. Department of Commerce. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
                Government Printing Office. 45 pp.

          Bureau of the Census. 1990. Building permit data ordering
                information package (data base]. Prepared by the
                Construction Statistics Division, Building Permit Branch.
                U.S. Department of Commerce. Washington, D.C.

          Bureau of Land Management. 1979. Final Environmental Statement
                OCS Sale 48. Vols 1-5. U.S. DOI, BLM, Pacific OCS office,
                Los Angeles, CA.

          Bureau of Land Management. 1980. Final Environmental Impact
                Statement, OCS Lease Sale No. 53, Vol. 1.

          Butts, Robert. 1988. Management of the Marine and Ocean
                Resources of the Washington Coast: An Interim Report to the
                Washington State Legislature, December, 1988.

          Calambokidis, J., G. Steiger. J. Cubbage. 1987. Marine Mammals
                in the Southwestern Strait of Juan De Fuca: -Natural History
                and Potential Impacts of Harbor Development in Neah Bay.
                Final Report for Seattle District Army Corps. of Engineers,
                January 1987.

          Carson, B., E.T. Baker, B.M. Hickey, C.A. Nittrouer, D.J.
                DeMaster, K.W. Thorbjarnarson, and G.W. Snyder.   1986.
                Modern Sediment Dispersal and Accumulation In Quinault
                Submarine Canyon - a Summary. Marine Geology, 71 (1986) 1-
                13.

          Carter, E.R... D.L. Jacques, C.S. Strong, G.J. McChesney, M.W.
                Parker, and J.E. Takekawa. In prep. Survey of seabrid
                colonies in northern and central California. U.S. Fish and
                Wildlife Service, Dixon, CA.

          Center for Marine Conservation. 1989. The Exxon Valdez Oil
                Spill: A Management Analysis. Washington, D.C.

                                        VIII-2










        Chan. G.L. 1977. The five-year recruitment of Marine Life after
              the 1971 San Francisco Oil Spill. Proceedings of the 1977
              Joint Conference on prevention and Control of Oil Spills.
              New Orleans, Louisiana. March 1977.

        Chelsea International Corporation. 1983. National Marine
              Sanctuary Site Evaluations: Recommendations and Final
              Reports. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
              office of ocean and Coastal Resource Management, Sanctuary
              Programs Division.

        Cheng, Cecil. 1992. Fleet Control and Coordination, Canadian
              Coast Guard. Victoria, B.C. Personal Communication.

        Cicin-Sain, B. 1985. Offshore Oil Development in California:
              Challenges to Governments and to the Public Interest.
          Department of Political Science and Marine Policy Program,
              Marine Science Institute, University of California, Santa
              Barbara, August 1985.

        Clark, R.C. Jr., D.B. Houston, D.L. Cole, W.J. Scorlett (ms).
              Ecology of Dead Salmon: Retention and Consumption of Coho
              (Oncorhynchus kisutch) Carcasses in Spawning Streams.

        Coastal Zone Atlas of Washington. 1980a. Land Cover/Land Use
              Narratives, Volume I: Urban, Agriculture, Non-forested
              Uplands, Forest, Water. State of Washington, Department of
              Ecology, June 1980.

        Coastal Zone Atlas of Washington. 1980b. Land Cover/Land Use
              Narratives, Volume II: Wetlands, Exposed and other Lands,
              Appendices, Glossary, Index. State of Washington,
              Department of Ecology, June 1980.

        COMSUBGRU 9 (Staff, Commander Submarine Group 9), August 1992.

        Coordinated Vessel Traffic Management Service (CVTMS). October,
              1991. Action Plan. Joint Coordinating Group, United-
              States-Canada. Seattle, Washington.

        Craig, Michael. 1992. Global Diving and Salvage, Inc. Seattle,
              Wa. Personal Communication.

        Culliton, T.J., M. A. Warren, T.R. Goodspeed, D.G. Remer, C.M.
              Blackwell, and J.J. McDonough, III. Fifty years of
              population along the Nation's coasts, 1960-2010. Coastal
              trends series, report #2. NOAA, Natl. Ocean Serv.,
              Strategic Assessment Branch, 6001 Executive Blvd., Suite
              220, Rockville, MD. 52 pp.

        Cutshell, N.H., I.L. Larsen, C.R. Olsen, C.A. Nittrouer, and D.J.
              DeMaster. 1986. Columbia River Sediment In Quinault Canyon,

                                      VIII-3









               Washington - Evidence From Artificial Radionuclides. Marine
               Geology, 71(1986) 125-136.

          Dayton, P.K. 1985. Ecology of Kelp Communities. Ann. Rev. Ecol.
               Syst. 16:215-245.

          Director, Naval Oceanography and Meteorology. 1976. climatic
               Study of the Near Coastal Zone, West Coast of the United
               States. 1976. Naval Weather Services Detachment, Ashville,
               NC.

          Dethier, M.N. 1988. A Survey of Intertidal Communities of the
               Pacific Coastal Area of Olympic National Park, Washington.
               Prepared for the Use of The National Park Service and
               Cooperating Agencies, October 1988.

          Douglas, George. 1992. Maritime Corporation. Seattle, WA.
               Personal Communication.

          Duggins, D.O., C.A. Simenstad, J.A. Estes. 1989. Magnification
               of Secondary Production of Kelp Detritus in Coastal Marine
               Ecosystems. Science, Vol. 245, pp. 170-173, 14 July 1989.

          Duxbury, Alyn C. Oceanographer, University of Washington. 1992.
               Personal Communication.

          Duxbury, Alyn C. and Alison B. Duxbury. 1989. An Introduction
               to the World's Oceans, 3rd ed. Wm. C. Brown Publishers.
               Dubuque, IA, 446 pp.

          EPA 1985. Environmental Assessment of Drilling Fluids and
               Cuttings Released onto the OCS. EPA 440/4-85/002.

          Everitt, R.D., C.H. Fiscus, and R.L. DeLong. 1979. Marine
               Mammals of Northern Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de
               Fuca - A Report on Investigations November 1, 1977 - October
               31, 1978. NOAA Tech. Mem. ERL MESA-41. 191 pp.

          Everitt, R.D., C.H. Fiscus, and R.L. DeLong. 1980. Northern Puget
               Sound Marine Mammals. DOC/EPA Interagency Energy/Environ.
               R&D Program. EPA-600/7-80-139, U.S. Environmental Protection
               Agency

          Felleman, F.L. 1985. Global Distribution of Marine Mammals and
               the Potential Impact of Offshore Scientific Drilling as it
               Relates to Life History Requirements.   Appendix A of
               Final Environmental Impact Statement by Tetra Tech Inc., for
               the National Science Foundation's Ocean Drilling Program.
               Contract No. OCE84-18886.

          Fred Felleman. 1988. "Draft Evaluation" Western Washington Outer
               Coast National Marine Sanctuary. Center For Environmental

                                        VIII-4











              Education.

         Felton, John. 1992. Foss Maritime. Personal Communication.

         Final Report of the States/British Columbia Oil Spill Task Force.
              October, 1990. Province of British Columbia, State of
              Washington, State of Oregon, State of Alaska, State of
              California.

         Foster, M.S.i A.P. De Vogelaere, C. Harrold, J.S. Pearse, and
              A.B. Thurm. 1988. Causes of Spatial and Temporal Patterns in
              Rocky Intertidal Communities of Central and Northern
              California. Memoirs of the California Academy of Sciences,
              No. 9.

         Freeland, H.J. and K.L. Denman. 1982. A Topographically
              Controlled Upwelling Center Off Southern Vancouver Island.
              Journal of Marine Research 4(4): 1069-1093.

         Freeman, Rai L. 1985. Measuring the Impact of the Ixtoc I oil
              spills on Visitation at Three Texas Public Coastal Parks.
              Coastal Zone Management Journal, Vol. 3, No. 2.

         Frisch, A.S., J. Holbrook, and A.B. Ages. 1981. Observations of
              a Summertime Reversal in Circulation in the Strait of Juan
         de Fuca. Journal of Geophysical Research, vol. 86, no. C3, pp.
              2044-2048.

         Fry. 1987. In Minerals Management Service, U.S. Department of
              Interior. 1989. Federal offshore Statistics: 1988, OCS
              Report 89-0082.

         Futures Group. 1982. Final Technical Report, Outer Continental
              Shelf Oil Spill Probability Assessment. Prepared by The
              Futures Group, Glastonberry, Connecticut, for the Bureau of
              Land Management, Department of the Interior.

         Gardner, Fred, Ed. 1981. Washington Coastal Areas of Major
              Biological Significance. Washington Department of Ecology.

         Grader, Jr. W.F. and E. Laychak 1989. The Effects of Seismic
              Exploration on Fisheries. Paper presented at the AAAS
              Annual Meeting on Oil Exploration on the Continental Shelf,
              Impacts on Fisheries, Policy, and the Mediation Process.
              San Francisco, CA 15 pp.

         Geraci, J.R. and D.J. St. Aubin. 1980. "Offshore Petroleum
              Resource Development and Marine Mammals: a Review and
              Research Recommendations." Marine Fisheries Review, Nov.
              1980.

         Geraci, J.R. and D.J. St. Aubin. 1982. Study of the Effects

                                       VIII-5










              of Oil on Cetaceans. Prepared for-the Department of
              Interior: cited in MMS, 1984. Final Environmental Impact
              Statement, OCS Sale No. 90. Minerals Management Service,
              Atlantic OCS Region, Vienna, VA.

         Geraci, J.R. and D.J. St. Aubin. 1983. "Fifth Interim Report-
              Study of the Effects.of Oil on Marine Mammals." Prepared
              for MMS and cited in MMS, 1984. Final Environmental Impact
              Statement, OCS Sale No. 90. Minerals Management Service,
              Atlantic OCS Region, Vienna, VA.

         Geraci, J.R. and T.G. Smith. 1977. Conseguences of Oil Fouling
              on Marine Mammals. In: D.C. Malins (ed.) Effects of
              Petroleum on Arctic and Subarctic Marine Environments on
              Organisms. Volume II. Biological Effects. Academic Press.
              New York, NY. pp. 399-409.

         Goodwin, Lynn. 1992. Biologist, Washington Department of
              Fisheries. Personal Communication.

         Haley, D. 1978. Marine Mammals. Pacific Search Press, Seattle,
              WA.

         Haw, Frank and R.M. Buckley. 1971. Saltwater Fishing in
              Washington. Published by Stanley N. Jones, Seattle.

         Hawkes, J. 1977. Morphological Abnormalities Produced by
              Hydrocarbon Exposure. In D.A. Wolfe (Ed.) Fate and Effects
              of Petroleum Hydrocarbon in Marine Ecosystems and
              Organisms. Pergamon Press. New York, NY.

         Hickey, B.M. 1979. The California Current System - Hypothesis and
              Facts. Prog. Oceanog. 8:191-279.

         Hickey, B.M. In press. Patterns and Process of Circulation Over
              the Shelf and Slope. In Coastal Oceanography of Washington
              and Oregon, ed. M.R. Landry and B.M. Hickey (Elsevier
              Applied Science, London and New York).

         Hickey, B.M., E. Baker and N. Kachel. 1986. Suspended Particle
              Movement In and Around Quinault Submarine Canyon.   Marine
              Geology, 71, 85-105.

         Hollowed, A.B., S.A. Alderstein, R.C. Francis, M.Saunders, N.J.
              Williamson, and T.A. Dark. 1988. Status of the Pacific
              whiting Resource in 1987, and Recommendations to Management
              in 1988. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS, F/NWC-138.

         Hopkins, T.S. 1971. On the Circulation Over the Continental
              Shelf Off Washington, Ph.D. Dissertation, Washington,
              Seattle, 204pp.



                                      VIII-6









         Huelsbeck, David R. 1983. Mammals and Fish in the Subsistence
              Economy of Ozette. Doctoral Dissertation, Washington State
              University.

         Hunt. 1987. In Minerals Management Service, U.S. Department of
              Interior. 1989. Federal Offshore Statistics: 1988, OCS
              Report 89-0082.

         Hyas' Yal Kolla', 1981. Quileute Coastal Zone Management Plan.

         Illustrations Unlimited, 1991. Silver Spring, MD.

         IMO (International Maritime Organization), 1991. Ships Routing,
              Sixth Edition. IMO, London, England.

         Ito D.H., D.K. Kimura, and M.E. Wilkins. 1987. Status and Future
              Prospects for the Pacific Ocean Perch Resource in Waters Off
              Washington and Oregon As Assessed in 1986. NOAA Technical
              Memorandum, NMFS, F/NWC-113.

         Jones, L. (personal communication). Research Director, National
              Marine Mammal Laboratory, Seattle, Washington.

         Johnston, C.S. 1979. "Sources and Effects of Hydrocarbons.in
              the Marine Environment." The Marine Environment and oil
              Facilities. Inst. of Civil Engrs., London.

         Jones, M.L., S.L. Swartz, S. Leatherwood, Eds. 1984. The Gray
              Whale (Eschrichtius robustus). Academic Press, Inc.,
              Orlando, Fla. 600 pp.

         Kachel, N. and J.D. Smith. In press. Sediment Transport and
              Deposition on the Washington Continental Shelf. In Coastal
              Oceanography of Washington and Oregon, ed. M.R. Landry and
              B.M. Hickey (Elsevier Applied Science, London and New York).

         Kendrick, G.A. and B.B. Moorhead. 1987. Monitoring Recreational
              Impact on Intertidal Biotic Communities, Pacific Coast Area,
              Olympic National Park. 1986 Progress Report. Prepared for
              the Use of The National Park Service and Cooperating
              Agencies, July 1987.

         Knight, Julie. Sept. 1992. Chairwoman, Emergency Towing Working
              Group, Emergency Response System Subcommittee, Strait of
              Juan de Fuca/Northern Puget Sound Regional Marine safety
              Committee. Personal Communication.

         Kooyman, G.L., R.W. Davis, and M.A. Castellini. 1977. Thermal
              Conductance of Immersed Pinniped and Sea Otter Pelts Before
              and After Oiling with Prudhoe Bay Crude. In: D.A. Wolfe
              (ed.). Fateand Effects of Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Marine
              Ecosystems and Organisms. Perrgamon Press. New York, NY.

                                      VIII-7










                pp. 151-157.

          Kooyman, G.L. and D.P. Costa. 1979. Effects of Oiling and
                Temperature Regulation in Sea Otters.

          Kozloff, Eugene N. 1983. Seashore Life of the Northern Pacific
                Coast. University of Washington Press, Seattle. 370 pp.

          Kyte, Michael. 1992. Biologist, Washington Department of
                Wildlife. Personal Communication.

          Landry, M.R. and B.M. Hickey (Ed.1s). 1989. Coastal
                OceanograRhy of Washington and Oregon. Elsevier Science
                Publishing Company, Inc., New York, NY.

          Landry, M.R. and C.J. Lorenzen. In Press. Utilization and
                Transformation of Primary Production by Zooplankton. In
                Coastal Oceanography of Washington and Oregon, ed. M.R.
                Landry and B.M. Hickey (Elsevier Applied Science, London and
                New York).

          Lasmanis, Raymond. 1988. Washington Offshore Mineral Resources.
              .Washington Geologic Newsletter. Volume 16, No. 3,' July
                1988.


          Leigh, E., R. Paine, J. Quinn, T. Suchanek. 1987. Wave Energy and
                Intertidal Productivity. Proceedings of the National Academy
                of Sciences. Vol. 84, No. 5, pp. 1314-1318, March 1987.

          Lewin, J., C.T. Schaefer and D.F. Winter.'In Press. Surf-Zone
                Ecology and Dynamics. In Coastal Oceanography of Washington
                and Oregon, ed. M.R. Landry and B.M. Hickey (Elsevier
                Applied Science, London and New York).

          Lily, K. Jr. Sept. 1992. Meteorologist/oceanographer, C2HM Hill
                Co., Bellvue, Wa.

          Loverich, Gary. 1990. Brief Comments on the Potential Damage to
                Bottom Terrain and Benthic Plants/Animals due to Bottom
                Trawling. Research and Development, NMFS. Seattle, Wa.

          Lowe, R.    . for Oregon information on seabird populations.
                Personal Communication.

          Malin, R.O. 1984. The Northwest Coast Southern Portion Map. Sobay
                Company, Olympia, Washington.

          Massey, B.W. 1988. California least tern field study, 1988
                breeding season. Cal. Dept. Fish and Game Contract FG 7660,
                Cal State Univ., Long Beach, CA.

          McAllister, K.R., T.E. Owens, L. Leschner, and E. Cummins. 1986.

                                         VIII-8









              Distribution and Productivity of Nesting Bald Eagles in
              Washington, 1981-1985. Murrelet 67: 45-50.

         McCartan, Chris. 1992. Administrator for Clean Sound
              Cooperative, Inc. Edmonds, Wa. Personal Communication.

         McConnaughey, B.H. 1970. Introduction to Marine Biology. The
              C.V. Mosby Company, St. Louis.

         McGregor, B.A. and T.W. Offield. 1986. The Exclusive Economic
              Zone: An Exciting New Frontier. U.S. Department of the
              Interior, U.S. Geological Survey.

         Mead, W.J. and P.E. Sorensen. 1970. The Economic Cost of the
              Santa Barbara.Oil Spill. In Santa Barbara Oil Symposium,
              December 17, p. 225.

         Michael, A.D. 1977. The Effects of Petroleum Hydrocarbons on
              Marine Populations and Communities. In D. Wolfe (Ed.).
              Fate and Effects of Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Marine
              Organisms and Ecosystems. Pergamon Press. New York, N.Y.
              pp.129-237.

         Minerals Management Service,, U.S. Department of the Interior.
              1986. Proposed 5-year Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas
              Leasing Program. January 1987-December 1991: Draft
              Environmental Impact Statement. Minerals Management Service,
              Washington, D.C.

         Minerals Management Service, U.S. Department of the Interior,
              1987. 5-year Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing
              Program. Mid-1987 to Mid-1992: Final Environmental Impact
              Statement. Minerals Management Service, Washington, D.C.

         Minerals Management Service, U.S. Department of Interior. 1989.
              Fourth Information Transfer Meeting Conference Proceedings;
              offshore oil and Gas: Risks and Benefits. June 1989 Costa
              Mesa, CA MMS# 89-0069.

         mineral Management Service, U.S. Department of Interior. 1990.
              Potential Effects of OCS Oil and Gas Activities on Oregon
              and Washington Indian Tribes: Description of Overall Legal
              Environment and Legal Status of 16 Specified Tribes. OCS
              Study MMS 90-0034.

         Minerals Management Service, U.S. Department of Interior. June
              20, 1990(a). Briefing Memo on Washington OCS transmitted by
              the Chief, Offshore Resource Evaluation Division (contact:
              Paul Martin) to the Deputy Associate Director for Offshore
              Leasing. Washington, D.C.

         Minerals Management Service, U.S. Department of Interior. 1991.

                                       VIII-9









              Potential Effects of OCS Oil and Gas Exploration and
              Development on Pacific Northwest Indian Tribes: Final
              Technical Report. OCS Study MMS 91-0056.

        .Minerals Management Service, U.S. Department of Interior. 1992.
              Oregon and Washington Marine Mammal and Seabird Surveys,
              Final Report. OCS Study MMS 91-0093.

         Minerals Management Service, U.S. Department of Interior. 1993.
              Final Report (and Executive Summary): Synthesis and
              Analysis of Existing Information Regarding Environmental
              Effects of Marine Mining. OCS Study MMS 93-0005 and MMS 93-
              0006.


         Moore, George W., and Michael D. Luken. 1979. Offshore sand and
              gravel resources of the Pacific Northwest: Oregon Geology,
              v. 41, no. 9, p. 143-151. In Raymond Lasmanis, 1988.
              "Washington Offshore Mineral Resources": Washington
              Geologic Newsletter, Washington State Department of Natural
              Resources, v. 12(3).

         Motekaitis,-Chet. 1992. U.S. Coast Guard. Seattle, Washington.
              Personal Communication.

         Munsell, Elsie. Aug. 1992. Deputy Assistant Secretary of the
              Navy (Environment and Safety). Washington, D.C.      Personal
              communication.

         National Academy of Sciences. 1989. The Adequacy of Information
              for Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Decisions: Florida and
              California. Washington, D.C.

         NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service), 1989. 1988 Fisheries
              Statistics of the United States. NOAA, NMFS.

         National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 1979.
              "Georges Bank Marine Issue Paper." Office of Coastal Zone
              Management. Washington, D.C. July 27, 1979.

         National Park Service. 1976. Final Environmental Statement on the
              Proposed Master Plan, Olympic National Park, Washington.

         National Park Service. 1989. Study of Requirements for Proposed
              Kalaloch Visitor Center, Olympic National Park/Washington.

         National Planning Association and Data Services, Inc. 1988.
              Key indicators of county growth, 1970-2010 (data base].
              Washington, D.C.: National Planning Association data
              Services, Inc.

         National Research Council, 1983. Drilling Discharges in the
              Marine Environment. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.

                                      VIII-10










         National Research Council, 1985. Oil in the Sea: Inputs, Fates,
              and Effects. National Academy Press Washington, D.C.

         Natural Resources Consultants. 1986. Commercial Fishing and the
              State of Washington, A Contemporary Economic Overview of
              Local and Distant Water Commercial Fisheries. Seattle, WA.

         Natural Resources Consultants. 1988. "Commercial Fishing and
              the State of Washington: A Brief Overview of Recent and
              Future Growth in the Washington Seafood Industry." Seattle,
              Washington.

         Nittrouer, C.A. 1978. The Process of Detrital Sediments
              Accumulation in a Continental Shelf Environment: An
              Examination of the Washington Shelf. Ph.D. Diss.,
              University of Washington, Seattle, 243 pp.

         Norman, Stan. 1992. United States Coast Guard, Seattle Wa.
              Personal Communication.

         Nybakken, J.W. 1982. Marine Biology. Harper and Row, New York,
              446 pp.

         Oceanographic Institute of Washington (OIW). 1977. A Summary of
              Knowledge of the Oregon and Washington Coastal Zone and
              Offshore Areas. Oceanographic Commission of Washington,
              Seattle, Washington.

         office of Technology Assessment, Congress of the United States.
              1987. Marine minerals: Exploring our new Ocean Frontier.

         Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC). 1988. Review of 1987
              Ocean Salmon Fisheries. Report PFMC, Portland, Oregon.

         Pacific Rim Planners, Inc. 1978. Makah Coastal Zone Management
              Program, Prepared for the Makah Tribal Council. Seattle,
              Washington.

         Parks, N.B. and F.R. Shaw. 1987. Changes in Relative Abundance
              and Size Composition of Sablefish in Coastal Waters of
              Washington and Oregon, 1979-85. NOAA Technical Memorandum
              NMFS, F/NWC-124.

         Parmanter, T. and Bailey, R. 1985. The Oregon Ocean Book: an
              Introduction to the Pacific Ocean off Oregon Including its
              Physical Setting and Living Marine Resources. State of
              Oregon, Department of Land Conservation and Development.
              Salem, Oregon.

         Pascua, Maria Parker. 1992. Language Research Specialist.
              Makah Cultural and Research Center. Written correspondence
              on Makah Traditional Cultural Properties in Relation to the

                                      VIII-11









                Proposed Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary. Neah Bay,
                Washington.

           Patten, B.G. 1977. Sublethal Biological Effects of Petroleum
                Hydrocarbon Exposures: Fish. In: D.C. Malins (ed.) Effects
                of Petroleum of Arctic and Subarctic Marine Environments and
                Organisms. Academic Press. New York, NY, pp. 319-332.

           Patterson, Pat. 1992. Manager, External Affairs. Marine Spill
                Response Corporation, Northwest Region (Region V). Edmonds,
                WA. Personal Communication.

           Penn, Christian. 1992. Chairman, Quileute Indian Tribe. La
                Push, Washington. Personal Communication.

           Perry, M.J., J.P. Bolger and D.C. English. In Press. Primary
                Production in Washington Coastal Waters. In Coastal
                Oceanography of Washington and Oregon, ed. M.R. Landry and
                B.M. Hickey (Elsevier Applied science, London and New York).

           Phillips, E.L. and W.R. Donaldson. 1972. Washington Climate for
                These Counties: Clallam, Grays' Harbor, Jefferson, Pacific,
                and Watcom. Cooperative Extension Service, College of
                Agriculture, Washington State University, Pullman, WA.

           Proctor, C.M., John Garcia, David V. Galvin, Timothy Joyner, Gary
                Lewis, Lincoln Loehr, and Alison M. Massa. 1980. An
                Ecological Characterization of the Pacific Northwest Coastal
                Region. Vol. 5. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological
                Services Program. FWS/OBS-79/11 through 79/15.

           Quinault Planning Commission. 1979. Quinault Coastal Zone
                Management Plan. Taholah, Washington.

           Rau, W.W. 1973. Geology of the Washington Coast Between Point
                Grenville and the Hoh River. Bulletin No. 66, Washington
                Department of Natural Resources, Geology and Earth Resources
                Division, Olympia, Washington.

           Rau, W.W. 1980. Washington Coastal Geology Between the Hoh and
                Quillayute Rivers. Bulletin No. 72, Washington Department
                of Natural Resources, Geology and Earth Resources Division,
                Olympia, Washington.

           Reilly, S. B., D.W. Rice, A.A. Wolman. 1983. Population
                Assessment of the Gray Whale, Eschrichtius robustus, from
                California'Shore Censuses, 1967-1980. Fish. Bull. 81:267-
                281.

           Ricketts, E., J. Calvin, and J. Hedgpeth. 1985. Between Pacific
                Tides. 5th ed. Stanford University Press. 652 p.


                                          VIII-12









         Ridge, M.H. and B. Carson. 1987. Sediment Transport on the
              Washington Continental Shelf: Estimates of Dispersal Rates
              From Mount St. Helens Ash. Continental Shelf Research, Vol.
              7, No.7, pp 759-772.

         Rohmann, Steve. 1990. Strategic Assessment Branch, OMA/NOAA,
              Rockville, MD. Personal Communication.

         SAB (Strategic Assessment Branch). 1984. Inventory of public
              recreation areas and facilities. NOAA, Natl. Ocean Serv.,
              Strategic Assessment Branch, 6001 Executive BLVD., Suite
              220, Rockville, MD.

         SAB.  1986. West coast land use data for NCPDI counties (data
              base]. NOAA, NOS, SAB, 6001 Executive BLVD., Suite 220,
              Rockville, MD.

         SAB.  1988. West coast of North America coastal and ocean zones
              strategic assessment: Data atlas, marine mammal
              prepublication volume. NOAA, NOS, SAB, 6001 Executive
              BLVD., Suite 220,   Rockville, MD.

         SAB. 1990. Cmas (Computer Mapping and Analysis System) analysis
              of seabird colonies for the west coast of North America.
              NOAA, NOS, SAB, 6001 Executive BLVD., Suite 220, Rockville,
              MD.

         Schaftlein, Shari, 1992. Environmental Planner, Quileute Tribe.
              Personal Communication.

         Schink, T.J., K.A. McGraw, and K.K. Chew. 1983. Pacific coast
              clam fisheries. Washington State Sea Grant Tech. Rep. 83-1.
              Univ. of Washington, Seattle, WA. 72 pp.

         Scholl, David W., Arthur Grantz, and John G. Vedder (ed's).
              Geology and resource potential of the continental margin of
              western North America and adjacent ocean basins-Beaufort Sea
              to Baja California. Circum-Pacific Council for Energy and
              Mineral Resources, Earth Science Series, Volume 6. U.S.
              Geological Survey, Menlo Park, California.

         Schwartz, Maurice L., et al. 1991. Net Shore Drift in
              Washington State: Volume 1, Pacific Ocean and Strait of
              Juan de Fuca. Shorelands and Coastal Zone Management
              Program, Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia Wa.

         Shipman, Hugh. 1992. Geologist, Washington Department of
              Ecology. Personal Communication.

         Siehl. George. 1991. Natural Resource Issues in National Defense
              Programs. Congressional Research Service, The Library of
              Congress, 91-781 ENR.

                                      VIII-13









          Simmons Bill.. 1993. Planner, Makah Tribe. Personal
               Co;m@nicat'ion.

          Simons, Doug.     . Washington Dept. of Fisheries, Montasano, WA.
               Personal Communication.

          Smith, David D . and Robert P. Brown. 1971. Ocean Disposal of
               Barge-Delivered Liquid and Solid Wastes from U. S. Coastal
               Cities. Prepared for U.S. EPA Solid Waste Management
               Office. Contract PH 86-68-203. Publication SW-19c, P.
          viii.

          Sniderman, C.J. 1979. Pollution-Associated Diseases and
               Abnormalities of Fish and Shellfish: A Review. Fish. Bull:
               Vol. 76, No. 4. 717-748o

          Sniderman, C.J. 1982. Implications of Oil Pollution in
               Production of Disease in Marine Organisms. Phil. Trans. R.
               Soc. Lond. B 297, pp. 385-399.

          Soike, Henry E. 1985. Coastal Ports of the Pacific Northwest.
               Bulletin of the Permanent International Association of
               Navigation Congresses. No. 51, 1985.

          Sones, David. Sept. 1992. Makah Tribal Council. Personal
               Communication.


          Sowls, A.L., A.R. DeGange, J.W. Nelson, and G.S. Lester. 1980.
               Catalogue of California seabird colonies. U.S. Fish and
               Wildl. Serv., Biol. Serv. Program. FWS/OBS 80/37.

          Speich, S.M., B.L. Troutman, A.C. Geiger, P.J. Meehan-Martin, and,
               S.J. Jefferies. 1987. Evaluation of Military Flight
               Operations on Wildlife of the Copalis National Wildlife
               Refuge, 1984-1985. Washington Department of Game, Olympia,
               WA. 181pp.

          Speich, Steven M. and Terrence R. Wahl. 1989. Catalog of
               Washington Seabird Colonies. United States Fish and Wildlife
               Service, Minerals Management Service, United States
               Department of Interior. Biological Report 88(6); OCS Study
               MMS 89-0054.

          Squire, J.L. and Susan E. Smith. 1978. Anglers' Guide to the
               United States Pacific Coast, Marine Fish, Fishing Grounds,
               and Facilities. NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service.

          Steelquist, R. 1987. Washington's Coast. American Geographic
               Publishing: Helena, Montana.

          Stohler, J.J. 1989.



                                        VIII-14









          Strickland R. and D.J. Chasan. 1989. Coastal Washington, A
               Synthesis of Information. Washington State and Offshore Oil
               and Gas, Washington Sea Grant, University of Washington,
               Seattle.

          Terich, T.A. and P. McKay. 1988. Olympic National Park Coastal
               Inventory and Monitoring. Preliminary Report to National
               Park Service, Western Washington University, Department of
               Geography and Regional Planning.

          Terich, T. and T. Levenseller. 1986. The Severe Erosion of Cape
               Shoalwater, Washington. Journal of Coastal Research, 2(4),
               465-477.

          Thom, Ronald M., and LoAnn Hallum. 1990. Long-Term Changes in
               the Areal Extent of Tidal Marshes, Eel Grass Meadows and
               Kelp Forests of Puget Sound. Fisheries Institute, School of
               Fisheries, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. Final
               Report to Office of Puget Sound, EPA Region 10.

          Tillet G. 1989. WDW, Personal Communication. In Strickland,
               Richard and Daniel J. Chasan. Coastal Washington: A
               Synthesis of Information. Washington Sea Grant Program,
               University of Washington, Seattle, WA.


          U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1986. Waterborne Commerce of the
               United States. Party 4, Waterways and Harbors, Pacific
               Coast, Alaska, Hawaii. Waterborne Commerce Statistics
               Center, New Orleans.

          U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1988. Grays Harbor, Washington
               Navigation Improvement Project, Chehalis and Hoquiam Rivers.
               Draft General Design Memo.

          U.S. Coast Guard. 1985. On Scene Coordinators Report - Tank
               Vessel Puerto Rican Explosion and Oil Pollution Incident,
               San Francisco CA-31 October 1984. Marine Safety Office San
               Francisco Bay, San Francisco.

          U.S. Coast Guard. 1987. Vessel Traffic Service, Puget Sound
               Users Manual. Seattle, Washington.

          U.S. Coast Guard. Aug. 1991. Port Needs Study (Vessel Traffic
               Services Benefits) Vol. 2: Appendices, Part 1. John Volpe
               National Transportation Systems Center, Cambridge, WA.
               PB92-107713.

          U.S. Coast Guard. 1991a. National Search and Rescue Manual,
               National Search and Rescue System, Vol.1, p.5-6 thru 5-7.

          U.S. Department of Commerce. 1990. Climatic Summaries for NDBC

                                         VIII-15









                Buoys and Stations Update 1. National Oceanic and
                Atmospheric Administration, National Weather Service,
                National Data Buoy Center, NSTL, Mississippi.

          U.S.  Department of the Navy. 1984. Final Environmental Impact
                Statement on the Disposal of Decommissioned, Defueled Naval
                Submarine Reactor Plants, Vol. 1 of 3. Office of the Chief
                of Naval Operations (OPNAV-45), Department of the Navy,
                Washington, D.C.

          U.S.G.S. Land Use/Land Cover data base as processed by the
                National Coastal Pollutant Discharge Inventory Program,
                1985.

          Waaland, J.R. 1977. Common Seaweeds of the Pacific Coast.
                Pacific Search Press, Seattle, Washington. 120pp.

          Wahl, T.R. 1984. Distribution and Abundance of Seabirds Over the
                Continental Shelf Off Washington. Washington Department of
                Ecology, Olympia, WA. 92 pp.

          WDF (Washington Department of Fisheries). 1983. 1982 Fisheries
                Statistical report for the state of Washington. Compiled
                and edited by W.D. Ward and L.J. Hoines. Wash. Dept. Fish.,
                Olympia, WA. 77 pp.

          WDF.  1983. Location, Harvest, and Economic Values of Salmon,
                Baitfish, Groundfish, and Shellfish Resources, Summarized
                From the WDF-Sponsored Testimony in the Northern Tier
                Pipeline Case (Proposed Cross Sound Route) with Updated
                Figures For 1979 and 1980. Technical Report No. 76.

          WDF. 1985       Final Environmental Impact Statement for the
                Continued Harvest of Bottomfish in Puget Sound by Commercial
                Otter Trawl Gears. Olympia, Wa.

          WDF. 1987. 1986 Fisheries statistical report for the state of
                Washington. Compiled and edited by W.D. Ward and L.J.
                Hoines. Wash. Dept. Fish., Olympia, WA. 89. pp.
                WDF. 1989. Commercial catches for fish and shellfish species
                by statistical subarea and month for the State of
                Washington, 1987 and 1988. Computer printout provided by D.
                Ward, Wash. Dept. Fish., Olympia, WA.

          WDNR. 1984. Your Public Beaches: Strait of Juan de Fuca.
                Olympia, Wa.

          Washington Geologic Newsletter, 1988. The mineral industry in
                Washington, 1987. Washington State Department of Natural
                Resources, Division of Geology and Earth Resources. Vol.
                16, No. 2.



                                          VIII-16








        Washington Public Shore Guide - Marine Water. 1986. Department
             of Ecology, University of Washington Press, Seattle.

        Washington State Department of Ecology. 1986. Handbook for
             Geophysical Survey Operators, For Washington's Offshore and
             Inland Marine Waters. Shorelands and Coastal Zone Management
             Program. Olympia, Washington.

        Washington Department of Ecology, 1989. Nestucca Oil Spill:
             On-Scene Coordinator's Report, Aug. 1989, Olympia,
             Washington.

        Washington Department of Ecology, 1988. Contingency Plan for
             Response to Spills of Oil and Hazardous Substances.

        Weisenborn, A.E. and P.D. Snavely, Jr. 1968. Summary Report On
             the Geology and Mineral Resources of Flattery Rocks,
             Quillayute Needles, and Copalis National Wildlife Refuges,
             Washington. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1260-F.

        Wessen, G.D., 1989. Historic Cultural Resources of the Coastal
             Strip of the Olympic National Park, Washington. Wessen and
             Associates.

        Whidbey Island Naval Air Station. 1992. Information provided on
             use of Sealion Rock and Flight Paths followed on the
             approach to Sealion Rock through personal communication.

        Whipple, J.A., T. Yocum, D.R. Smart and M. Cohen. 1978. Effects
             of Chronic Concentrations of Petroleum Hydrocarbons on
             Gonadal Maturation in Starry Flounder. Proceedings of
             Conference on Assessment of Ecological Impacts of oil
             Spills, Keystone, Colorado, A.I.B.S. 1978.

        Wolteira, Robert. 1992. Chief, Biogeographic Characterization
             Branch, Strategic and Environmental Assessment Branch,
             Office of Ocean Resources, Conservation and Assessment,
             National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. silver
             Spring, MD.















                                      VIII-17


                                                 *U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE:1993-300-566/84099



























                                                                                                                                               I
















































                                                                                                                                               ol

















                                                                                                            I






                                                                                ----I

                                                     I
                                                     1                               1

                                                         3 6668 00000 5530