[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
Final Environmental Impact Statement & Draft Management Plan WAQUOIT BAY NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY COASTAL ZONE INFORMATION CENTER U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NATIONAL OCEANIC & ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION NAT Service Sanction Programs Division COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Executive Office Of Environmental Affairs UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND DRAFT MANAGEMENT PLAN WAQUOIT BAY NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY SEPTEMBER 1984 Prepared by: U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Ocean Service Sanctuary Programs Division 3300 Whitehaven St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 and Commonwealth of Massachusetts US Department of Commerce Executive Office of Environmental NOAA Coastal Services Center Library Affairs 100 Cambridge Street 2234 South Hobson Avenue Boston, Massachusetts 02202 Charleston, SC 29405-2413 DESIGNATION: Final Environmental Impact Statement TITLE: Proposed designation of Waquoit Bay as a National Estuarine Sanctuary and preparation of a Draft Sanctuary Management Plan ABSTRACT: The Commonwealth of Massachusetts has proposed designation of the area around Waquoit Bay in the Towns of Mashpee and Falmouth, Massachusetts, as a National Estuarine Sanctuary. The proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary, located adjacent to Nantucket Sound, would include approximately 2,250 acres of land and water (1,315 acres of open water, 316 acres of marsh, and 619 acres of adjacent uplands). Federal financial assist,:iince for acquisition and development has -been requested by the Commonwealth. These Federal funds, matched by the Commonwealth, would be used for fee simple acquisition of certain land and wetland areas of the Swift estate, and the salt marsh areas around Waquoit Bay, and Bourne, Bog, Hamblin'and Jehu Ponus, to develop and renovate research and interpretive facilities witlin the proposed Sanctuary, and to prepare a final management plan for the Sanctuary. All other land within the proposed Sanctuary is in public ownership. Approval of this financial assistance application would permit the establishment of a national estuarine sanctuary representing a subcategory of the Virginian biogeographic region. The proposed sanctuary would be used primarily for resea.rch and education purposes, especially to provide information useful for coastal zone management decisionmaking. Multiple uses (e.g., traditional activities) would be allowed to the extent that they are compatible with the proposed Sanctuary's research and educational programs and the protection of Sanctuary resources consistent with the Sanctuary's character as a natural field laboratory. Research and. monitoring . in and near the proposed Sanctuary would provide baseline information against which the impacts of human activities in similar coastal areas elsewhere in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the Virginian biogeographic region could be assessed. APPLICANT: Commonwealth of Massachusetts Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs LEAD AGENCY: -U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management CONTACT: Dr. Nancy Foster Chief, Sanctuary Programs Division National Ocean Service National Oceanic And Atmospheric Administration 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 (202) 634-4236 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page LETTER FROM GOVERNOR MICHAEL S. DUKAKIS ................................... 1 SUMMARY .............. 0....... 0.0..0.0 ......... a ........................... ii PART 1. PuRPOSE UF AND NEED FOR ACTION ................................... 3 A. National Estuarine Sanctuary Program ...0 ......................... 3 1. Federal Legislation/Authority .......................... 2. National Estuarine Sanctuary Program ................. 3. Concept of biogeographic Zones ............................... 4 4. Existing National Estuarine Sanctuaries ............ 4 b. Funding Types and Limits .......................... b 6. Federal Role in the Sanctuary after Designation ... 6 B. Proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary ................ 6 1. Background: Massachu.sett's Site Selection Process and "Pre" Acquisition................. ..... *000 ................... PART II. ALTERNATIVES (INCLUDING THE PRUPUSEU ACTION) ... ...... A. Preferred Alternative ....... ......... 0.00 ................ 1. Boundaries and Acquisition Plan .............................. 11 a. Biog@eoyraphic Classification of the Proposed Sanctuary ........ 0.0008.000000 ... *00000#000.00 ........... 11 b. General Description of the Proposed Sanctuary 11 c Land under Waterbodies: Waquoit bay; Hamblin, Sage Lot, Flat, bourne, Bog, and Caleb Ponds; Great, Little and Lower Quashnet Rivers ......................... 12 d. South Cape Beach ......................................... . 13 e. Washburn Island .......................................... 15 f. Swift Estate ............................................. 15 g. Marshes around Hamblin and Jehu Ponds .................... 1b 2. Administration, or Management Structure ...................... 32 a. Sanctuary Management Goals ............................... 32 b. Relationship with Existing Administrative Programs in Waquoit Bay and Statewide ........ ..... 32 c. Proposed Sanctuary Staff ........... 33 d. Advisory Committee ... 34 e. Existing State Land-use Regulatory Programs Affecting Waquoit Bay ...... 35 i. Wetlands Protection Act .................................. 36 ii. Wetlands Restriction Act ........................... 36 iii. Chapter 91 Waterways Licensing Program ............. 37 iv. Area of Critical Environmental Concern ............. 37 V. Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act ............. 38 Section Paye f. Existing Management Program at South Cape Beach .......... 39 g. Existing Management Program at Washburn Island ........... 39 h. Local Land-use Regulations ................................ 39 i. Shellfishing and fishing ........................... 39 ii. Harbormasters ...................................... 40 iii. Falmouth Area of Critical Environmental Concern Bylaw .............................................. 4U iv. Local Wetland Bylaws in Falmouth and Mashpee ....... 40 3. The "Physical Plant"; Buildings and other Facilities ......... 4', a. Swift Estate ............................................. 41 b. South Cape Beach .......................................... 41 c. Washburn Island .......................................... +I 4. Research Program and Policies ................................ 41 a. Goals .................................................... 41 b.. Research Program Framework ................................ 42 c. Research Policies ........................................ 42 d. Research Advisory Committee .............................. 47 e. Funding ................................................... 47 !3. Education Programs and Policies .... ...... 47 a. Goals .............. 1! .....................................: ...... 47 b. Education Program Framework .... ................... 47 c. Education Policies ...................................... 48 d. Education Advisory Committee ............................. 49 e. Funding ..................................... .... 5U 6. Objectives and Policies for Other Activities ................. so a. Hunting, Fishing and Shellfis.hing ........................ 50 b. Uff-Road/Uver-Sand Vehicles .............................. 50 c. Boating ........................................... 0 ...... 50 d. Public Access ............................................ 51 B. Other Alternatives Considered., .... ...................... b2 1. No Action/Status Quo ......................................... t)2 2.- Alternative Sites ............................................ b2 3. Alternative Boundaries ....................................... 53 a. BQundary Alternative 1: Inclusion of Town of Maspee Inholdings at South Cape Beach State Park ................ 53 b. Boundary Alternative 2: Exclusion of Little River and G@eat River .............................................. 54 c. Boundary Alternative 3: Exclusion of Saltmarsh Areas Around Hamblin and Jehu Ponds ............................ 54 d. Boundary Alternative 4: Inclusion of Uther Parts of the Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) ............ 55 e. Boundary Alternative 5: Inclusion of Eel Pond and the Childs and Seapit Rivers ................... 0.000.0 ....... 56 Section Page .4. Alternative Management Plan Options ........................... 56 a. Greater Restriction on Pulibc Access to South Cape Beach and Washburn Island ........................... 56 b. Locate the Sanctuary Headquarters Somewhere Other than the Swift Estate: (do not attempt to acquire the Swift Estate) ........................................ 57 c. Establishing Administration of the Sanctuary Within a Governmental Body Other Than the Oepartinent of Environmental Management .................................. b7 PART Ill. AFFECTED ENVIRONME[iT ............. ............................... o@ A. Natural Environment .............................................. 1. Geoloyy/Soils ................................................. b3 2. Hydrology .................................................... ob 3. Climate ...................................................... 6b 4. Biology ...................................................... bb a. Plants ..................................................... . ;6 6 b. Shellfish ................................................. @7U c. Fish ........... t7l d. Birds .......... @74 e. Mammals .......................................... 76 f. Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Species .................. 76 b. Ecosystem ........... 46-9.0 ...... to .......................... 78 B. Current Use of Site .............................................. 80 1. Hunting ....................................................... 80 2. Fishing ...................................................... 80 3. Shelifisniny ........................................... o ..... bU 4. Boating ............................ o ......................... 61 5. Aesthetics ................................................... 81 6. Housing .................................................... - 62 7. Archaeologic and Historic Interests ............. o............ 82 Part IV. ENVIRUNMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ............................... o...o.. 83 A. General Impacts .......................... 0...... * ................ 83 B. Specific Impacts ................ ...... 83 1. Natural En vironment .......................................... 83 2. Human Environment .......................................... o. 83 a. Scientific and Educational ................... o ........... 83 b. Public Access .......................... o............... 83 c. State and Federal ...................................... :: 84 Section Page C. Unavoidable Adverse Environmental or Socio-Economic Impacts ...... 84 1. Tax Revenue Loss ............................................. 84 2. Pedestrian and Traffic Impacts ............................... 84 D. Relationship between the Proposed Action on the Environment and the Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-Term Productivity.... 84 E. Irreversible or Irretrievable Commitment of Resources ........... db F. Possible Conflicts between the Proposed Action and the Objectives of Federal, State, Regional, and Local Land-use Plans, Policies and Controls for the Area Concerned .............. db PART V. LIST OF PREPARERS .............................. *....... ** ...... 87 PART VI. LIST OF AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND PERSONS RECEIVING COPIES OF THE FEIS/DMP ............................... ......... 89 PART VII. WRITTEN AND VERB AL COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE WAQUUIT BAY NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY URAFT ENV-IRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND DRAFT MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND NOWS RESPONSES ...... 95 PART VIII. APPENDICES ............................ *.oo* .................... 165 Appendix 1: National Estuarine Sanctuary Program Regulations 1974, 1977 and 1984... ............................ 166 Appendix 2: Massachusetts/Town of Mashpee - South Cape Beach Agreement .......................................... 199 Appendix 3: waquoit Bay Area of Critical Envlironmental Concern Designation Oocument ...................... 2U7 Appendix 4: Massachusetts Notice of Intent to Prepare DEIS and OMP, Published in State Environmental Monitor on May 8, 1984, and Notice of Pre-Acquisition Planning Activities, Published in State Environmental Monitor on November 23, 215 Appendix 5: Excerpts from the Washburn Island Preliminary Management Plan of April 1983 - "Conservation and Recreational ........ 221 Appendix 6: Water Quality Provisions for the Waquoit Bay Area of Critical Environmental Concern ............ 231 LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1: Location Map - New England .......................... 1 Figure 2: Location map - Eastern Massacnusetts ................ 2 Figure 3: Proposed Boundary for the waquoit Say National Estuarine Sanctuary (Preferred Alternative) ....... 18 Figure 4: Key to Figures 4A, 4B, 4C, and 40 (Enlarged Sections of Pruposed boundary fur the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary) ..... 19 Figure 4A: Enlarged Northeast Section ............... 20 Figure 48: Enlarged Southeast Section ............... 21 Figure 4C: Enlarged Northwest Section ............... 22 Figure 40: Enlarged Southwest Section ............... 23 Figure 5: South Cape Beach (Master Plan - Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management)-* ......... 24 Figure 6: Washburn Island (Preliminary Master Plan Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management) ....................................... 25 Figure 7: Swift Estate (Detail) ............................... 26 Figure 8: Waquoit Bay Area of Critical Environmental Concern ........................................... 27 Figure 9: Barrier Beaches within and adjacent to the Proposed Sanctuary Boundary ................................ 28 Figure IU: Upland and Marsh Area within the Proposed Sanctudry Boundary ................................ @9 Figure 11: Salt Marshes Uver Une-Half Acre within the Waquoit bay Area ..... $000 .......... 0......0........ 0 30 Fitjure IZ: Salt Marshes around Hamblin and Jenu Ponds .......... 31 Figure 13: Alternative Sanctuary boundary Excluding the Swift Estate, .................................... o 59 Figure 14: Alternative Sanctuary Boundary Excluding the Great and Little Rivers.. ......................... 6U Figure 15: Alternative Sanctuary boundary Excluding the Saltmarshes around Hamblin and Jehu Ponds ......... 61 LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1. norphometric Data on 'Waquoit bay and Connecting Waterbodies ...........0...... **.* ...0......0....... Table 2. Preliminary Vegetative Species List-Marsh and Upland AredS ....................................... 67 LIST OF ACRONYMS ACEC Areas'of Critical Environ mental Concern CUE Corps of Engi neers CZMA Coastal Zone Management Act DEIS Draft Environmental Impact Statement 0 EM Department of Environmental Manayement DEQE Department of Environmental Quality En(jineering DMF Division of marine Fisneries DMP Draft Management Plan EIS Environmental Impact Statement EOEA Executive Office of Environmental Affairs FEIS Final Environemntal Impact Statement FMP Final Management Plan NESP National Estuarine Sanctury Proyram NESS National Estuar-ine Sanctuary System NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration UUM Office of Coastdl Zone Management OCRM Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management (NOAA) REICEP Research and Education Information Coordination and Exchanye Prcl@ram WBNES Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE 0EPARTMENT STATE HOUSE BOSTON 02133 MICHAEL S. DUKAKIS GOVERNOR July 20, 1984 Dr. Nancy Foster, Director Sanctuary Programs Division Office of Ocean Coastal Resource Management National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration 3300 Whitehaven Street N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 RE: Proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary Oea.r Dr..Foster: I have reviewed the proposal generated by the s-taffs of our Coastal Zone Management Office and Department of Environmental Management for establishment of a National Estuarine Sanctuary in Waquoit Bay and heartiiy endorse them. As you are-aware, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts has designated Waquoit Bay and its surrounding shoreline as an Area of Critical Environmental Concern. Further, we have committed significant amounts of time, energy and dollars to acquire, manage and preserve South Cape Beach and Washburn Island. Acquisition of the Swift Estate, and renovation of its facilities into a research and education center, will add to the protection of the Bay as well as,to.develop and disseminate informatiorrfor its better management. I certainly hope that this proposa] will be approved and funded by your program and that we may work as partners to better understand and manage these vital coastal resources. Sincerely,/ L \M S. -IYUkakh, Go ernor v Commonwealth of Masgachusetts MSO/SB/gb SUMMARY The National Estuarine Sanctuary Program (NESP) was e'stablisned under the authority of Section 315 of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1461). The NESP provides for a Federal-State partnership to establish representative estuarine areas as national estuarine sanctuaries. Such areas are established to: (1) provide opportunities for lonq-term estuarine research, education and interpretation; (2) provije a 1@asis for more informed coastal management decisions; and (3) enhance public awareness and understanding of the estuarine environment. Federal funding, along wi--n matching funds provided by the State, are used to acquire, develop, and operate estuarine areas that are incorporated with the National Estuarine Sanctuary System. To ensure that the National Estuarine Sanctuary System includes sites tha-, adequately represent regional and ecological differences, the National Estuarine Sanctuary Program regulations establish a biogeographi,cal classification scheme that reflects regional differences in biogeography and an estuarine typol-ogy system to ensure the inclusion of a variety of ecosystem types. The biogeogra- phical classification scheme and estuarine typology system are presented in Appendix 1. Eleven biogeographic regions and twenty-seven (27) biogeographic sub-regions are identified in the National Estua-rine Sanctuary Program requ- lations. Based on the results of an Estuarine Research Program and meetin gs held concerning the 'National Estuarine Sanctuary Program, and after a thorough re- view of alternative sites within the coastal area of the Commonwealth, Massachusetts recommended Waquoit Bay for designation as a national estuarine sanctuary in July 1981. In September 1981 NOAA awarded, and the State matched, a "pre-acquisition" Federal financial assistance award for further evaluation of the site, collection of information necessary for management plan and draft environmental impact statement preparation, and preliminary acquisition activi- ties. Consistent with its 1981 pre-acquisition proposal, the Commonwealcn of Massachusetts has now requested,that Waquoit Bay be designated a national estuarine sanctuary and has submitted an application to NOAA for acquisition and development financial assistance. The proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary is representative of the Southern New England (Cape Cod to Sandy Hook) portion of the Virginian biogeographic.region. In addition, the Sanctuary would be located within the transitional border between- the Virginian and Acadian biogeographic regions. Specifically, Waquoit Bay is located adjacent to Nantucket Sound on the south side of Cape Cod in the towns of Falmouth and Mashpee in Barnstable County. The boundary proposed for the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary includes all of Waquoit Bay; Jehu, Hamblin, Caleb, Bourne, Bog, Sage Lot and Flat Ponds; the Little and Great Rivers; and portions of the Quashnet River. Also included in the boundary for the proposed sanctuary are adjacent uplands on Washburn Island, portions of the South Cape Beach State Park and portions of the Swift Estate at the northern end of the Bay. The boundary of the proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary largely reflects the boundary developed for the State-designated Waquoit Bay Area of Critical Environmental Concern. Although much Of the upland and marsh areas of the proposed sanctuary are now under State control as a result of the Commonwealth's recent acquisition of major parcels within the proposed Sanctuary, South Cape Beach and Washburn Island, the Commonwealth is requesting Federal funds for the purpose of: (1) acquiring in fee simple or by easement the wetlands, waters, and uplands of the Swift Estate at the head of Waquoit Bay and developing a sanctuary visitors center with support facilities for sanctuary research and education prograns; (2) acquiring a fee simple, or less than fee simple (e.g., conservation easenent, access rights for research and education purposes, etc.) property interest i@rl the marsh areas adjacent to Hamblin and Jehu Ponds and marsh areas in and around Caleb, Bog and Bourne Ponds; and (3) the construction of necessary support facilities and equipment for sanctuary research and education (e.g., dockS, boardwalks, interpretive exhibits, shelters, etc.). The current owner of the Swift Estate has indicated willingness to part with parcels comprising approxi- mately 16 acres. The Commonwealth has initiated an appraisal of the property and negotiations with the owners. The marshes around Hamblim -and Jehu Ponds are presently protected from development by the Wetlands Protection Act and, for the marshes located in the Town of Falmouth, the Wetlands Restriction Act. Because the Commonwealth has, or soon will have, adequate authority to ensure major activities may not be undertaken in any of the salt marsh areas that would have an adverse impact on the estuarine resources of the sanctuary, it is not anticipated that the Commonwealth would consider exercising its power of eminent domain in these marsh areas. Other than the Swift Estate and the marsh areas surroundirig Hamblin and Jehu Ponds, all other land and water arec* within the proposed boundaries of the Sanctuary are in public ownership. In addition to their protection, guaranteed access to the Hamblin and Jehu Pond ma*rshes, as well as Caleb, Bog and Bourne Ponds; for research or educational purposes is important to Sanctuary operation. The fragile nature of the marshes precludes wide public access, but assured limited access is important for both research and interpretive activities. As a result, following Federal approval of the Federal financial assistance award for acquisition and development, it is the intention of the Commonwealth to approach owners to ascertain their interest in donation, sale, or voluntary restriction of or easements over these parcels. Avenues of tax abatement or exemption will be investigated to make such actions as attractive as possible. Every effort wil.1 be make to pursue these actions only with willing participants. Under. the prefePred alternative, administration of the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctury will be under the direction of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management (OEM). As the Commonwealth's principal holder of land for environmental and conservation purposes, DEM is the best-equipped State agency to manage any new properties acquired as part of the sanctuary desig- nation. In addition, OEM's existing interpretive program will provide the foundation for the planned educational activities to be sponsored by the Sanctuary. A Sanctuary Manager will be the principal administrator of the Sanctuary and will be responsible for ensuring that the policies contained in the Sanctuary Management Plan are followed. This individual will be employed and supervised by the Department of Environmental Management. A portion of the Swift Estate will be acquired by the Commonwealth and developed as a headquarters for Sanctuary operations and for Sanctuary research and education activities. Primary Sanctuary management goals are: to establish and manage the area within iii the boundaries of the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary as a natural field laboratory; to protect the natural resources of the wetlands, transitional areas, and adjacent uplands; to conduct and facilitate both short and long- term estuarine research, education, and interpretation; to gather and distri- bute information on estuarine ecosystems that is essential to sound decisions regarding the management of coastal resources; and to provide for controlled multiple use of the Sanctuary to allow for the' continuation of existing low intensity recreational uses that are presently permitted, including fish and wildlife recreation (e.g. hunting, fishing, wildlife observation) and boating, which are compatible with the sanctuary's character as a natu'ral field labora- tory. Research and education programs will be developed for the sanctuary. The basic elements of these programs, and policies for their finplerrentatCion, are presented in this draft EIS. Alternatives to the proposed action include: no action; alternative sites; alternative boundaries for the Waquoit Bay site; and alternative management plan options. The no action alternative would preserve the status quo: '1o designation of a national estuarine sanctuary would be made; a natural field laboratory would not be established; and both short and long-term estuarine research, education and interpretation would not be conducted or facilitated. Several alternative sites in the coastal. area of Massachusetts were examined and rejected. Waquoit Bay was selected as the optimum site as a candidate- for national estuarine sanctuary designation. Several areas in and around Waquoit Bay were considered for inclusion within the boundaries of the sanctiary. Various alternative boundaries were examined that included or excluded. the following areas: the Town of Mashpee in-holdings at South Cape Beach State Park, the Little and Great Rivers, the saltmarsh areas around Hamblin and Jehu Ponds, ACEC areas beyond the immediate Waquoit' Bay-area, and the Eel Pond and Childs/Seapit Rivers'area. Of these areas only the Little and Great Rivers and the marshes around Hamblin and Jehu Ponds were identified, in addition to Waquoit Bay itself, as key land and water areas the protection of which is necessary for sanctuary designation. As a result, these areas are included in the preferred boundary alternative for the Sanctuary. Management alternatives examined and rejected included: greater restriction on public access to South Cape Beach and Washburn Island, location of fhe Sanctuary headquarters somewhere other than the Swift Estate; and administration of the Sanctuary by Stat,e agency other than the Department of Environmental Management. The principal resources affected by the proposed attion include, in general, 2,250 acres of marsh, open water, and uplands. The sanctuary site is an estuarine embayment, which connects a series of tidal ponds, and represents the last remaining large relatively unaltered estuary on the south shore of Cape CoC Waquoit Bay is separated from Nantucket Sound by two barrier beaches. This area supports a wide variety of terrestrial and estuarine biota that is primarily temperate with some boreal representatives. The area is characterized by a high species di.versity due to the intermingling of cold water species from the Gulf of Maine and warm 'water species from the mid-Atlantic. Plant and animal species of special interest have been noted in the area, including sandplain gerardia, bushy rockrose, butterfly weed, little ladies tresses, shortnose sturgeon (historical occurrence), least tern, piping plover, and the northern diamondback terrapin. Waquoit Bay and its adjoining waters support iv an active local fishery, se rve as a primary nursery area, and, as a direct result of their high aesthetic value, are popular recreational boating areas. The upland areas of South Cape Beach and Washburn Island also support a number of traditional hunting activities. Species generally hunted in these area-, include pheasants, rabbits,.squirrels, quail, and migratory waterfowl. The environmental effects of the proposed action would be beneficial in terms of research, education, traditional uses, and natural resource protection benefits. There would be no adverse impacts to residents because the areas proposed to be included in the Sanctuary are not inhabited. The adverse impacts of the proposed action would be loss of tax revenues and, in the case of the Swift Estate, loss of potentially developable property - However, the approximately S2,500-4,000 paid in local taxes each year would be offset by additional income from local services required by researchers, educational groups, etc., attracted to the site. No irreversible or irretrievable commitments of resources would occur with the preferred alternative other than those resources committed to facilities construction (e.g., Swift Estate renovations, simple boat dock, interpre'"v-'@ trail with boardwalk, etc.) in support of the management plan goals, objectives, and policies. The overall and major impacts of designation of the proposed Waquoit'.Baiy National Estuarine Sanctuary are expected to be positive through better scien- tific and public u.nderstanding of the estuary and its resources. The proposed national estuarine sanctuary does not. conflict with existing commercial or recreational uses of Waquoit Say. Without national estuarine sanctuary desig- nation, Waquoit Bay would not be an area dedicated specifically and permanently to research and education. However, with sanctuary designation, present uses of the site, including hunting and other recreational uses where currently allowed, would continue. Furthermore, designation of the Sanctuary, acquisition of the Swift Estate and development of a Sanctuary headquarters from which both research and education programs can be administered, would provide improved public access to the Bay for educational and interpretive purposes. fLLu re 1 Location Map New England Vermont Maine New Harnpshire massachus ts Boston C necticut RA .................. . .. Waquoit Bay :: .. . ... . ... . ........ ............ I.Mg Island Regional Location MOP _2 Figure Location Map Eas tern Massacnuset:s N 4t, _j W4 A r CAM -Vwk WAQUOIT SAY 2 EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PART I: PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION A. National Estuarine Sanctuary Program I Federal Legi slation/Authority In response to intense pressures on the coastal resources of the United States, Congress enacted the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) , which was 1980. 7 signed into law on October 27, 1972, and amended in 1976 and I I h, e C ZM A authorized Federal grants-in-aid and assistance programs to be adininistered by the Secretary of Commprce, who in turn has delegated this responsic)ility to the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Ocean Servi@_e, in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The CZMA affirms a national interest in the. effective protection ani development of the Nation's coastal zone, and provides financial and technical assistance to coastal Sta tes (including those bordering on the Atlantic ancl Pacific Oceans, the Gulf of Mexico, and the Great Lakes) and U.S. territories to develop . and implement State coastal zone management programs. The Act established a variety of grant-in-aid programs to such States for p urposes Of: developing coastal zone management programs (Sec. 305); implement'ing and administering coasta 1 management programs that receive Federal approval (Sec. 306)-; avoiding or minimizing adverse environmental , social, and economic impacts resulting from coastal energy activities (Sec. 309); coordinating, studying, planning, and implementing interstate coastal management activities and programs (Sec. 309); conducting research, study, and training programs to provide scientific and technical support to State. coastal zone management programs (Sec. 310); and acquiring land for estuarine sanctuaries and island preservation (Sec. 315).. 2. National Estuarine Sanctuary Program Section 315 of the CZMA established the National Estuarine Sanctuary Program to provide matching Federal financial assistance to States to acquire, develop, and operate estuarine areas as natural field laboratories, so that researchers and students may be provided the opportunity to examine the ecological relationships within the areas over time. This information will then be used to develop a basis for improved decision-making and resource management strategies. Section 315 provides a maximum of $3 million in Federal funds, to be matched by an equivalent amount from the State, to acquire and manage lands for each sanctuary. The regulations for implementation of the Estuarine Sanctuary Program are found at 15 CFR Part 921 (Appendix 1). 3 The mission of the National Estuarine Sanctuary Program is the establish- ment and management, through Federal-state cooperation, of a national system of estuarine sanctuaries representative of the various regions and estuarine types in the 'United States in order to provide opportunities for long-term research, education, and interpretation. The goals of the Program for carrying out this mission are: (1) Enhance resource protection by implementing a long-term managernent plan tailored to the site's specific resources; (2) Provide opportunities for long-term research and educational programs in estuarine areas to develop information for improve(I coastal decisionmaking; (3) Enhance public awareness and understanding of the estuarine environment through resource interpretive programs; and (4) Promote Federal-state cooperative efforts in managing estuarine areas. While the primary purposes of national estuarine sanctuaries are researcii and education, multiple use of estuarine sanctuaries by the general puolic is encouraged to. the extent that such usage is compatible with the sanctuary's character as a natural field laboratory. Such uses generally include low- intensity recreation,- such as boating, fishing, shellfishing, hunting, and wildlife photography or observation. Traditiona '1 activities such as commercial fishing and shellfishing may also be compatible uses. 3. Concept of Biogeographic Zones To ensure that the National Estuarine Sanctuary System includes sites that adequately represent regional and ecological differences, the National Estuarine Sanctuary Program regulations establish a biogeographical classi- fication scheme that reflects regional differences in biogeography and an estuarine typology system to ensure the inclusion of a variety of ecosyste'n types. The biogeographical classification scheme and estuarine typology syszef-n are presented in Appendix 1. Eleven biogeographic regions and twenty-seven (27) biogeographic sub-regions are identified in the National Estuarine Sanctuary Program regulations. The proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary is representative of the Southern New England (Cape Cod to Sandy Hook) portion of the Virginian biogeographic region. 4. Existing National Estuarine Sanctuaries Since 1974, the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management has awarded grants to establish fifteen national estuarine sanctuaries. These include: Sanctuary Biogeographic Classification South Slough Columbian Coos Bay, Oregon Sanctuary Biogeographic Classification Sapelo Island Columbian McIntosh County, Georgia Waimanu Valley insular Island of Hawaii, Hawaii Rookery Bay West Indian Col I i e r County, Fl ori da Old Woman Creek Great Lakes Erie County, Ohio Apalachicola River/Bay Louisian.ian Franklin County, Florida Elkhorn Slough Californian Monterey County, California Padilla Bay Columbia n Skagit County, Washington Narragansett Bay Virginian Newport County, Rhode Island Ches*apeake Bay (2 components) Virginian Anne Arundel and Somerset Counties, Maryland Jobos Bay West Indian Puerto Rico Tijuana River Californian San Diego County, California Hudson River (4 components) Virginian Hudson River, New York Wells Acadian York County, Maine North Carolina (4 components) Virginian/Carolinian 5. Funding Types and Limits The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) may provide financial assistance, not to exceed 50 percent of all actual costs to coastal states, to assist in the designation and operation of national estuarine sanctuaries. Three types of awards are available under the National Estuarine Sanctuary Program. The preacquisition award is for site selection and draft management plan preparation. The total Federal share of the preacquisition award fnay not exceed $50,000, of which up to $10,000 may be used for site sel ect i on. The acquisition and development award is intended primarily for land acquisition and construction purposes. The operation and management award provides funds to assist in implementing the research, educational, and adnini- strative programs detailed in the sanctuary management plan. Federal funds of up to S250,000, to be matched by the state, are available for the operation an(I management of the national estuarine sanctuary; with no more than S50,000 in Federal funds per annual award. At the conclusion of Federal financial assis- tance for operation and management, funding for the long-term operation of "he sanctuary becomes the responsibility of the state. To stimulate high quality research within designated national estuarine sanctuaries, NOAA may also provide funds for research on a competitive basis to sanctuaries having an approved final management plan. The maximum total Federal funding per sanctuary is S3,000,000 for the preacquisition, acquisition and development, and operation and manage- ment awards@. Federal funding provided by NOAA on a competitive basis for research in national estuarine sanctuaries is excluded from this total. 6. Federal Role in the Sanctuary After Designation State performance during the term of the operation and management award wi I l be evaluated annually by NOAA; and periodically in accordance with the provisions of Section 312 of the CZMA. Such an evaluation will be conducted to determine the state's compliance with the conditions of the award and overall progress in implementing the management plan. After Federal funding available to a state for sanctuary purposeshas been exhausted, NOAA will begin a biennial review of the state's performance in managing the national estuarine sanctuary to ensure that the purposes for which the sanctuary was designated are still being main- tained. Through such programmatic evaluations NOAA determines whether such a national estuarine sanctuary is meeting the mandate of section 315 of the Act, the national program goals and the policies established in the management plan. B. Proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary 1. Background - Massachusetts' Site Selection Process and "Pre"-Acquisition Massachusetts first established a program to study systematically its estuaries in 1963. This research effort was initiated as a result of a report of the Marine Fisheries Advisory Commission to the Governor of the Commonwealth in December 1960. The Commission stated: "The Commonwealth has only limited knowledge as to the physical. conditions and productivity of its many harbors, bays, river mouths and other estu- aries. As these serve as key areas of productivity for many species of marine organisms important to the commercial and recreation (sport fishing) industries, it would appear of paramount importance to initiate this basic survey as rapidly as possible. "An additional factor lending further emphasis to the need for detailed studies is the rapid rate of change evident along much of the Massachusetts coastline involving the dredging of channels, construction of hurricane protection barriers, and filling of tidal marshland for commercial purposes. The Commission recognizes the urgent necessity of prompt investigation before such changes become irrevocable." G Since 1963, 17 major coastal bays and estuaries have been studied. These areas are representative of the entire Massachusetts coast both with respect to the physical and biological environment and to the extent of environmental impacts and alterations. A full explanation and discussion of this program is presented in the 1970 Transactions of the Thirty-Fifth North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference. A scientific analysis of the results of the Massachusetts Estiarine Research Program was published in 1975. Using data from the Research Program, this study calculated cer 'tain indices to compare species abundance and diver- sity with environmental quality of a specific estuary. Massachusetts has long had an interest in the National Estuarine Sanctuary Program. In 1974, the Massachusetts Coastal Zone Task Force to discuss the possibility of applying for funds to establish a nationa Ii estuarine sanctuary in the Commonwealth. By early 1975, a preliminary appli- cation for the North-South River estuary had been completed. However, this application was not submitted for consideration. A meeting @wa,s held on August 15, 1978, with officials of the then Federal Office of Coastal Zone Management (currently the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Manayement) and several members of the Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Office staff. At this meeting the status of the National Estuarine Sanctuary Program and its potential application in Massachusetts were discussed. Officials at this meeting also considered possible can,didates.for sanctuary status as well as certain management issues such as use restrictions and research needs. After the meeting, a series of informal discussions and telephone conversations were conducted by Massachusetts CZM staff with" other State officials, particularly within the Department of Environmental Management. The major estuarine areas considered by the Commonwealth as candidates for national estuarine sanctuary status included: Parker River/Essex Bay, North/ South River, Weymouth Back River, Ellisville Harbor, Sandy Neck, and Waquoit Bay. The North/South River and Waquoit Bay were selected from among this group as the sites most likely to meet the requirements of the Federal National Estuarine Sanctuary Program and benefit from the research and education programs and the additional protection that national estuarine sanctuary designation would provide. In 1979 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts designated Waquoit Bay as an Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 21(A) Section (2)(7). This ACEC designation followed an extensive public participation process during which major management issues for the area were addressed; and during Which interest in national estuarine sanctuary status was expressed. The North/South River site, after additional evaluation and discussions with Federal officials, was determined to be not as compatible with the National Estuarine Sanctuary Program as the Waquoit Bay area. Based on the results of the Commonwealth's Estuarine Research Program and the meetin'gs held concerning the National Estuarine Sanctuary Program, and after a thorough review of alternative sites within the coastal area of the Commonwealth, Massachusetts recommended Waquoit Bay for designation as a national estuarine sanctuary in July 1981. At this same time the Secretary of the Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs applied for 7. "preacquisition" Federal f i nanci al assistance. The area proposed in July 1981 by the Commonwealth included the land and water areas commonly known as Waquoit Bay, Washburn Island, South Cape Beach, Sage Lot Pond, Flat Pond Hamblin Pond, Jehu Pond, and the major marshes immediately adjacent to thes; areas. In September 1981 NOAA awarded, and the State matched, a "pre-acquisi- tion" Federal financial assistance award for further evaluation of the site, the collection of information necessary for management plan and draft environ- mental impact statement preparation, and preliminary acquisition activities. During the period of this preacquisition phase, a more detailed series of discussions were conducted among MCZM staff, DEM planners and tiie Commi ssi one r. These discussions, and the subsequent acquisitions below, led the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to apply for Federal funcs "jr acquisition and development of Waquoit Bay as a national.estuarine sanctuary. In December 1982, South Cape Beach was acquired by the Commonwealtri. South Cape 'Beach is a barrier beach/salt pond/ marsh/ upland complex loc3tecl immediately to the east of the inlet to Waquoit Bay from Nantucket Souno. South Cape Beach, located entirely within the Town of Mashpee, was acquired with the Town of Mashpee's cooperation and is now being operated 3s a state park for low-intensity recreation. In June 1983, the Commonwealth acquired an additional part of the proposed Sanctuary, Washburn Island. Washburn Island, located in the Town of Falmouth west of the inlet to Waquoit Bay, essentially forms the western border of Waquoit Bay. It is a barrier island composed of upland, marsh, a small salt pond, and a dune/beach system at the southern end bordering on Nantucket Sound * Upon acquisition by. the Commonwealth, Washburn Island was made part of the South Cape Beach State Park and will be managed for limited use, low-intensity recreation. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts has now submitted an application to NOAA to acquire and develop a national estuarine sanctuary in an area essen- tially consistent with its 1981 pre-acquisition proposal. Although much of the upland and marsh areas of the proposed Sanctuary are now under State control as a result of the Commonwealth's acquisition of South Cape Beach and Washburn Island, the Commonwealth is requesting Federal funds for the purpose of: (1) acquiring the wetlands, waters, and uplands of the Swift estate at the head of Waquoit Bay and developing a sanctuary visitors' center with support facilities for the sanctuary research and education programs; (2) acquiring a fee simple, or less -than fee simple (e.g., conservation easement, access rights for research and education purposes, etc.) property interest in the marsh areas adjacent to Hamblin and Jeh'u Ponds and marsh areas in and around Caleb, Bog and Bourne Ponds; and (3) the construction of necessary support facilities, and equipment for sanctuary research and edu- cation (e.g., docks, boardwalks, interpretive exhibits, shelters, etc.). Other than the Swift estate and the marsh areas surrounding Hamblin, Jehu, Caleb, Bog and Bourne Ponds, all other land and water areas within the proposed boundaries of the Sanctuary are in public ownership. The Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary, if established, would represent a major subcategory within the northern one-third of the Virginian biogeographic region. In addition, the Sanctuary would be located within the transitional border between the Virginian and Acadian biogeographic reyions. This proposed Sanctuary would contain approximately 2,250 acres of riarsh, open water, and uplands. The sanctuary site is an estu'arine embayment, which connects a series of tidal ponds, and represents the last remaining large unaltered estuary on the south shore of Cape Cod. The biota is primarily temperate with some boreal representatives. The area is characterized by a high species diversity due to the intermingling of cold water species froin the Gulf of Maine and warm water species from the mid-Atlantic. The proposed Sanctury would be used primarily for research and education purposes, especially to provide information useful for coastal zone management decisionnia.King. Multiple and traditional uses would be allowed to the extent that t,@ey are compatible with the proposed sanctuary's research and educational programs. NOAA and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts are in the process of devel.)pinq a memorandum of understanding (MOU). This MOU will emphasize the significance of establishing a national estuarine sanctuary and express the long-term coorlit- ment of the Commonwealth to effective management of the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary in accordance with agreed upon program goals after Federal financial assistance ends. PART 11. ALTERNATIVES (INCLUDING THE PRO POSED ACTION) The action under consideration by NOAA is a proposal from the Conmonwealt,@ of Massachusetts to establish a Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary consisting of the land and water areas encompassed by the Waquoit Bay estudrine system in Barnstable County (Cape -Cod), Massachusetts. This part considers five alternatives. The first alternative is the pre- ferred alternative. The No Action alternative proposes that Waquoit Bay not be designated as a national estuarine sanctuary. The third alternative presents other sites considered by the Commonwealth as candidates for national estuarine sanctuary designation. Five alternatives boundaries are discussed in the fo,.,!-th major alternati,ve. The fifth major alternative presents different management options. Although this project is called the Waq'uoit Bay National Estuarine "Sanctuary", it will be managed and operated under a policy of multiple use, particularly with respect to the traditional uses of the areas. The primary objective of the proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary is to pro- vide protection from developmental disturbances so the area may be used for long-term research and educational purposes. Although primary emphasis will be on the use of the Sanctuary for estuarine studies, other traditional water use activities may be compatible with the Sanctuary's character as a natural field labor-atory. Such compatible uses are reasonable levels of hunting, fishing, trapping, boating and wildlife observation.' These uses will continue subject to existing State laws. A.' Preferred Alternative 1. Boundaries and Acquisition Plan a. Biographic Classification of the Proposed Sanctuary Wa@uoit Bay is within the Virginian province of the National Estuarine Sanctuary biogeographic classification scheme set forth in the National Estuarine Sanctuary Program Regulations; 15 CFR Part 921, (Appendix 1). However, because Cape Cod is the.dividing line between the Virginian and Acadian biographic regions, Waquoit Bay represents an area of biogeographical transi- tion. High species diversity characterizes the area due to the intermingling of cold water species from the Gulf of Maine and warm water species from the mid-Atlantic. The Virginian classification includes estuaries found along the Middle Atlantic coast from Cape Cod to Cape Hatteras. These estuaries are characterized by lowland streams, coastal marshes and muddy or sandy bottoms. The biota is predominantly temperate, but there are regular boreal represent- atives. b. General Description of Proposed Sanctuary Waquoit Bay is located in the towns of Falmouth and Mashpee in Barnstable County (Cape Cod), Massachusetts. The Bay is adjacent to Nantucket Sound on the south side of Cape Cod. The boundary proposed for the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary includes all of Waquoit Bay; Jehu, Hamblin, Bourne, Bog, Caleb, Sage Lot and' Flat Ponds; the Great and Little Rivers; and portions of Quashnet River. Al so included in the boundary for the proposed Sanctuary are the adjacent uplanas on Washburn Island, South Cape Beach State Park (excluding approximately 30 acres of Town of Mashpee inholdings), and portions of the Swift Estate at the northern end of the Say. Figure 3 shows the proposed boundary. This boundary includes the key land and water areas of the Waquoit Bay estuary. The boundary of the proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary largely reflects the boundary developed for the State designdted 'Aaquoit @ay Area of Critical Environmental Concern (see Figure 3 and Figure 8). Th i s latter designation followed an extensive public participation process duriny which major management issues (e.g., shellfishing, recreational boating, and commercial interests) were addressed. There are several large segments of publicly-owned land within t@e proposed Sanctuary. These include all of Washburn Island and the holdings )f the Massachuetts Department of Environmental Management on South Cape Beach. Further, all subtidal lands are publ-ic in Massachusetts and belong to thi@ Commonwealth. All of the land below the mean low tide line within the proposed boundaries would be included within the Sanctuary. C. Land under Waterbodies: Waquoit Bay; Hamblin, Jehu, Sage _T_ - Lot, Flat, ourne, Bog, and Caleb Ponds; Great, Liti7eand q' Lower Quashnet ivers Subtidal lands proposed for inclusion in the Sanctuary are those under Waquoit Bay itself; Hamblin, Jehu, Sage Lot, Flat, Bourne, Bog and Caleb Ponds; the Great and Little Rivers; and a portion of the lower Quashnet River. The table below provides morphometric data on these waterbodies. As the table indicates, there are extensive salt marsh areas around Hamblin and Jehu Ponds. These are discussed in further detail below. Current management and regulation of subtidal areas is principally under the Massachusetts Wetlands Proteczion Act and Chapter 91, the Waterways Licensing Process. (See pages3S-37 Table 1: MORPHOMETRIC DATA ON WAQUOIT BAY AND CONNECTING WATERBODIES Max. Max. Max. Mean Water Marsh Upla-nd Shoreline Sub-System Length Width Depth Depth Area Area Area Length (mi.) (mi.) Ift. (ft.) (acres) (acres) (acres) (mi.) Waquoit Bay 2.6 1.1 9.0 2.7 942 6 7.5 Quashnet River 1.1 0.1 7.6 Unk 42 6 2.8 Hamblin Pond/ 1.7 0.4 5.0 2.0 141 217 5.3 Little River Jehu Pond/ 2.3 0.3 7.6 Unk 172 95 7.6 Great River 12 Washburn 32.5 297.5 5.9 Isl-and South Cape 88.5 311.5 2.5 Beach Swift Estate (proposed 2 10 .2 for acquisition) Hamblin/Jehu 193 Pond Marshes Caleb Pond .12 .11 Unk Unk 5.7 Bog Pond .08' .08 Unk Unk 2.75 Bourne Pond .18 .16 Unk Unk 10.6 (Modified from Marine Resources of Waquoi t Bay, Curley, et. a I . , Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, 1971) d. South Cape Beach South Cape Beach, 432 acres of barrier beach, salt ponds, salt marsh and uplands, was acquired by the Commonwealth in December of 1982. The property, located entirely in Mashpee, is being operated as a State park by the Department of Environmental Management's Forest and Parks Division. A managment plan is being developed based on an agreement between the Commonwealth and the Town of Mashpee which authorized taking of the land by eminent domain. That agree- ment of June 29, 1981 (see Appendix 2) stipulates that development and use of the park shall be limited to "bathing, sunning, hiking, fishing, nature inter- pretation, non-motorized biking, and associated passive enjoyment through recreational use consistent with the fragile ecology of the site...." Overnight camping is expressly forbidden. Off-road vehicles may be used only by the elderly or disabled and are limited in number and routes. Permits may be issued for a maximum of six such vehicles during any period and are intended only to provide access for fishing. Public parking is limited to.a total of 400 vehicles in "several landscaped sites". It is further required that "all park facilities will be designed, sited and maintained so that they do not harm the natural and scenic qualities of the area..." and that the Commonwealth "will manage the fragile wetland, dune and upland areas of the site to prevent erosion and to preserve critical habitat and the area's natural scenic qualities." Clearly the agreement intends a limit to the recreational usage of South- Cape Beach, and requires that usage to be of @a passive nature. Designation of the proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary would not alter this agreement. The agreement establishes a South Cape Beach State Park Advisory Committee comprised of the following: Voting Members: 8 representatives appointed by the Mashpee Board of Selectmen I representative each to be appointed by the Select-men of Fali7,outh, Barnstable, and Sandwich Ex-officio Members 1 representative of the Massachusetts Coastal Zone Mianagement Office I representative of the Massachusetts Department of Fisheries, and Recreational Vehicles The State Representative of the Third Barnstable Representative District The State Senator from the Cape and Islands Senatorial District The Committee meets monthly to review and advise on matters of park management and operations, rules and regulations, and design and plan review. A Park Superintendent and staff have been appointed for South Cape Beach and they work closely with the South Cape Beach State Park Advisory Committee. The proposal for incorporation of South Cape Beach 'State 'Park into a national estuarine sanctuary makes no suggestion of change in this existing structure. It is intended that the Sanctuary Manager would consult with both the Park Superintendent and the Advisory Committee on any contemplated Sanctuary acti- vities at South-Cape Beach. Included within the present bounds of South Cape Beach State Park is an area that eventually will be deeded to the Town of Mashpee for use. as a town recreational beach. This parcel is @approximately 30 acres in size and has roughly 1700 feet of frontage on Nantucket Sound. There is also a 10 acre parcel bordering on Waquoit Bay and the Great River that will be deeded to Mashpee for the possible siting of a municipal boat launching facility. It is proposed that these areas not be included in the Sanctuary initially. At some point subsequent to desigri-a-tion, the Sanctuary Manager will consult with the Board of Selectmen of the Town of Mashpee, or their Town Meeting, to ascertain whether or not it is appropriate'to have these parcels incorporated into the Sanctuary. Within the 400+ acres of South Cape Beach State Park are two salt ponds (Sage Lot and Flat Ponds), 88.5 acres of salt marsh and 104 acres of barrier beach. These ponds provide habitat for Northern Diamondback terrapins, Piping Plovers, and Least Terns. The barrier beach has been designated by the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone- Management for regulation under the Wetlands Protection Act and under a Massachusetts Executive Order (#181), which prohibits use of State funds for growth and development of such barriers The barrier has also been designated under regulations of the Federal Coasta Barrier Resources Act which limit Federal expenditures encouraging growth on undeveloped barriers. 14 e. Washburn Island Washburn Island, located in the Town of Falmouth, makes up the western border of Waquoit- Bay. Comprised of some 330 acres, tnis barrier island includes a sandy barrier beach and dune system at the southern end bordering on Nantucket Sound. This barrier is a western extension of that on South Cape Beach. North from the barrier extend acres of oak and pine forests, salt marshes and salt ponds. This parcel was acquired by the Commonwealth in June 1983 and has become part of the Sta'te's forest and park system. It is presently managed in conjunction with South Cape Beach State Park by kth@? Department of Environmental Management through the Forests and Parks Division. A Preliminary Management Plan has been developed by the Depart:ne.'it of LE'nviro',- mental Management which recommends that the island be managed for limited use, primarily passive recreation such as hiking, nature study, etc. Access to the island, is by boat only, and there are no plans to construct any sort of vehicle connector. Wooden docks are proposed to accommodate visitors and Staff. Trails and interpretive displays are being planned and developed. Consideration is being given to tent camping on the eastern side of the island. In the past, despite being private property, there has been a tradition of campers on the island. This uncontrolled activity has led to some defiling of parts of the site. There has also been a serious concern for fire. It is felt that, under strict control and in specifically delineated areas, limited camping qould exist without these adverse impacts in the future; however, this will rejuire extensive review and should. currently be considered an unresolved issue. Comfort stations are proposed, as are strategically located boardwalks and scenic overlooks.. Unsupervised swimming would. be allowed on the southern beach facing Nantucket Sound, and fishing can take place at the mouth of the Bay and at the western end of the barrier at the mouth of Eel River. Least terns have. been observed nesting on the barrier beach on Washburn Island. To protect this significant resource, portions of -the beach may be closed during portions of the mid-summer nesting season. Appropriate boardwalk design and location will facilitate this protective management measure. The barrier beach at the southern end of Washburn Island has been identi- fied by the Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Inventory for regulation under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act and Massachusetts Executive Order 181, which limit State support for growth and development on such resource areas. The entire island has been designated as an undeveloped barrier island under the regulations of the Federal Coastal Barrier Resources Act. f. The Swift-E state Located in Falmouth on a bluff thirty feet above the water at the northern end of Waquoit Bay is the so-called Swift Estate (Figure 7). The total property consists of some 23 acres; the current owner has indicated willingness to part with parcels comprising approximately 16 acres. These parcels include a 100- year old, three story, 16-room Victorian mansion and a large carriage house. The buildings have not been occupied for many years and have been visited by vandals and small animals. They appear structually sound, however, and, with considerable renovation, are proposed as the central facility for the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary. The parcel which includes the buildings is comprised of approximately seven acres. The second parcel lies near sea level and i ncl udes a smal I barri er beach f ronti ng a one-acre sal t pond and just over two acees of salt marsh. A small Amount of uplands forms the border for this area. Access to the Swift property is from Route 28 to the north and the waters of Waquoit Say to the south. The initial application for funding will be to acquire this property and to renovate the structures. An investigation will be made into naming the site to the List of Historic Buildings and applying for supplemental funding for historic preservation. The intent will be to restore the exterior to its former splendor as a Victorian mansion while turning the interior into a multiple use facility including a Sanctuary office, library, meeting rooms, quarters for the Sanctuary Manager, dormitories for researchers, etc. Tn e carriage house would be used for equipment storage, workshops and, as fun,,Js permit, basic wet and dry laboratory facilities. The Commonwealth has initiated an appraisal of the property and negotiations with the owner. g. Marshes aroun@d Hamblin and Jehu Ponds Surrounding these two ponds in both Falmouth and Mashpee are sizeable salt marsh areas (see Figure 12 for marsh location and sizes). Virtually all of these marshes are in private ownership. However, the Commonwealth has adequate authority to ensure major activities may not be undertaken in any of the sal marsh areas that would have a significant adverse impact on the estuarin& resources of the Sanctuary. As a result, it is not anticipated that the Commonwealth would consider exercising its power of eminant domain in these areas. The marshes presently are protected from development by the Wetlands Protection Act as described on pages 3S-34. The regulations to this Act are administered locally by Conservation Commissions and prohibit activities that would destroy the marsh or impair its productivity. The Wetlands Restriction Act has been implemented to protect the marshes in the Town of Falmouth only The Act establishes a list of activities that which may or may not be allowe@ in the marsh, much in the nature of a zoning overlay. This program has not yet been applied to the marshes in the Town of Mashpee but. the area is a priority for wetland restriction in the near future. In addition to their protection, guaranteed access to these marshes for research or educational purposes is considered important to Sanctuary operation. The fragile nature of the marshes precludes wide public access, but assured limited access is important for both research and interpretative activities. As a result, following Federal approval of the proposed Federal financial assistance award for acquisition and development, it is the intention of the Commonwealth to approach owners to ascertain their interests in donation, sale, or voluntary restriction of or easements over, these parcels. Avenues of tax abatement or exemption will be investigated to make such actions as attractive as possible. Every effort will be made to pursue these actions only with willing participants. In areas where the boundary of the proposed Waquoit Say National Estuarine Sanctuary is drawn around salt marsh areas, the definition of the landward b'oundary of these salt marsh areas is proposed to be consistent with that used in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (M. G1. c. 131 s. 40) as listed below: JLG "Salt Marsh" means a coastal wetland that extends landward up to the highest tide line, that is, the highest spring tide of the year, and is characterized by plants that are well adapted to, or prefer living in, saline soils. Dominant plants within salt ma rs hes are salt, meadow cord grass (Spartina patens.) and/or salt marsh cord grass (Spartina alterniflora). A salt marsh may contain tidal creeks, ditches and pools." 17 3 Proposed Boundary for the @,-iaouOil- National Estuarine Sanctuary (Preferred Alternative) Ip N to -4,I J..TI V 040OW q N. ids Z, AL N, 4 c AC 7-66 dZI ALi @4r A Ja WD - -CFO dt 416 qC. Figure 4 Key to Figures 4A, 48, 4C, and 4D (Enlarged Quadrangle of Proposed Boundary for the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary) cy P 71 AUZ 04 "C4 do@ R IS V5 ............ X4 -4@ 007'@-, 4mL 4L. 7 colt 19 @ITGURE 4A L - C I Enlarged Northeast Section of Proposed Boundary for the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary In 0 -Z.Z Oe 0 it it m it it It C 411 30 L C A Ze 0 C71" LM CM R 0 % Mm 20 7econsett 11 Island Ile 4v q- ge Lot 0 Pond - r-l so V--.tN E, U N, FIGURE 4C Enlarged Northwest Section of Proposed Boundary for the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary CCO \.j (0) CIA 0* R Nt x 49 ze C a. 0 we: FIGURE 4D Enlarged Sou -thwest Sect-ion of Proposed Boundary-for the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary kn Lb q. 0/, Oak .;AJ 40 A r-Ir-9. L 23 Figure Soutm a -Pe iieacm (Master Plan massachusetts Department 04 of Environmental Management WA A W4 40 4Z wi r 24 Fi gure Washburn Island (Preliminary Master Plan Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management) 4 "weed #A" 8041 bAce'VV: 'k camtal star sar"'.rv, O%V,1@0" PaGam" Gromo ul@ Tras 50,cm P066*6 P"ffbme can" % wcquol@ SCY Fmo Mw4w Vvpw,,".* Am* O.M.C Area OVA* sawd@tft Froneffid 500'd@k 0-d son ftnd pond r/ Tom Neevinq Area uaeed) Ok 7' Dead NOVA Preliminary Master Plan WASHBURN ISLAND F.114MCUTH. *.*.SWmU%T7S U MASS*04-SEM OEPYM*NT at Eh%VKX*veqM A%4e4ACEN*w PmPbxld bv ft Cghce ag Pm%w VAL9W"W 0 1w Q Figure Swift Estat,@ (Detail) 0 100' 200 300 SWIFT ESTATE 10 4 Route 28 j "ZZ Seap t R WAQUOIT BAY 2!11 Figure Waquoit Bay Area of Critical Environmental Concern 4 12@ A 12@ 4-, -1 ..... 7.4 I< A., j . ..... ... -4A N . .......... ..... 7. .. ....... X . .. .. ...... . . . . . . . ... *,@@..-,@ . . ..... - . .. .. .. ........ . 414 :4 W IZ6 z z 27 Figure Barrier beaches within the Proposed Sanctuary Boundar@' 3 16 0 J. 04 r 0 C4 SA41 9 CS 4 N.. S. %k ta .@, @lfl 16.1 roe (01 .4 A he 4e 4' oar '44 28 Figure 1 Upland and Marsh Area within the Proposec Sanct;jary 6oun.. 4. 1:9 IL \@jo 12 @4, q4 77 r 19* 7j, 7@0 ek -7 41@ tAo Ti' N, ;L YX I a r 42 Irk 160 ra Figjjre 11 Salt Marshes Over One-Half Acre Within the Waquoit Bay Area 7 ot, Z tdo 10 co Cb 0 AL It ........... k*dr IZI Rag, d 40 30 Figure 12 Salt Marsnes around Hamblin and Jenu Pc -7- 51 4vo - - ----- J.A NID -'.)Va0oit Village, 5," 34 10 7- 'k 30 Cri i C ra n berry, F. Z@ inb '@rr@ Og OAS C) B-ag Pond @,-Ca SRO '20, 2 cgs . . . . . . . . . . . n hip r A Jehu AD Po-Ad 7 econsett ":*/I"j 8 A%I Pon la @il Island .......... 4v 31 2. Administration, or Management Structure a. S@nctuary Management Goals The primary goals for establishing the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary are: 0 To establish and manage the area within the boundaries of the elaquo, Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary as a natural field laboratory. To protect the natural resources of the wetlands, transitional ar2dS, :@nd adjacent uplands. To conduct and facilitate both short and long-teri-,i estuarine research, education, and interpretation. 0 To protect research sites and make them available for continuoUs future study of the natural proces-ses and ecological relationships shaping and sustaining the estuarine system. To gather a*nd distribute information on estuarine ecosystems that is essential to sound decisions regarding the management of coastal resources. � To provide a focal point for educational act.ivities that increase the public's awareness and understanding of estuarine ecosystems%. human effects on them, and their importance to the State and the nation. � To promote cooperative management among Federal, State and municipal agencies to ensure that the short and long-term uses of the Sanctuary contribute to carrying out Sanctuary goals, policies and management objectives as articulated in the final Sanctuary Management Plan. � To provide for controlled multiple uses of the Sanctuary in order to ensure the continuation of existing low intensity recreational uses that are presently permitted, including fish and wildlife recreation (e.g. hunting, fishing, wildlife observation) and boating, which are compatible with Sanctuary's character as a natural field laboratory. b. Relationship with Existing Administrative Progr@ams in Waquoit Ta-y-a-nd--Statewide Administration of the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary will be under the direction of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management (DEM). OEM presently manages almost 250,000 acres statewide as one of the largest and most successful park syste 'ms in the country. As the Commonwealth's. principal holder of land@for environmental and conservation purposes, OEM is the best equipped State agency to manage any new properties acquired as part of the Sanctuary designation. In addition, DEM's existing interpretive program will provide the foundation for planned educational activities sponsored by the Sanctuary. The Park Supervisor and staff will continue supervisory and enforce- ment roles within South Cape Beach State Park and on Washburn Island. 32 Close coordination between the Park Supervisor and the Sanctuary' Manager is planned in order to avoid conflicts or duplication of effort. A careful review of existing local, State, and Federal laws and regulations pertaining to resource management and land use which apply to the area proposed for inclusion within the boundaries of the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary indicates that they provide a high degree of protection. Therefore, other than on any new properties acquired as a part of the designation of the Sanctuary, the Commonwealth anticipates that no new regulations will @e neces- sary. Management of the Bay and other water bodi-es, South Cape Beach State Park and Washburn Island will continue under the programs currently in place. If any new properties are acquired to become part of the Sanctuary, management. plans will be developed to cover those parcels with the advice and assistance of the Sanctuary Advisory Committee discussed below. Initial operation and management funding will be pro0ded by the Federal National Estuarine Sanctuary Program, and will be inatched by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Over a period of years, the 'funding burden will shift to t"ne Commonwealth. There will be an attempt to make the Sanctuary's administration, research program and education program as self-sufficient as.possible throu@'n the development of endowment funds for research and education; grants for specific activities or for general operational and administrative activi@-ies; and donations and.gifts for restricted or unrestricted purposes. c. Proposed Sanctuary Staff The Sanctuary Manager will be the principal adminis trator of the Sanctuary and will be responsible for ensuring that the policies contained in the Sanctuary Management Plan are followed.. This individual will be employed and supervised by the Department of Environmental Management and will be responsible for the following activities:* , i. General administration of the Sanctuary including the preparation of required State, Federal, and other grant applications, budgets, reports, and management of any necessary records. ii. Representation of the Sanctuary program and policies in public hearings and meetings where appropriate. iii. Implementation of the Sanctuary research program, with the advice and assistance of the Research Advisory Committee. This will include coordination of all re- search activities proposed for and conducted within Sanctuary boundaries. iv. Implementation of the Sanctuary education program, with the advice and assistance of the Educational Advisory Committee. This will include coordination of on-site and off-site interpretive activities, preparation, publication and distribution of brochures, reports, newsletters, slide shows and other forms of eduational material. 33 V. Responsibility for upkeep of the building and grounds at the Sanctuary headquarters. vi. Supervision of Sanctuary staff and volunteers involved in activities of the Sanctuary. vii. Coordination with the Federal National Estuarine Sanctuary Program. The Sanctuary Manager position will require a background in administration of similar or related programs. In addition, experience in conducting estUdrine research or in the administration of research programs will be necessary. A background in environmental education or in the administration of such programs would also be useful. It is expected that a clerical assistant to the Manager will be needed. This individual will perform routine secretarial , clerical and office managerlent functions. As activities and programs develop at the Waquoi.t Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary, it may be necessary to consider employing a Research Director and/or an Education Director. It is intended that supervisory, enforcement and interpretive responsi- bilities at South Cape Beach State Park and on Washburn Island will remain as they are presently structured. The Park Supervisor will continue to assume these responsibilities on park land; only at the Sanctuary headquarters will the Sanctuary Manager have responsibility for building and grounds supervision. As is discussed in the section on Education Program and Policies below, it is intended that the educational programs at the Sanctuary headquarters and off- site be coordinated with the interpretive programs at South Cape Beach State Park and Washburn Island. d. Advisory Committee In order to provide for effective coordination and cooperation among all interests involved with Sanctuary programs, a Sanctuary Advisory Committee will be established. Eleven members will be appointed to this Committee by the Secretary of Environmental Affairs, (DEM). Representatives of the following interest groups shall be included in the membership: i. The Board of Selectmen of the Town of Falmouth ii. The Board of Selectmen of the Town of Mashpee iii. The Cape Cod Planning and Economic Development Commission iv. The South Cape Beach State Park Advisory Committee V. The Commissioner of the Massachusetts.Oepartment of Fisheries, Wildlife and Recreational Vehicles 34 vi. The Director of the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management vii. The Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality and Emergency viii. The scientific community ix. The education community X. Environmental interest groups xi. Hunting, fishing, she'llfishing interest yroups xii. Boating, waterways, marina interest groups Representatives will be nominated to the Se cretary of Environmental Affairs for one year appointments with no limit on the number of reap poi ntiTien 16- s. A representative of NOAA will be included as an ex-officio, non-voting, member. The activities of the Sanctuary Advisory Committee will include the following: i. Advise the'Department of Environmental Management (DEM) and the Sanctuary Manager on matters of policy relating to planning for and operation of the Sanctuary; ii. Appoint the members of the Research and Educational Advisory Committees; iii. Assist in seeking support for the Research and Educational Programs and other financial matters; iv. Assist in the preparation of any periodic summary or annual reports on the operations of the Sanctuary; and V. Represent the interests of the users of the Sanctuary, its neighbors, and the users of information and educational materials generated by the Sanctuary. The Committee shall conduct regular meetings, open to the public. The Sanctuary Manager or staff shall act as staff to the Committee. The Committee shall be chaired by the Sanctury Manager or an appropriate representative of the Department of Environmental Management. e. Existing State Regulatory Programs Affecting Waquoit Bay i. Wetlands Protection Act The Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (MGL C.131 s. 40) and the regu- lations that have been developed thereto require that, no one shall remove, fill, dredge, or alter any coastal or freshwater wetland without a review by the local Conservation Commission to protect specific public interests stated in the Act. The definition of wetlands provided by the Act includes such resource areas as coastal banks, dunes, beaches, salt marshes, land under waterbodies and land subject to flooding. The Conservation Commission nust hold an open hearing to determine whether the area of the impacts of the project are significant to seven public inte rests, including: public or private water supply ground water supply flood contro.1 storm damage prevention prevention of pollution land containing shellfish fisheries The Conservation Commission will then produce an Order of Conditions regulatin�- the project so as to protect these interests. Under the regulations governing activities in coa stal sites, performance standards are set for projects proposed for various resource areas. For most work in a: coastal bank; coastal beach; coastal dune; land under a salt pond; land containing shellfish; and banks of, or land under, the ocean, rivers, streams, ponds, or lakes that are part of an anadromous fish run, the standard is that a project shall have "no adverse effect" on the seven interests listed above. For salt marshes, the standard is even more stringent, stating that a project "shall not destroy any portion of the salt marsh and shall not have an adverse effect on the productivity of the salt marsh". Within an area that has been designated as an Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC), such as Waquoit Bay, the performance standard for projects on land under the ocean and tidal flats is also established as "no adverse effect". An exception to this standard is maintenance dredging of land under the ocean for navigation improvement. Such dredging must "minimize adverse effects using best available measures as defined by regulation" and may not expand on existing channels. Exemptions from the Act and its procedures are provided for work on land already in agricultural use and for approved mosquito control projects. A variance procedure does exist; however, it will be used only in rare and unusual cases to provide for instances of overwhelming public need. . ii. Wetlands Restriction Acts There are two statutes under Massachusetts law which set restrictions on activities within wetlands; the Coastal Wetlands Restriction Act (MGL C.130 s .105) and the I n 1 and' We'tl ands Rest ri ct i on Act (MGL C. 131 s .40A) . Although these serve to protect different types of wetlands, generally they have the same format and procedures. The statutes authorize the Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Management, following a public hearing and with the approval of the Board of Environmental Management, to restrict or prohibit major alterations of signifi- cant wetlands. The tool used is an "Order of Restriction", fashioned to affect land use to promote public health, safety and welfare and to protect public and private property, wildlife and marine fisheries (the Inland Wetlands Restrictlon Act also provides protection to fisheries, water resources, flood plain artas, and.agriculture). Ownership rights however, are not affected. The .)rder pnerally prohibits large scale alterations of wetlands such as filling, dredg- ing and discharge of pollutants. Permitted activities include agriculture and aquaculture; building and maintenance of docks and piers; upkeep of existiig roads, marine channels and 'structures; and construction and maintenance if temporary structures on pilings. The Order of Restriction is recorded in the local Registry of Deeds, and a marginal notation i 's made either on the deed of a recorded parcel or the Lan.-, Court Certificate of a registered parcel. The effect of the restriction is much like a zoning overlay in that landowners are advised in advance of .1both allowed and prohibited activities. Lands subject to the Wetlands Restrittion Acts are still subject to the provisions of the Wetlands Protection Act and other applicable laws and regulations. Coastal beaches, coastal dunes, tide flats, and salt marshes have been restricted under the Coastal Wetlands Restriction Act in the Town of Faliiiout@. The Inland Wetlands Restriction Act has not been implemented in either Falmouth or Mashpee. At this point the Coastal Wetlands Restriction Act has. not been implemented in Mashpee, the only remaining town in Barnstable County where this statute is not in effect. The coastal sections of Mashpee remain a high priority for restriction when staff and funding levels allow. It is the intent of the Commonwealth to implement these restrictions within the next two Jears. iii. Chapter 91 Waterways Licensing Program Administered by the Wetlands and Waterways Regulatory Division of the State's Department of Environmental Quality Engineering, t"his program estab- lishes uniform procedures for review and licensing of activities in the water- ways and on the subtidal lands of the Commonwealth. It provides for an evalu- ation of specified environmental interests and for the protection of public interests in inter- and sub-tidal lands. The performance standard for waterways projects is to "minimize" adverse effects to the environment. As a matter of policy, the Division defers issuing a license until a permit under the Wetlands Protection Act has been written for the project. The conditions under the Wetlands Order are generally included in the Waterways permit to provide environmental protection standards. iv. Area of Critical-Environmental Concern In November 1979, the Secretary of En vironmental Affairs designated Waquoit Bay, Washburn Island, South Cape Beach, Hamblin and Jehu Ponds, some 37 connecting waterways and adjacent uplands to the 11-foot contour (the so-called 100-year storm I eve I) as an Area of Critica I Environment a I Concern (ACE C) . Figure 8 indicates the designated boundaries. Designation followed an extensive environmental review, an extended public comment period, and two public hearil,,,S. (See Appendix 3 for a copy of the designation document.) The effect of ACEC designation is to raise certain environmental perfor mance standards under'the Wetlands Protection Act from "minimum" adverse impact; on certain public interests protected by that Act -to "no" allowable adverse impacts. Under Chapter 91 all new improvement dredging within the ACEC is prohibited unless the purpose is to enhance biological productivity. Likewise, disposal of dredge spoils is prohibited within an ACEC unless for beach nouris@- ment or marsh creation. Special review standards are established for the siting of any energy facility within an ACEC, and the regulations of the Division of Water Pollution Control require the. elimination of hazardous substances discharge, and prohibit new industrial discharges and direct discharges fron new sewage treatment facilities. Under the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) it is noted that every project,'of whatever magnitude, requiring any state permit, approval or other authorization, or involving state funding a; any level must initiate a public review. This review may lead to the requireme n t of an Environmental Impact Report. (See below for further discussion of the MEPA process.) Finally, all agencies under the direction of the Secretary of Environmental Affairs are required to write or revise regulations, administer programs and issue permits so as to conform with Policy 2 of the Massachusett*s Coastal Zone Management Program: "ensuring that activities in or impacting on such complexes are designed and carried out to minimize adverse effects on marine productivity, habitat values, water quality and storm buffering values of the entire complex." The boundaries of the designated Waquoit Bay Area of Critical Environmental Concern and the proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary are generally similar, but do not coincide exactly. A comparision of the Figures 3 (proposed Sanctuary boundaries) and 8 (ACEC boundaries) delineates the difference. The Great and Little River area navigation corridors within the Bay are not included within the State-designated ACEC. Within these areas, improvement dredging is allowed under existing State requirements. V. Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act The Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) serves to establish a uniform metho d of information collection for use in the evaluation of environ- mental impacts of a proposed activity. A process is established for public notification of proposed projects via the Environmental Monitor published every three weeks through the Massachusetts ExecG-Fir-ve Office of Environmental Affairs. Projects exceeding specified thresholds require the completion of an Environ- mental Impact Report detailing effects of the work planned. All activities conducted, licensed, regulated or funded by any agency of the Commonwealth which will take place within or affect an Area of Critical Environmental Concern require public notification and at least a preliminary review by the MEPA office. Even activities such as preliminary planning for the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary proposal required MEPA review. (See Appendix 4 for notification of EOEA # 4256 and public notice dated May 8, 1984.) 38 f. Existing Management Program at South Cape Beach The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management is presently developing a management plan for South Cape Beach State Park under the terins of an agreement between the Town of Mashpee and the Commonwealth. This agreement, discussed on page 12 (copy in Appendix 2) sets out the general nature of activ- ities to be allowed at the Park and establishes a South Cape Beach State Park Advisory Committee for review and advice on specific managerient issues. The general tenor of the agreement i *s that the Park is established for passil ve recreation, with limited participants, that i's consistent with the "fragila ecology of the site". Facilities are to be designed and maintained so that they do not harm the natural and scenic qualities of the area.. An interpretive program is also being developed for the Park that will complement and become a part of the educational program of the proposed Sanctuary. Exhibits may be established and initial visitor contact points made that can refer interested parties to the Sanctuary office for more detailed i nformati on. The presence of Park staff will provide enforcement of Par,< and Sanctuary regulations and policies and will serve to monitor and protect research activities. There will be close contact. among' the Sanctuary Manager, the Park Supervisor and the South, Cape Beach state Park Advisory Committee to e6sure the details of the management plans for both the Sanctuary and the State Park are parallel and complementary. All Sanctuary activities occurring within Park boundaries will be compatible with the agreement of June 29, 1981, between the Town of Mashpee and the Commonwealth (see Appendix 2). g. Existing Management Program at Washburn Island The Management Plan for Washburn Island is still in a very preliminary stage of development. As a result, its development provides an opportunity for the Park Supervisor, Department of Environmental Management Planners, and the Sanctuary Manager to work closely in order to develop complementary pol.icies, procedures and regulations. The concepts of the Washburn Island PreliMindry Management Plan of April 1983 (see Appendix 5) are hereby incorporated into t(he Draft Sanctuary Management Pla n, and the policies and philosophies of the Draft Sanctuary Management Plan will be worked into the Final Management Plan for the Island portion of the State Park. h. Local Regulations' i. Shellfishing and fishing Shellfishing and most forms of salt-water fishing are under the general control of the State Division of Marine Fisheries. In the case of Falmouth and Mashpee, the Division has granted management of fishery resources in local waters to the respective towns following the preparation and acceptance of a suitable management plan. The regulation of these resources is under the direct supervision of the local Shellfish, or Natural Resource, officers, appointed by the Boards of Selectmen. Sanctuary 'designation will not change the existing arrangements regarding the towns' relationship with the Division 39 of Marine Fisheries, the local management plans. for fish and shellfish, or local enforcement of these regulations. It is hoped that the Sanctuary Research Program wil I be able to provide accurate and useful information on fish and shellfish stocks, habitat or sustainable yield for the local shellfish programs. There is no intent to interfere with the present system of fish and shellfish regulation. ii. Harbormasters Under Massachusetts law and regulations, control over most boating ac:iv- ities within Waquoit Bay and its connecting waterbodies is vested in the local Harbormasters, and their assistants, appointed by the respective Boaris of Selectmen. Harbormasters have the authority to establish mooring and anchorage locations, to,develop master plans for harbor use (often with the assistance of Waterways Committees), and to enforce any local by-laws pertaining to boating. The Sanctuary designation will not change existing arrangements regarding these local plans, authorities, or enforcement; no existing programs will be changed as a result of the establishment of a Sanctuary. As noted above, it is hoped that Sanctuary research and education programs will be able to assist local programs. iii. Falmouth Area of Crit .ical Environmental Concern By-Law At its Town Meeting in the Spring of 1983, the Town of Falmouth adopted a by-law to incorporate the state-designated Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) boundary into their zoning structure. Within the ACEC boundaries and a 25-foot buffer zone around those boundaries, regulations are adopted to limit construction and alteration of vegetation. Enforcement of this by-law will contribute significantly to the protection of sanctuary resources. No similar by-law has been developed in the Town of Mashpee. The designation of a Sanctuary will have no effect on this local by-law; it will continue to be administered and enforced by officials of the Town of Falmouth. iv. Local Wetlands By-lawsin Falmouth and Mashpee Both the Towns of Falmouth and Mashpee have adopted local by-laws for the protection of wetland resources and values. Both of these are patterned after the State Wetlands Protection Act described above. The local by-laws, however establish an appeal procedure through the courts system, rather than through th; Department of Environmental Quality Engineering. Each of the by-laws also includes interests additional to the seven specified in the state law, including such things as wildlife, aesthetics and recreation. These by-laws are adminis- tered locally by the Conservation Commissions. The designation of a'Sanctuary will have no effect on these local by-laws or their implementation. They will continue to be administered and enforced by local officials within the Towns of Falmouth and Mashpee. 40 3. The "Physical Plant", Buildings and other Facilities a. Swift Estate It is intended to acquire and develop a portion of the Swift Estate as headquarters for Sanctuary operations. The existing large Victorian house will be developed as a public area including meeting rooms, lecture hall and displaj area. Research components located in the headquarters will include office space, library and research file areas, and, where possible, small scale labora- tory space and dormitory space for researchers. The carriage house will b-2 used for rough laboratory areas, workshops, and equipment storalye. 'lost of tne Sanctuary administration activities will -be centralized at t@is site. Both of the existing buildings will need considerable renovation to meet. expected need's, as well as existing building and safety codes. Funding for mucn of this activity will be provided through the initial Federal acquisition and development award, although, additional funding sources will be investiga"led.- The exterior of the buidings will be restored as faithfully as possible to e original Victorian splendor. The landscaped grounds will be restored to their former status following a complete inventory of plant species present. b. South Cape Beach Management plans for South Cape Beach call for a visitor center that will* have space allocated for displays of the resources found in and environmental processes acting on Waquoit Bay, South Cape Beach and Washburn Island. This fits well into the Sanctuary plan and can serve to introduce visitors, in an informal way, to the values and interrelationships of the Sanctuary. Visitors with a further interest can then be directed to the Sanctuary Headquarters or to one of the educational activities sponsored by the Sanctuary. Preliminary plans also include construction of a small amphitheater near the visitor center that can be used as an outdoor, or natural, classroom for interpretive or other educatio nal activities. Self-guided trails and boardwalks are also part of the management plan for South Cape Beach State Park. These too, will add to the educational experience of the Sanctuary. c. Washburn Island The preliminary master plan for Washburn Island provides for no buildings other than comfort stations. Boardwalks and s cenic overlooks are being proposed to provide exposure to scenic but sensitive areas. These structures support Sanctuary policies and, as part of the Washburn Island Master Plan, are incorporated into plans for the Sanctuary. 4. Research Progr. am and Policies, a. Goals The primary research goals for the proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary are three-fold: 41 i. To establish adequate baseline data on the nature and functioning of a "protected" estuary, so that knowledge may be used as a control against which to judge acti- vities in other similar areas. Obtaining this goal will require a thorough inventory of resources and conditions present in the Sanctuary and in those adjacent areas that affect the Sanctuary, as well as an understanding of the interrelationships among these resources and natural environmental forces. Collection and review of existing baseline data will be a necessary first step and will dictate the direction for subsequent research. ii. To develop an understanding of the impacts of hunan activities, both obvious and subtle, on the resources of the Sanctuary. iii. To make information developed from the above research available and useful to those responsible for resource management and land-use planning. at individual, local, State and Federal levels. b. Research Program Framework To meet these goals, a research program will be developed for the Sanctuary that will encourage and support scientific investigations within the boundaries of the Sanctuary, and in nearby areas of a similar nature. To provide direction, the Sanctuary Research Program will establish the following: i. Policies to establish priorities and procedures for the types of research to take place under the auspices of the Sanctuary; ii. Procedures for evaluating, permitting and monitoring research activities; and iii. Procedures for the dissemination of research results. c. Research Policies Policy 1 Research that pertains directly to the management of the resources of the Sanctuary will be actively encouraged and will receive highest priority of any research conducted by Sanctuary staff or supported by Sanctuary funding. As stated above, the principal goal for research within the Sanctuary is the development of appropriate management techniques for coastal resources To meet this objective, initial priorities will be given to assessing an@ monitoring the existing resources of the Sanctuary. These objectives will necessitate activities such as: Baseline measurements of the biological, chemical and physical characteristics of the Sanctuary and areas which affect it. 42 Characterize, and to the extent practicable, document the location, extent and composition of the biological resources of the Sanctuary; Identify the hydrologic and geomorphologic processes such as water currents, sediment characteristics and movement, etc., that sh.ape the Sanctuary; Determine water quality in various areas of the Sanct,,larj and identify factors which might cause alteration. Periodic monitoring of changes in the biological, and physical conditions of the Sanctuary. Track changes over time' in the location, extent, -in composition of the biological resources of the Sanct_@a-,/ and identify the causes of these changes; - Track changes over time in water circulation pa',t,-_,rns and landforms and identify the causes of these changes; - Track changes in water qua lity over time to determine seasonality, storm effects, etc., and identify the casues for such changes. Studies of the effects of commercial and recreational shellfishing on the resources and habitats of the Sanctuary. Determine the level of shellfish resources and the appropriate level of harvesting to reach a maximum sustainable yield; Evaluate the effects of various means of shellfish harvesting-on the habitat and populations of various species. 0,Studies of the effects of other human activities on the flora, fauna, physical processes, and ecological composition of the Sanctuary. - Review the effects of recreational boating on the resources of the Sanctuary in order to help communities devise practical resource-related harbor use and mooring plans; - Monitor the effects of development in the uplands around the Bay and connecting ponds on water quality, sedimentation, salt marshes and other resources; - Determine the effects from recreational activities along the beach and attempt to define a "carrying capacity" in order to maximize human use and minimize adverse impacts on the resources. 43 Policy.2 Research will be actively encouraged that will provide information on estuarine ecosystems which will improve coastal resource management decisionmaking at the Sanctuary si te, on Cape Cod and the Islands, in Massachusetts and other states in the Virginian biogeographic region, and in the Nation. When designated, Waquoit Bay and its surrounding areas would be set aside to provide valuable information which can be used to manage more responsi.@Ij resources in similar estuarine systems. As there is increased pressure development in such areas, there is a greater need for scientifical ly-baS,-:-j information that will make possible sensible, sensitive, land-us,:4 decisio-ns both on Cape Cod and in other coastal areas. Policy 3 Research which bears less of a direct appl'ication to th2 rlanagE@- ment of coastal resourtes will* be permitted and encour3ged-as long as it does not conflict with research related to resourc@@ management. In situations where research proposals may be in conflict with study siles or funding, that proposal which has the greater resource management potential will be given priority. Policy 4 Research involving manipulation of the Sanctuary environment will orily be permitted on a very limited basis, and will be reviewed strictly. If allowed,, such projects will be for specified time frames only. Resea-rchers must, upon completion, restore the project site to its original condition. Manipulative studies, those which cause physical, biological, and/or chemical changes to the environment, are often useful in establishing cause-and- effect relationships. However, such studies are generally incompatible with the goals of the Sanctuary. Alteration of natural processes could defeat the purpose of maintaining the Sanctuary as a control for comparative studies or of supporting existing flora or fauna. Although not encouraged, limited manipula- tive research would be allowed only if there are demonstrable benefits to the F-effects are of short duration and can I)e Sanctuary and its programs; if t e reversed at the end of the experiment; and if they are carefully monitored for unexpected and undesired side effects. Policy 5 Before commencing work, researchers must have all appropriate collecting or handling permits from applicable State or Federal agencies. Collection and/or handling of many species of wildlife require special permits from State or Federal agencies. Anyone wishing to perform this sort of research within the' boundaries of the Sanctuary must have the appropriate permits from such agenciet as the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, etc. 44 Policy 6 Proposals for major research within the boundaries of the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary must be submitted in writing to the Sanctuary Manager and receive a favorable review from the Research Advisory Committee prior to commencement. A written proposal must be approved in order for major research work to be done in the Sanctuary. The proposal must include the following information: - name, address, telephone number and professional or agency affiliation of the principal investigator; - names of persons to be involved fn field work; - objectives of the proposed stu dy and their relationship to the goals and policies of the Sanctuary and to the management of coastal resources; - accurate location(s) of proposed work site(s) within the Sanctuary; - explanation of methods, materials and equipment to @e used; and - duratio n of the study, starting and expected completion dates. Availability of this information will allow a prior review of the proposal , wi 11 al I ow f o r coordi hat i on of resea rch act i vi t i es and wi I I a 11 ow mon i to ring, ,and protection, of research sites and equipment. Routine activities such as water quality sampling, shellfish or finfish sampling, bird banding, or other non-manipulation research conducted by State or Federal. agencies will not require a proposal. However, the agency involved should notify the Sanctuary Manager either by telephone or in writing prior to commencement in order to avoid conflicts in research activities. The Sanctuary Manager, with the advice of the Research Advisory Committee, will evaluate the feasibility of proposed projects based on their scientific and technical merit and their relationship to the goals and research policies of the Sanctuary. Field work may not begin in the Sanctuary until the principal investigator receives written notification of approval from the Sanctuary Manager. All attempts will be made to make the review process as efficient as possible while maintaining standards for the protection of the Sanctuary. Policy 7 Research t.hat does not comply with the goals and po licies of the Sanctuary Research Program will not be approved. Research that does not comply with the original proposal submitted will be terminated. Policy 8 Researchers are responsible for maintaining all equipment in a safe condition during the experiment period and for removing it upon completion of the research. Any disturbance to the site must be restored to its original condition. 45 Maintenance of field equipment by researchers in a safe condition will protect them as well as the public. It is expected that all equipment and refuse will be removed from the site as soon as possible. This serves to keep the Sanctuary in a pristine condition for the use and enjoyment of others. Policy_9 The Sanctuary Manager or staff will periodically monitor the progress of research taking place in the Sanctuary. Researchers will be required to present a final progress report no later than 90 days after completion of field work. For projects that extend longer than a year, annual progress reports shou'll @e - de made to the Sanctuary Manager. Copies of progress reports na to funding agencies are acceptable. The Sanctuary Manager and staff are responsible for maintaining contact with researchers and being aware of the status of the work. Progress reports provide a valuable record of types, locations and volume of work done in the Sanctuary. Policy 10 After complet ion of the research project, researchers should submit to the Research Advisory Committee an abstract summarizing the project and its results and at least one copy of any report, publication, dissertation, or thesis resulting f ronn work in the Sanctuary. If research is funded through the Sanctuary, researchers will be expected to present a'short paper, suitable for a newsletter format, explaining the research,, its results, and implications for management of coastal resources. Copies of abstracts and other publications will be filed in the Sanctuary Office along with the research proposal and progress reports. Availability of research results and information taken from the abstract will be disseminatend to local, State and Federal agencies, environmental groups and other interested parties. A centralized repository for all research products from the Sanctuary will facilitate review and dissemination of information. The Sanctuary Manager and staff will be responsible for directing such products to the agencies, groups, or individuals where they will be useful. A format for abstracts will be developed to facilitate understanding, dissemination, organization, and retrieval of information. Policy 11 The Sanctuary Manager, staff and research committee will disseminate information on work that has taken place in the Sanctuary and recruit other researchers to use the Sanctuary. As a base of research builds on the Sanctuary's resources and conditions other researchers should be attracted. It will be the function of the Sanctuar; Manager, staff and the Research Committee to make known previous work, facilities available, access to, and.research possibilities of the Sanctuary. This may be done through a newsletter with wide distribution, scientific publications brochures, etc. Research summaries will be provided to the news media an@ newsletters of various scientific and regulatory agencies. 4G d. Research Advisory Committee The Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary Advisory Committee will be responsible for recruiting a Research Advisory Committee. Membership shoul'a include persons with a scientific research background, persons with a resource management background, and persons involved in land-use decision-making. It will be the function of this Committee to work with the Sanctuary Manager to: i. develop and refine the Sanctuary Rese-arch Proy'rim; ii. review research proposals and results of work within the Sanctuary for suitability a nd co n fo r! ia:ic e with the established goals of the Research Program; iii. publicize Sanctuary facilities and recruit researcners to work in the Sanctuary; and iv. w'ith the Sanctuary Manager, develop sources of f,@ndlin- and distribute such. funding for research within Lhe Sanctuary. The Committee members will serve one-year terms with no limit on reappointments. Their work will be critical in assuring that research done in the Sanctuary meets the goals and policies of the Research Program. In so doing,they will assure the continuation and direction of the Research Program and help protect the resources of the Sanctuary. e. Funding It is hoped that the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary will be able to provide limited funds for research. Initially these may be provided, on a competitive basis, under the National Estuarine Sanctuary Program administered by the Federal Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management. Further sources of funding, from foundations, funding agencies, or private individuals and organizations will be sought. Such funds will be used to directly support researchers or to acquire necessary equipment for studies within the Sanctuary. 5. Education Program and Policies a. Goals The principal educational goal of the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary will be to provide a program of educational opportunities and activities that will foster a public awareness and understanding of estuarine ecosystems, human effects on*them and the importance of these systems to the community, region, State, and Nation. b. Education Program Framework To meet this goal, the Education Program will: i. establish procedures to develop and support varying types of educational activities to be carried out 47 both at the Sanctuary headquarters and at various visitor centers on South Cape Beach and Washburn Island; ii. establish procedu res for coordinating educational activities among these areas; iii. establish procedures for transferring scientific infor- mation generated through the Sanctuary Research @ro.-jram into lay terms and making it availaole to che public and coastal management decision-makers. The Sanctuary Research Program will generate information about Waquoit Bay and its environs, and it will be the task of the Education Proyram to disseminate this information to the public. Recipients may range from decision-makers on Planning Boards, Boards of Health or Conservation Commissions, to State or Federal regulatory agencies, to decision-makers of tomorrov'r - our children. Learning more about the estuary and its functioning, and about how resear,,@ is conducted and information is gathered is a valuable experience for all. Personal contacts will continue wi th individuals and groups that have been established by the Interpretive Program of the Department of Environmental Management at South Cape Beach and Washburn Island. This'method of instruction provides a valuable field experience for participants. The availability of a Sanctuary Headquarters will also make possible "classroom" situations for group activities: lectures, slide shows, classes, etc., as well as facilities for individual literature searches and specimen study. The development of various sorts of publications, such as brochures and newsletters, will reach a broader public and will be actively pursued. The dissemination of these materials may draw on and be coordinated with local schools, colleges, museums and other organizations. Visitor orientation packets or trail guides will be developed to allow individuals to explore and learn at their own pace. On-site educational programs will be coordinated by the Sanctuary Manager and staff to avoid conflict with research activities being conducted within the Sanctuary. It will also be the function of the Sanctuary Manager and staff to coordinate the various educational activities held in the Sanctuary, to recruit outside speakers or programs, and to provide adequate facilities for such programs. c. Education Policies Policy 1 On-site programs will be provided in conjunction with existing activities., Policy 2 Off-site educational programs will be provided in conjunction with school systems, civic and environmental organizations, colleges and other educational institutions in order to make the public aware of the Sanctuary, its facilities and its role at the local, regional, State and National levels. 48 "Nature walks" and Interpretive Programs will be available. Tours may be offered to public groups upon request. Research site tours may be arranged with the cooperation of the researchers to provide an insight into methods and types of data gathering and interpretation. It is hoped that 'Che Sanctuary cai@l become a "living classroom" for its visitors. Policy 3 On-site activities will be coordinated so that they do not interfere with established research projects. The Sanctuary .11anager and staff will ensure that all scheduled activities do not interfere with research sites, unless coorJi'latei researchers. Policy 4 Li teratu re, vi sual ai ds, and other rel ated materi al s wi I I developed, distributed and routinely updated in order to convey to the general public, management agencies and 'lo t,,e scientific community the goals, programs and of the Sanctuary. Policy 5 The Sanctuary Manager and staff will actively encourage tne dissemination of scientific information developed through the Research Program. As mentioned abo ve, a high priority of the Sanctuary will be to get accurate, useable resource management -o ri ented information to the decision- makers in coastal management planning. The Education Program will work to provide this material in written,vi.sual, or spoken form. Researchers will be encouraged to make public presentations of their work, and research results will be distributed directly,. either through abstracts or through periodic news- letters. Policy 6 The Sanctuary Manager will coordinate the activities of the Educational Program to provide the broadest exposure and dissemination. d. Education Advisory Committee The Waquoit Say National -Estuarine S anctuary Advisory Committee will be responsible for recruiting and appointing an Education Advisory Committee. Membership should include persons with a background in education at various levels, fromprimary education through college, persons with a media background, and local decision-makers. It will be the role of this Committee to work with the Sanctuary Manager to: i. develop and refine the Sanctuary Education Program; ii, develop and define educational activities, with various formats for presentation to varying audiences; iii. publicize Sanctuary educational activities and recruit individuals and groups to use the facilities of the Sanctuary; and 49 iv. develop sources of funding to sponsor educational activities, publications, media presentations, etc. The Committee members will serve one-year terms with no limit on reappointments. Their work will be critical in assuring that information ibout the Sanctuary and coastal and estuarine resources in general is disseminated to the public. e. Funding It is intended that, to the maximum extent possible, the ad:jcation pro@r3r@ of the Sanctuary will be financially self-sufficient. Tuition For :Iasses, @), donations for lectures and slide-shows, sale of publications, memberships in a Sanctuary support group, grants from funding agencies, etc., can all help to defray thecostsof education. It is not intended that each educational prograini be self-supporting, but that the program as a whole cover its costs. 6. Objectives and Policies for Other Activities a. Hunting, Fishing and Shellfishing Hunting, fishing and shellfishing are traditional uses of the Waquoit Bay, South Cape Beach and the Washburn Island area. Presently each of these activi - ttes is subject to local and State jurisdiction. The Sanctuary designation will not change the existing arrangements concerning these activities in.the Bay, or at South Cape Beach and Washburn Island. Hunting on Washburn Itiand and on South Cape Beach has'been the subject of local discussion in the past. Any final decision on allowing this practice will be made by the Department of Environmental Management as adminis.trators of the parks at these sites based on public use, safety and welfare. The South Cape Beach State Park Advisory Committee reviews the issue of hunting and makes its recommendations yearly depending on use patterns. Due to the limited size of the property and the prospects of a siza0le public presence, hunting will not be allowed on the Swift Estate property once it becomes part of the Sanctuary. b. Off-Road/Over-Sand Vehicles This issue is only a valid concern at South Cape Beach State Park. According to the agreement between the Commonwealth and the Town of Mashpee, use of these vehicles at the Park will be severely limited. Use by the elderly and handicapped is provided in order to allow access to fishing spots. They may be used by permit only and are restricted to designated roadways. See Appendix 2 for a copy of the Mashpee/Commonwealth-agreement. c. Boating As discussed above, control of boating activities is the province of the local Harbormasters or the U.S. Coast Guard. The policy of the Sanctuary so Program will be to accept the local plan and enforcement and the authority of ,thq Coast Guard. d. Public Access Public access to the resources of the Sanctuary for research, education and interpretive purposes is a prime objective of the Sanctury Program. I t- wi 11 be encou raged to t he ext ent t h at t he resou rces . wi 11 bea r. There M,3,/ be periods where access will be limited due to stress on some sensitIve envilron- mental resource (e.g., tern nesting areas during the breeding season, ercsi@@n on a coastal bank, etc.) or to protect the location, equipment or resources forming a part of research activities. These "closures" will be coorcli-1,-iled between the Sanctuary Manager and the Park Supervisor and will be posted. Tile Park Supervisor will be responsible for enforcement of any "closures" at SOUt-1 Cape Beach Park and on Washburn Island; the Sanctuary Manager for the Swift Estate. B. Other Alternatives Considered In developing the Preferred Alternative for the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary described above, several options were carefully reviewed. These are described below along with reasons for their rejection. 1. No Actio n/Status Quo Under this option no designation of a national estuarine sanctuary woull be made in Waquoit Bay or anywhere else in Massachusetts. One of the considerations of the Commonwealth in the acquisition of So.,@. Cape Beach State Park and Washburn Island was the protection of the relatively pristine nature of Waquoit Bay and its preservation for future generations. This is the last relatively undeveloped warm water beach available on Cape Cod, and is highly desirable property. Both parcels were threatened with develop- ment in one form or another and would have limited or prohibited public JsagE? The possibility of establishing this area as a national estuarine Sanctuary wa; a prime consideration of the Commonwealth of Massachussetts in the decision- making process' leading to these acquisitions. The natural and recreat i onall resources of Waquoit Say were widely recognized and there were concerns that existing regulatory programs might not have the authority or coordination to provide adequate protection. Acquisition seemed to be the 'best option for preservation. The continuing development pressures experienced on Cape Cod, the Islands, southeast Masachusetts and the rest of the coastline of the Commonwealth require an understanding of the resources of this coastal area, the* interrelationships within coastal ecosystems, and their ability to withstand human pressures. The research and education facilities associated with a national estuarine sanctuary can make a significant contribution to the understanding and protec- tion of sensitive coastal resources and can also improve coastal management decisionmaking. Therefore, designation of a national estuarine sanctuary in Massachusetts, particularly in Waquoit Bay, will facilitate an improved under- standing of 'coastal resources. "No action" would run counter to State and Federal goals of protection, study, and appropriate management of sensitive coastal resources; particularly estuarine ecosystems. 2. Alternative Sites The process used by the Commonwealth in selecting Waquoit Bay for a proposed national estuarine sanctuary is described,on pages 6-8. Several other sites were reviewed in detail and ultimately rejected prior to the choice of Waquoit Bay. Those'sites receiving particularly careful review include the North/SOUth Rivers system in the Marshfield/Scituate area, and Ellisville Harbor in Plymouth. The North/South Rive*r complex was very carefully considered for additional protection and preservation. The rivers begin in fresh water ponds and wetlands and flow for miles through marshes of increasing salinity until reaching their common mouth at New Inlet and emptying into Massachusetts Bay. Over 2000 acres of saltrharsh flank the rivers. Hummarock Beach, a sizable barrier beach fronts the South River, protecting it from the effects of storms. There has been con- siderable development along Hummarock, particularly in summer and, increasingly, in year-round housing, and along the lower portions of the rivers. 52 The system is extended 1 inearly; salinity levels are measurable 13 r..i i I e s upriver in the North River and 11 miles in the South River. Ultimately, in addition to a number of lesser factors, it was these tao latter points, the ariount of development at the mouth and the extended lenntln, that made this site less attractive than Waquoit Bay for National Estuarine Sanctuary designation. Acquisition of such extended areas, and of developed areas, would have been difficult and extremely expensive. In Waquoit Bay, by acquiring two major parcels, it was possible to provide a considerable 3Mount of preservation to a significant area. This situation was not feasi@le in t@e North/South River system. It was agreed that a better means of protection fl@r the North/South River system would be a State Scenic Rivers designation. 4 greenway corridor has been established to afford a buffer to this waterway. In addition, the marshes in the complex are restricted under the Coastal Wetlands Restriction Act. In addition, Waquoit Bay was the more suitable site under criteria established by the Federal National Estuarine Sanctuary Progrdii. regulations. Ellisville Harbor is a small inlet in the town of 'Plymouth. A break in a barrier beach opens, into a shallow harbor and saltmarsh complex. Adjacent to the marshes are a series of freshwater wetlands that have been utilized for growing cranberries. Historically, the harbor has been used for shipping cord- wood and f i sh. Broad-beamed, flat-bottomed boats* sailed onto the beach and. flats within the harbor at high tide. When the tide ebbed, cargo was hurried across the exposed flats by wagons to the now-grounded ships. a At the next high tide, the vessels would refloat and carry their cargo to port, usually Boston. The harbor is still used-by a small fleet of fishing boats and for recreational shellfishing and the beaches are used for swimming. This site was ultimately rejected for consideration as a National Estuarine Sanctuary because of, in addition to a number of lesser factors, its small size, limited freshwater input, and periodic inaccessibility to sufficient water for navigation. It has, however, been designated by the Commonwealth as an Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) and carries the added protection of that program. 3. Alternative Boundaries The boundaries for the preferred alternative include: South Cape Beach; Washburn Island; portions of the Swift Estate; Waquoit Bay; Hamblin, Jehu, Caleb, Bourne, Bog, Sage Lot and Flat Ponds; the Great and Little Rivers; and the lower Quashnet River (Figure 3). Additional boundary alternatives are discussed below. a. Boundary Alternative 1: Inclusion of Town of Mashpee Inholdings at South Cape Beach 3-tate Park. In considering Sanctuary boundaries, it was decided to exclude approximately 30 acres within the borders of South Cape Beach State Park, where the Town of Mashpee will own and operate a Town Beach and parking area. In addition, 10 acres bordering on the Great River and Waquoit Bay to which the Town also will gain ownership rights for the purpose of establishing a municipal boat launch, have been excluded from propose d Sanctuary boundaries as well. These parcels will be transferred to the Town of Mashpee as the development of the Park, progresses; they are currently included in the State's holdings. Exclusion of these properties from the proposed Sanctuary boudaries 4as decided upon in order to avoid any possible difficulties with the transfer of land between the Town and State. At some future date, the Town of lashpee will be approached through either the Board of Selectmen or the Town MeeL-ing, whichever is appropriate, to ascertain whether there is interest in these areas becoming part of the Sanctuary. These parcels could remain under the ownership and management of Mashpee if that management was compatible with the Sanctuary Program. These areas would be eligible for inclusion in the Sanctuary -4ith appropriate binding agreements regarding their use. b. Boundary Alternative 2: Exclusio n of Little River and Great River Consideration was given to the exclusion of Great and Little Rivers from the Sanctuary boundaries because of possible dredge activities and the subst3n- tial development along their banks, particularly on Seconsett and Monomoscoy Islands. The proposal to include these areas within the Sanctuary boundary recognizes that there may be future dredging in these areas. However, it is felt that there is significant protection of the resources through the existing regulatory structure of the State Wetlands Protection Act And Waterways Licensing process. The National' Estuarine Sanctuary Program is gesigned to allow multiple use of sanctuaries, when compatible with the protection of sanctuary resources. It was felt that these sanctuary resources would be adequately protected through existing State regulatory controls. Therefore, because of their character as significant connecting waters within the Waquoit Bay estuarine system, the Great and Little Rivers are proposed for inclusion within the Sanctuary. Th ese areas are not included within the Waquoit Bay Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC). Therefore, they are eligible for new, improvement dredging. There is, in fact, an imminent dredging project at the mouth of the Great River. Improvement dredging is prohibited within the ACEC, including Waquoit Say outside the central navigation corridor, the Quashnet River and Hamblin and Jehu Ponds. c. Boundary Alternative 3: Exclusion of Saltmarsh Areas around .Ta-mblin and Jehu Ponds. At the head of Great River and along the shores of Hamblin and Jehu Ponds are approximately 193 acres of saltmarshes (see Figure 12). These are all in private ownership. The Town of Mashpee, however, holds a conservation easement granted by the New Seabury Corporation for a border around the southern and western section of Jehu Pond. All of the marshes are protected to the "shall not destroy nor impair the productivity of" standard of the State Wetlands Protection Act. The 42 acres of marsh in Falmouth are also protected under the State Coastal Wetlands Restriction Act. The 151 acres located. in Mashpee have not been restricted to this point in time; however as the only town on the Cape that is still unrestricted under the Coastal Wetlands Restriction Act, the town is at the top of the priority list for the time when funding and staff levels 54 permit restrictive action. Such action is planned within the next two years. The marshes in both towns are further protected under local wetlands by-laws and those in Falmouth under their ACEC by-laws. Under these existing programs these areas are, or soon will be, suffictlent',y protected to meet the adequate State control standard of the National Estuarine Sanctuary Program. Therefore, it was proposed to include them winin the Sanctuary boundaries. Inclusion within the Sanctuary, by- itself, (lop-, not bring additional restrictions to this property. Because these areas are private property, the Sanctuary prograin vootiIJ not be able to provide public access. Following NOAA approval. of ".he prop-'se., Federal financial assistance award for acq-uisition and development, however, owners of this land will be approached in an attempt to acquire ownersli ,1) or access rights for scientific or education purposes. Every ef fort wi I I [)e ma'1-2 to conduct these discussions on a'willing seller basis. This will @e atter,lpze(l either through fee-sim.pTe acquisition, purchase, or conservation or ot;1er easement rights, or donation of property rights or easements. @4 Inclusion of these areas would therefore enable the State, using f _In's provi ded under the Nati onal Estuari ne Sanctuary Program, to work wi th wi 1141 ng landowners to acquire access rights, easements, or fee-simple interests in important marsh areas of the sanctuary system. d. Boundary Alternative 4: Inclusion of Other Parts of the Area.of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) Boundaries of the portions of the Waquoit Bay ACEC lying along the Childs (Falmouth) and Quashnet (Falmouth/ Mashpee) Rivers, Red Brook (Fa I mouth/ Mashpee), Bourne and Bog Ponds (Falmouth), and Witch and Jim Pond (Mashpee) were defined by the levels of the 100-year flood plain. This is coincidental with the 11- foot elevation above mean sea level". Generally they provide a buffer from resources found within the bay, rivers, ponds and marshes. These areas are protected under the State and town Wetlands Protection Acts, although the protection standards for these "areas subject to flooding" are somewhat weaker than for other resource areas under the Act. None of these sites have been restricted under the Wetlands Restriction Act. Virtually all of this area is in private ownership and a portion is being used as a functioning cranberry bog. Possible Sanctuary boundaries are considered on the basis of: the inclu- sion of an adequate portion of the key land and water areas of the natural system to approximate an ecological unit and ensure effective conservation; the site's importance to long-term research and educational/ i nterpreti ve programs; and, the site's compatibility with existing and potential land and water uses in contiguous areas. The focus of the National Estuarine Sanctuary Program is to establish representative estuarine systems as natural field laboratories. The core or immediate area (key land and water areas) of these estuarine systems is, in almost all cases, measurably saline and tidally affected. Some portions of the Waquoit Bay ACEC do not meet a strict test of these criteria, and therefore must be considered buffer areas rather than part of the key land and water areas most important for inclusion within Sanctuary boun- daries. By itself, extension of proposed Sanctuary boundaries to incorporarce the entire ACEC would not ensure any additional protection for those areas or other downstream Waquoit Bay resources. At p-resent, there is no long-ter;n assurance that the uplands immediately adjacent to upstream areas witnin the ACEC will be adequately controlled or protected. The uncertainty rejardiln7, t@ie potential land and water uses in these upstream buffer areas is sufficient *1-0. question the compatibility of these areas with the key land and ,4ater areas of the Sanctuary. These upstream buffer areas, although of considerable ir;por- tance, are not a part of the "immediate" estuarine system of 'Aaquoir- 3ay (i.q., the key land and water areas). Consequently, -and in consideration of other boundary factors noted above, these upstream buffer areas (see Fi-gures 3 3nd R) have not been included within the proposed Sanctuary boundaries. However, those areas of the ACEC not included witnin the proposed San,--tuary boundaries are important for their potential ability to act as buffer areas to upstream inputs/impacts on the key land and water areas of the Sanctuary. As a result, if uses of these upstream buffer areas and their immediately adjace.11t uplands can be adequately controlled on a long-term basis sufficient to justify their inclusion within Sanctuary boundaries, then, if requested by the Common- wealth, the boundaries.of the Sanctuary will be so amended. e. Boundary Alternative 5: Inclusion of Eel Pond and the Childs and Seapit Rivers. These areas lie to the west of Washburn Island and connect to Waquoit Bay at the northern end of the Seapit River. Prior to a 1938 hurricane Waquoit Say and Eel Pond were more closely allied. At that time a barrier beach extended from Washburn Island westward to the mainland. This situation meant that Eel Pond flushed through Waquoit Bay on its way to Nantucket Sound. The 1938 hurricane breached this barrier, destroying a road and several houses. It apparently was repaired, but was breached again in 1944. Since that time tili s area has remained open to the sea, lessening its relation with 'Aaquoit Bay . Because of its separate identity, the potential need for dredging, and the substantial level of development along the western shoreline of the Seapit and Childs River, this system of waterways was not included in the Waquoit Bay Area of Critical Environmental Concern. For the same reasons, it is not proposed for inclusion within the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary. 4. Alternative Management Plan Options Various alternative management plan options were reviewed and rejected prior to proposing the preferred alternative. Those options are listed and revi ewed bel ow. a. Greater Restriction on Public Access to South Cape Beach and Wa-shburn Island Restricting access to these two parcels would serve to further protect the resources of the proposed Sanctuary. A substantial part of t he reason for acquisition of these areas was to increase public access. Although any public (or private) use would have soine effect on the site's resources, it was felt that workable management plans .could be developed that would increase access and provide protection oif cna environment to a level that is compatible with the goals of the Sanctuary. These management plans take into account the limitations on parking at South rape Beach State Park and the lack of land access to Washburn Island; both featires keep visitor numbers to a manageable level. Further, it is noted that the Sanctuary Program encourages multiple, compatible use of the Sanctuary. For these reasons this option was rejected. b. Locate the Sanctuary Headquarters Somewhere Other Than the Swift Estate: (i.e., do not attempt to acquire the Swift Estate) It was strongly felt that the Sanctuary Headquarters should be located within the Sanctuary and provide access to Waquoit Bay. This would be @enefici.31 to the Sanctuary's research and education programs and to enforceipent/sur,/eil- lance. A review of South Cape Beach and Washburn Island suggest that neither would be a suitable site for a headquarters facility. Washburn Island, with no land connection, offers significant problems for access and necessary utilities. Parking and activities at South Cape Beach are limited by agreement between the Commonwealth and the Town of Mashpee. It is expected that during peak periods in summer months the parking lots will be filled. This situation could present conflicts with Sancetuary activities. No other parcels have been located with resources comparable to the Swift Estate for access to roads, access to water and setting in relationship to the proposed Sanctuary. c. Establishing Administration of the Sanctuary Within a Governmental Body Other Than the Department of Environmental Management. Early consideration was given to establishing administration of the Sanc- tuary within various agencies, including the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, Division of Marine Fisheries (within the Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and Recreational Vehicles), or the Coastal Zone Management Jffice. Locating the Sanctuary administration within the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs would give the Sanctuary Manager dire@t accessibility to the office of the Secretary of Environmental Affairs. It was decided that this would not be a critical need and that better coordination could take place if the program were incorporated into a line agency. The Division of Marine Fisheries presently maintains' research, survey and inventory programs for management of finfish, shellfish, and factors affecting their growth and development. Consideration was given to drawing on this experience in research and developing the Sanctuary administration through this Division. It was decided that administration and education were also substan- tial components of the Sanctuary program, and that the Sanctuary goals are broader than fisheries interests. The Coastal Zone Management Office has been the lead agency in developing the proposal for a National Estuarine Sanctuary in Waquoit Bay. Generally this is because of its role in developing sound management policies for coastal resources, and its pre-existing relationship with the Federal Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management. The State Coastal Zone Management Office however, is not designed as a facilities or land management unit. The Department of Environmental Management became the logical choice to manage the Sanctuary and administer its programs based on its experience in land and facility management, interpretive and educational programs, ind planning and current operation and management of the South Cape Beach State Park and Washburn Island. Fi qu re 13 Alternative Sanctuary Boundarj Exclujing :Ie Swilt 057 1: VIC -1 r 91 :41 aN. .43. X7. Al _-.!; Vg 14 CZ 44--7- .'A' . .............. . VIVW log 'L talk 59 Figure 14 Alternative Sanctuary 6oundary Excludiny tne @reat and Lit- ,le ou RR nw 10 V T J- . T .......... . . % A. .. Qm.4.. .-- -- --- ------- . . ........ ... ......... ........ .. IC .......... ... ... . . Tt? .28 1 its,, 4 46 fa do 60 F i@e @l Alternative Sanc tuary Boundary Excluding tMe Salt Mars@es ar,, .Hamblin and Jehu Ponds -34w-' X p LI ,4 4 61 T . . . . . . . . . . ... ... "DI lk sit CIF N gas, d"O 0.9 61 PART III. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT A. Natural Environment 1 a Geol ogy/ Soi 1 s Cape Cod is almost entirely composed of unconsolida ted sand, gravel and boulders deposited by glacial ice during the last four major glaciations. Occasional clay and silt layers and masses occur within and beneath the coarser materials. The deposits, resting on very old bedrock, are generally 300 to 500 feet thick., but range from around 150 to nearly 1000 feet in thickness. As the last glacier retreated from the Cape 12,000 years ayo, sand and gravel was spread smoothly in front of the ice as stream-bed deposits. The entire Waquoit Bay area lies within one such area known as the Mas@pee Outwash Plain. As the glacier retreated, sea le vels rose quickly, and had nearly reached present levels by 3500 years ago. The action of waves and currents shaped the coastline by filling some sheltered bays and tidal channels with fine sediment and organic matter producing tidal mud flats and salt marshes. This was likely the case with Flat, Sage Lot, Hamblin, and Jehu Ponds, probably low areas left as kettle holes after the formation of the outwash plain. The rise in sea level -left them separated from the sea by only a narrow sandy spit whic)o has been punctured periodically with inlets. All four ponds ar@e salty, though the marsh to the north of Flat Pond is fresh. Waves also have shaped the sand spits and barrier beaches, with some contribution from wind action. The shore line is continually shifting. There are several types of glacial deposits on South Cape Beach and Washburn Island. The majority of the site was formed by Mashpee pitted plain deposits, which are gravelly sand with some pebble to small boulder gravel. A smaller area bordering the northern edge of Flat Pond is composed of kame deposits, which differ from the Mashpee pitted plain deposits in having somewhat coarser sands and larger boulders. Dune deposits along the beach are* relatively young due to continual shifting of sands by wind action. They are generally less than twenty feet thick and between ten to several hundreds of years old. Most are sti 11 active. Sandy beach deposits with some minor cobbles and pebbles occur as spits. They are composed of wave-eroded glacial sediments, and tend to be overlain by dune deposits. The marsh and swamp deposits mentioned above consist mainly of decaying estuarine marsh plants along with sand and clay, topped by live marsh plants. The soils on South Cape Beach and Washburn Island correspond to the geology, with some variations and additional categories. In the upland areas ,are several types of loamy course sand within the Mashpee pitted plain and kame deposit areas. The marsh and swamp deposits contain both muck and tidal marsh. The soil categories described below are from reports by the U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service. Muck - These are very poorly drained bog soils formed in accumulations of organic depo sits that- are underlain by mineral soil materials. The upper portion of the organic material is generally black and has decomposed to Such a degree that plant remains cannot be identified by the unaided eye. Decomposition of the materials in the lower portion of the deep Muck soils varies from this condition to one of practically no decomposition, in which plant remains are readily identifiable. Muck soils occur in depressions and potholes. The water table in these soils is at or near the surface most of the year. Some Muck Soils have only one to two-and-one-half feet of organic deposits over mineral soil materials, while in others the organic deposits are many feet thick. Tidal Marsh - This land type consists of areas subject to regular tidal flooding. The areas commonly support salt-tolerant vegetation, sucn as grasses and sedges. The soil material ranges from soft,- plastic silts and clays to matted, fibrous organic deposits. Dune Sand - This land type consists of highly quartzose sands along the ocean shore. I .ndividual sand particles have been rounded by the combined action of wind and waves. TO s land type is continually changing in shape and size. Dunes are formed by beach sand which is swept up by wind and deposited on the leeward side of the beach. Some are partially stabilized by beach grass and hardy shrubs such as beach plum and bayberry; others are devoid of veyatation and are actively shifting. Coestal Beach - This la nd type consists of sandy, gravelly, or cobbly shores that are d and rewashed by waves along the cdast. Some areas are subject to periodic flooding by tides. Areas above tide level are subject to shifting by wind action. Carver loamy sand, U-3% slopes - These are excessively drained soils formed Tn -thick sand deposits. Carvir soils have a loamy coarse sand or coarse sand surface soil and subsoil. The subsoil is underlain by coarse sands. They contain little or no gravel. The soils are loose and have rapid permeability. In places, Carver soils are underlain at a depth of 5 feet or more by a firm, slowly permeable substratum of compact glacial till, silt or clay. These areas are mapped as a firm substratum phase of tne Carver soils. Carver soils occupy nearly level to very steep slopes. Deerfield loamy course sand, 0-3% slopes - These are moderately well drained soils that have formed in thick depoST-ts of sand. They have a 1 oamy sand surface soi.1 and subsoil that are usually free of gravel and cobbles to a depth of 3 feet or more. These soils have a seasonal high water table within 1-1/2 to 2 feet of the surface that keeps them saturated with water in the winter, early spring, and during prolonged periods of rainfall. They do not have stones and boulders on the surf ace or wi thin the soi 1 . They occur on level to'gentle slopes. Au.Gres loamy course sand, 0-3% slopes - These are poorly drained soils developed in thick deposits of sand or sands and gravel. 'The water table is at or near the surface of these soils for about 7 to 9 months each year. They do not contain stones or boulders but may contain gravel and cobbles below the surface in some places. They have rapid permeability. Because G4 they are saturated most of the time, they can absorb little additional water. The Au Gres soils occur on level to gentle slopes. The Barrier Beach and Dune System Almost the entire stretch of dunes (which extend the whole length of South Cape Beach) and the southern portion of Washburn Island is also a barrier beach. The approximately 1UO feet of beach running in front of t@le )roposed new town parking lot is not part of the barrier system, as there is no @iiarsh or water body between it and the mainland; rather its landward side is immediately adjacent to an upland area. Most of the Cape Cod shoreline is continually beiny eroded by long-snore currents. Where current li,-ectlions diverge (nodal points), such as along the oute-r Cape's eastern shore, erosion is accelerated. Where currents converge, accretion occurs. This latti-@r occurrence takes place along the eastern half of Washburn Island and the western half of-Soutm Cape Beach, at the Waquoit Bay inlet. This rest of South Cape Beach is eroding at a moderate rate* 2. Hydrology The loose, sandy soils of the Waquoit Bay area permit rapid percolation of precipitation. In unaltered areas there is virtually no run-off. Of the average' annual precipitation of 42-44 inches', 17-18 inches seep into the soil to recharge ground-water aquifiers (the other 25 inches are lost to trte atmosphere through evaporation and water loss by plants). In coastal areas like Waquoit Bay, ground water is near the surface at approximately sea level. Low areas are often dischange points such 'as swamp, fresh water marshes or kettle hole ponds. The adjacent bodies of salt water nave a major effect on ground water quality. Because fresh water is lighter than salt, fresh ground water at Washburn Island or South Cape Beach tends to "float" above the saline in a relatively shallow lens. Along the edges and at the boundary there is some mixing to form brackish zones. The nature, and to some extent the level, of the ground water can change with tidal oscilla- tion, amounts of fresh water percolation, and volume of fresh water withdrawal for human use. Excessive withdrawal can and does -lead to salt intrusion into individual or adjacent wells. Analyses of ground water in the Waquoit Bay area characterize it as slightly acidic (ph 6.5-7.U), very soft and yenerally low in dissolved solids. Both sodium and chlorine levels can be high at individual sites due to salt water intrusion, and elevated iron and manganese levels are occasionally noted. 3. Climate The Falmouth Mashpe e area, like most of Cape Cod, has the humid continen- tal climate of the northeastern United States. The surrounding waters moderate temperature extremes producing milder winters and cooler summers. Humidity is often high in summer, with fog common in the spring and summer. *From Cape Cod Environmental Atlas, by Arthur H. Brownlow, Editor (Boston: Boston University, 1979), pp. 53-5. Winds are generally from the west with orientation depending on the season; between October and April from the northwest, and between May and September from the southwest. Major storms can come in any season with hurricanes most common in late summer and early fall; "northeasters," in winter and early spring; and local thunderstorms or squalls, in the summer. Hurricanes affecting the area bccurred in September of 1938 and 1944, August of 1954 and 1955, and September of 196U. January and February on the coldest months on Cape Cud and July and Auyust are the warmest. The annual growing season (consecutive frost-free lays) averages between 180-20U days. Average annual precipation is between 42-44 inches, fairly evenly distri- buted throughout the year at 3-4 inches per month. June and July are somewhat drier, averaging 2.9 and 2.7 inches, respectively. Snowfall is highly variable from one year to the next, but averages below 30" per year. Generally snow does not remain on tMe ground for extended periods of time. 4. Biology a. Plants Preliminary vegetative species list for acquatic areas proposed for inclusion in the Waquoit'day National Estuarine Sanctuary: Algae Green algae Cladaphora sp. Codium fragile Entermopha intestinalis EnteromorFha @Imosa Ulva lactuca Brown algae Ascophylum nodosum Fucus spiralis Fucus resiculosus Sar@arssum filipendula Laminaria agardhil Red algae Agardhiella tenera Chondrus, crispus Polysiphonia urceolata Vascular Plants Zostera marina 66 Table 2: Preliminary Vegetative Species List Marsh and Upland Areas Fresh- Salt- Beach/ Mixed Mixed Water Water Barrier Hard- Oak/ Pin Common Name Scientific Name Marsh Marsh Beach woods Aspen Scr Marsh Elder Iva frutescens x x Willow Salix sp. x Saltmarsh Cord Grass Spartina alterniflora X Saltmarsh Hay Spartina patens x Freshwater Cordgrass Spartqina pectinata Broom-Beardgrass Andropogon scoparius Beardgrass Andropogon sp. Hairgrass Deschampsia flexuosa x Spikegrass Distqichlis spicata x Dune Grass Ammophila breviligulata X Sedges Carex sp. x Rushes Juncus sp. x Cattail Typha angustifolia,letifolia x Virginia Creeper Parthenocissus quinquefolia x x x Common Greenbrier Smilax rotundifolia X Glaucous Greenbrier Smilax glauca x Grape Vitis sp. x Bearberry Arctostaphylos uva-ursi x x Thagnum Moss Sphagnum sp. x ranberry Vaccinium macrocarpon X Sundew Drosera rotundifolia x Thread-leaved sundew Drosera filiformis X Three square sedge Scirpus americanus x Marsh fern Dryopteris thelypteris x Yarrow Achillea millefolium x Daisy Chrysanthemum leucanthemum x Wild Carrot Daucus carota x Ragweed Ambrosia artemisifolia x Mullien Verbascum thapsus 0 X Salt Marsh Aster Aster enuifolius x Late Purple Aster Aster patens x Blazing Star Liatris sp. X Chicory Cichorium intybus x Table 2 continued Fresh- Salt- Beach/ Nixed Water Water Rarrier Hard- Oakl Pin Pine Open Pine Common Name Scientific Name Marsh Marsh Reach woods Aspen Screl Grass uh Pitch Pine Pinus rigida x X x X x x X Black Oak Quercus -velutina x X x x X Scarlet Oak Quercus cocinea X X x X White Oak Quercus alba x x X .Scrub Oak Quercus ilicifolia x X x X x x Post Oak Quercus stellata x X Red Oak Quercus rubra x X Red Maple Acer rubrum X Black Locust Robinia pseudo-acacia x Black Gum Nyssa sylvatica x Quacking Aspen Populus tremuloides x X Red Cedar Juniperus virginia x x x x Sassafras Sassafras albidum X Grey Birch Betula populifolia x Black Cherry Prunus serotina X x Chokecherry Prunus virginiana x x Beach Plum Prunus maritima X x Rose Rosa rugosa x Bayberry Myrica pensylvanica X x x x Lowbush Blueberry Vaccinium vacillans x x Highbush Blueberry Vacccinium corymbosum x x x X Black Huckleberry Gaylussacia baccata X Swamp Azalea Rododendron viscosum x Pink Azalea Rhodoendron nudiflorum X Coast Pepperbush Clethra alnifolia x x x Winged Sumac Rhus copallina x x Staghorn Sumac Rhus typhina x x Poison Ivy Rhus radicans X x x x x X x WiinterberOy flex verticillata x Inkberry Ilex glabra x Buckthorn Rhamnus frangula x Groundsel-tree Baccharis halimiifolia x X Northern Wild Raisin Viburnum cassinoides x e Table 2 continued Fresh- Salt_- Reach/ Mixed Water Water Barrier Hard- Oak/ Pine Pine Open Pine Common Name Scientific Name Marsh Marsh Beach woods. Aspen Scrub Grass or swamp Starflower Trientalis borealis x Blue Flag Iris Iris versicolor x .Pink Ladyslipper Cypripedium accule X St. Johnswort Hypercum perforatum x Wild Sarsaparilla Aralia nudicaulis X Canada Mayflower Maianthemum canadense x x Wintergreen Gaulther4a procumbens X x x Spotted Wintergreen Chimaphila maculata X x x Trailing Arbutus Epigaea repens X Solomon's Seal Polygonatum pubes@ens Indian Pipe Monotropa uniflora X x x Sweetfern Comptonia perearina x x x Seaside Goldenrod Solidago sempervirens x x x x Goldenrods Solidago sp. x X X x Beach Peal' Lathyrus Japonicus x Sea Rocket Cakile edentula X Common Saltwort Salsola Kali X Seabeach Sandwort Arenaria peploides X Seaside Spurge Euphorbia polygonifolia x Dusty Miller Artemesia stellariana X Tall Wormwood Artemesia caudata x Glassworts Salicornia europaea, bigelovii, virginica X x Sea Lavender Limonium nashii x Marsh Rosemary Limonium Carolinianum x Phrasmiter Phragmites communis x Rose Shadbush Amelanchir canadensis x Red Chokeberry Pyrus arbitifolia x Fragrant waterlily Nymphaea odorata x b Shel lf i sh Marine invertebrates living in the proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary: Common Name Scientific Name Molluscs Slipper Shell Crepidula fornicata. Slipper Limpet Cre-pid-ula plana Common Periwinkle Littorina 7-T-t-torea Moon Snail Lunatia heros Soft Shelled Clam Ty:a7 -ar e n Tar i a Quahog Mercenaria mercenaria Ribbed Mussel Modiolus demissus Jingle Shell Anomia s mplex Blood Ark Tndara ;-salis Common Mussel FyTir7u s _e U 71s Bay Scallop @equlpeJ-enirradians Razor Clam Ensis directus Moon Snails To-I 'In i Ze-s--A U-T @icatus Knobbled Whelk Busycon carica Channeled Whelk Busycon -ca-n-aTi'alatum Sea Clam Mactra solidissima- American oyster TF-assostrea virginica Lunar dove-sh.ell Ritrella lunata Thick-lipped drill ru-pTe -ur a -ca-n 2 Tat-a I Oyster drill Urosalpi x cinerea Eastern Mud Snail Nassarius-oFs-o-7e-tus Stimpson's surf clam Spisula, Polynyma Atlantic surf clam Spisula idissima Morton's egg cockle Mum mortoni False angel wing Petricola-PFOTRUT-ormis Gem clam Gemma gemma Arthropods Barnacle Balanus sp. Blue crab rMi-n-ectes saRidus Mole crab Emerita ta poida Horseshoe crab ITEU-us po yp emus Spider crab rrm-575--s polyphemus Green crab Z-ar-cTF-us maenas Hermit crab )ng carpus Decapods Squid Loligo paelci 70 c Fi Sh Preliminary list of f i s hspeci es taken from Waquoit Bay and its connecting waters proposed for inclusion within the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary: Family Clupeidae Alosa aestivalis (Mitchill) - blueback herring Alosa pseudoharenqus (Wilson) - alewife Tr-evoo-Ft--i-a tyrannus (Latrobe) - Atlantic menhaden Family Salmonidae Salvelinus fontinalis (Mitchill) - brook trout Family: Osmeridae Osmerus mordax (Mitchill) - rainbow smelt Family: Cyprinidae Notemigonus crysoleucas (Mitchill) golden shiner Family: Catostomidae Catostomus commersoni (Lacepede) - white sucker Family: Anguillidae Anguilla rostrata (LeSueur) American eel Family: Belonidae Strongylura marina (Walbaum) Atlantic needlefish Family: Cyprinodontidae Cyprinodon varie2atus (Lacepede - sheepshead minnow Fundulus Tiaphanus (LeSueur) - banded killifish 7-un`275-us Fe-t-e-r-o-Mtus (Linnaeus) - mummichog Fundlus- ma-jalis (WaTRaum) - striped killifish Lacanf-a ---- parva7l3aird) - rainwater killifish Family: Atherinidae Menidia beryllina (C'ope) - tidewater silverside M'enidia Fe-n-d-idia (Linnaeus) Atlantic silverside 71 Family: Gadi dae Gadus'morhua (Linnaeus) - Atlantic cod Microg-aFu-stomcod (Walbaum) - Atlantic tomcod Pollachius virens (Linnaeus) - pollock Uroph@E-is tenuis (Mitchill) - white hake Family: Gasterosteidae Apeltes quadracus (Mitchill) - fourspine stickleback GasteF-os-t"5`usaE`7eatus (Linnaeus) threespine stickleback Gasterosteus wheat (Putnam) blackspotted stickleback PungiT-lu-spungiLlus (Linnaeus) - ninespine stickleback Family: Syngnathi dae Syngnathus fuscus (Storer) northern pipefish Family: Serranidae Centropristis striata (Linnaeus) - black seabass Family: Percichthyidae Morone americana (Gmelin) white perch Morone saxatilis (Walbaum) striped bass Family:. Percidae Etheostoma nigrum (Rafinesque) - Johnny darter Family: Pomatomidae Pomatomus saltatrix (Linnaeus) - bluefish Family: Sciaenidae Menticirrhus saxitilis (Block and Schne.ider) - northern kingfish Family: Sparidae Stenotomus chrysops (Linnaeus) - scup Family: Labridads Tautoga onitus (Linnaeus) - tautog Tautogolabrus adspersus (Walbaum) - cunner Family: Triglidae Prionotus carolinus (Linnaeus) - northern searobin PrionUtus evolans (Linnaeus) - striped searobin 72 Fami ly: Cottida6 Myoxocephalus aenaeus (Mitchill) - grubby Myoxocephalus octodecemspinosus (Mitchill) longhorn sculpin Family: Cycolpeteridae Cycolperus lumpus (Linnaeus) - lumpfish Fai,,ii 1 yAmmodytidae A,mmodytes americanus (Dekay) - American sand lance Fa'mi I y: Pholidae Pholis gunnellus (Linnaeus) - rock gunnel Family: Mugillidae Mugil cephalus (Linnaeus) stripped mullet Family: Bothidae Paralichthys dent'atus (Linnaeus) - summer flounder Family: Pleuronectidae Pseudopleuronectes americanus (Walbaum) - winter flounder Order: Tetraodontiformes Family: Tetraodontidae Sphaeroides maculatus (Bloch & Schneider) - northern puffer Order: Batrachoidiformes Family: Batrachoididae Opsanus tau (Linnaeus) - oyster toadfish Categories of fish noted in the .proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary: 1. Fresh water fishes that occasionally enter brackish waters: banded killifish golden shiner brook trout johnny darter@ white sucker 73 2. Truly estuarine species which spend their entire lives in the estuary: Atlantic silverside ninespine stickleback fourspine stickleback northern pipefish mummichog oyster toadfish rainwater killifish sheepshead minnow threespine stickleback tidewater silverside blackspotted stickleback 3. Anadromous and catadromous fish species: alewife striped bass American eel white perch rainbow smelt blueback herring 4. Marine species which pay regular seasonal visits to the estuary usually as adults: American sand lance northern kingfish Atlantic needlefish northern puffer striped mullet northern searobin grubby striped searobin longhorn sculpin summer flounder scup 5. Marine species which use the estuary primarily as a nursery ground usually spawning and spending much of their adult life at sea, but often returning seasonally to the estuary: Atlantic menhaden tautog Atlantic tomcod white hake cunner winter flounder 6. Adventitious visitors, which appear irregularly and have no apparent estuarine requirements: Atlantic cod lumpfish black seabass pollock bluefish rock gunnel d. Birds A preliminary listing of bird species found at the proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary: Common Loon Merganser species Red throated Loon Hawks Various varieties of Grebes Bob-White Quail Sheerwater Species Pheasant American Egret Rail species Snowy Egret Plover species Green Heron Ruddy Turnstone 74 Black Crowned Night Heron Sandpiper species American Bittern Yellow legs Mute Swan Owls, various species Common Canada Goose Flickers American Brant Gulls, various species Mallard and Black Ducks Song birds Baldpate Duck Whip-Poor-will Green and 3lue-Winged Teal Catbird Greater and Lesser Scaup Blackbird Golden Eye Duck Yellow Warbler Buffle-head Duck Common Yellow throat Scoter species Eider A checklist of Massachusetts breeding birds in the Waquoit Bay vicinity:* Species Code Species, Code Green Heron PRobable Eastern Kingbird PO Snowy Egret 70nfirmed Horned Lark co Mute Swan 77ssible Tree Swallow PR Canada Goose Barn.Swallow PR Mallard CO Blue Jay CO Black Duck CO Common Crow Co Osprey PR Black@-capped Chickadee CO Ruffed Grouse PO White-breasted Nathatch PO Bobwhite CO Brown Creeper PO Ring-neck Pheasant' PR Grey Catbird CO Piping Plover Co Brown Thrasher PO Killdeer PO American Robin Co Spotted Sandpiper CO Eastern Bluebird PO Great Black-backed Gull PO Starling CO Herring Gull PO Common Yellowthroat PR Laughing Gull PO House Sparrow CO Common Tern CO Red-winged Blackbird CO Least Tern CO Northern Oriole Co Rock Dove CO Common Grackle PR Mourning Dove Co Brown-headed Cowbird PR Whip-poor-will PO Cardinal PO Belted Kingfisher PR Purple Finch PO Common Flicker Co House Finch Co Downy Woodpecker PO American Goldfinch PR Savannah-,Sparrow Co Rufous-sided Towhee co "Massachusetts Breeding Bird Atlas Project", Massachusetts Audubon Society, (unpublished). 75 e. Mammal s A preliminary listing of mammal species found at the proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary: Various Species of Moles Shrews 3ats Skunk Red Fox Red and Gray Squirrels Chipmunk Muskrat Cotton tail rabbit Deer Racoon Woodchuck f. Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Species Rare, endangered, or threatened species noted in the proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary: RARE PLANT SPECIES* Name Common Name Mass. status Federal status Agalinis acuta Sandplain gerardia Critically Considered for endangered listing as throughout Endangered under range ESA, (Category 1). Heliathemum dumosum Bushy Rockrose Threatened Considered for throughout listing as range Threatened under Asclepias tuberosa Butterfly Weed Apparently ESA, (Category 2). secure in state ind range. Spiranthes tuberosa Little Ladies' Apparently Tresses secure in state throughout range.1 1. Recently removed from Division of Fisheries & Wildlife Rare Plant List. Source: Massachusetts Natural Heritage Program, Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, 1984. 7S RARE ANIMAL SPECIES Acipense brevirostrum2 Shortnose Sturgeon Proposed for Listed as End3n,-l listing as inder Endangered.3 Sterna antillarum Least Tern Proposed for .listing is Threatened.3 Charadrius melodus Piping Plover Threathened throughout range 1hreatenec Jnder (Category 2.). Malaclemys terrapin Northern Diamond- Proposed for back terrapin listing as a Species of Special Concern3 2. Historical occurrence (last verified before 1978). 3. Oivision of Fisheries & Wildlife Rare Animal List currently under revision. 5. Ecosystem The following is a brief description of the various resource areas found within the proposed Sanctuary boundaries. Collectively they make uP the Bay's ecosystem. Barrier Beach System: The low-lying beach forming South Cape Beach, Dead Neck and the sOuthFrn segment of Washburn Island protects the estuarine resources within the Waquoit Bay system. Salt water access into the astuary is restricted to the tidal flow through the narrow cut between th,@ easL end of Washburn Island and Dead Neck. The barrier beach is undeveloped. @art of South Cape Beach is a recreational beach. Salt Marsh: There are approximately 316 acres of salt marsh in the Waquoit Bay system. The Mashpee portion of the system has 240 of these acres, most of which surround Hamblin Pond, Jehu Pond, Sage Lot' Pond and tne head of Great River. Salt marsh acreage on the Falmouth side occurs in small parcels scattered mostly about Washburn Island and the head of 'elaquoit, Bay. Throughout the system these marshes are almost exclusively privately- owned, although the Commonwealth's acquisition of the South Cape Beach anc, Washburn Island includes the Sage Lot Pond marsh and others, totaling 121 acres. The high productivity of the salt marshes contributes to the food chain of the near shore environment. Shellfish Beds: The combination of warm shallow water and a sand mA sediment provides ideal conditions for an abundance of shellfish in the estuary. In order- of economic importance, quahogs, bay scallops and soft shelled clams are harvested recreationally and commerci al ly. Shel 1 f i sMi ng provides the primary source of income to those who use the estuary for economic purposes. Both Falmouth and Mashpee recognize the need to protect and maintain this valuable resource. Long-standing programs of propagation and predator control are ongoing. Anadromous and Catadromous Fish Run: The Quashnet River, stretching to Johns Pond in Mashpee, is an imp@_rtant alewife run. American eel, rainbow smelt, blueback herring, stripped bass and white perch are also found within the system. Erosion and Accretion Areas: Moderate erosion occurs along the length of South Cape Beach and F-heWestern half of Washburn Island. Stone groins were constructed on the tidal flat at the western end of Washburn in the 1930's by the Division of Waterways to trap easterly-moving sand. These groins have now decayed to the point where they are no longer effective, and the beach continues to retreat. The eastern portion of Washburn fronting the Sound experiences accretion, but this buildup of sand does not seem to have seriously affected the entrance channel to Waquoit Bay. Dunes: Sand dunes are found on both Dead Neck and the eastern end of Washburn Island. The Dead Neck dunes are more extensive and are currently under the management of the South Cape Beach State Park. 78 Beach: South Cape Beach has long been recognized as one of Cape Cod's finest sandy beaches by both summer visitors and permanent residents. it is also a prime surfcasting area for fishermen when bluefish are running. Motor vehicle access is presently limited to an ungraded extension of Great Oak Road in Mashpee. Estuary: The Waquoit Bay estuarine system is composed of interconnected water bodies, including Waquoit Bay, Hamblin Pond, Jehu Pond, Flat Pond, Caleb Pond, Bog Pond, Bourne Pond and Sage Lot Pond. Fresh water enters the syste!i through the Quashnet River, which originate at Johns pond and throug@ @ed Brook; Little River, which flows- from Hamblin Pond and through Red Brook; and Great River, from Jehu Pond. The waters are classified SA (suitable for propa- gation of aquatic life, primary and secondary contact recreation, and shellfish harvesting without depuration) by the Division of I-later Pollution Control. Under the antidegradation provisions of the Water Quality Standards, the water3 are furthur classified as 4.2, Protection of High Quality Waters. Significant Scenic Site: The striking scenic quality of the Waquoit Bay area is due to the remaining open land which surrounds much of the Bay. The entire western and southern shores of Waquoit Bay are composed of the undeveloped stretches of Washburn Island and Dead Neck. In addition, there is a magnificent view of the headlands of Martha's Vineyard, f i ve Mi I.es distant across Vineyard Sound. Fish Spawning and Nursery_Area: Many species of finfish utilize the warm water and nutrient-rich conditions of this estuary as a spawning and nursery ground. ' In addition to the anadromous and catadromous species already mentioned, there are also exclusively marine species that use the estuary, including Atlantic menhaden, Atlantic tomcod, cunner, tautog, white hake and winter flounder. A Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries- investigating team found that the Waquoit Bay system exhibited the greatest diversity of estuarine finfish species, among the nine areas studied in the Commonwealth. The team attributed this abundance to Waquoit's location south of Cape Cod where cold water species from the Gulf of Maine and warm water species from tile Mid-Atlantic intermingle. Wildlife Habitat: An adequate supply of food water and cover in the Say area provides an important' breeding ground for many species of both land and sea birds. B Current Use of Site 1. Huntinq Hunting has traditionally occurred on Washburn Island and South C ape Beach. No hunting occurs at the Swift Estate site because of its small size and developed nature. Species generally hunted in the Waquoit Bay area i nc 1 ude pheasants, rabbits, squirrels, quail, and migratory waterfowl. Seasons and other rel7U- lations are set by the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife. For all the above species, seasons occur between October and Februari. No @i;jntin'j is allowed on Sundays. Pheasants have been stocked on South Cape Beach since 1975-76 by the Division of Fish and Wildlife at a level of approximately 120 birds a year. The 1983 season ran from October 20 to November 26. Between October 19 and November 24, 1983, 104 birds were released. An additional 12 birds '-4ere released at the close of the season in an effort to re-establish a native population. Hunting activity was heaviest at the beginning of the season with a turnout Of 12 to 20 hunters per day on weekdays and approximately 40 hunters the first Saturday. For the rest of the season levels were at 0 to 10 per weekday and 25 to 30 on Saturdays. Most hunting occurred during morning hours with the average hunter stay of approximately 3 hours. Waterfowl hunting levels in 1983 were low with most activity occurring before 8:00 a.m. 2. Fishing Considerable recreational (rod and reel) fishing occurs in the lower (southern) end of Waquoit Bay for such species as winter flounder, striped bass, bluefish, tautog, white perch, sea-run brook trout and tomcod. Most of this is done from boats or at the mouth of the Bay on Washburn Island or South Cape Beach. There is some commercial fishing for eels in the upper parts of the estuary. Fishing is done wih eel pots in warm months and with spears in colder periods. A springtime run of alewives and blueback herring enters the Bay and goes up the Quashnet River to spawn. Young of the year move down river into the Bay during the summer months. Local sportfishing groups, in cooperation with the State Division of Fisheries and Wildlife have re-established a population of sea-run brook trout in the Quashnet river. These fish periodically are found in Waquoit Bay. 3. Shellfishing Shellfishing is done both recreationally and commercially in Waquoit Bay It is directly managed by the two communities involved under plans approved 1); the State Division of Marine Fisheries. Species harvested include quahogs, bay scallops, and some soft-shell clams. so The 1983 Town Report for Falmouth lists, the following take from that Town 's por.tion of the Bay: 410 bushels of soft-shell clams, 2,900 bushels'of quahogs, and 250 bushels - of bay scallops. These figures represent only one year of shellfish take for one of the two Towns with jurisdiction over Waquoit Bay's shellfish resources. Shellfish harvests are quite variable from year to year and season to season. One of the goals of the Sanctuary Research Program's baseline studies would be to estimate past and present harvest levels by year and season, if possible. Recreational harvesting of shellfish is 3 1 so an unknown which likely contributes significantly to the seasonal and yearly shellfish harvest. Figures for the Mashpee section of the Bay are not presently available. 4. Boating Recreational boating is very popular in and around Waquoit Bay and its ,connecting waterways. With th6 exception of the Little River boatyard located on the Little River, there are presently no marinas ' or heavily-used mooring areas within the proposed Sanctuary. Along the shores of the Metoxit area of Falmouth and the Seconsett and Monomoscoy Islands there are many docks and moorings for small boats. There is a public landing and marina on the Childs River and another public landing on the Seapit River; both of these are outside the proposed boundaries of the Sanctuary. A Town of.Mashpee landing is loc,ated on the Great River and the South Cape Beach agreement provides for space on the Great River for a Town of Mashpee boat launching facility. Some of the boating on Waquoit Bay is for commercial shellfishing purposes. There have been concerns raised in both Falmouth,and Mashpee about present and future management of boating. Falmouth is developing a management plan for boating and such related activities as waterskiing. Mashpee is involved in ongoing planning for future needs for mooring areas and accessible waterways. The shal-low nature of the Bay, the size of the mouth and of the connecting waterways and the prohibition against dredging within the boundaries of the Area of Critical Environmental Concern all serve as limiting features on the size and type of boating. It is expected that boating in the Say will remain principally recreational in nature (with some commercial shellfishermen) and small (below 30-35 feet) in size of craft. 5. Aesthetics The undeveloped, "pristine" nature of the Bay, Washburn Island and South Cape Beach is enjoyed by many of the visitors-to the area as well as nearby residents and townspeople of Falmouth and Mashpee. This appreciation was manifested in both local and statewide support for acquisition of the parcels now included in the State Park. People use the area for swimming in the high quality waters, walking the clean beaches, harvesting the uncontaminated shellfish, and viewing the plants and animals of the area in a peaceful and unhurried atmosphere. 6. Housing .There is no housing on Washburn Island and only one summer residence on South 'Cape Beach. As one of the terms of acquisition for the State par@ a continuing tenancy, or life-estate, has been negotiated. At some point in @@Je future, the Commonwealth will acquire complete control of this structure. Presently no one is inhabiting the Swift Estate that is proposed for acquisition as part of the Sanctuary. Therefore, no residents will be displaced as a result of Sanctuary designation. 7. Archaeological and Historic Interests The building and grounds of the portion of the Swift Estate proposed for inclusion in the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary are classic examples of rural, coastal Victorian architecture and landscaping. This style evolved at the end of the 1800's around the recreation and tourism influences of wealthy individuals leaving the cities and summering along the coast. Subsequent to designation, it is proposed to explore the potential for nomination of this site to the National Register of Historic Places. I-n Massachusetts this prograin is administered for the National Park Service by the State Historical Preser- vation Office under the auspices of the Massachusetts Historical Commission (a sub-di-vision of the office of the Massachusetts Secret,ary of State). Such a listing would make it eligible for potential funding for preservation of National Register properties. A preliminary historic and archaeologic survey on South Cape Beach identi- fied no areas of special interest. A more intense survey is being developed as part of an upcoming State Environmental Impact Report. Historic reports indicate that the site was used as a summer fishing and hunting encampment for Native American tribes. A walkover survey of Washburn Island found two areas with historic artifacts along the eastern shore. Further investigation would be required to relate these stone.flakes to activities by Native Americans. They could indicate an encampment area or merely a temporary worksite. Historic maps of Washburn Island show five structures between '1853 and 1910. Evidence of two additional structures was found during a recent (1982) survey. Evidence of some of these structures can no longer be found because of U.S. Army construction between 1942 and-1945. At that time, military barracks, mess halls, garages and related structures were built as part of the defense effort of World War II. 82 PART IV. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES A. General Impacts The overall impact of establishing the proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary would be environmentally beneficial. Soci.al and economic impacts would be both beneficial and adverse to some degree. Designation of the Sanctuary would entail minimal developnent or physical alteration of present environmental conditions beyond v4hat is already proposed as part of South Cape Beach State Park and on Washburn Island. The com)ination of present Federal, State, and local land-use and ragulatory programs and the management plans for the State properties serves to ensure a minir,,Ium of environ- mental disturbance will occur in this area. Access for traditional uses of the proposed Sanctuary would not be changed. Fishing.and shellfishing will continue to be administered by the same authorities and hunting will be under the management of the Department of Environmental Management (DEM). On South Cape Beach, advice and review will be offered by the South Cape Beach State Park Advisory Committee. A detailed management plan for the Sanctuary will be developed incor". ra- ting criteria for the Swift Estate and the management plan prepared by DEM for park lands. Adjacent landowners would be unaffected. B. Specific Impacts 1. Natural Environment Physical impacts on the 'natural environment though designation of a National Estuarine Sanctuary in Waquoit Bay would be negligible. Effects of the Education and Research Programs would be beneficial in the long run through a better understanding of the estuary and mangement of its resources. 2. Human Environment a. Scientific and Educational It is the goal of the Sanctuary Research and Educafional Programs to provide the public a better understanding of the resources and interworkings of the estuary. This should benefit the resources of the estuary and help satisfy those curious about estuarine systems. b. Public Acces s Acquisition of South Cape Beach and Washburn Island has made these once- private lands accessible to the public. The further acquisition of the Swift Estate proposed by tanct 'uary designation will open another avenue of access to the public for education and interpretive purposes. Here the public will not only experience the environment, but will more fully become a part of it, through a better understanding of its workings. For researchers, a guaranteed access will be available-along with the support facilities of the Sanctuary Research Program. c. State and Federal Acquisition and management of the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary will have a short-term fiscal impact on the Federal government and the Co,nmon- wealth of Massachusetts. Long-term operation of the Sanctuary will @e the responsibility of the Commonwealth; however, as discussed above, attempts will be made to investigate alternate funding sources for long-term operations. Any expenditures are expected to be offset by t,,,io non-quanti f i able bene- fits: (1) improved scientific and technical knowledge to be applied toward management practices concerning estuarine resources here and in other areas, and (2) improved intergovernmental coordination in the Bay system as a -Whole. The sanctuary management plan shall not prohibit any activity conducted ty the Department of Defense that is essential for national defense or in response to an emergency. To the maximum extent practicable, s'uch activities shall be conducted consistently with the management plan. C. Unavoidable Adverse Environmental or Socio-Economic Impacts 1. Tax Revenue Loss Acquisition of the Swift property will result in a Timited loss of revenu e to the Town of Falmouth. After a proposed sub-division of the Swift property, State acquisition would result in a net loss of approximately $2,500-$3,00;0 per year in tax income based on 1984 figures. Any future acquisition of marsh areas in Falmouth or Mashpee could result in slight additional tax revenue loss. 2. Pedestrian and Traffic Impacts Designation is expected to introduce additional people into the Sanctuary and the included Park areas under the Research and Educational Programs. It is expected that, with appropriate management plans and implementation, there should be an insignificant effect. Establishment of a Sanctuary Headquarters at the Swift Estate would increase traffic impacts along Route 28. Initially this would entail only Sanctuary staff and researchers, an expected average of 20 vehicle trips per day. As the educational program develops and displays and information are available for the public, this figure could increase. Evening activities or meetings could produce "pulses" of traffic entering or exiting the facility. D. Relationship between the Proposed Action on the Environment and the Fa'intenance and Enhancement of_Long-Term ProductLi@L The expressed purpose of the proposed action is to protect the Waquoit Bay ecosystem in perpetuity and to guarantee long-term stability to the benefit of a large and diverse assemblage of wildlife and fish species. Regulated harvesting of natural resources would continue, but there would be no short- term or exploitative uses at the expense of long-time productivity or continued public utilization. By implication, all short-term uses that would reduce or 84 eliminate long-term productivity would be prevented with the proposed action and 'intended management. The proposed action of habitat preservation and resource conservation is conducive to maintaining natural producti vi ty and ecosystem processes wit-i little or no work or subsidy by man. The natural productive efficiency of estuaries is among the highest of all known natural or artificial systems and is virtually irreplacable. The protection and management of the area as a natural field laboratorY will serve to maintain, and possibly enhance, Ahe ecosystem's productivity in the long term. E. Irreversible or Irretrievable Commitments of Resources No irreversible or irretrievable commitments of resources have @een identified in the assessment or are expected to result from the proposed action. No reduction in income to the county would result from loss of agricultural production. No other adverse, unavoidable environmental impacts are known. No significant construction is anticipated, except for possible education facili- ties such as an interpretative center, trails, signs, and small upland parking areas at controlled access points. Other than spqrt and commercial fish, shellfish, and wildlife harvesting, no extraction of renewable or nonrenewable resources would occur. Endangered, threatened, and sensitive species and their vital habitats would be protected, as would'any known or discovered archeofogi- cal. or historical sites. Minor maintenance and energy expenditures would beincurred, as would the expenditure of public funds. These may be regarded as a commitment of economic resources and also as an investment in recreation amenities for the welfare of present and future generations. F. Possible Conflicts Between the Proposed Action and the Objectives of Federal, State, Regional, and Local Land-use Plans, Policies and Controls for the Area Concerned No conflicts have been not 'ed in the assessment used to develop the proposed Sanctuary designation. By incorporating existing local, State, and Federal regulatory, land-use, and resource management programs, it is intended that the Sanctuary operation will carefully fit into its natural and institutional environment. PART V: LIST OF PREPARERS WASHINGTON, D.C. Mr. Artnur E. Jeffers, Sanctuary Projects Manager Sanctuary Programs Division National Jcean Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Washington, D.C. Ms. Sherrard C. Foster, Assistant Project Manager Sa nctuary Programs Division Dr. Frank Hebard, Projects Manager Sanctuary Programs Division Ms. Gloria Thompson, Proyram Specialist Sanctuary Programs Division MASSACHUSETTS Mr. Stephen Bliven, Coastal Biologist and Planner Coastal Zone Management Office Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs Boston, Massachusetts Mr. Gary Clayton, Assistant Director Coastal Zone Management Office Mr. Harry Dodson, Planner Department of Environmental Management Ms. Ruth Helfeld, Planner Department of Environmental Management Mr. Jack Clarke, Cape Cod Planning and Economic Development Commission 87 PART VI: LIST OF AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND PERSONS RECEIVING COPIES OF THE FEIS/DMP Federal Agencies Advisory Council of 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 Department of Transportation - Federal Highway Administration Environmental Protection Agency Permits Branch, Region 1, Environmental Protection Agency Federal Energy Regulatory Commission General Services Administration Nuclear Regulatory Commission National Interest.Groups (Commented on the DEIS o rrequested an FEIS) United Mobile Sportfishermen, Inc. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute United States.Senators The Honorable Edward M. Kennedy The Honorable Paul E. Tsongas United States Representatives The Honorable Gerry E. Studds Massachusetts State Government The Honorable Michael S. Dukakis, Governor Executive Office of Environmental Affairs Environmental Impact Review (MEPA) Commissioner Department of Environmental Management Office of Planning Department of Environmental Management Bureau of Recreation Department of Environmental Planning Forests and Park's Division Department of Environmental Management Acquisition Division Department of Environmental Management Engineering Division Department of Environmental Management Planning Division Department of Environmental Management Region I Department of Environmental Management South Cape Beach State Park Department of Environmental Management Commissioner Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and Recreational Vehicles Fisheries and Wildlife Division Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and Recreational Vehicles Non-Game Endangered Species Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and Recreational Vehicles Natural Heritage Program Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and Recreational Vehicles Division of Marine Fisheries Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and Recreational Vehicles Division of Marine Fisheries Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and Recreational Vehicles Research and Management Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and Recreational Vehicles Commissioner Department of Environmental Quality Engineering Division of Wetlands and Waterways Regulation Department of Environmental Quality Engineering Southeast Region Department of Environmental Quality Engineering Director Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Office Cape and Islands Senatorial District Massachusetts Historical Commission Coastal Resources Advisory Board Cape Cod C itizens Alvisory Committee 90 Cape Cod Planning and Economic Development Commission South Cape Beach State Park Advisory Committee State Senator Paul V. Doane, Cape and Islands Senatorial District Local Officials Town of Falmouth Board of Selectmen Planning Board Conservation Commission Board of Health Harbormaster Shellfish Warden Waterways Committee Department of Public Works Conservation Department Falmouth Airport Town of Mashpee Board of Selectmen Planning Board Conservation Commission Board of Health Harbormaster Recreation Director Shellfish Officer Waterways Advisory Committee State, Regional and Local Environmental Organizations Massachusetts Association of Conservation Commissions Massachusetts Audubon Society Association for the Preservation of Cape Cod Citizens for the Protection of Waquoit Bay Wellfleet Audubon Sanctuary New Alchemy Institute Environmental Lobby of Massachusetts Nature Conservancy Conservation Law Foundation of New England Trustees of Reservations Sierra Club Scientific and Educational Organi.zations Provincetown Center for Coastal Studies Cape Cod Museum of Natural History Sea Grant Office - Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Coastal Research Center - Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Cape Cod Community College Lloyd Center for Environmental Studies, So. Dartmouth, MA NEED Collaborative (Falmouth, Dennis, Yarmouth, Harwich School Systems) Other Regional or Local Groups The New Seabury Corporation Edwards Boatyard Inc. The Waquoit Association Precinct 7 (Falmouth) Organization Waquoit Shellfish Corporation Waquoit Bay Yacht Club Menauhant Yacht Club League of Barnstable County Sportsman's Clubs, Inc. Metoxit Point Association Individual Landowners Edward S. Anderson John W. Atkinson Richard E. Ball Steven R. Ball Joseph Biknaitis Mary B. Bingham Richard J. Breivogel Ronald Bourque Robert DeVoe Guiseppe Durso Francis B. Ellis Pauline A. Gregory Earl H. Hutt Jennie E. James Arthur F. Koch Donald Koslow Albert V. Lawton Edgar A. Leaf Joseph J. McGrath Louis M. McMenany Harris Douglas Moore John J. Moore New Seabury Corporation Richard D. Otis Nancy S. Pfeiffer Edward F. Quirk Red Brook Corporation Henry Spohr Francis Southwick John F. Stanton Joseph R. Uzmann John L. Venckus Albert W. Whitmore Ruth E. Witkus Kathryn V. Wood 92 Individuals Who have Provided Comments on the DEIS, or Who have Reque sted an FEIS/DMP Abbott, Tom Abbott, Mrs. William J. Aloi, Anthony J. Anderson, Edward S. Andrews, Ruth M. Bailey, Laura C. Bailey, Louise A. Ball, Richard E. Ball, John D. Barnun, Nancy Barnum, Sarah K. Biknaitis, Joseph M. Bode, Henry Boretos, C. Diane Bourque, Vicki Bourne, Donald W. Breivogel, Carl Breivogel, Richard Burden, Chris Byk, Chester and Ruth Cadwalader, Sandra L. Canning, Robert and Jean Collins, Peggy Cowam, Terry Davison', Donald P. DeVoe, Mr. and Mrs. Warren Douthart, Elizabeth Fiske, John D. Flynn, Martin Gaines, Arthur C. Gallagher, William Good, Neil Hugo, Theodore E. Hutt, Cornelia Hutt, Earl H. Kelley, Dorothy R. and Olin J. Kirsher, Morris Kistin, Marcel S. Koblinsky, Chester and Marjorie Koch, Edith V. Loring, Pat Lynch, Joseph F. Martiros, William Mason, Everett & Kathleen McGrath, Muriel McLean, Ann A. McNally, Monica Miller, William E. O'Malley-Keyes, M. E. Overholtz, Bi I I Palmer, David & Patricia Petersen, Jon Peterson, Jane Philobotte, Norman Rose, Leonard Seay, Bob Schlitz, Ronald Shibel, Mrs. Joseph Smith, Janice R. Spohr, Elizabeth and Henry N. Stauton, John F. Stetson, Judith C. Studds, Honorable Gerry Swain, Charles A. Sanders-Fleming, Allison Talmage, Ms. Valerie Thomas, B. Jean Tripp, Bruce W. Turkington, Eric Uzmann, Joseph R.. Webb, George W. Weisner, Herman A. Williams, Deborah M. Witt, William S. Witten, Jon Woods, Winnifred IqA PART VII: WRITTEN AND VERBAL COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE WAQUOIT BAY NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND DRAFT MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND NOAA-S RESPONSES This section presents the written and verbal comments received on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Draft Management Plan (DEIS/DMP), and provides NOAA's response to these comments. Generally, the responses are made in one or more of the following ways: 1. Expansion, clarification, or revision of the DEIS/DMP, 2. General response to comments raised by several reviewers, and 3. Specific responses to individual comments made by each reviewer. The written comments received are arranged in the following order: 1. Federal Agencies 2. Congressional 3. State and Local Government 4. Environmental Organizations 5. Fish and Ga'me Clubs 6. Private Individuals The written comments are followed by a section containing a verbatim transcript of speakers at the 'public h earing. They appear in the order of thei.r presentation at the hearing. For the convenience of the reader, all comments appear on the left side of the page, and corresponding responses appear on the right side of the page. The following are three of the most common issues raised by reviewers. General Comments and Resp onses A. Expand the boundaries so that the proposed Sanctuary boundary coincides with the presently existing Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) One of the criteria upon which national estuarine sanctuary sites are established is assurance that the site encompass an adequate portion of the key land and water areas of the natural system to approximate an ecological unit. In general the core areas of these systems should be measurably saline and tidally influenced. Several upstream, freshwater areas of the ACEC, among them the headwaters of the Childs River, do not meet this criterion. In addition, designation of these ACEC "upstream" areas as part of the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary would not, by itself alone, offer these areas any additional protection. For these and several other reasons further discussed on page -'Z in the discussion concerning Boundary Alternative 4, the entire ACEC boundary has not been proposed as the preferred Sanctuary boundary alternative. 95 B Concern that the Swift Estate would be used as a general public access point to Washburn Island for recreational purposes The Swift Estate will not be used as a "jumping-off point" for access to Washburn Island for other than research or education purposes under t'he auspices of the Sanctuary. As discussed at page 41, the proposed acquisi- tion and renovation of the Swift Estate would be for the purposes of estab- lishing administrative headquarters for the Sanctuary (office, library, public meeting rooms, Sanctuary Manager quarters, equipment storage, an,! 4- educational, interpretive and laboratory facilities). There is no intenL. to encourage, through facilities or publicity, widespread public access "or recreation. No public parking areas for recreation will be established. No public dock or launching facilities for recreational purposes will be created at the Swift Estate site. Faciliites necessary to support research, inter- pretive and educational activities will, however, be necessary. C. Concern about the Commonwealth's intent in acquiring access rights on privately-owned salt marshes, and the effects on landowners As discussed in a number of locations in this document, long-term guaranteed access to salt marsh areas, particularly for research purposes, is vital to the accomplishment of Sanctuary goals. Most of the salt marshes proposed for inclusion in the Sanctuary, however, are privately-owned. Designation of these areas as part of a National Estuarine Sanctuary would make no change in private ownership rights. Following designation, activities on private property will remain subject to the same regulatory authorities and controls as prior to designation. There will be no change in existing public access rights. Prior to designation, the Commonwealth will attempt to negotiate mutually acceptable access rights, between willing landowners and the Commonwealth. Landowners will be contacted to more fully explain the intent and the needs of the Sanctuary, and possible tax and other incentives. It is not anticipated that the Commonwealth would consider acquiring ownership rights or other property interests througheminent domain proceedi ngs . 96 I I . I I I .I I COMMENTS AND RESPONSES I Federal Agencies I . . I I I I I I I I I 1 97 1 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION I J.F. KENNEDY FEDERAL BUILDING, BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02990 September 4, 1984 Dr. Nancy Foster Chief, Sanctuary Programs Division National Ocean Service/NOAA 3400 Whitehaven Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20235 Re: D-HOA-B90007-HA Dear Dr. Foster: In accordance with Section 309 of the Clean Air Act, the National Environmental Policy Act and Section 1424(c) of the Safe Drinking Water Act, we have reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact State- ment (EIS) and Draft Management Plan for the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary, located in Barnstable County, Massachusetts. From the standpoint of EPA's areas of jurisdiction and expertise, we believe that the proposed plan will not cause significant adverse impacts on the environment, and will not affect the ground- water quality of the Cape Cod sole source aquifer so as to create a significant hazard to public health. We have rated this EIS LO-1 in accordance with our national EIS rating system (copy enclosed). Thank you for the opportunity to review the Draft EIS. Please send Five (5) copies fo the Final EIS when it becomes available. Sincerely yours, Stephen F. Ells, Director Office of Government Relations and Environmental Review Enclosure 1.1 Comment noted; no response necessary. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION REGION ONE 55 Broadway - 10th Floor Cambridge, MA 01242 IN REPLY REFER TO: Waquoit Bay National Estuarine HPE-HA Sancturary - DEIS September 4, 1984 Dr. N. Foster, Chief Sanctuary Programs Division national Ocean Service/NOAA 3300 Whitehaven Street, NW Washington, D. C. 20235 Dear Dr. Foster: We have reviewed the draft environmental impact statement/draft management plan on the proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary and have no comments. Sincerely yours, James A. Walsh Division Administrator By: P. Robinson Transportation Planner cc: Ms. Joyce Wood, Chief Ecology and Conservation Division U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Washington, D.C. Mr. W. Chubb, LCDR, U.S. Coast Guard Philadelphia, PA 2.1 Comment noted; no response necessary. United States Department of the Interior OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASIIINGI-ON, D.C. 20240 SEP 5 1984 ER 84/941 Dr. Nancy foster Chief. Sanctuary Programs Division National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 3300 Whitehaven Street. N.W. Washington. 0. C. 20235 Dear Dr. Foster: We have reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Draft Management Plan for the proposed Waquolt Bay Nationa],Estuarine Sanctuary and have the following comments. We concur with the proposal to establish Waquolt Bay as a National Estuarine 3.1 Sanctuary. We are concerned. however, that the boundaries of the Sanctuary may not Include sufficient land and water areas to protect Waquoit Bay fully 3.1 Comment noted; no response necessary. for research and educational purposes. For example, water bodies such as Eel, " , Bourne and Little Flat Ponds. and Seapit, Childs and Quashnet Rivers, 3.2 and Red Brook are interconnected to Waquolt Bay. However, It appears that the Sanctuary would have little or no control over land and water development 3.2 we are also concerned about land and water development activities in activities on or adjacent to these water bodies. We suggest that the bound- areas adjacent to the proposed Sanctuary aries be extended to Include all of the watershed of Waquolt Bay. or that boundaries., However. the ACLC boundaries, regulatory mechanisms be developed and included in the plan to insure that which extend beyond those of the proposed the intended research and education programs will be fully protected. Sanctuary, effectively serve as buffer areas to Sanctuary resources. This is Mineral resources likely to be found In the area are peat and sand and gravel. because of the special attention ACEC Deposits known to be In the area should be described and indicated on maps areas receive under protective Comition- In the final document. Operation of the sanctuary as a natural field wealth statutes. However, expansion of 3.3 laboratory will not Inhibit development of mineral deposits because In 1979 the proposed Sanctuary's boundary (for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts designated Waquolt Bay as an "Area of instance, to include the entire watershed Critical Environmental Concern.m Owing to the existing restrictions on of Waquolt Bay) would not. by itselt. mineral resource development In the area, we anticipate no additional provide any additional protection to Impacts on minerals as a result of the proposed desijnation. those "upstream" land and water areas. Thank you for the opportunity to review this document. Please also note the discussion on page Y) under Boundary Alterndtive 4. Sincerely, 3.3 To the extent praticable, deposits of mineral resources likely to be in the Sanctuary will he described and their location indicated graphically in the final management plan. Bruce Blanchard, Director Environmental Project Review DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service Centers for Disease Control Atlanta GA 30333 August 28, 1984 Dr. Nancy Foster Chief, Sanctuary Programs Division National Ocean Service/NOAA 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 Dear Dr. Foster: We have reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Draft Management Plan for Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary, Massachusetts. We are responding on behalf of the U.S. Public Health Service. 4.1 We have reviewed this Draft EIS for possible human health effects and have no comments to offer. Thank you for the opportunity to review this Draft EIS. Please send us a copy of the final statement when it becomes available. Sincerely yours, Stephen Margolis, Ph.D. Chief, Environmental Affairs Group Environmental Health Services Division Center for Environmental Health 4.1 Comment noted; no response necessary. DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE REGIONAL CIVIL ENGINEER, EASTERN REGION (HQ AFESC) 824 Title Building, 30 Pryor Street, S W Atlanta, Georgia 30333 REPLY TO of ROV3 28 August 1984 SUBJECT: Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary - Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) and Draft Management Plan TO: United States Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Attn: Dr. Nancy Foster Chief, Sanctuary Programs Division National Ocean Service/NOAA 3300 Whitehaven Street, NW Washington, DC 20235 1. As the Air Force central point of ocntact for Environmental Planning in the eastern United States, we have reviewed the subject DEIS and Draft Management Plan. Our comments are as follows: a. Several flight tracks identified in the Otis AFB, MA Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) Plan traverse the proposed sanctuary area. Thus, there is a potential impact on flying operations at Otis AFB. b. An active bombing range is located at Nomans Land, a small island approximately 40 miles south of the proposed sanctuary area. The range is designated as a restricted area, R-4105. Even though the range is outside the limits of the proposed sanctuary, aircraft using the range could approach over the sanctuary area. 2. To avoid potential adverse impacts on aircraft operations in the proposed sanctuary area, we recommend the following statement be added under 5.1 Section F. F. IV. B. 2. c. State and Federal Impacts, page 74: Defense Activities. The management plan shall not prohibit any activity conducted by the Department of Defense that is essential for national defense or because of emergency. Such activities shall be conducted consistently with the management plan to the maximum extent practicable. 3. Thank you for the opportunity to review the DEIS and Draft Management Plan. Please contact our Mr. David A. Glass, if you have any questions concerning our comments. THOMAS D. SIMS cc: HQ USAF/LEEV Chief ANGSC/DEV Environmental Planning Division U.S. Dept of Commerce/ Ms. Wood 5.1 Comment noted; the text has been revised as requested. I I I I I I I COMMENTS AND RESPONSES I Congressional I I I I I I I I I I I if)3 GERRY E. STUDDS CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515 August 30, 1984 Dear Dr. Foster: This is in response to a letter of July 13 soliciting my comments on the draft environmental impact statement and draft management plan concerning the proposed National Estuarine Sanctuary at Waquoit Bay, on Cape Cod. I appreciate the opportunity to comment, and want to express both my strong support for the plan and my recommendation that the designation process proceed as rapidly as possible. The proposal for an esxtuarine sanctuary at Waquoit Bay is the product of a strong cooperative effort led by the Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, with the assistance of officials from the affected local communities. The goal is to manage the Waquoit Bay sanctuary as a natural field laboratory, providing protection for a full range of scien- tific research and public education programs of substantial long term value to the people of Massachusetts and our country. The project is fully in accord with the intent of Congress in establishing the Estuarine Sanctuary program, and it has been handled in a manner that fully reflects the procedural guaran- tees for public comment and a balancing of interests in the coastal zone that are called for in the law. I want to thank you once again for affording me the opportunity to comment on this proposal, and I look forward to its rapid approval and funding by your agency. With kind regards. Sincerely, Gerry E. Studds Dr. Nancy Foster Chief, Sanctuary Program Division National Ocean Service NOAA 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 CC: Joyce M.T. Wood 6.1 Comments noted; no response necessary. I . I I I I I I COMMENTS AND RESPONSES I State an.d Local Organizations I I I I I I I I I I - 1 109 Massachusetts Natural Heritage Program August 29, 1984 Nancy Foster Sanctuary Programs Division .National Ocean Service/NOAA 3300 Whitehaven St., N.W. Washington. D.C.-20235 Re: Waquolt Day National Estuarine Sanctuary DEIS/OMP Dear Dr. Foster: The Massachusetts Natural Heritage Program maintains an ongoing Inventory of rare plant and animal species populatlon4 and ecologically significant natural communities In the state. As part of our regular reviews of the Mass. Environmental Policy Act Monitor, the A-95 Federal Consistency Review Monitor, and at the request of the Mass. Coastal Zone Management Office, the MNHP staff has reviewed the Draft Environmental impact Statement/Draft Management Plan for the proposed Waquolt Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary. We would I-Ike to make the following comments: Page,Sectio Comment P. 1,11.3-5 "Sanctuary research". "research. . . to provide Descriptions scientific and technical support to State 7.1 If the Wdquqit Bay National Estuarisie of planned coastel zone management programs". and ' Sanctuary is designated, a final managenient research. "long-term research programs In estuarine plan will be developed, incorporatiiiq a areas ..." should be more clearly defined to specific research program. This program ensure efficient and effective use of any will be developed by the Sanctuary Manager research grant monies available. One specific and the Research Advisory Committee, in area where focused biological research Is accordance with the research goals and necessary and would benefit coastal decision- policies outlined at pages 42 through 47. making Is In studies of the distribution and Research that pertains directly to the habitat requirement% of the rare species that mandgenient of Sanctuary resources will are documented to occur Iii the area. receive the highest priority of any research studies conducted with Sanctuary staff or funding. Among studies necessary to meet the research.goals will be an inventory of Sanctuary resources (including rare species) and habitat requirements. 2 Page,Sectlon Comment P. Ill. The Importance of the species listed here 7.2 Comments noted; corrections have been third paragraph. could be more clearly described as. "Rare made. See also "Part Ill. Affected 7.2 List of rare and endangered plant and animal species Environment" for a more detailed description species. occur In the area...." Within this list, the of rare, threatened, or endangered species following changes should be made: Piping occurring In the proposed Sanctuary area. Plover should be added, Shortnose Sturgeon should be qualified by the addition of the parenthetical phrase "(historical occurrence)", and "Sandplaln" In Sandplain Gerardia should be one word. p. 13. third These two salt ponds Include habitat for the paragraph. state rare turtle, Northern Diamondback 7.3 Comment noted; see "Part H. Alternatives." 7.3 Description of Terrapin (Malaclemmys terrStl_n)- The nationally features at South rare birds Plp'lng**Plover (4haradrius melodus)apd Cape Beach State Least Torn (Sterna antillarum a so occur at the Park. State Park. This Informatro-ncould appropriately be Included here to underl4ne the Importance of this area. P. 14, section f. The grounds of the Swift Estate and property Description of Immediately adjacent provide habitat for two Swift Estate, Important rare plant species, which could be 7.4 Comment noted. Any changes to the present 7.4 and P. 33, threatened by heavy visitor use and especially landscaping at the Swift Estate would be section 3a., 'by proposals to landscape the grounds. Any preceded by consultation with appropriate plans for Swift specific plans for this area should Include Cominonwealth agencies to ensure no detriment Estate. serious consideration of these nationally to rare or vulnerable species. rare plants, and the MNHP should be consulted for details and management recommendations. The proposed "Inventory of species present" (p. 34) should also Include consultation with the KNHP botanist, and focus on native and rare species. P. �3. section The MNHP strongly supports the concept of d. Public Access. periodically limiting public access for the protection of specific sensitive environmental 7.5 resources. The Mass. Division of Fisheries and 7.b Cormuent noted. Wildlife should be contacted for the most up-to- date Information on nesting Terns, Piping Plovers, and other rare or vulnerable bird species, as well as recommendations for their protection. 7.6 p. 66, section f. The MHP should be credited as the source of this 7.6 Comment noted; correction made. Rare species. Information. I hope this Information Is useful In your assessment of the proposal. and that you will contact us with any questions. Please note that our 7. Comment noted. As it becomes available, 1.7 Inventory expands through ongoing fieldwork and research, so that further additional information would be appreciated. data on the area may become available In the future. Yours sincerely, Alison Sanders-Fleming Environmental Reviewer ASF:phb CC: Joyce H.T. Wood, U.S.D.C. Dave Shepardson. HIEPA Unit, EOEA Steve Bliven MCZM COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Office of the Secretary of State MASSACHUSETTS 294 Washington Street HISTORICAL Boston, Massachusetts COMMISSION 02108 MICHAEL JOSEPH CONNOLLY 617-727-8470 Secretary of State August 31, 1984 Dr. Nancy Foster Chief, Sanctuary Programs Div. National Ocean Services/NOAA 3300 Whitehaven St., NW Washington, D.C. 20235 RE: Waquoit Bay national Estuarine Sanctuary, Falmouth and Mashpee Dear Dr. Foster: Staff of the Massachusetts Historical Commission have reviewed the DEIS and Draft Management Plan for the proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary. Washburn Island is known to and is also considered likely to contain significant archaeological resources. While the majority of the activities proposed for use of the island as a Natural Estuarine Sanctuary (e.g., passive recreational uses) are unlikely to adversely affect these resources, other improvements (e.g. comfort 8.1 stations, boat landings, trails, picnic grounds) have the potential to impact significant archaeological properties. An intensive (locational) archaeological survey of Washburn Island should be conducted in the planning stages of the Sanctuary development to locate and identify important archaeological properties which should be avoided in project design. 8.2 The MHC is unable to evaluate the historic significance and possible eligibility of the Swift Estate for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places without additional information on the property (36CFR63). 8.3 The archaeological survey of South Cape Beach failed to locate any significant historic or archaeological properties within the South Cape Beach parcels. These comments have been provided in compliance with Advisory Council Procedures (36CFR800) pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, and with the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act. If you have any questions ro require further assistance, please contact Brona Simon at this office. Sincerely, Valerie Talmage Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Executive Director Massachusetts Historical Commission cc: Joyce Wood, national Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin.; Dave Shepardson, EOEA - MEPA Unit 8.1 Prior to designation Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary, a final management plan will be developed. The preparation of this plan will incorporate Washburn Island archeological information, in order to identify any sensitive properties to be avoided during sanctuary operation. If practicable, an archeological survey will be conducted during the development of this plan. The future development of picnic grounds on the island, if any, will be sited in consideration of any archeological information available at that time. 8.2 The Commonwealth will investigate the possibility of having the Swift Estate site placed on the List of Historic Buildings, and, if successful, will apply for funding for historical preservation purposes. These activities will occur if the Swift Estate is acquired and Waquoit Bay is designated as a National Estuarine Sanctuary. 8.3 Comment noted; no response necessary. CAPE COD PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION 1st DISTRICT COURT HOUSE, BARNSTABLE, MASSACHUSETTS 02630 TELEPHONE: 617-362-2511 August 9, 1984 Dr. Nancy Foster Chief, Sanctuary Programs Division National Ocean Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 3300 Whitehaven St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 Dear Dr. Foster: As the regional planning agency for Cape Cod, comprised of representatives from each one of the fifteen towns in Barnstable County, the Cape Cod Planning and 9.1 Economic Development Commission (CCPEDC) supports the Commonwealth of Massachusetts' application to your agency for designation of Waquoit Bay in Nashpee and Falmouth as a National Estuarine Sanctuary. Staff from this Commission have worked with both your agency and the Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs in preparing the Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Draft Management Plan for the sanctuary proposal. Public hearings, public meetings and close contact between state CoastalZone Management and local offical have assured widespread public input and review of the proposal. CCPEDC is therefore satisfied with the content of and the process that has resulted in the Statement and Plan for the Waquoit Bay Estuarine Sanctuary. Two major points raised by local officials and citizens that should be addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Statement and Management Plan are: 9.2 1. The proposed sanctuary boundary should be expanded to include more of the Waquoit Bay rivers which are presently within the state's designated Waquoit Bay Area of Critical Environmental Concern; and, 9.3 2. The so called "Swift Estate," if acquired by the Commonwealth as part of the sanctuary, should not be used as a general public access point for Washburn Island. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this worthwhile proposal. Sincerely, Martin J. Flynn Chairman cc: Senator Edward M. Kennedy Senator Paul Tsongas Congressman Gerry E. Studds Richard F. Delaney, Dir., MCZH CCPEDC CZM Adv. Com 9.1 Comment noted; no response necess 9.2 Please see the discussion regarding "Alternative Boundary 4" on page 55, and the discussion under General Comment/Response A. 9.3 The proposed acquisition and renovation of the Swift Estate would be for the purposes of establishing an administrative facility (office, library, public meeting rooms, Sanctuary Manager quarters, equip- ment storage, and educational, interpretive and laboratory facilities). The site would not be used as a general public access point to Washburn Island. However, if acquired as the administrative center for Sanctuary research adn educational/inter- pretiev programs, the Swift Estate site would be used as a base from which research activities and educational/interpretive field trips would embark to other parts of the Sanctuary; including Washburn Island. TOWN OF MASHPEE P. O. BOX 1108 MASHPEE, MA 02649 August 20, 1984 Dr. Nancy Foster Chief Sanctuary Programs Director National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration 3300 Whitehaven St. N.W. Washington D.C. 20235 Re: Waquoit Bay E.I.R. Comments Dear Dr. Foster, The Mashpee Selectmen support the proposal to designate Waquoit Bay as 10.1 a National Estuarine Sanctuary. Waquoit Bay is a pristine ecosystem shared by the towns of Falmouth and Mashpee. A natural system which can provide an abundance of scientific information for many coastal communities. 10.2 While the Board is supportive of this proposal, we feel there should be no duplication of programs already in place by the Woods Hole Oceanographic institute. 10.3 In past years, Waquoit Bay has produced a generous amount of finfish, squid and a variety of shellfish. Such productivity is declining. As a primary goal, a scientific study identifying the reasons for this decline and a management plan to revitalize this important economic resource is requested. Such knowledge can only enhance other coastal areas. 10.4 In reference to C. Boundary Alternative 3: Exclusion of Saltmarsh Areas Around Hamblin and John's Pond, the Board emphasizes the urgent need to place these saltmarsh areas under the Coastal Wetlands Restriction Act which consist of approximately 151 acres. Willard L. Hanson, Chmn. Richard L. Terry B. Jean Thomas Board of Selectmen BJT/jm cc: Senator Edward Kennedy Senator Paul Tsongas Congressman Gerry E. Studds Richard F. Delaney Jack Clark 10.1 Comment noted; no response necessary. 10.2 The research conducted at the proposed Sanctuary would be applied in nature, as opposed to basic research which is the emphasis at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute. See "Research Program and Policies," pages 42 through 47. 10.3 One of the primary goals of the Sanctuary Research Program is to determine the nature and functioning of the Waquoit Bay estuary. If sufficient support can be identified for such an effort, the Sanctuary Research Program would include an inventory of present finfish, squid, and shellfish resources, an investigation into their historical and present status, and an examination of their habitat requirements, in order to determine reasons for any decline in productivity. 10.4 As noted in a number of locations in the text, it is the Commonwealth's intention to implement the Coastal Wetlands Restric- tion Act in Mashpee within the next two years. Dr. Nancy Foster Chief, Sanctuary Programs Division National Ocean Service/NOAA 3300 WhItehaven Street HW Washington. D.C. 20235 Atigust 30, 1984 Dear Dr. Foster: On behalf of the Massachusetts Coastal Resources Advisory Board (CRAB), 11.1 1 would like to congratulate you on your excellent draft Environmental Impact Statement and Management Plan for the proposed Waquolt Day National Estuarine 11.1 Comment noted Sanctuary. Us endorse the establishment of this Estuarine Sanctuary and, In general. your proposed management scheme. There are some points we wish to bring to your attention: -As you have pointed out In the draft report. the Town of Hashpee has 11.2 not yet been brought within the protective umbrella of the Massachusetts Wetlands Restrictions program. We-feel it Is Imperative that high priority be assigned to rectifying this situation. 11.2 As noted in a nunber of locations in the text, It Is the Cormionwealth's Intention -A disproportional amount of the draft report deals with regulating to Implement the Coastal Wetlands Restric- scientific research activities within the Estuarine Sanctuary. Many of these tion Act In Mashpee within the next two 11.3 regulations will tend to discourage, rather than encourage, research In this years. The restriction of wetlands In estuary where for years scientists have conducted their work unimpeded. We Mashpee is a high priority for the Common- suggest that the general policy of encouraging research be stated. and that wealth. spectfice,regairding regulation be left to the scientific advisory committee- for later enunciation. 11.3 Relevant and necessary scientific research will be encouraged in the Sanctuary. It -The creation of this Estuarine Sanctuary will provide numerous is Important that baseline data on resources opportunities for collaboration among existing groups of diverse focus and and estuarine systemS be gathered. liowever, 11.4 Interest. It also could result In conflict with existing groups If they ore coordination and collaboration are necessary not consulted where appropriate. We encourage maximum communication with the to avoid duplication of effort and over-exploi- South Cape beach Advisory Committee. the Town Conservation --ommissions and tation of the resources, and will Increase Shellfish Wardens and other applicable groups and agencies, public and the utility of the data gathered. Conse- private. involve4 or potentially Involved with Waquoit Bay. quently, as noted in your further comments, It is In the interest of the research Over the years, the Waquolt Bay area has received Increasing levels of community that uniform criteria and protection and public recognition an a valuable estuarine setting and It see a standards for reporting be established fitting to provide It this additional. Federal, designation. If we can be o7 for scieilLific research activities occurring 11-5 assistance in the implementation of the proposed Sanctuary. please contact within the Sdnctuary. us. We would look forward to holding one of our CRAB field meetings In the renovated Swift facility. 11.4 We agree. Coordination will be an essential loart of Sanctuary programs. , @rety 11.5 It d0JUIVed and renovated, the Swift EStdte would, of course, be available for CHAII Ir t hu r meet i flys Ca nes. Jr. Hember Coastal Resources Advisory Board FALMOUTH AIRPORT WILLIAM F. GALLAGHER, MANAGER BOX 242 - FALMOUTH, MASSACHUSETTS 02541 August 29, 1984 Dr. Nancy Foster, Chief Sanctuary Programs Division National Ocean Service/NOAA 3300 Whitehaven Street, NW Washington, D. C. Dear Dr. Foster: Regarding the proposed Waquoit estuarine sanctuary, we hope that Falmouth Airport will be seen as an amenity to the recreational use of the bay. Perhaps some are not aware that the airport has been in continuous operation for thirty years, 12.1 and is now serving a limited part of the flying public. Our traffic patterns, to be non-conflicting with Otis Air Force Base and to conform with requirements of the Massa- chusetts Aeronautics Commission, take aircraft over portions of this area at 700'. For environmental reasons we have restricted the use of the airport to single engine aircraft under 3500 pounds since 1977. Sincerely yours, William T. Gallagher Owner/Manager FG: Copies: Massachusetts Aeronautics Commission Falmouth Board of Selectment Falmouth Planning Board Society for Preservation of Waquoit Bay Joyce M. T. Wood 12.1 Comment noted; no response necessary. COMMENTS AND RESPONSES Environmental Organizations 119 The Association for the Preservation of Cape Cod, Inc. P. O. Box 636 Orleans, Massachusetts 02653 617-255-4142 BOARD OF DIRECTORS August 27, 1984 Dr. Nancy Foster Chief, Sanctuary Programs Div. National Oceans Service/NOAA 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D. C. 20235 Dear Dr. Foster: Please find attached a copy of our comments at the public hearing in Falmouth on August 22, 1984, on the DEIS - Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary. Sincerely, Esther A. Snyder Executive Director EAS:ep Encl. PTO adam" The Association for the Preservation of Cape Cod, Inc. F. 0. Ban $30 Orleans, Massachusetts 02843 617,260-V42 IMPAR1140 61101641 (IRS roll l.. It COMMENTS AT THE PUBLIC HEARING IN FALMOUTH ON THE DEIS - WAQUOIT BAY NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY - AUGUST 22, 1984 The Association for the Preservation of Cape Cod was organized in 1968 and now has a membership of over 2200, making it the second largest non-profit environ- mental advocacy group In Massachusetts. Knowledgeable members of the Board have reviewed the draft environ- mental impact statement for the Waquolit Say National Estuarine Sanctuary. As a result APCC would like to enter the following comments for the records The Purposes of this federal program are In keeping with state and local efforts to afford additional pro- tection for the Massachusetts coastline. The sanctuary 1-3 . I plan will not have a detrimental effect on the environ- ment and any impact due to research will be very short- 13.1 Comment noted; no response necessary. :lot 4,14.1 6. to low lived and easily repaired. There will be no interruption of current uses of the land or water access except as may IMIANt) (it S( WNTIFIC be called for In the future by the Department of Environ- A111% mental Management. ownership by the state of South Cape Beach State Park and Washburn Island provides a large, publicly owned area for study and research. The Inclusion of 13.2 Pesticide and street run-off controls 13.2 the Swift estate as a research center clearly makes the beat use of this property. APCC agrees with the decision are within the jurisdiction of CommDn- of the DEIS that management responsibility should rest wealth and local authority. It is with the Department of Environmental Management. While hoped that the information gained APCC endorses the preferred alternative of the DEIS, we through the Sanctuary research program strongly urge that further funding be sought to Include (e.g., investigations concerning the the upper reaches of the Waquoit estuaries. These areas effects of pesticides and street F.- N should be protected against excessive use ol pesticides run-off on sanctuary resources) will and a program of curtailment of street run-off should be aid the Commonwealth and localities In established. their decisions regarding the most appropriate methods/programs to address The Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management these problems. Please also see the has awarded grants to establish 15 national estuarine discussion under General Comment/Response sanctuaries. It the Waquoit Say National Estuarine Sanc- A and, on page 5b. under the discussion . ........ tuary to established, It will be the first in the State for Boundary Alternative 4. of Massachusetts. This program will further protect one of the largest undeveloped areas in the Commonwealth. Approval of this grant will add an important segment to estuarine protection along the eastern seaboard. Deborah Moore Williams P.O. Box 103, Howard Hill Temple, W.H. 03084 Dr. Nancy Foster Chief, Sanctuary Programs Division 3300 Whitehaven STREET, WW Washington, D.C. 20235 Dear Dr. Poster, As co-founder of the group, Citizens for the Protection of Waguoit Bay, and an a concerned citizen, I would like to comment favorably on the proposed designation of Waquoit Say an a National Estuarine Sanctuary. Citizens for the Protection of Waquoit Day, Inc. is a grass roots organization concerned with maintaining the natural environ- ment of the waguoit Say Estuary. Our group has spent many hours educating the public an to the uniqueness of this Day through newsletters, testimony at public hearings, fundraising to hire experts to aid us and so on. We worked very hard and I believe we had a great deal to do with the eventual acquisition of Washburn Island and South Cape Beach by the State of Massachusetts. We have continued to work against development on Hamblin Pond and 14.1 One of the major goals of the proposed the Quashnet River. Waquolt Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary would be to provide for the protection I am excited that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric and understanding of Waquait Bay through Administration has recognized the uniqueness of this area and has chosen to consider.it for a National Estuarine Sanctuary. I have the Implementation of a long-term manage- ment plan specifically tailored to the @A three brief comments concerning the draft proposal. site's needs. Accomplishment of this First, I feel it is imperative that research and education goal Is In large part tied to research take place in this estuary. Although we are fortunate to have and educational programs which focus on such institutions as Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution and the estuarine system at Waquoit Bay. the Marine Biological Laboratories, their research to useful In general. research conducted at the 14.1 locally only in the broad sense. I believe that we need specific proposed Sanctuary would be applied In research done on the special characteristics of the Waquoit Bay nature. as opposed to basic research itself. An you know, this area is under tremendous development which is the emphasis at the Woods Hole pressures. Local planners, conservation commissions and all Oceanographic Institute. The focus of those involved in the decision making process that will affect the research program would be on obtaining the future of this area, must have more information in order to information necessary for Improved coastal make appropriate decisions. management decision-maklng. Secondly, I would encourage you to include the entire Area 14.2 See General Comment/Response A and the of Critical Environmental Concern as designated by the Massachusetts discussion for *Alternative boundary 4" 14-2 Department of Coastal Zone Management. The fact that it is not on page 55. Please note the proposed totally included will tend to diminidh its importance in the eyes boundaries have been expanded to include of some. This will introduce more room for argument and a lack Bourne and Bog Ponds and the open water of clarity for those must maintain It. and salt wArsh areas of the lower Quashnet Thirdly, I am pleased that the Massachusetts Department of River between Marsh Mesh Road and Route 28. Environmental Management to being considered as the managing agency for this Sanctuary. During the past three years, I have dealt with them as an individual and as a member of the Citizens 14.3 Conment noted; no response necessary. 14.3 for the Protection of Waquoit Day. I have always found them to be professional, well organized, well researched and always willing to help. As a lifelong resident of Haseachdoette, I have been well acquainted with their work with other parka and management areas. I tool they are a very appropriate group for the management of this Sanctuary. Thank you for all your efforts to preserve this most unique and valuable part of our coastline. Sinceriply. Deborah Moore Williams I I I I I I I COMMENTS AND RESPONSES I Fish and Game Clubs I I I I I I I I I I 1 125 League of Barnstable County Sportman's Clubs, Inc. CAPE COD, MASSACHUSETTS August 20, 1984 Dr. Nancy Foster, Chief Sanctuary Programs Division OCRM/NOAA 3300 Whitehaven St. NW Washington, D.C. 20235 Dear Dr. Foster, On behalf of the officers and members of the Barnstable County League of Sportsmens Clubs, representing the concerns and best interest of the organized sportsment of Cape Cod and the islands, we have expended consid- erable time and effort reviewing, verifying and evaluating the content and direction being pursued in both the Environmental Impact Statement and Management Plan Drafts. We wish to compliment and thank all participants for a highly acurate and unbiased product. If the finished product contains appropriate verbage assuring that hunting, fishing, trapping, shellfishing and waterfowling will be permitted to con- tinue in accordance with local, state and federal regulations, you have our full support and endorsement. The one concern which we wish to indicate is: That the General Public be made well aware that the term "Sanctuary" 15.1 is not intended and should not be construed in any manner to PREVENT MULTIPLE RECREATION UTILIZATION relating to the traditional uses such as: hunting, fishing, trapping, shellfishing and waterfowling as indicated on page ten of the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary Study. 15.2 In view of the above statement, we wish to be recorded in full support of the projects intent and direction. Sincerely C.C Joyce M. T. Wood Dave Shepardson Michael J Veloza, President Richard F Delaney Richard Cronin Barnstable County League of Sen. Paula Doane Sportmen's Clubs 15.1 Traditional uses in the proposed Sanctuary area, such as hunting, fishing, shellfishing and trapping, will continue to be permitted, subject to State and/or local laws and regulations. The assistance of local sportsmen will be important in developing, establishing and enforcing appropriate standards for the protection and maintenance of Sanctuary resources. In general, sanctuaries are intended to be open to the public; low intensity recreational and interpretive activities are generally encouraged. 15.2 Comment noted; no response necessary. United Mobile Sportfishermen, Inc. Dr. Nancy Foster Chief, Sanctuary Programs Division National Ocean Survey/NOAA 3300 Whitehaven Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20235 September 1, 1984 Dear Dr. Foster, The United Mobile Sportfishermen support 16.1 establishment of the Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary in the State of Massachusetts, with one exception. The exception: we believe is that the oceanfront beach area at South Cape Beach State Park (SCBSP) 16.2 in the Town of Mashpee should not be included within the estuarine sanctuary. The coastal portion of the park is outside the estuarine area and thus should not be included. We support the concept of protection of the areas from development, however a reading of Appendix 2 of the WBNES DEIS will confirm that a rather onerous deal was strong in the acquisition of SCBSP. 16.3 It allowed the taxpayers of the Commonwealth the privilege of footing the bill for its acquisition and then deed it over to the town of Mashpee so that certain local prejudices would be "set in concrete". We feel federal support must be avoided in any form that would condone or finance such exclusionary policy. Prior to establishment of SCBSP, mobil sportfishermen and their families enjoyed access to and use of the ocean to fish, launch "tin" boats at the jetty and clam in the bay. There was public access to the coastal zone of this area for the many forms of coastal dependent recreation and the area could be claimed to truly provide for this recreational access to the coast as required by the CSBSP. The many members of our affiliates who enjoyed this access have effectively been denied access since this disgraceful undertaking and then have had to seek coastal access elsewhere and further away. As a sail fisherman with 30 years experience as of th** walking ****************************************************************** in 16.1 Comment noted; no response necessary. 16.2 The primary objective of National Estuarine Sanctuary designation is the protection and long-term management of representative estuarine systems. Both the barrier beaches at South Cape Beach State Park and at Washburn Island are considered an integral element of the Waquoit Bay estuarine system. These landforms have a direct and uninterupted relationship with Waquoit Bay. The natural processes which occur between these landforms and the Bay are an integral part of the estuarine system. To arbitrarily divide these landforms to an estuarine side and a marine side (by excluding the South Cape Beach) would fail to recognize their uninterupted relationship and importance to estuarine processes. 16.3 Standards regarding the use of privately- owned off-road or over-sand vehicles at South Cape Beach State Park were established in a cooperative agreement dated June 29, 1981, between the Commonwealth (Department of Environmental Management) and the Town of Mashpee. Designation of the proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary would have no effect on this agreement. The Department of Environmental Management has resonsibility for the control of off-road vehicle use at South Cape Beach State Park. The Department of Environmental Management and the Town of Mashpee will be examining alternatives for fishing access, other than with privately-owned vehicles, in the Department's development of the South Cape Beach State Park Management Plan. federal jargon), one thing I have learned is that you can not walk very far with chest high waders and encumbered with the paraphernalia of the sport from the distance diminishes with age). You are also not as successful as your counterpart who has access with a vehicle capable fo over-the-sand travel along the beach. There is little question that theree are few or no fishermen so equipped who are capable fo the six mile hike (3 down and 3 back) to the jetty at SCBSP and any who attempted it would have to describe it as an rather than a recreational experience. Of course those who did could not bring their families. To provide recreational access to this section of the coast under the , there must be mobile sportfishing access for the fisherman the "present" ORV policy here; 6 over 60 year old fishermen only are allowed. The rest of the general public is excluded except for a small section of the beach that they could walk to from the parking area, with the majority of the remaining beach effectively closed to them. With regards to any research on the effects of this public (ORV) use; there exists a voluminous body of research funded by the Dept. of Interior (the National Park Service (NPS)) and conducted by the University of Massachusetts at Cape Cod National Seashore on the effects of Off Road Vehicles on the coastal environment. As these effects have already been well documented, the effects of these human activities are strong well known and any further research at the proposed sanctuary would be repetitious and wasteful of tax dollars NPS furthermore maintains a continuing program of monitoring the effects of this ongoing use at Cape Cod N. S.. All of this effort is documented. If there are any questions regarding these studies or monitoring we suggest you contact: Dr. Paul Godfrey Mr. Herbert Olsen Dept. of Botony Superintendent Univ. of Massachusetts 3410 300 National Seachore , MA 01003 South ,MA 02663 (413) -0136 (617) 349-3768 As a result of these studies, resource management decisions were made that allow for continuation of this use with minimum or no impact on the coastal environment. At the same time, these management decisions allowed for continuous use so that may still enjoy the recreational benefits of use of the environment in the coastal zone. Therefore any further research along these lines at WBNES would serve no productive purpose or reason to include the beach/upland area. In closing, for the above reasons we strongly recommend exclusion of the of SCBSP from the proposed this is support to its establishment. Sincerely William E. Miller Copy to: 16.4 Comment noted; please see Appendix 2 and response 16.3 above. I I I I I I I COMMENTS AND RESPONSES I Private Individuals I I I I I I I I I I 1 131 September 1, 1984 Dr. Nancy Foster, Chief Sanctuary Programs Division OCRM/NOAA 3300 Whitehaven St., NW Washington, D.C. 20235 Dear Dr. Foster Enclosed is a statement concerning the proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary signed by members of the Metoxit Point Association. I hope this reaches you by the deadline as we would like very much to be part of the testimony on behalf of the project. Sincerely, Nancy Grinnell Barnum, President Metoxit Point Assn. Box 88 Waquoit, MA 02536 cc: Joyce Wood, Chief Ecology and Conservation Div. Rm. 6111 U.S. Dept. of Commerce Washington, D.C. 20230 Dave Shepardson MEPA Unit Exec. Off. Of Env. Affairs 100 Cambridge St. Boston, MA 02202 September 1, 1984 We, the undersigned, being members of the Metoxit Point Association (property owners and residents and summer residents of Metoxit Point on the Northeastern end of Waquoit Bay) wish to 17.1 1) Strongly endorse the Estuarian Sanctuary Proposal for Waquoit Bay 17.2 2) Express our hope that the Estuarian Sanctuary Area may be coextensive with the Area of Critical Environmental Concern bound- aries for Waquoit Bay 17.3 3) Express also the hope that the Estuarian Sanctuary program give attention to the waters (streams etc.) that are tributary to the proposed Sanctuary. s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ 17.1 Comment noted; no response necessary. 17.2 Bog and Bourne Ponds and the open water and saltmarsh areas of the Lower Quashnet River between marsh Neck Road and Route 28 have been included in the proposed boundary for the Sanctuary. Please see General Comment/Response A and the discussion concerning "Boundary Altern- ative 4" on page 55 of this document. 17.3 Please see response 17.2 above. Z2 k'LAA. gao,j CO) Cori t3r. @A. tow rem) SAP- It" August 30. 1984 Dr. Nancy Poster Chief, Sanctuary Programs Division National Ocean Service/MOAA 3300 WhitehavOn Street, UW Washington. D.C. 20235 Re: Proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary Dear Dr. Foster: By way of identifying myself and my interest in the future of Waquoit Day, please allow we to state the following: 1. I've resided in the vicinity of Waquoit Bay and have enjoyed its many resources for nearly 30 years. 2. 1 was co-founder and first chairman (no finan- cial compensation) of Citizens for the Protection of Waquoit Say, Inc. (CPWB), a grassroote environmental group that was instrumental in staving off private development and having the Commonwealth of Massachusetts take the nearly 600 acres of South Cape Beach and Washburn Island for public recreation and conservation. When I was Involved with CPWB, severs'I hundred households (representing over 2,000 people) were a part of the organization and I had personal contact with many of them. 3. 1 now serve the Town of Falmouth on a voluntary basis an a member of both the Planning Board and the Capi- tal Program Committee. and as a Town Meeting representa- tive for Precinct 7. a major part of which is the Waquoit Bay area of Falmouth. I am liaison between the Planning Board and the Conservation Commission. I also serve on the open Space subcommittee and the Zoning By-law Revisions. subcommittee. 4. Prior to joining the Planning Board, I was chief author of a local by-law that now restricts construction and the cutting of vegetation in the Waquoit Bay ACEC and a buffer strip around it. Along with some dedicated col- leagues. I successfully worked for the upgrading of zoning in the Waquoit Bay area. the imposition of special stan- dards for the granting of special permits with the ACEC, and increased funding by the Town of Falmouth of its Con- servation Fund. Dr. Nancy Foster August 30, 1984 Page 2 As a further preface to my comments on the Draft Environ- mental Impact Statement and Draft Management Plan for the proposed Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary, I would like to focus on some apparent realities that daily hamper efforts to protect the environmental quality of Waquoit Bay (and any similar area): 1. Most people do not understand the long-term nega- tive impacts to an estuarine system of construction and utilization of amenities located within the system or in surrounding areas that directly or indirectly relate to the estuarine system. 2. Many people are much more motivated by readily de- fineable dollars and cents investments in private property interests than they are in financially.undefined values such an water quality, air quality. noise, lose of farmland, loss of food chain productivity, safety aspects of increas- ing or lessening traffic and congestion, et cetera. 3. Few people have the experience to nee the ultimate potential of the ever-increasing "tyranny of small decisionall. 4. The proportion of this area's population that has been here long enough to recognize the losses due to develop- ment in also rapidly shrinking in political influence as now arrivals flock to the area. S. The 'outside" demand for development here to un- limited while the supply of available land is limited and disappearing at an alarming rate. 6. Most people seem to believe that there is a rigid system of rules and regulations that totally protect sensi- tive and valuable areas (i.e., the general thought is that "if it's worth protecting, it's going to be protected". In reality, the regulatory system is full of exceptions and loopholes and is somewhat counterproductive by giving the public the illusion that "all is well". I enthusiasticIly support the proposal to designate Waquoit Bay as a National Estuarine'Sanctuary and the accompanying management plan. The focal point of the DEIS, in my opinion. 18.1 Coninent noted; no response necessary. in found in the middle of page 44: The continuing development pressures experienced on Cape cod, the islands, southeast Massachusetts and the rest of the coastline of the Commonwealth requires an understanding of the resources of this coastal area, the interrelationships within coastal ecosystems, and their ability to withstand human pressures. The re- search and education facilities associated with a na- tional estuarine sanctuary can make a significant Dr. Nancy Foster August 30, 1984 Page 3 contribution to the understanding and protection of sensitive coastal resources and can also improve coastal management decisionmaking." As the Maquoit Bay area faces steadily greater development pressures, we are finding, with greater frequency, that the private interests in development are in direct conflict with the public Interests in conservation. Furthermore, while the local officials try to balance the two. we are hampered by the fact that the private interests tend to be localized 'and vocal while the public interests tend to be silent and stretched out aloost indefinitely. (Preserva- tion of salt marshes (because of their vital role in the food chain) has been said to be of world-wide importance, yet I've never heard any distinct representation of those Interests at a local hearing. However. local hearings tend to be dominated by private Interests insisting that their project will do "insignificant" damage, if any.) It is not satisfactory to me that present land use regula- tions emerge in response to development and often after irreversible environmental damage has been done. We need underlying scientific understanding of the carrying capacity of the land In order to properly anticipate our regulatory needs. The Falmouth Planning Board has attempted to direct 18.2 our local regulations away from arbitrary land-area zoning and toward performance standards and sound environmental 18.2 One of the primary goals of the Waquoit planning. However, we lack the applied scientific basis Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary would we need to be entirely successful. Everyone remotely in- to provide estuarine and coastal terested In the problem seems to recognize that there is a Information for improved coastal limit to the "carrying capacity" of the land, but no one management decisionmaking. is near being able to define it. If we are to sensibly balance the costs and benefits of development, we are in dire need of applied research to indicate just wh%t the long-term costs for benefits?) might be. And it we are to be politically successful in sound en- vironmental planning. we need a populace that is educated, and understanding and supportive of the need for more re- gulation. I believe that if the general public were pro- perly educated. the myriad of constant "minor" environmental abuses could be diminished so that they would not add up to major and eventually irreversible losses of our natural re- sources. The necessary research and educational efforts should not Dr. Nancy Foster August 30, 1984 Page 4 be left to individual towns. It makes no sense for hundreds of communities to all be trying to "reinvent the wheel". It seems much more economic and efficient to do this through the federal government, which has the resources to prevent needless duplication of effort and promote timely dissemina- tion of knowledge gained by research. Also, the benefits to be gained from education and research extend far beyond the local level. I was particularly pleased to see that so much of the admini- stration of the sanctuary itself would be by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management (DEN). Over the past three years I've had frequent contact with many individuals in several departments of DEN and found all of them to be 18.3 knowledgeable. hardworking and-dedicated to the protection of the environment. I have.absolutely no cause to distrust 18.3 Comment noted; no response necessary. "the state coming In here". The state park system in Massa- chusetts is a rapidly expanding one. New parks are well- conceived and planned with a view to public need and the specific attributes of each site. Existing parka are well- managed and readily accessible to the general public. Prior to adopting restrictions and regulation of uses of a parti- cular park. DEN officials are thorough in their studies of the existing conditions. the needs of the potential users. and the particular goals of the contemplated restrictions. In my experience. the restricjions adopted make sense and maximize the benefits for everyone. The only disappointment I have with the DEIS is,that the entire ACEC (Area of Critical Environmental Concern) to not included within the bounds of the proposed estuarine sanc- tuary. Both the state and local governments have takengreat 18.4 care to define the ACEC and then regulate it properly. If 16.4 Please see General Comment/Response A the federal government subsequently omits areas of the ACEC and the discussion under "Boundary from sanctuary designation, it will be.interpreted by some h1ternative 4" on page 55. as a signal that those areas are not environmentally im- portant. The federal government could thereby unwittingly reinforce development proposals that are counterproductive to the goals hoped to be achieved by the sanctuary designa- tion. Certainly, the federal government recognizes that the "zone of contribution" (i.e., the area within which development activities directly affects Waquoit Day) extends far beyond Dr. Nancy Poster August 30, 1984 Page S. the ACEC boundary. While I recognize the administrative difficulties in extending the boundaries of the sanctuary, I believe that designating the entire ACEC is a good com- promise, and one which maximizes protection of the Bay, while not attempting to encompass the entire Ozone of contribution". Finally, I urge haste in completion of the designation of Waquoit Say an a National Estuarine Sanctuary. Time in running out for efficient planning. Reversing the damage done by development that exceeds the carrying capacity of the land will be much more costly to everyone than prevent- ing the damage In the first place. The appropriate time 18.5 Comment noted; no response necessary. for necessary research and planning may have already passed. Let's not waste precious time. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Winnifred Woods Box 606W Waquoit, MA 02536 1 July 24, 1984 Mr. Steven Bliven Office of Coastal Zone Management received at Commonwealth of Mass. SPD July 30, 1984 100 Cambridge St. Boston, MA 02202 Dear Mr. Bliven: Re: Waquoit Bay. We are greatly in favor of federal protected status for the bay, its tributaries and adjacent lands. We are property owners on Bourne Pond which empties into the marsh at the hood of the bay. This ten acre pond is quiet and undisturbed as yet, and as a tributary to the bay, we would like it included in the protection. Sincerely, Chester & Ruth Byk 19.1 Comment noted; no response necessary. 19.2 Possible Sanctuary boundaries are consi- dered on the basis of: the inclusion of an adequate portion of the key land and water areas of the natural system to approximate an ecological unit and ensure effective conservation; the site's impor- tance to long-term research and educa- tional/interpretive programs; and the site's compatibility with existing and potential land and water uses in contiguous areas. On the basis of their potential contribution to the Sanctuary's educa- tional/interpretive and research programs, both Bourne and Bog Pond have been included within Sanctuary boundaries. However, until suitable conservation/access ease- ments or protective buffer measures are established, the inclusion of these areas within Sanctuary boundaries will not afford additional protection for either pond. Please also see General Comment/Response A and the discussion under "Boundary Alternative 4" on page 55. The Law Offices of LEONARD ROSE COUNSELLOR AT LAW - ADMIRALTY LAWYER 220 SCRANTON AVENUE FALMOUTH, MASSACHUSETTS 02540 LEONARD ROSE, AB, JD, LLM TEL (617)548-7900 Letter Ref 4462M 14 August 1984 File Ref Misc. Dr. Nancy Foster, Chief Joyce M. T. Wood, Chief Sanctuary Programs Division Ecoloby and Conservation Division OCRM/NOAA Room 6111 3300 Whitehaven Street NW U.S. Department of Commerce Washington, D.C. 20235 Washington, DC 20230 Mr. Dave Shepardson MEPA Unit Executive Office of Environmental Affairs 100 Cambridge Street Boston, MA 02202 Re: Proposed National Estuarine Sanctuary in Waquoit Bay Dear Sir/Madams: Please file this letter as my comment on the proposed Washburn Island National Estuaring Sanctuary. I am a year around resident at 184 Seapit Road, Waquoit, East Falmouth, Massachusetts 02536. My home is located on the Seapit River, facing Washburn Island. 20.1 I am generally in favor of the establishment of a National Estuarine Sanctuary in Waquoit Bay. However, I am concerned about navigation and the maintenance of channels at the entrance to and wihtin Waquoit Bay and also at Menauhant at the southwest tip of Washburn Island. I am also concerned about navigable depths along the entire western side of the island. For the record, i think that it is beyond dispute that the navigable channel between the jetties at the entrance to Waquoit Bay is shoaling immediately to the east of the southeast tip of Washburn Island. Also, as one heads into Waquoit Bay after passing through the entrance channels, there is extensive shoaling on the west side of the channel within Waquoit Bay. 20.1 Comment noted; no response necessary. At the southern tip of Seconsett Island. extensive shoaling occurs, from time to time. Dredging to ongoing at the moment In that area. I am unfamiliar with the conditions of Little River leading to Hamblin Pond and Great River leading to Jehu Pond, but I suggest shoaling may occur there to. from time to time. On the west aide of Washburn Island at the outside of the Henauhant entrance to Bel Pond, extensive shoaling has occurred between the jetties. making It hazardous for even moderate aimed vessels to pass through at low tide. The southwest tip of Washburn Island has migrated In a westerly direction. narrowing the waterway at that point Inside Eel Pond. the effect of the narrowing of the channel on voter flow has resulted to shoaling there. At the northwesterly point of Washburn Island the channel to always relatively shallow. and there Is a sand bar in the middle of the northerly portion of SeapIt River, which causes vessels to run aground when their operators become confused about the direction of returning to port. It they think they are returning to Waquolt Bay through Sespit River. they will place their red channel buoys on the right and run aground on the sand bar. Since Washburn Island to a recreational area of great value, and since a major aspect of the recreation to be derived from the area In 20.2 connected with water navigation, It seems to me that It Is vital that 20.2 Uesignation and Implementation of the any proposed management plan for a Waquolt bay National Estuarine Sanctuary should provide continuing permission to main a prIate Waquolt Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary widths and depths of naviiLable channels to and around Wn Hrosland V hbur I will have no effect on the maintenance and Seconsett Island. While It to not a major threat, a grounding In of navigation channels at the entrance : ny of these channels could result In oil and gasoline spillage that to and within the Uay. Responsibility ould adversely affect the area. and this should be of some concern. for these activities will continue to be Primarily. however. It would be a tragedy If any proposed management divided among the Division of Waterways. plan made no provision for continuing maintenance dredging, with the Department of Environmental Management, result the navigable channels could close and water flow would the Corps of Engineers, and the Townships slacken, causing stagnation and the build up of harmful elements that of Falmouth and Mashpee. Such maintenance would cause the entire estuary to deteriorate. dredging should, of course, be conducted In a manner which minimizes impact on I understand that nature can operate in cycles and that periods of Sanctuary resources. Standards, schedules stagnation and negative conditions are not necessarily unusual. and identification or correction of However. I think It to the intention of all concerned to maintain the channel deficiencies will remain the current status quo to Waquoit Day. rather than to prevent mankind f rom responsiblity of the above mentioned Interfering with the vagaries of nature. 1. therefore. ask you to agencies. Include In your proposed management plan adequate standards for width and depths of noviiLable channels. adequate provision for regular maintenance draditinjL. and plans to correct deficiencies In existing channeli (such an Hanauhant) where the effect would be beneficial In respect to navigable water flow. and stability of the channels themselves. Lastly. I note that In the past hunting boo been permitted on Washburn 20.3 Inland. At times. hunters have fired shotguns to the direction of 20.3 Hunting has traditional bases along Seapit River and Seacoast Shares to the vast of Washburn Island. 1 suggest that where the area to being proposed for use &a a Washburn Island, which sanctuary. all hunting should he prohibited. the Commonwealth, and t State forest and Park Thank you for your consideration of these comments. I trust that you managed by the Departwe will Implement the to your planning. Management. which has d imarY Management Plan r Sincerely, use. primarily passive hiking, nature study, a The level of hunting. I LEONARD ROSE for Washburn Island is this planning process. ----- -- ----- ------ --- --- -------- ----- --------- -- ----- August 15. 1984 Dr. Nancy foster, Chief Sanctuary Programs Division National Ocean ServicelNo" 3300 Whitehouse Street, N.w. Washington, DC 20235 Dear Dr. Foster& I am writing to express my strong support for the proposal to make the WaquOit Day area a National Estuarine "actuary. The Abbott family has owned land near the northeast corner of the bay for eighty years, and 1 21.1 Comment noted; no response necessary. have been following the progress of this proposal since 1981 when this area was first considered for Sanctuary status. Having read the DRISO I am convinced that the designation will be both appropriate and beneficial for Waquoit. Sincerely, T. W. Osler Abbott co Joyce M.T. Wood 22.1 Funding for Improved enforcement of resource protection regulations Is not available through the National Estuarine Box 24, Metoxit Pt. Sanctuary Program. Responsibility for Waquoit, MA 02536 effectively Implementing those regu- lations Is vested In the Commonwealth. August 23, 1984 and/or In relevant local jurisdictions. Dr. Nancy Foster 22.2 If the Waquolt Bay area is designated as Sanctuary ProgreAs Division a National Estuarine Sanctuary. one of OCRH/NOAA the management goals will be to provide 3300 Whitshaven St. NW for controlled multiple uses of the Washington, D.C. 20235 Sanctuary (including low-intensity recreational boating. fishing. hunting, Dear,Dr. FoAterl etc.) which are compatible with the Sanctuary's character as a natural field I am writing about the proposal to make Waquoit Bay a laboratory. Under existing Commonwealth National Estuarine Sanctuary. After reading the drafts Aaws and regulations. control over most of the Environmental Impact Statement and the Management boating activities and the establishment Plan and attending the Public Hearing on August 22 1 of anchorage locations Is vested in the found I had a few comments to make. local harbormaster. It Is not the intent In establishing the Sanctuary to alter The concept of an Estuarine Sanctuary In a magnificent one. this authority In any way. If the level I do hope you will be able to maintain the are& as a of boating activity becomes so heavy as sanctuary In the true sense of the word. The restrictions to jeopardize public safety or natural 22.1 and regulations that you referred to are In effect only resources within the Say, then the Sanctuary on paper. There are many. many violations that Manager will approach the harbor master neither Falmouth nor Mashpas seem able to enforce. Perhaps to discuss methods of improved enforcement money could be made available to these towns so they of existing controls and alternative could afford to hire personnel to patrol and enforce the measures for protection of the Day's rules. natural resources. The proposed research. education. and Interpretive programs for You are aware that the area In an extramemly fragile one the Waquolt Bay area are intended to encompassing many habitats that are fast becoming extinct. provide a basis for both better coastal I am worried that classes for children and the public management decisionmaking and Improved will introduce more people and destroy what is left.. public awareness and understanding of 22.2 The re really ahcpld be no hunting or trapping within a estuarine systems. While public access. sanctuaryl no boardwalks over marshes for people to use to the Sanctuary area will increase the to invade an otherwise pr.3tected habitat; no excessively potential Impact on Sanctuary resources. speeding boats to cause noise, vibration and destruction such access will be monitored carefully, of aquatic vegetation. particularly in sensitive areas, to ensure that the resources are able to Please give this Input the serious consideration you sustain such use. In addition. although promised. We all thank you for an extremely lucid Increased access means more individuals presentation and the thoughtful nature of the draft within Sanctuary boundaries, the Sanctuary Environmental Impact Statement. education/ Interpretive program will make every effort to ensure that these same Sincerely yours, individuals have a greater understanding and appreciation of the sensitivity of estuarine systems within the Sanctuary. Ann A. McLean August 31, 1984 Dr. Nancy Foster, Chief Sanctuary Programs Division National Ocean Service/NGAA 3300 WhItehaven Street, N.M. Washington, D.C. 20235 Dear Dr. Fosters The plans which are underway seeking to designate 2,232 acre Wequoit Say as a National Estuarine Sanctuary 23.1 have our most earnest support. Having lived on Waquoit 23.1 Comment noted; no resp Bay For over twenty years, we are aware of just how fragile it Is. Fifteen years ago, we deeded over to the Salt Pond Bird Sanctuary, Inc., two acres of beautiful land and marsh bordering on Hoonakle River, which empties Into Waquoit Day.. This was such a fragile place of land, we Is opened to preserve It from future alterations. Washburn Island, Waquoit Day, and all of its surroundings, have more to offer our grandchildren and future generations if left as It Is. Washburn Island Is no doubt one of the most unique areas on the New England coastline. For thin reason, It must be protected at any cost. IPA Sincerely Robert J Conning, D.D, 194 Sespit Road E. Falmouth,MA 02536 cc: Joyce N.T. Wood, Chief Ecology and Conservation Division Room 6111 U.S. Department of Commerce Washington. D.C. 20230 MUNSON LEBHERZ and TURKINGTON Attorneys at Laaw (617)548-6600 OLD RAWLY COURT WILLIAM T. MUNSON box S46 GEORGE N. LEDHENZ FALMOUTH. MA 02141 August'31, 1984 ERIC T. TURKINGTON Dr. Nancy Foster chief, of the Sanctuary Programs Div. National Ocean Services/HOAA 3300 White Haven Street, HN Washington,.D.C. 20235 Dear Dr. Poster: Please record me as strongly in favor of the 24.1 designation proposed for Waquoit Say and environs as 24.1 contsent noted; no respon a Federally protected Sanctuary. Sincerely, Eric T. Turki gton ETT:bc cc: Joyce Wood (617) 548-1067 DONALD W. BOURNE P.O. Box 282 Wequoit, Massachusetts 02536 30 August 1984 Dr. Nancy Faster Chief. Sanctuary Programs Division National Ocean service National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration 3300 Whitehaves Street. N Washington. DC'20235 Door Dr. faster: Designation of a National --tuarloo Sanctuary in the Waquoqit Bay region could not be more timely. Is my lifetime I have soon the Cope change from an 2q5.1 Comment noted. isolated rural county. supplying Boston with produce, to something of an exurb, supplying commuters. Now that Indian land claims and high mortgage interest rates have abated. the extraordinary year-round development to this pert of the county puts a wholly now kind of pressure on the local environment. which so longer gets nine or too months yearly to recuperate. I am writing so a biologist concerned with the coastal tons. and as a householder adjacent to the 'preferred alternative' sanctuary boundary. The only question I have. which noel neighbors have as well. In why the sanctuary 25.2 Please see General Co 25.2 does not *stood at least as for as the present ACBCf I Ili* on Bourne Pond. a the discussion under tributary to Waquoit Say through So& Pond and the tide ma--- at the northeast 4" on page 55. Bog an corset of the Bay. Those ponds and their margins are part of the ACKC, and may of as feel it would make sense If they were also part of the sanctuary. the open water and so] A strong general policy addressed to water quality in the sanctuary's the lower Quashnet R4qiv tributary drainage would have plenty of support bore. Neck Road and Route 28 25.3 1 cannot at the moment speak for all of my neighbors. but speaking for within the propsoed sa so" of them and myself. we would be happy to discuss easements at other measures affecting our property which would help to secure the Integrity of 25.3 Comment noted. Access the proposed sanctuary and Its drainage. Lot me add that your draft BIS sad Sanctuary's resources 25.4 your Falmouth hearings on August 22 were both carried out In first-class of research and educat fashion. among Sanctuary object for your Interest. Re Very truly yours, the Commonwealth will Donald W. Bourne 25.4 Comments noted; no res Janice R. Smith 136 Spoondrill Circle R.F.D. 1 Box 701 Mashpoe, MA 02649 August 1, 1984 Door Dr. Fostor: On August 24, 1984 TIM ENTERPRISE newspaper of Falmouth Massachusetts featured a story entitled *Seek To Designate 2,232-acre Waquoit Bay as a National Estuarine Sanatuary It pleased me, as a Mashpoo resident, that our Solootmen supported the August 22nd proposal. I do also, even though I woo unable to attend that meeting. It Is generally agreed by Cape Cod residents (real-estate) operators notwithstanding) that the level of development need not be curtailed, but must be considerably @loved. We are dan- garously taxing our resources# and also Ignoring our supperior farming lands, beauty and historic facets on this unique Cape/ One has only to view the rap* of Bout* 28 and the equal destruction of Waal Beach, Florida to shudder In terror that the remainder of our unusual terrain be equally abused. My sincere best wishes to the State In Its appeal to the Federal Government for the 1.6 million dollar grant which, hopefully will be notched by the State. Please keep us Informed of the progress along the way I would like to add way voice to those who sIncerly desire that the Sanctuary will come to fruition. 26.1 Comment noted; no response necessary. Sincerely, Janice r. Smith Copy to: Joyce M.T.Wood Chief Ecology and Conservation Div. Room 6111 US Dept. of Commerce Washington,D.C. 20230 P7 Qr N NOAA ZBOO (A) ;L Ox 3 -S- 0, fV7 IAL I crur- ct'-zp C- 27.1 vel C 27.1 Comment noted; no response necessary. v 4@ @O 27.2 21.2 We appreciate your of0qfe the Sanctuary Research support by both private businesses. public Intet all levels of government It operation and manage Say National Estuarine reach Its potential. No the Massachusetts OffIce Managevent will contact your generous offer of 14 Whistler Way, Waquoit, Ma. 02536 1 September 1984 Dr. Nancy Foster Chief, Sanetuary Programs Division National Ocean Servics/NOAA 3300 Whitehaven Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20235 Dear Dr. Foster, After reviewing the Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Draft Management PLan on th proposed Waquoit May National Estuarine Santuary I would like to suggest that you reconsider the proposed boundaries. My preferance would be that you include all of the area which is included in th eWaquoit Bay Area of Environmental Concern. It would seem to me that this would make sense, be consistent and provide additional effective protection for this rather fra- gile resource. For example, Calob Pond at the head of the bay is included but you omit both Bog Pond and Bourne Pond, both of which food directly into Calob Pond. LIke wise, you include the lower part of the Quashnet Riber and not the upper reacher. While there may be valid scientific reasons for doing so, they are lost on me. 28.1 Please see General Comment/Responses and the discussion under "Boundary Alternative 4 on page 55. Please note the proposd boundaries have been expanded to include Bourne and Bog Ponds, and the open water and salt march areas of the lower Quashnet River between Marsh Meck Road and Route 28. If closing, I would just like to say that I am delighted that the Office of Environmental Affairs is taking this initiative as I think it is a most positive step towards preserving this almost unique and valueable natural resourse. 28.2 Comment noted; no response necessary. Yours truly, Joseph F. Lynch cc: Joyce M.T. Wood Chief Ecology and Conservation Divisinion COMMENTS AND RESPONSES Public Hearing Based on public requests and remarks received at the Public Hearing, a transcript has been prepared of each speaker's remarks, and is presented on the following pages. Introductory remarks by the Hearing Officer and the State's representatives have not been included to save space; however, these can be made- available on written request to NOAA. JL55 August 22. 1984 2:00 P.M. 12 speakers 44. Laura C. Bailey (approximately) 70 persons present 45. Noramn PhIllbotte 46. Elizabeth Douthart 41. Sandra L. Cadwalader Morse Pond School, Falmouth, Massachusetts 41. Everett/Kathleen Mas 48. Chester/Harjorle Kob 49. Muriel McGrath Persons present: 50. Vicki Bourque 51. Mr. & Mrs. Anthony J 1. Arthur Jeffers - Public Hearing Officer 52. Mrs. Joseph ShIbel 2. Sherrard foster 53. William S. Witt 3. Steven Bliven 54. Mrs. William J. Abbo 4. Rich Delaney 55. Chester and Ruth Byk 5. Jack Clarke 56. Ruth M. Andrews 6. Jea Thomas., speaker 57. Edward S. Anderson 7. Charles Swat , speaker 58. Monica McNally 8. Tom Abbott. speaker 59. Bill Overholtz 9. Ronald Schlitz. speaker 60. Donald P. Davison 10. Richard Brelvogel, speaker 61. Mrs. Warren DeVoe 11. Herman A. Weisner, speaker 62. Morris Kirsher 12. Edith Koch. speaker 63. Rr. & Mrs. Richard E 13. M. E. O'Nalley-Keyes, speaker 64. John 0. Ball 14. John Fiske. speaker 65. Joseph R. Uzmann 15. Jon Witten, speaker 66. Terry Cowam 16. Winalfred Woods. speaker 67. Nancy Barnum 17. Olin Kelley, speaker 68. Carl Breivogel 18. Elizabeth B. Spohr/Henry N. Spohr 19. Dorothy R. Kelley 2O. Mr. Chris Burden 21. Ms. Jane Peterson 22. Bob Seay 23. Louise A. Bailey 24. Judith 6. Stetson 25. C. Diane Boretos 26. John F. Stauton 27. Bruce W. Tripp 28. Joseph N. Biknattis 29. Pat Loring 30. Donald W. Bourne 31. Henry Bode 32. Theodore E. Hugo 33. Arthur G. Gaines 34. Ann A. McLean 35. Jon Petersen 36. Sarah K. Barnum 37. Nell Good 38. William Martiros 39. Peggy Collins 40. Earl It. Hutt 41. George W. Webb 42. Marcel S. Kistin 43. Coriielia K. Hutt Transcript of Comments A.I. Comment noted; no response necessary. Public Hearing August 22. 1984 7:00 PH A.2. Any research conducted at the proposed Morse Pond School, Falmouth. Massachusetts Sanctuary would be applied In nature. Proposed studies pertaining directly to the management of Sanctuary resources B. Jean Thomas Town of Mashpee would recieve the highest priority by Sanctuary staff and funding. I am representing the Board of Selectmen from the Town of Mashpee and we support the proposal of the estuarine sanctuary for the Waquoit Bay. We A.3. The Coastal Wetlands Restriction Act has feel that scientific research would be most beneficial to not only the Bay. not yet been Implemented In the Town of, A.I. but other coastal communities. We also do not want to see a duplication of Mashpee. although such action Is a efforts take place and, even though you have It In your alternative as a priority of the Commonwealth and should A.2 priority. we would stress the priority to have research work Include Hamblin occur within the next two years. To Pond and Jehu Pond In this Wetlands Restriction Act. We would like to have the extent possible, the Information A.3 that really considered a priority. gained from Sanctuary sponsored research at Hamblin and Jehu Ponds will be used Charles A. Swain - Edwards Boatzard - Harbor Master/Waquolt Bay In Implementation of both the Wetland Restriction Act and other resource I as a Town Meeting member. also Assistant Harbor Master. one of them management programs. from Waquolt Bay. and I am in agreement with the program. I think that the B.1 purpose of the program Is well laid out. well thought out. however. not only looking from sW point of view. but looking after Interests of other people B.I. Comment noted; no response necessary. In the community with reference to the Swift Estate on page 4 of the Summary. You mentioned renovation of the existing buildings on the Swift Estate, 6.2. Multiple uses of the Sanctuary Would which Is an excellent Idea, establishing a simple, but solid boat dock, be encouraged to the extent compatible building a trail with a boardwalk, keeping the whole use public. but more with the Sanctuary's character as a or less low key. I feel that this shold be written In the final agreement. natural field laboratory. Recreational B.2 We do not -- Steve Bliven did mention this -- but we do not need boat ramps. uses would only be of a low-intensity we do not need additional Intensive use of the Bay area. That was the nature. The focus of Sai-ituary opera- comment on that Item. tions would be on research. education, and Interpretation; with minimal Impact OD On page 71 of the document. there are currently servicing the Waquolt on the natural resources of Waquoit Bay. Bay area three launching ramps, and the State. I believe. or the Town of 8.3 Mashpee Is possibly putting In the fourth. This should be sufficient and 0.3. The facilities proposed for development ample for public use for any resident of the United States. more or less, to at the Swift estate site would be the gain access to the say. Already It Is pretty overcrowded. minimum necessary for efficient Imple- mentation of Sanctuary research and There Is a boating study by the Town of Falmouth now under way. there education programs. B.4 are no results of that at the present time. 6.4. Comment noted. When available. results On page 68 of this brochure, It makes reference to shellfishIng. I am of the boating study referenced. Would out In the Bay, say. 9 to 10 months of the year every to every other day. be appreciated for use In developing There are always shellfisherman out there, both the private and commercial. Sanctuary programs. and I feel that somewhere In the final statement there should be a sort of B.5 guarantee that these people (although you generally state they willbe able 8.5. Traditional low-intensity uses of the to use this area). that It Is put In that they, will have the inherent rights Bay area, including recreational and to use the area for commercial and pleasure uses with reference to she])- commercial shelifishing, will be main- fishing. tained, subject to State and local regulations. The designation of Waquolt That is the extent of my verbal comment. Thank you. Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary will have no direct effect on either existing regulations or the traditional low-inten- sity uses of Waquoit Bay. Tom Abbott - Falmouth Conservation Commission/A.P.C.C./S.C.B.A.C. I would like to read some comments from the Association for the Preservation of Cape Cod. The Association for the Preservation of Cape Cod was organized In 1968 and now has a membership of over 2,200 people, making C.I. The discussion provided In response C.1 us the second largest non-profit environmental advocacy group In Massachusetts. number 13 on page 122 addresses the Knowledgeable members of the Board have reviewed the Draft Invironmentai submission of the same comments by the Impact Statement for Waquolt Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary. As a result, Association for the Preservation of Cape APCC would like to enter the following comments for the record. Cod In a letter dated August 27. 1984. The purposes of this Federal program are In keeping with State and local efforts to afford additional protection for the Massachusetts coastline. The Sanctuary plan will not have a detrimental effect on the environment and any Impact due to research will be very short lived and easily repaired. There will be no Interruption of current uses of land or water access, except as may be called for In the future by the Department of Environmental Management. Ownership by the State of South Cape Beach State Park and Washburn Island provides a large publicly owned area for study and research. ' The inclusion of the Swift Estate as a research center clearly makes the best use of the property. APCC agrees with the decision In the DEIS that management responsibilities should rest with the Department of Environmental Management. While APCC endorses the preferred alternative of the DEIS, we strongly urge that further funding be sought to include the upper reaches of the Waquoit estuary. These areas should be protected against excessive use of pesticides and a program of curtailment of street runoff should be established. The Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management has awarded grants to establish 15 national estuaries and sanctuaries. If a Waquolt Bay National Estuarine and Sanctuary Is established, It will be the first In the State of Massachusetts. This program will further protect one of the largest undevel- U.I. Comment noted; no response necessary. oped areas In the Commonwealth. Approval of this grant will add an important segment to estuarine protection along the eastern seaboard. Thank you. 0.2. The provision of public access for research, educational and Interpretive purposes Ronald Schlitz - Waguoit Bay Yacht Club would be a prime objective of Sanctuary management. Access for low-intensity I have been asked to represent the Commandant of the Waquolt Day Yacht recreation and enjoyment would. of course. Club tonight. John Eastment Bradley. who could not be here. be allowed to the extent that Sanctuary resources are not adversely affected by We are an organization located in the northwest corner of Wa#4uoit Bay such access. In an effort to clarify 0.1 with a total membership of about 500 and support this designation. However. matters regarding the affect of Sanctuary there is one question on Roman IV that has been brought up In reading the designation on public access, the last document and I would like to refer to the last sentence of the page which Is part of the sentence referenced has been in seeming contradiction to what we have heard earlier this evening. Let me revised to read, ". . . would provide just read the last part of the sentence and I quote. "Would provide Improved Improved public access to the Bay for 1).2 public access to the Bay for recreation and enjoyment." It seems to me that research. educational and interpretive that Is not what has been spoken about before this evening and we would purposes." appreciateyour comments on that. U.3. the boundaries of the proposed Sanctuary Secondly, as an individual now, I would like to make a comment and ask have been exiianded to Include Bourne and 1). 1 for the inclusion in the designation of the quashnet River and its marshes Hoy Ponds, and the open water and salt 11P to Lhe point where It no longer is an embayment or a small embdyment which marsh areas of the lower Quashnet River between 11drsh Neck Road and Route 28. is just south of the crossing of Rt. 28. In looking at the maps It seems to be suitable looking at the area as a whole. Specifically. the marshes below .the bridge, the lower bridge crossing the river, are excluded with no explan- ation given and I would suggest that. as a minumm that they be Included and preferably the area up to Rt. 20 be Included. Thank you. E.I. If designated. the Waquolt Bay National Richard Brelvogel - Falmouth, MA Estuarine Sanctuary will allow for continued multiple use of the Bay's resources, consis- tent with the Sanctuary's character as a - I an an owner of marshland on Hamblin Pond. I am In general agreement natural field laboratory. These activities E.1 with the proposed program. but I would like to be assured of retaining will remain subject to Commonwealth and shellfish rights and the rights to marsh grass. That Is all I have to say. local regulations. Please see Part Herman A. Wiesner - Barnstable County, League of Sportmen's Club II.A.Z.h. on page 39. 1 as Herman A. Wiesner from Monument beach. Nany of you recognize me as a conservation technician. 0"uty Natural Resource Officer. I have a great deal of Input over the past years relative to the use and utilization of this area and as a professional and a sportsman. I have and will strongly endorse F.I. Comment noted; no response necessary. F.1 this proposal personally. and I believe our agency has also. I am here also on behalf of the Barnstable County League of Sportsmen. who strongly endorse this concept. It his been much needed. We have supported coastal zone management along with the barrier beaches and other requirements to preserve and enhance our environment and co-existence with nature. In the study. I feel that the people that prepared It must be compli- mented. It Is one of the best draftsthat I have every had the privilege of reviewing. It covered all aspects and I feel It Is very fair. It has taken F.2. Please see response E.I. above and Part a lot of bias out of the comments that were generated here. shall we say, II.A.2.h. on page 39 of this document. throughout the communities. three or four or five months ago. It has alle- F.2 viated much of the misunderstanding. And. at this time. we would like to endorse It very strongly and the only comment to be assured that the sports- men's Interests: the fishing. the fowling. the shelifishing, water fowling, and trapping. be assured as part of the traditional ongoing utilization. And we, as an agency. and as the users and participants in this area, we very strongly support this endeavor. Edith V. Koch - KaShpee, 14A G.I. Comment noted. On this map you can see the green area. I own ten acres of this area on G.Z. A variety of alternatives are available for ensuring that undesired access will Hamblin Pond. It is a wonderful wildlife area. We have all kinds of birds not occur on privately owned property. and ducks and geese and they nest there. When we have high tide, all this Easements. or other property Interests area Is completely covered with water. You can see thousands of little small necessary to ensure access for research 6. 1 fish jumping In this marsh area. I am concerned because we are going to have and educational purposes, It approplately a great big development above this marshland. I am concerned that we are restricted. would not allow general going to have septic tanks. and around twenty or thirty or them. right on the rights of access for other purposes (e.g., idge of this marsh. And since I am the only person that owns that land (I general public access for recreational was away down south when this development thing came up) so that I was not purposes could be restricted In this able to say a word about It. I didn't know about it. manner while. at the same time. allowing for Sanctuary-related access). Represen- Now. mW question Is this. It I gave this marsh for experimental purposes, tatives of the Commonwealth will contact G.2 would these people on this development be able to walk across my marsh because landowners to discuss the various options I am al I alone In a house -- there Is a little Island In the middle of this available for both providing access for Sanctuary purposes and protecting rights retained. marsh where my house Is. I live alone. So my question Is, what protection would I have It this was given for educational purposes? Thank you. M. E. O'Malley-Keys Hashpee Shellfish Warden On page 71, there Is mention that there are currently no marinas or N.I. Thank you for the Information. The text heavily used mooring areas within the proposed sanctuary. I may be mistaken. has been corrected to mention the Little H.1 but I believe that there Is a Little River boat yard located on the Little River boatyard. River that Is actively used. Additionally. I am the Shellfish Warden from the Town of 14&shpee and of course In conjunction with Jean Thomas I am com- H.2. The summary section provided at the begin- pletely enthusiastic about this proposal. I do. howeverr. feel that this ning of this document was included for document Is a best asotoric and leaves the general public a bit bewildered. those who may not have the time or lncitn- I would Imagine. when confronted with something like this. perhaps an ation to read the entire FEIS and ONP. H.2 extrapolation of sow of the key points might be useful for general distribution In addition. general explanation brochures to people who don't have the time nor ability to digest something of this would be developed under the Sanctuary complexity. Thank you. education program If the Sanctuary is designated. Jon Witten - Falmouth Planning board I am the Town Planner for the Town of Falmouth. It gives me great pleasure to speak positively about a proposal in Falmouth. particularly in 1.1 light of some recent events. On behalf of the Planning Board.1 would like to convey the message of their strong support of the proposal of the Waquolt I.I. Comment noted; no response necessary. Say area as a federal estuarine system and I would also like to offer. on behalf of the Planning Board. our assistance to both State and Federal agencies as well as the regional commissions In terms of the development of 1.2. the Swift property. Ingress and egress on the Swift property, as well as 1.2. The offer of assistance by the Falmouth boating and development of the area Itself. Thank you. Planning Board Is appreciated. Winnifred Woods - Falmouth Planning Board By way of background, for those people who may not know of my Involvement. I have lived near the Waquolt Bay Estuarine Sanctuary. or the proposed Waquolt Day Estuarine Sanctuary. for nearly thirty years, since I was five years old. I don't need scientists to tell me that there has been a great deal of change and there Is going to be a great deal of change coming In the future without sow help, and I think that the change would be negative. I got Involved with the environmental status of Waquolt Bay In the end of 1981. co-founded and became the first chairman for the Citizens for the Protection.of Waquolt Bay. I left that group In 1983 when I was elected to the Falmouth Planning board. I now serve on the subcommittee that Is Involved with zoning bylaws regulation. I say this all, by way of background. to give you a little bit of an understanding of my comments to follow. In fact that I may be a little bit emotional shrill. I would like to quote from the Statemept Itself. On page 44. It says, "The continuing development pressures experienced on Cape Cod, the Island, southeast Massachusetts. and the rest of the coastline of the Commonwealth require an understanding of the resources of this coastal area and the Inter- relationships within the coastal ecosystems and their ability to withstdnd human pressures. The research and education facilities associated with a national estuarine sanctuary can make significant contrtbutlonto the under- Standing and protection of sensitive coastal resourcesand can also Improve coastal management decision making." This for me was the focal point of this entire proposal. Every week. when the Planning Board meets. we find that we are weighing decisions that have private property Interests pitted against what is In the public good. The decisions we make. although they are on a local level. In fact affect the environmental health of the entire world. All too often I feel that the public and the landowners. In particular, do not have an adequate understanding of the environmental effects of activities that they conduct with respect to their own land. And this lack of understanding. I believe. is the reason why we are seeing so many negative environmental Impacts. and I feel that with public education, a lot of those negative environmental Impacts could be stopped. I don't believe that people Intentionally do harm; I believe that they.do It when they are not cognizant of the negative effects. This estuarine sanctuary proposal Is something that I have been Involved In in the periphery for the past couple of years and I need not say how much I heartily endorse It. The Planning Board has been struggling with the effort of trying to have our regulation. local regulation, conform to specific performance standards. In order words. what we are trying to do Is regulate on the basis of scientific knowledge and adjust the public versus the private Interests based on actual understanding of the carrying capacity of the land. In other words. promote development but don't overdevelop to the point of Irreversible destruction. The estuarine sanctuary proposal. If In fact it develops In a way that enables us to get an adequate sclenf Itic basis for J-1 Comments noted; no response necessary. that decision making, will only promote the local environmental health and J.1. certainly the economy. I think we have all seen the Incredible costs of clean up of pollution and I think that we can all agree that it is much saner and certainly more economically efficient to prevent the pollution In the first place. A lot of people view me personally as being totally opposed to' development. That Is not so. What I am opposed to is the Ignorance that pervades our system In terms of trying to decide how do we develop and how do we pick the public Interest versus the private landowners Interest. Because of my activities with the Citizens for the Protection of Waquolt Bay. I had very close contact with many departments. Including the Department of Environmental Management and I am heartily in favor of that Department being .the primary agency In charge of overseeing this estuarine sanctuary. I feel that they are staffed with very. very, Intelligent and enthusiastic scientists and technicians and I feel that this Is something that I feet very comfortable In having this particular State Agency administer. The only real problem I have with7 the proposal is. that In the alterna- tives that were named, you had Indicated that you were not including the entire ACEC. On the local level In Falmouth we have produced the bylaw that controls vegetation removal and certain construction activities In the entire J.2. ACEC as well as the 25-foot buffer strip around It. And given the fact of J.Z. Please refer to 'Boundary Alternative 4,' our concern over the entire ACEC area (for those of you that don'tknow What page 55, and to General Comment/Response A. ACEC Is. It Is Area of Critical Environmental Concern) I personally would like to see the estuarine sanctuary encompass that entire area. I am a little bit disorganized. as you can see. I apologize for the delay. there was some discussion about a possible duplication of effort In terms of the fact that we have ongoing educational programs and also we have the Woods Note Oceanographic Institute and the other reserch institutions. I J.3. We agree. Research conducted at the J.3. would like to reiterate that the contact the local regulatory boards have proposed Sanctuary would be applied in with those Institutions Is extremely minimal. We do not benefit from the nature, with priority emphasis given to scientific data that Is produced by those institutions and. in fact. we do studies pertaining directly to the manage- positively need the applied scientific data that should come out of this sent of Sanctuary resources. estuarine sanctuary proposal. I guess the last thing I have to say is: the sanctuary program started In 1972 and here we.are 12 years later. Where have you guys been? We need you. Thank you very much for your patience. Olin Kelley - Waguolt Say Commercial Shelifisherman I have a family affair Waquoit shellfish corporation in Waquolt and among other things that I did see. and as a shellfish dealer, I feel tht somewhere along the lines somebody sadly underestimated the amount of shell- fish that are produced In the Waquolt Bay area. There Is a tremedndous influx of summer people that Is no record kept of the amount of product that they take out. There are commercial men who are fishing there that there Is no record kept of what they take out. I don't personally keep a record of the Individuals and the amounts that they take, but I know that the amount that is shown Is only for the year 1983. There are many, many years that there are tremendous amounts of scallops Involved as well as the hard class. how, you should take Into consideration the fact that there are many, many K.I. We concur that the Information Is Incom- K.1 years. Some years they take out tens of thousands of bushels of scallops out plete, particularly regarding the recrea- of 1he Waquolt Say area. This should be taken Into consideration. not just tional harvest. However, the information the one particular year that you have recorded on page 70. which Is. as I presented Is the best available at the say. I believe grossly underestimated. present. One of the primary goals of research In the proposed Sanctuary would The other one thing Is that you stated. on page 47. alternatives and It be to determine the nature and functioning mentioned the possiblity of Including the Eel Pond and Seaplt River In the of the Waquolt Day estuary. If sufficient K.2 sanctuary program. It was stated that they didn't envision It. but you can support Is available, research would always change your mind, can't you? It does happen. Include an Inventory of present shellfish (and other) resources, past commercial and recreational harvests. as well as an John Fiske, Massachusetts Division of Marine fisheries Investigation Into habitat requirements, In order to determine the health of the I had hoped to have a formal statement to submit. I have passed on shellfish resource. favorable comments to oty Director, but he hasn't had time to review them. L.1 I am sure they will be submitted In writing in the very near future. X.2. Please refer to "Boundary Alternative 5," By and large. we were generally very much In favor of this proposal. page 56. L.I. Comments noted; no response necessary. APPENDIX 1 National Estuar.ine Program Regulations 1974, 1977 and 1984 :16S TUESDAY, JUNE 4, 1974 WASHINGTON, D.C. Volume 39 Number 108 PART IV DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Estuarine Sanctuary Guidelines 167 RULES AND REGULATIONS 19922 Title 15-Commerce and Foreign Trade Chapter X-NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE PART 921-ESTURAINE SANCTUARY GUIDELINES The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) on March 4, 1974, proposed guidelines (13 CFR Part 921) pursuant to section 312 of the Coast Zone Management Act of 1972 (Pub. L. 92-383. 45 Stat. 1280). herinafter referred to as the "Act," for the purpose of establishing the policy and procedures for the nomination, ---lectoin and management of estuarine sanctuaries. Written comments were to be submitted to the Office of Coast Environmen (now the Office of Coast Zone Management), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration before April 8, 1974, and consideration has been give those comments. The Act recognizes that the coastal zone is rich in a variety of natural, commercial, recreational, industrial and esthetic resources of immediate and potential value to the present and futre well-being of the nation. States are encouraged to develop and impiement management programs to achieve wise use of the resources of the coastal zone, and the Act authorizes Federal grants to the States for those purposed (section 305 and 306). In addition, under sectoin 312 of the Act, the Secretary of Commerce is authorized to make available to a coastal State grants of up to 50 per --tum of the cost of acquisition, development, and operation of estuarine sanctuaries. The guidelines contained in this part are for grants under section 312. In general, section 312 provides that grants may be awarded to Sates on a matching bests to acquire, develop and operate natural areas as estuarine sanctuaries in order that scientists and students may be provided the opportunity to examine over a period of time ecological relationships within the area. The purpose of these guidelines is to establish the rules and regulations for implementation of this program. The National Oceanic and Atmospherica Administration is publishing herewith the final regulations describing the procedures for applications to receive grants for estuarine sanctuaries under section 312 of the Act. The final regulations and creiteria were revised from the proposed guidelines based on the comments received. A total of (50) States, agencies, organizations and individuals submitted responses to the proposed section 312 guidelines on March 7, 1974. Of those responses received, sights offered no commment or were wholy favorable as to the nature and content of the guidelines to the nature and content of the guidelines as originally proposed. Forty- two (42) commentators submitted suggestions concerning the proposed section 312 guidelines. The following summary analysis bay comments received on various sections of the proposed regulations and presents the rationale for the responses made. Section 312 Definitions. Three comments requested that the trm "estuary" be defined. Although the term is defined in the Act, and also in the regulations dealing with Coastal Zone Management Program Development Grants (Part 920 of this chapter) published November 29, 1973, it has been added to these regulations and broadened, slightly to include marine lagoons, with restriced freshwater input such as might occur along the South Texas coast. Two other comments requested that the "primary purpose" referred to in - 921.2(b) be clearly defined. Although elaborated upon in - 921.3(a) for the purpose of clarity this change has been made. SEction 921.3 Objectives and Implementation. Several comments suggestted that the esutarine sanctuary program objectives were too narrowly defined and specifically that they should be broadened to include the acquisition and preservation of unique or endangered estuaries for wildlife or ecological reasons. Although the Act (Section 302) declares it he nation's policy to preserve, protect, develop, and where possible, to restore or enhance coastal resources, this is perceived to be achiebable through Sate actions pursuant to sectoins 305 and 306. While it is recognized that the creation of an estuarine sanctuary may in fact serve to preserve or protect an area or biological community, the legislative history of section 312 clearly indicates the estuarine sanctuary program was not intended to duplicate existing broad purpose Federal preservation programs, such as might be accommodated by use of the Land an Water Conservation Fund Act. Instead, bot in the Act as well as its legislative history, the objective is defined as preserving representative estuarine areas for long-term research and educational uses. Three other comments suggested the objectives of the program should be enlarged to include the restoration of environmentally degraded areas. This, too, is perceived to be a State requirement separate from section 312. In addition, adequate authority for restoring degraded water areas now exists (for emample, Pub. L. 92-500 in addition to section 302, 305, and 306 of the Act). No significant additional benefit would appear to result from declaring an area an estuarine santuary for the purposed of restoration. A few comments indicated that the examples of sanctuary use were too heavily weighted toward scientific uses to the exclusion of educational uses. Public education concerning the values and benefits of, and the nature of conflict within the coastal zone, will be essential to the success of a coastal zone management program. The section has been changed to reflect an appropriate concer for educational use. Some commentators suggeted changes in or additions to the specific examples of sanctuary uses and purposes. These examples were taken from the Senate and House Committee Reports and are considered sufficent to reflect the kinds of uses intended within an estuarine sanctuary. Several comments were received pertaining to - 921.3(c) involving the restrictions against overemphasis of destructive or manipulative reserch. Ten comments indicated that the section was too weak and wouldn ot provide sufficent long-term protection for the sanctuary ecosystem. Several commentators specifically recommended deleting the words "wouldnot normally be permitted" and inserting in their place "will not be permitted." In contrast three respondents indicated that the potential use of estuarine sanctuaries for manipulative or destructive research was too restricted, and that these uses should be generally permitted if not encouraged. The legislative history of section 312 clearly indicates that the intent of the estuarine sanctuary program should be to preserve representative estuarine areas so that they may provide long-term(virtually permanent) scientific and educational use. The uses perceived are compatible with what has been defined "research natural areas." In an eral of rapidly degrading estuarine environments the estuarine sanctuary program will ensure that a representative series of natural areas will be available for scientific or educational uses dependent on that natural character for example, for baeline studies for use in understanding the functioning of natural ecological systems, for controls against which the impacts of development in other areas might be compared and as interpretive centers for educational pruposes. Any use, research or otherwise which would destroy or detract from te natural system would be inappropriate under this program. In general, the necessity of or benfit from permitting manipulative or destructive research within an estuarine sanctuary is unclear. While there is a legitimate need for such kinds of research, ample opportunity for manipulative or destructive research to assess directly man's impact or stresses on the estuarine environment exists now with but the need for creation or use of an estuarine nsactuary for this purpose. In contrast, a clear need exists for natural areas to serve as controls for manipulative research or research on altered systems. The action on manipulativ research has been changed to reflect the concern for continued maintenance of the area as a natural system. However, the midifier "normally" has been retained because, within these limits it is not felt necessary to preclude all such uses; the occasion may rarely arise when because of a thoroughly demonstrated direct benefits, such research may be permitted. Several comments suggested that the program should include degraded estuarine systems, rather than be limited to areas which are "relatively undistrubed by hum activites." Such areas would permit research efforts designed to restore an estuarine area. As indicated Ferederal ------, VOL 39, -- ---TUESDAY, JUNE 4, 1974 168 RULES AND REGULATIONS above, an ample mandate to restore environmentally degraded areas already exists; the benefits to be derrived from declaring such areas estuarine sanctuaries would be marginal. Indeed, it would appear that if restoratoin efforts cannot occur without estuarine sanctuary designation, then, give the limited resources of this program, such eforts wouldnot be feasible. A few commentators suggested that the phrase (- -21.3(e) "if sufficent permanence and control by the State can be assured, the acquisition of a sancturay may involved les than the acquisition of a fee simple interest" bemore clearly defined. Explanator language has been added to that section. Section 921.4 Zoogeographic Classification. Because the classification scheme utilized plants as well as animals, two commentators suggested that zoogeographic be changed to biogeiographic. This change is reflected in the final regulations. One comment suggested that selection of sanctuaries should depend on the pressures and threats being brought to bear upon the natural areas involved even if thismeant selecting several sanctuaries from one classification and none from another. The legislative history of section 312 clearly shows the intense to select estuarine sanctuaries on a rational basis which would reflect regional differentiation and a variety of ecosystems. The biogeographic classification system, which reflects geographic, hydrographic, and biologic differences fulfills that intention. A scheme which would abandon that system or another similar one and would not fulfill the requirements of providing regional differentiation and a variety of ecosystems, would not be consistent with the intended purpose of the Act. A few comments received suggested that the biogeographic classification scheme by enlarged by the addition of a new class reflecting an area or State of special concern or interest to the respondent. (No two commentators suggested the same area.) It is felt that adequate national representation is provided by the biogeiographic scheme proposed, and that the changes offered were in most cases examples of sub-categories that might be utilized. One comment suggeted a sprecific change in the definition of the "Great Lakes" category. Portions of that suggestion have been incorporated into the final rules. Two commentators requested assurance that sub-categories of the biogeographic scheme will in fact be utilized. The final language substitutes "will be developed and utilized" for "may be developed and ------." Section -21.5 Multiple Use. Several comments were received pertaining to the mulitple use concepts. Three commentators suggested that the mulitple use directive was contrary to or absent from the Act and should be emited. Ten respondents felt the concept should be more exp----- defined and restricted to that the primary purpose of the sanctuary would be more clealy protected. In contrast, two commentators felt that the definition might prove too restrictive and should be broadended. Several commentators suggested that examples of anticipated multiple use might be appropriate. While recognizing that it is not always possible to accomodate more than a singe use in an environmentally sensitive area, it is not the intention to unnecessarily preclude the uses of sanctuary areas where they are clearly compatible with and do not detract from the long-term protection of the ecosystem for scientific and educational purposes. The langurage of -931.5 has been changed accordingly. Section 921.6 Relationship to Other Provisions of the Act and to Marine Sanctuaries. Several coments were received which commended and stressed the need for close coordination between the development of State coastal none management programs, especially and land and water use controls, and the estuarine sanctuary program. The relationship between the two programs is emphasized: estuarine sancuaries should provide benefit-both short-term and long-term-to coastal zone management decision-makers: and State coastal zone management programs must provide necessary protection for estuarine sanctuaries. This necessary coordination is discussed not only in the estuarine sanctuary regulations, but will also be addressed in an appropriate fashion in guidelines and rules for Coastal zone Management Program Approval Criteria and Administrative Grants. Three commentators discussed the need for swift action by both State and Federal governemnts to establish and acquire estuarine sanctuaries. The Office of Coastal Zone Management intents to pursue the program as swifly as available manpower restainst will permit. A few comments sought reassurance that the estuarine sanctuaries program will in fact be coordinated with the Marine Sanctuaries Program (Title III Pbu. L. 92-532). The guidelines have been changed to reflect that both programs will be administered by the same office. ------- B-APPLICATION FOR GRANTS Section 921.10 General One reviewer indicated uncertainty about which State agency may submit applications for grants under section 312. Although inidvidual agencies to apply for an estuarine sanctuary, because of the necesesity for coordination with the State coastal zone management program the entity within the State which is the certified contact with the Office of Coastal Zone Management, NOAA, responsible for the administration of the coastal zone management program must endorse or approve an estuarine sanctuary application. Appropriate Language has been included to ensure this coordination. Section 921.11 Initial Application for Acquisition, Development and Operation Grants. Two comments requsted th--- the sources and nature of accepta---- matching funds should be ex----- identified. OMB Circular A-102 generally defin---- and identifies legitimate "match" ---- Federal grant projects. In general, ref---- ence should be made to that documen----HOwever, the section has been expand---- in response to some specific and freque---- questions. Two comments stresses the need ---- increased availibility of research fun---- to adequately sanctuaries. While note an appropriate function of the estuarine sanctuary program, the Office of Coastal Zone Management is discussing the necess---- of adequate funding with approprite agencies. One comment suggested that the ----"legal description" of the --------(-921.11(a)) is not appropriate for categories of information requested. T---- work "legal" has been omitted. Three reviewers indicated that the ---- provides no basis for consideration socio-economic impacts (-921.11(-)) and that this criterion seem inappropriate to selecting estuarine sancturies. Apparently these reviewers misunderstood the intention of this requirement. The information in this section is necessary for preparation of an environment-- impact statement which will be prepar---- pursuants to NEPA. Although required the application, such information is ---- a part of the selection criteria, which ----- addressed in Subpart C. -921.20. One similar comment was received with regard to consideration of existt---- and potential uses and conflicts (-92-11(h)). This item is also discussed und--- selection criteria (-921.20(h)). It is intended that this criterion will only ----- considered when choosing between ----ormore sanctuary applications with the same biogeographic categoy which are of otherwise equal merti. One comment drew attention to ---- apparent typographic error in - 921 --(m) where the term "marine estuarine" seems out of context. This has been corrected. Two commentators suggested that public hearings should be required in the development of an estuarine sanctuary application. Although such a hearing deeemed des---able by the Office of Coastal Zone Management. It would not ----seem to be necesary. The language 921.11(1)) has been changed to ---- the sincere concern for the adequate involvement of the public, which is ----- addressed under a new 920.21. One respondent suggested that a ---- secion be added requiring th applicant to discuss alternative methods ---- acquisition or control of the areas, including the designation of a marine sancuary in place of establishing an estuary sanetuary. A new section (920.11(n)) has been added for this purpose. Section 921.12 Subsequent Application for Development and Operation Grant. Three commentators expressed concern that the intent of 921.12 be more clear----- expressed. Appropriate changes have been made. FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 29. NO.1-- - TUESDAY, JUNE 4 1974 169 19924 RULES AND REGULATION One comment was made that a provision should be included to use existing Federally owned land for the purpose of the estuarine sanctuary program. A section has been added for that purpose. Section 921.20 Criteria for Selection. One comment suggested that the consideration of conflict with existing or potential competing uses should not be included as a selection criterion is considered appropriate. Another reviewer suggeted the addition of a new criterion, consideration of "the need to protect a particular estuary from harmful development." As discussed earlier, this criterion is not considered appropriate. Such a basis for determining selection would lead estuarine sancuaries, rather than the rationally chosen representatives series mandated in the legislative history. Two reviewers commented that the limitation on the Federal share (-------- for each sanctuary) was too low and wold severely restrict the usefulness of the program. However, this limitation is provided by the Act. Another commentator suggested that 921.20 (g) was unnecessarily restrictive in that it might prevent selecting an estuarine sanctuary in an area adjacent to existing preserved lands where the conjunction maight be mutually beneficial. The language of - 921.20(g) does not prelcude such action, but has been changed to specifically permit this possibility. Two commentators inquired whether the reference to a "draft" environmental impact statement (- 921.20, last paragraph) indicated an intention to avoid further compliance with NEPA. It is the firm intention of the Office of Coastal Zones Management to fully comply in all respects with NEPA. The word "draft" has been struck. Three reviewers addressed th problems of providing adequate public participation in the review and selection process. In addition to the change in (--20.11(1), a new section has been added to address this issue. SUPART D-OPERATION Section 921.30 General One commentator suggested that during contract negotiations there should be a meeting between the applicant agency and proposed sanctuary management team, and representatives of the Office of Coastal Zone Management. The general provisions have been broadened to provide for this suggestion. Two comments were submitted which urged that some discretion be exercised in the use and access to the sanctuary by scientists and students. Two other comments were received which requested specific protection for use by the general public. The guidelines have been changed to include these suggestions. One comment was received suggesting language to clarify - 921.--(g). This was incorporated into the guidelines. Two commentators expressed concern for enforcement capabilities and activities to ensure protection of the estuarine sanctuaries. A new section has been added which addrresses this issue. Finally, one suggestion was received that a ve---- for change in the mangement policy or research programs should be provided. A new section has been added for that purpose. Accordingly, having considered the comments received and other relevant information, the Secretary concludes by adopting the final regulations describing the procedure for applications to receive estuarine sanctuary grants under section 312 of the Act, as modified and set forth below. Effective date: June 3, 1974 Dated: May 31, 1974 ROBERT M WHITE Administrator -----A--General Sec. 923.1 Policy and objectives 921.1 Policy and objectives 921.2 Definitions 923.3 Objectives and implementation of the program. 921.4 Biogeographic classification 921.5 Multiple uses. 921.6 Relationship to other provisions of the Act and to ------ ---------. ------- - -- Application for Grants 921.10 General 921.11 Application for initial requisition development and operation grants. 921.13 Federally owned lands ------- - --Selection Criteria 921.20 Criteria for application 921.21 Public participation ------- - --Operation 921.30 General 921.31 Changes in the sanctuary ------, management policy or research program. 021.33 Program review. --------: Sec. --- of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (Pbu. - -- - ---, -- ------). Subpart A-General - ---.1 Policy and Objectives The estuarine sanctuaries program will provide grants to States on a matching basis to acquire, develop and operate natural areas as estuarine sanctuaries in order that scientists and students may be provided the opportunity to examine over a period of time te ecological relationships within the areas. The purpose of these guidelines is to establish the rules and regulations for implementation of the program. - 921.2 De------- (a) In addition to the definitions found in the Act and in the regulations dealing with Coastal Zone Management Program Development Grants published November 29, 1973 (Part --- of this chapter) the term "estuarine sanctuary" as defined in the Act, means a research area which may include any part or all of an estuary, adjoining transitional areas, and adjacent uplands, constituting to th extent feasible a natural unit set aside to provide scientists and students the opportunity to examine over a period of time the ecological relationships within the area. (b) For the purposes of this section, "estuary" means that part of a river or stream or other body of water having unimpared connection with the open sea where the seawater is measurably diluted with freshwater derived from land drainage. The term includes estuary-type areas of the Great Lakes as well as lagoons in more and coastal regions. (c) The term "multiple use" as used in this section shall mean the simultaneous utilization of an area or reource for a variety of compatible purposes or to provide more than one benefit. The term implies the long-term, continued uses of such resources in such a fashion that other uses will not interfere with, diminish or prevent the primary purpose, which is the long-term protection of the area for scientific and educational use. - 921.3 Objectives and Implementation of the program (a) Genreal. The purpose of the estuarine sanctuaries program is to create natural field laboratories in which to gather data and make studies of the natural and human process occurring within the estuaries of the coastal zone. This shall be accomplished by the establishment of a series of estuarines sanctuaries, which will be designated so that at least one representative of each type of estuarine ecosystem will endure into the future for scientific and educational purposes. The primary use of estuarine sanctuaries shall be fore research and educational purpose, especially to provide some of the information essential to coastal zone management, decision making. Specific examples of such purposes and uses include but are not limited to: (1) To gain a thorough understanding of the ecological relationships within the estuarine environment. (2) To make baseline ecological measurements. (3) To monitor significant or vital changes in the estuarine environment. (4) To ----- the effects of man's stresses on the ecosystem and to forecast and m----gate possible deterioration from human activities. (a) To provide a vehicle for increasing public knowledge and awareness of the complex nature of estuarine systems, their values and benefits to man and nature, and the problems which confront thm. (b) The emphasis within the program will be on the designation as estuarine sanctuaries of areas which will serve as natural field laboratories for studies and investigations over an extended period. The area chosen as an estuarine sanctuary shall, to the extent fessible, include water and land masses constituting a natural ecological unit. (c) In order that the etuarine sanctuary will be available for future studies, research involving the destruction of any portion of an estuarine sanctuary which would permanently alter the nature of the ecosystem shall not nomally be FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 39, NO. 1-- -- TUESDAY, JUNE 4 1974 ~0 R~0qU~qL~qIM AND ~qR~qE~2qGULA~4qU~4qM ~q1~. ~qo~qw~qn~qi~qt~qt~d~8q& ~q11~1 an unusual ~c~qi~r~c~u~lm~s~t~a~n~c~e~s ~&~qM~t~o~d And subject to Winter ~A~G~U~qW~. ~b~i~o~t~a (b) ~q7b~e estuarine sanctuaries Pro~, when permitted~. manipulative A" ~r~e~. ~b~o~r~qw to ~su~b-Ar~st~i~a, will be conducted~ In close ~co~o~p~qw ~5~0~1~1~r~8qd~, shall be ~qf~qt~r~*~qf~2qW~ql~qy ~c~ont~r~o~qn~e~8q& ~qt~qg~o ~IL ~S~u~b~a~r~a~qf~qt~L ~qV~es~s, ~qn~d ~n~qW~qA ~a~o~s~e~t~s of with ~qt~qb~k~o marine ~qa~c~c~qU~n~Lr~qi~e~s pr~o~@~, experiment w~qb~2qk~2qA ~qI~n~v~o~ql~v~e~s ~qm~a~c~qI~p~al~a~4qd~v~i~e ~A~i~m~*~&~. ~5~q0 stressed c~o~a~s~u~r b~i~o~q% Arctic ~qm~d ~8qM~t~ql~e In of the ~4qu~Ar~I~ns~ Pr~o~t~ect~i~o~qm ~r~e~s~s~amb ~a~ql~6q" be ~2qWt~qi~at~ed ~u~nt~qa the ter%. ~0~1~2~b~-~A~r~c~t~I~& ~s~e~ar~6qd~t Act of 1~q9~q72~. Pub. L 92~-632. ~w to. Mower~. l~i~a~r~qv~e~r ~I~d~a~n~d~s. ~s~qm~e~t~t:~z~s~s With ~qm~i~n~a~t~ql~a~s date IS ~sp~qf~qt~qt~qd~2q" and ~O~r~qU~q141~20~0 ~pl~e~d~p~i~t~&~U~S ~W~O~U~D~qU~U~qW. ~c~o~os~i~q"r~ab~l~e ~1~qf~qt~V~* is ~L~qw~o~,~o~qd~u~qa~n~qi~st~e~r~e~qd by the ~4qO~qf~qI~c given that the environment will be re- ~a~ct~i~o~qw ~tr~e~q~u~qm~a~y ~w~w~a ~s~qw~e~n~i~t~o ~e~p~e~o~l~o~w Cos" Zone ~4qu~A~n~s~qo~qm~a~n~t~. NO turned to Its condition~ which ~m~c~qis~qt~e~qd low island s~qm~i~o ~P~r~u~n~qw~a~y ~W~qM ~tr~o~p~q" ~w~qb~qu~qb recognizes ~8qQA~qA art-in am prior to the ~e~x~q"r~qim~en~qt. ~b~i~o~t~a. We we= waters~, ~q" far seaward as ~(d~q) It ~qi~s ~a~nt~qA~c~qI~qP~2q" t~qk~qAt moot of t~qh~e II. ~O~qf~qt~e~t Lek~q". ~Gr~e~a~s Lakes at North outer edge at t~qb~* Continental ~qS~qh~e~qb ~X~r~e~e~z selected ~q" ~qM~qW~V~U~&~qM~qU Will be ~r~4qd- A~R~qM~U~S~. ~b~l~u~f~f~-~4~q=~0 ~or ~r~o~qa~Y~. ~g~i~qm~q"~t~al other coastal waters ~qw~qh~qm the Ud~e ~a~t~qt~v~e~qly undisturbed by hum- ~act~qi~T~qt~quds ~S~h~O~f~ell~a~o~. I~U~ZUt~e~d ~W~O~U~&~A~d~a ~2~1fi~f~t~V~a~t~e~r ~a~qw~qr~. and flows, or of the Great ~qLA~qk~es at me time of ~a~cqu~i~f~f~i~l~qu~a~qm ~2qTh~qa~qwf~o~r~e~. ~b~qW~qA ~6 ~=~4~9~9~qW~O ~O~t ~b~O~r~O~U ~&~q" ~%~O~UL~P~*~qf~qtt~* their connecting w~a~t~e~qm need to be I most of ~qt~qh~e areas s~2qda~c~qt~e~qd will be areas ~qm~e~q"~'~q" ~q"~t~h ~q"~q"~qm~q-~q- ~q"~w~q" ~q"~q4 am" served ~o~r restored for their c~o~naerv~a~t with a ~f~a~l~i~n~i~qm~u~qn of development~. t~od~u~s~- Marine ~l~o~v~q"~e~qm ~qM~m~q"t~qi~o~n~a~qL ecologic or esthetic ~v~L~q1 try or h~a~qk~i~qlt~at~qi~qm ~(b~) Various ~sub-c~ate~g~or~ql~es will be do- It Is anticipated that the Secret~a~qn (~0) ~2qU ~s~u~8qm~c~ql~e~c~qt permanence and con- ~T~eloped and utilized " appropriate. occasion may establish marine san~q, tral by t~qb~o ~qS~t~a~t~o can be ~e~ar~qa~id. We ~qj 921~.~q5 Multiple GO& arias to complement the d~es~i~g~nat~l~o~t ~a~qw~r~8q"~qt~qio~n of ~6 sanctum may ~qI~n~v~o~il~v~e States of estuarine sa~in~ctu~a~qn~t~s~. ~w~qi less than the ~a~qm,~f~id of a fee "Via (a) ~V~4qA~0qWs the primary p~u~r~p~qm of ~e~s- this may be mutually ~b~e~n~e~qf~qi~c~i~a~qL Interest Such Interest may b~i~L for ex- tu~ar~qi~c~e sanctuaries is ~U~) provide long~- Subpart ~q8~q-~-A~pp~qi~qk~at~i~on for ~qC~ar~e~nt ample. the acquisition ~o~qf a conserve~- term ~Prot~ec~qU~o~n for natural are" so that ~4qU~o~n easement. *development r~qig~qh~t~0qe, or they may be used for scientific and ~edu- ~qj 921~8qJO ~qC~o~o~qm L other partial interest, su~qg~q2ci~en~qt to ~a~s~s~qm ~c~qa~qU~a~n~al ~qpurpo~e~qf~qt m~u~qi~t~qA~pl~e ~v~a~s at ~e~s~qt~u- ~qSw~qUo~n 312 ~a~ut~qhor~qi~qm Federal ~rr ~qt~qh~e ~p~r~o~t~e~c~t~qi~qm ~of t~qh~e n~a~qu~tr~a~ql ~s~qy~s~te~q= brim sanctuaries will be ~s~n~e~qw~Ar~a~g~ed to to coastal States ~so that the States L~q"~Ai~ng. which ~qV~Q~8qW~q4 not ~z~a~t~qw~* Pam&' ~qt~qh~s, extent that such ~u~s~s ~qJ~O compatible establish sanctuaries according to ~r cent ~p~r~o~t~e~c~qt~qu~qm of the system Would~ not with this ~qO~r~qtm~a~z~qy~.~s~a~n~c~qtu~a~r~y purpose. "act ~c ~P u~ql~g~at~e~qd by the Secret be an acceptable alternative. The capacity of a given sanctuary to ~a~c. Coastal ~qat~i~s~qt~e~s may ~qf~qu~e applications 921.4 ~qB~q&~O~qo~d~0qp~a~qg~qb~qi~g ~6qd~a~qf~qt~qL~qAGI~O~qU0~06 ~c~o~qmm~od~at~e additional u~s~c~L and the grants with the Director, ~4qO~f~qO~c~e of Cos 'pint's Lad intensity of such use. will be Zone Management~, National Oceanic (a) It Is Int~4~a~qd~i~2qd ~qU~m~qA estuarine Sam. determined an a case by ~e~a~s~s~, basis. W~qt~4qW~@ Atmospheric Ad-~4-~ist~r~at~i~on. ~4qU~.S, t~u~ar~qt~q" a~qh~o~n~'~A not be ~c~ql~io~s~en at ~r~q-~Aam It Is anticipated Chat compatible uses ~'m~ay generally ~qt~r~8q4ud~a activities such ~as ~V~a~r~t~qm~e~n~t of Commerce. ~4q8oc~qk~v~j~qU~e~, BE but should ~r~a~qd~ec~qt regional differ="- land ~q2~qO~4qU~4qL TUC ~ace~nc~y which has ~t t~qi~on and a variety of ecosystems so " low Intensity r~e~ic~r~e~s~t~qi~qm ~qA~l~b~'~"~qL ~-~qhU~ct~- certified to the ~4qOf~qOc~e~, of Coastal ~; to cover all. ~a~ql~qen~qi~8qf~8qt~ant variations. To Ing. and wildlife ~o~qb~s~e~r~v~*~4qU~an. It Is ree- Management as the entity re~s~pon~; ensure adequate r~e~qpr~e~s~entat~qi~qm of ~L~qU e~s~- ~a~gn~iz~ed t~qh~q" t~qh~e ~e~x~c~qlu~s~qtr~e u~s~e of an am for administration of the State c~o~s ~t~u~ar~ql~q" typo ~r~e~qf~qi~e~c~t~qi~n~g regional differ. 'for scientific at ~ed~q=t~qla~n~al ~pur~p~o~s~qm Zone management program May ~e~i ~e~nt~qi~a~t~qi~o~n ~a~nd a variety of ~ ~ y ~a~l~q" provide t~4qA~S ~q~0~t~i~r~nt~ir~y~k benefit to submit an application directly. or ~c selections will be made by the Coastal ~3~0~11~8 M~a~n~q"~e~x~a~qm~t and resource and may on ~o~c~c~a~d~o~n be necessary. endorse and approve applications trim the following biogeographic class- ~U~q" ~qa~ql~qt~s~ed, by other ag~e~nc~l within ~q1~q1~q1c~a~qd~o~c~s~: ~(b) ~q7~q2~i~sr~e ~4qd~L~L~qU be no ~@~4q&~ort to balance at" 1. ~A~r~e~q"~4~61~1~6 Northeast Atlantic ~6~0~0~0t or optimize uses of an ~e~f~f~u~u~L~qn~u~e ~B~a~n~ct~u~- south to Cape ~c~o~qc ~g~il~l~ic~i~a~q"~d ~G~q"~r~*~J~I~qW ~V~A~b~- ~qU~7 an economic of ~o~t~qb~qw ~qb~a~qn~& A~ql~ql &do- ~q� 9~q2~q1.11 App~qi~qk~at~qio~n for ~ql~i~miti~al mew )eat to ~w~i~t~a~t~er ~W~1~0~qC ~W~OU develop~q" ~W~g~S~L t~i~on~a~ql uses of t~qh~e sanctuary an Clearly dent~, ~qd~e~qr~s~qi~o~p~qm~e~qw and ~op~e~s ~S~O~qM ~b~o~r~qmA ~b~b~*~& secondary to Me Primary purpose ~a~n~8qd Vasil~& a. ~v~v~v~u~w~s~@~L ~m~3~dd~i~s Au~s~at~i~c men ~tr~o~s~s ~u~s~e~qc which an l~ong~-~qt~e~r~n~i maintenance (a) ~qC~qir~a~n~t~s may be awarded ~o~i ~C~M~A cad to c~a~q" ~q"~t~t~er~qw ~L~O~w~l~s~q" ~$~t~qm~q- of the ~qw~c~qM~qul~c for ~sc~i~en~t~qi~4qf~4qt ~a~n~qd educe~- matching basis to cover the costs Coastal marsh" ~qMd ~mm~u~q"~T ~b~*~q"~O~qm~*~, ~c~b~qm- t~i~on~al us~e~L ~4qR~on~-~com~p~at~Ibl~e uses ~qI~nc~ql~ud- acquisition. development and opera ~a~c~t~u~l~at~i~qf~qt ~1~1~0~q=~1~11~o~f~t~a~l ~b~o~t~w~e~e~n and ~3~; Ing those Via which Would cause ~s~qi~qg~- of ~e~stu~a~r~tn~e s~on~ctu~ar~i~a~L States may b~lo~qf~qt ~p~r~U~qW~U~Y ~t~e~c~a~q"~e~s~t~o with ~q"~Pr~o~q"~U~t~a~f~t~q"~06 ~s~o~e~s~'~* ~b~o~r~e~e~l 1~1~q9~q1C~O~X~I~S short or long-term ecological donations of land or money to ~s~at~i~s~qt~- 3. ~C~a~r~O~U~R~A~qW~L Muth At~I~qM~U~G ~0~9~2~0~1~. ~fr~o~qn disco or would otherwise detract from or part at the matching cost ~r~qM CA" Uttered to Cis~q" Kennelly~: ~O~U~N~G~qA~T~O or restrict t~qh~e u~s~e of t~q1~i~s ~qanctu~ar~qy as ~n~q=LL ~qm~qu~s~b~a~s aid ~s~w~qu~qm~s~. ~ir~a~qw~e t~qw~o~qu am a ~f~t~a~f~t~u~%~ql ~8qf~8qt~4qM laboratory~. will be pre. ~(b~) In ~g~ener~a~qL ~1-d~e acquired productive; b~i~o~q" ~u~n~ap~er~as~e with memo" ~qb~1~qb~i~t~qa~qL s~m~a~n~t to ~qU~U~A ~s~ec~t~qU~qm including ~E ~t~r~o~p~t~e~q" ~*~1~4~U~M~A~qU~. ~4. Wag ~1~"~d~i~a~L South ~P~t~a~r~l~q" Cos" ~f~t~o~qm ~q1 ~8q"~q1~.~q6 Relationship to ~o~k~qb~qw ~1~, ~0, jam owned lands but ~n~q" State owned c~a~q" ~K~A~nn~e~0qo ~t~o ~O~qW~qW ~WA~qr~. ~G~q" ~C~qW~1~1~3~b~qf~qt~& of the a" and to ~n~qw~j~u~g ~a~s~e~c~t~u~a~r~i~qm merged lands. or bar bottoms, that o within the proposed ~a~a~n~ct~t~i~ar~y bou~n. Wends. ~s~h~o~qm~a~q" ~W~qv~4~r~qm~g 11~q=~e~s~t~o~o~e: (a) ~qT~8qU ~e~st~qmrt~n~e sanctuary program an legitimate costs and their fair ma ~*~&~L~O~qU~V~O~qW --A- ~qw~er~m ~q"~d ~O~qW~qU ~r~e~e~t~s; must t~c~Lt~qa~*~0qA with the ~o~qf~qtr~a~qll coastal Cos" ~qm~ar~s~k~q" ~qU~q4 ~s~t~a~ngr~o~v~e~m v~a~qLu~a may be included as m~a~t~e~lL ~E b~la~u~L ~t~r~e9~l~o~q" ~s~o~c~e management program In two Ways: am. t~qh~s value of ~1-~4~, donated to a L ~L~o~s~i~e~l~s~a~qW~L North~q" Chair at maxim ~( ~) t~qh~e Intended ~r~es~e~a~r~i~t~qh ~u~s~e of the We State for Inclusion In the sa~nct~i~q: I ~O~qw~er ~Z~e~y to ~qM~e~qM~o: ~qm~e~ir~sa~qw~r~i~s~ti~c~s ~M~A~Z~qW~q9~1~11~1~q" ~a~qb~ould provide relevant ~qd~a~qt~s, may only be used to match other c of ~3~. with ~o~qn~qo~qm~e~n~t~m at ~4~: ~s~w~o~u~g~l~y ~qM~S~U~. and conclusions of Assistance to coastal of ~q1~q=~q4 ~a~c~q=~4qWt~qk~qm ~4qU~L the event t one" by ~t~er~v~i~g~e~e~qm~n ~f~o~o~t~o~qn~; ~b~k~f~t~s ~P~r~u~n~a~qm~y VOW management d~e~c~i~s~qi~o~n-~k~i~n~c and I~and~s already exist In a protected ~st~a ~qU~qW~4~k~W~b~qU6 (2) ~qW~qb~en ~qd~ev~e~ql~op~e~qd~qo t~qh~e ~S~t~s a coastal their value cannot be used as match L ~q0~q4~q0~08qW~qO~qN~qO~qL ~qP~qa~qd~qt~qa Me" ~8qO~6qM ~q9~4q=~q0 ~4qM~qAZI~00qM~4qU~4qM~qU~qS ~qV~qr~qO~qg~qr~4q= MUSS ~qr~qe~qc~qo~qg~q- sanctuary ~4qd~qe~qv~qe~4qlo~qp~4qm~qut~q, and opera ~2qU~qn~qd~qo~qo~, to C~qa~2q" 31~qf~qi~qn~qo~qdo~qo~ql~qa~qo~q: ~qa~qb~qor~qe~qL~qs~2q" Oft- ~00qW~4qn ad be designed to protect ~4qUld 4~q8~0q0~q1- ~q4~q0~8q0~q4 by ~qo~q0~qs~qa~2qw ~qO~qM~6qM~8qU~qA~8qM room ~qo~6q"~6qM mine sanctuary~q; ~qa~qp~qp~qr~qop~qr~0q1~qa~2qf~2qt land and ~qg~qr~qe~qn~qta~q, which will require their with reduced auk-wow ~qr~qa~qn~qo~qf~qf~q: pose" mew ~4q=~q0 regulations And planning con- ~4qm~qa~qt~qe~4ql~qi~qt~qt~qi~0qg ~4qf~qu~qn~4qd~qi~qL ~qs~qh~2q"~qO~2qf~2qt -at ~qi~qn~qs~qc~qo~qb~qe~qs ~2qU~8qd ~qs~qe,~q6~q0~q4~0qM ~qb~ql~qo~qt~qa, ~qs~0qi~4qd~qe~qr~00q"~qo~qs~qi~qa must am' to ~qadJ~0qu~0qm l~qand~qL ~q(c~q) ~04qD~qe~qy~qs~4qiop~qn~qen~qt and operation ~qc ~q7.~q.~qo~qo~ql~qo~qo~qt~qb~qi~2qm worm ~qP~qb~qd~2qf~2qt A~4ql~qt~4qbo~qugb, estuarine sanctuaries s~4qh~qo~qi~qe~0ql~4qd may include t~0qh~qe administrative e~qz~2qm Cape ~4qm~2qm~qi~qc~qa~q"~qO to ~qc~qa~q.~q.~q.~qA~q- ~_~8qO~q_~2qN~36q@~_~qf~qt~28qm be ~4qb~qi~qc~qi~qorp~qo~0qm~8qo~4qd into the State coo" necessary to monitor the sanctuary ~qet~qi~qn~qe~qw~q"~qM~2qc ro~4q"~q, ~qo~qa~qm~qe~2qw ~2q"~0qW~qa~qs~qi~qv~qe ~qA~08qw ~q0~q0~q4~64qZ ~q3~q0~q0~q0 ~0qm~q4~qm~qa~qg~qe~qs~qc~qo~qa~qt program~q. their ~4qd~qe~04qd~qg~q- coo" Its continued ~qv~ql~04q"~04qWt~0qY and to ~qS ~6qs~qun~qsw~qe~qs; ~qb~qi~8qm ~6qP~2qa~2qu~qf~qf~08q" "sup ~qV~q1~q211~q1 nation need not &wait the. ~q%~qec~qt the integrity Of the ecosystem ~qs~qo~qn~qe~qi~qs ~qb~qor~qs~qe~qL and approval of the pro. search will not normally be funded L ~qP~2qb~qF~qd~qL South ~q0~q0~q2~4q4 AI~qA41~qK& ad AIM~q- grain where of ~qt~4qh~qs, ~qt~qi~qa~0qm~qp ~, l~qo~8qw~qe~qa~qs ~qt~qa~qo~qu~qn~4qa~qi~0qm two ~qO~qw~qN~qtr~qi~qe~qs~q, s~qa~qn~qet~qt~4qar~qy would AM ~qt~0qh~qe Section 312 ~qg~qr~qa~qn~qt~qL It ~q1~q2 anticipated I ~qs~qo~qv~qe~qs ~qm~2qm ~qg~qi~qs~qow~qn~qs~q; ~qs~qe~qa~qr~qeu~6qm ~qb~2qm~8q"~qy ~4qw of a program ~qo~qt~08qaw sources of ~8qF~ql~qed~4qu~4qsl~q. ~4qat~q&~6q" ~qp~qg~6qn~6q" ~qI~2qM~qJ~00qM ~qV~2qO_ ~2q", ~qX~2q& ~qJ~qO~qS.-~qTU~2qMA~qY, ~qJ~6q" 4. ~4qM4 171 ~0 RUM ~8q"D ~qA~qf~0qr~o~4qu~4q"~qT~qI~4q"~qs Mtn" ~qf~q=~2q& ~qv~0qM be ~a~v~a~qll~a~qbl~e for re- Ulm the States should attempt to Subpart ~qC~.~q-~qs~e~8qw~e~qd~q" ~6qw~e~r~qi~s search In ~q"~qO~O~qM~8qM~O ~qn~qo~t~4qo~qw~qi~qm ~qd~qi~n~a~4qw ~2qQ~4qw ~a~c~qt~qiv~qit~qi~qm ~2qT~qI~qd~s will help to (d) ~1~"~1~4~4-~1 ~G~qO~qD~qU~O~S~qO~qM ~A~qb~O~U~ql~qd contain ~U~qJ~A~qI~qM~q1~q1~31~0 the possibility 0~q9 similar ~a~s~t~u~- the following ~qt~nf~o~qn~qu~2qv~qw~: wine types being proposed for ~r~f~a~fAg~n~a, ~qA~qp~qp~qu~e~4q"~qI~qm~s for grants to establish ~(1~q) Description at t~qh~e ~0qN~o~qp~o~s~ed ~s~a~n~o- t~qion ~qi~n t~qh~e am region~. ~8qT~qh~e ~qpl~qic~a~qt~qi~o~n ~qs~qt~u~s~a~qt~m~e sanctuaries will be reviewed ~A~ql~qd Indicate the extent ~t~A~) which and Mad an criteria Including~' Ulm? ~qI~nc~qt~2qw~e ~qk~q"~8qa~0qm~ ~qb~o~u~n~qd~a~0qf~0qt~e~s~, do ~s~qh~qf~qf ~a~nd cat of ~&~qo~4qr~'~s~it~qi~qm operation and do- neighboring ~qS~qt~&~8qW were ~G~O~D~AU1~q1~0~2qC (a) Done% to the coastal ~s~o~n~* man- ~v~e~qlop~qm~ent~. A ~qm~a~qp should be included~. as a) ~8qD~qi~s~c~u~a~s~U~qf~qt including Cost ~a~nd ~a~qg~l~qW~a~qnt Program~. ~qA~qP~qP~ql~8qk~*~qU~q= should well as an ~s~e~r~i~-~I ~qph~a~qt~agr~aph. it ~e~v~a~qn~a~qbl~e. ~qf~e~a~g~qi~qb~ql~qUt~qy. ~o~qf ~I~L~qI~4qW~q=t~ql~v~g methods for demonstrate t~qh~e b~en~e~8qdt o~qf the proposal ~(2) ~4qCl~a~s~si~qf~qi~qf~qtt~qi~on Of ~qt~qh~e Proposed ~A~C~qRU~qA~8qd~qI~qb~qm Control ~a~nd ~qPr~o~qt~e~c~t~qi~o~n of t~qh~e to t~qh~e development or operations of the sanctum ~ac~e~ard~qing to the ~qb~8qWc~e~o~qgr~a~qp~qh~ql~o am to provide ~a~t~q-~1~1- u~s~s~a. gas of t~qh~e Overall ~4~0~q"t~a~ql ~X~qw~e management Pro- scheme at forth ~qt~1~i I ~8qn~q1~8qA wafts ~q91~6n~i~ct~u~ary authority and fund ~qgr~e~qm~. ~qI~n~clud~qIn~qg how well the proposal ~q(~q3~q) ~2qD~e~s~c~4qap~qt~qi~o~n of t~qh~e major physical~, ~2q&~qM t~qh~e Land and Water Conservation ~qf~qi~qt~a into the national program of ~r~e~p~r~e~- geographic and ~qb~ql~o~ql~o~qg~ql~e~al c~qh~a~r~s~e~t~e~r~qi~st~qi~c~s Pu~nd Act should be s~qp~e~c~qi~4qf~4qt~all~y ad- ~qU~qf~qtt~LU~T~* estuarine types~; Me ~MAt~qi~o~n~s~.~q1 and resources of the proposed sanctuary dressed. Or ~T~O~qC~qU~qM~A~qI benefits. mid the usefulness ~(~q4) Id~e~at~qtf~qi~c~at~qI~o~n of ownership ~q9~8q"~q_ In research. 1~q921~-12 A~p~pl~qie~s~t~0qW~e for ~s~u~qb~seq~ue~qm do. terns: proportion of land already I~8qR t~qh~e ~v~4~q1~9~q9~n~qw sad p~q,~,~d~a ~q0~,~,~c~, (b~) The ecological c~qh~ar~ac~ter~fs~q=~3 of public domain~. the ~e~c~o~qm~qmm~. including its b~ql~0qWo~4qOC&~qI ~(~q5~) Description of Intended research (a) Although th~e Initial grant ~a~p~pl~qi~- productivity. diversity ~a~nd re~pr~esen~t~a~. uses, potential research organizations or c~at~i~qm for creation of an estuarine Mae~- ~t~qi~v~ene~s~s~. Extent of alteration of the ~a~qge~nc~ and b~e~n~e~qd~qu to the overall tu~qa~0qT should I~n~4qdud~e Initial development natural "ate= Its ability to remain a coastal sow management program and operation costs. subsequent ~&~P~P~qU- viable and healthy system ~qi~n~v~qiew of the (~q6) ~2qD~em~o~ns~4qu~qStI~o~n of necessary ~a~u~. ~C~&~8qU~qM~A MY b~e ~M~l~qb~8qW~qt~t~Ad f~G~qU~G~qVt~1~1g SO~- present ~a~nd possible development of ~e~x- t~qh~qw~qit~qy to acquire or ~C~o~ntr~a~ql ~a~n~qd manage ~qq~u~qi~sU~qic~i~a and establishment at an ~qa~tu~s- t~ern~4qg by ~m~g ~P . ~qt~qh~e sanctuary~. rim ~s~e~n~et~qu~4qa for ~adc~ql~qit~qI~o~qn~a~ql develop- (~c) ~qS~ql~a~s and choice of boundaries. TO ~(~q7~q) Description ~o~qf proposed ~qm~q"~0q" ~qm~o~s~i~qt and operation funds. A~s Indicated t~qh~e extent feasible, estuarine sanctuaries m~ant ~qt~echn~qi~qq~u~e~0qm ~8qf~8qt~qiud~qing t~qh~e in ~q1~q2~q21.1~q1. these costs may include ad- should approximate a natural ecological ~i~n~q=~q% ~ac~e~qm~qy. principles and pro; ~qm~qi~n~4q"~qt~r~0q"~qA~Y~0 ~G~O~qV~qA ~1~14~1~C~O~qU~S~27 ~t~o monitor unit~. The minimal ~s~qa~*~qp~t~*~4qW~e size will budget Including both State and ~qP~ed~er~al the sanctuary and to protect the ~qI~nt~e~qg- very greatly and will depend on Me ~n~j~. shares~. ~r~2qM 0~q9 the ~*~0~0~8~7~s~t~e~qm ~qZ~z~t~*~q=~i~v~* manage- t~ur~e of the ecosystem, ~(~q4) Description of existing ~a~nd ~qp~o~qt~qm~- ~qm~a~qn~$ programs~. Capital ~qm~qm~s~e~s~, or re- (~q4) Cast Although the Act limits th~e t~8qW uses of and ~c~o~n~qf~qi~qli~c~t~s within t~qh~e am ~G~O~N~S~T~8qA Will ~n~ot ~n~GCMR1~q1~Y ~qb~e funded b~qt P~ed~er~a~ql ~4q&~a~qm of the out for each ~s~g~u~e~- If It were not declared an ~qa~ql~qlu~u~ql~qm ~a~s~q=~- ~s~e~e~t~qi~o~n 3~q12 grants. t~u~0qW to ~1~q1~q2.~q0~q00~,~q0~4qW. It Is ~az~it~ql~4qd~P~ate~qd that ~t~u~ar~y~; potential am use r~e~str~qi~c~t~ql~o~qb~s and (~qb) After the creation of an estuarine in ~p~r~a~c~t~i~qf~qt the average grant Will be sub~. ~c~o~n~qf~qL~qi~et~s it the s~a~z~qwtu~ar~qy Is established sanctuary established under this pro, st~e~qat~qi~ally ~ql~a~qw than this. ~(~q1) Assessment of the ~s~a~0qf~0qt grain. ~S~OP~8qU~S~UC~S1~4 ~qf~or 3~11C~4qA development ~(~0~) ~qZ~a~qb~s~n~c~e~qment of ~n~o~n-~c~omp~e~qa~t~qi~v~e Gold ~s~o~c~qi~o~-~ec~o~n~o~s~s~qu~c impacts of And ~O~P~qM~qU~qM ~qg~r~z~Ut~s ~s~qh~qm~qid ~qU~qr~qJu~qd~e at ~u~qm ~t~qh~e am an ~s~e~4qf~4qt~qw~qi~qm sanctuary~. ~qI~n~ol~u~qd~- %be f~ol~ql~ow~qin~e Information: (~q1) Proximity and seem to existing I= the ~0~0~0~0~0~21~2~q1~0 impact of such a ~qd~e~s~qi~qg~- (~q1) ~qId~e~n~t~qi~qf~qi~qm~qU~qm ~o~qf t~qh~e ~qb~o~on~qd~qw~7. research ~qt~s~c~lU~t~qI~O~L nation an t~qh~e surrounding ~O~qM~qMU~NI~qt~qy (2) ~qO~qp~e~c~qU~ql~c~a~t~qi~o~n~a of the management (~q9) Av~a~qll~ab~qU~ql~t~y of suitable alternative and ~qI~t~s tax base. ~qw~q4u~qd~qi~n~qg managing ~a~qg~qm~e~qy and sites already protected which might be ~(~q6~q) Description of planned or ~an~qk~qi~8qd- ~qt~o~c~qb~n~ql~q~u~*~L capable of providing the same use or ~p~a~8qW land and water u~s~e and (3) ~8qD~e~qt~a~qll~ed bud~qg~e~qL b~e~n~s~qf~qi~qL Unnecessary duplication ~a~ql ex- tol ~c~o~qn~t~q1~qg~u~o~u~g ~I~f~f~i~l~t~A~s s~t~ur~o~u~nd~qi~n~qg t~qh~e ~(~q4~q) ~8qD~qi~sc~u~s~s~i~qm of recent ~a~nd projected ~qi~g~qa~ng activities under other programs Via ~x~qw~qd ~s~a~q=tu~a~0qn ~U~n~0qd~ud~i~n It ~u~s~e of ~t~qh~e ~s~a~n~c~t~i~z~a~qm should be avoided. However. estuarine ~G~qV~qp~T~*~_ (~q6) P~O~C~C~0qO~q"~qd threats t~o t~qh~e ~qInt~*~qgr~qity sanctuaries might be established ~&~qd~qJ~&~. ~qP~r~qI~at~e an analysis of the desirability of creating a marine sanctuary In ~a~6qw~a~ic~e~n~t at the sanctuary. cent to existing preserved ~I-~A where wow). 19~q1~q1~q2.1~q3 ~qF~ed~qir~all~y ~ow~e~e~qd ~qb~a~m~qL~L mutual ~e~nh~qw~qwement or benefit of each might occur. ~(10~) List of protected sites, ~a~qf~qt~qh~er Where ~8qF~l~ed~er~a~qD~qY owned lands an ~(~qh) Cond~ql~et with existing or potential within t~qh~e estuarine s~at~qwt~u~ar~qi~e~s ~qo~r~0qw~a~n~i ~& ~p~&~qM ~o~qf of ~s~qdJ~a~qm~qt go the ~am pro. ~c~o~s~s~i~p~e~t~qi~n~qg~u~qm or within other Pectoral~. ~qBt~a~qt~e or private ~qp~o~s~ec~q! for d~e~s~qtg~n~a~t~i~o~n as an estuarine (A.) ~qC~om~p~a~i~qib~il~qit~y with existing or pro. programs~. which are located In t~qh~e same sanctuary~. or where the control of land posed land mad water ~u~s~e ~qi~n contiguous. regional or ~qb~ql~o'~qg~eO~g~r~a~P~qh~i~c ~c~qi~qw~g~qi~qf~qi~c~a~t~qi~o~iL ~a~n~qd water uses an such ~'~,~q-~k Is ~n~ec~e~s- ~4qU~q) it Is essential that the ~o~q9~p~o~r~tu~n~q"~T my to protect~ the natural &yaw= within ~ar~q"~L b~e ~0qMO~V~Ided ~qf~or public involvement ~a~n~qd %he ~qa~qw~t~u~g~r~qy~. the State should contact It the initial review ~qd~e~qm~o~q=tr~at~qm the input In the development of the ~qn~a~qf~qt~U- the ~8qp~q~qd~g~g~a~ql agency ~qM~t~nt~&~j~n~j~M C~o~n~qtr~8qd feasibility of the application, an e~n~v~tr~o~n- my proposal and ~ap~qpl~ie~s~t~i~qm Where the of ~t~qh~e land to request ~qw~op~er~s~t~i~o~n In ~p~r~o~o~- mental ~ql~in~v~a~0qd statement will be on- is controversial a oboe ~v~qid~qi~n~qg coordinated management ~qpo~qllc~qi~es. 1~24~1~0~11 ~qb~y t~qh~e 0~q9~q5~q" Of ~0qQ~qW~4qW Zone ~B~I~A~1~2~- ~qm~qtr~o~v~e~r~4q" Issues am addressed~. to ~qBu~i~c~qh lands and State request, and the ~a~qg~e~qm~e~n~t In ~ac~cord~a~qme with Me National AMC~& should provide adequate Means ~qt~s ~qP~ed~e~r~a~ql ~s~g~o~w~ql ~r~q~sp~q=~q"~. should be Idea. Va.- --natal ~qP~oll~qa Act of 1~9~69 and ensure ~t~qh~q" an interested Duties ~qb~s~v~* tt~ql~qi~ed and conveyed. to the Odic* of ~qU~n~qp~ql~am~e~nt~qI~n~qg C~qZ~6qQ guidelines. t~qh~e o~pp~o~rt~u~s~i~2qf~2qt to present their comes-, Zoo~* Management~. 1 ~4q"1~.21 P~u~8qN~4qk This may be ~qi~n the ~qf~or~u~s at an I ~(~qb) Where such ~; ~v ~c ~V a A use or con- Advertised ram ~4qb~8qm~qr~4qb~qm~ql~q@ ~q' ~4qtro~8ql ~qa~4ql ~08qF~qad~qe~qr~qe~12qW owned lands would not Public ~qp~qa~qr~0qt~4qi~04qd~qp~qa~qt~qi~qo~qn will be an n~q. (~4qU~0q) ~08qD~qt~qs~04qf~04qt~4qg me ~2qd~q�~qV~qo~8qk~6qm~4q=~4qN~08qU of an ~qC~qo~qn~8qa~4ql~ql~qs; ~0qw~qi~qt~0qi~qs ~qt~0qh~qe Federal we of their ~qt~08qW factor in the selection at estuarine estuarine ~qs~qa~qn~qc~0qt~qu~qf~qf~qi~04qa ~00qw~4qi~4ql~qe~qs~qs~0qi~00qm all INA- lands~q, s~qi~qsc~4qh c~qo~qo~0qp~qer~qa~qt~0qi~4qm mad ~qcoard~0qi~qn~qa~0qt~qi~qo~qn ~qB~qO~0qwt~qu~qbl~qi~0qm In addition to the ~qp~qa~qrt~qic~qi~qp~qs~q- ovum Within t~8qh~qe Don ~0q0 ~q1 ~q4 boundaries ~qI~qA ~4qm~8qm~qw~qs~00qp~4qd ~qt~qo ~0qit~qs ~8qW&~qx~qi~4qm~4q= extent ~00qU~8qm ~4qdw~0qI~qn~0qg the application development should be informed in writing at the pre- ~8qg~8q"~04qd~12qN~8q& ~00qN~qo~qs~qe~qs~qe (I public ~0qp~qa~qru~00qd~qg~qe~q- Dowd smut ~qa~0qp~qp~ql~qi~qe~qs~qt~0qi~qo~qn (a) ~8qs~qa~qc~4qt~4qi~8qm 312 ~4qg~8q=~00qU may not be dolls will b~qe ~qN ~2qU I At Me Federal level (in) T~8qb~qg ~qa~00qp~6qg~08qM~qa~00qu~8qm should ~0qi~qn~4qd~0qi~8qm~qs~qe awarded to ~8qF~qa~8qi~qs~qr~qal ~qa~qg~qe~qn~qc~qi~8qa for ~4qa~4qnd~qo~qn by ~0qt~2qh~qe XJ~2q1PA ~0qv - ~qP and by public hew- the ~qin~qann~qer ~0qi~qn which the ~8qSt~qa~6qf~6qt ~qs~qo~8ql~4qi~qe~0qf~4qt~qed. ~qe~6qt ~qs~qi~0qt~qwu~4ql~8qn ~qs~qa~qn~qc~ql~qu~qtr~qi~2qa In P~qe~8qd~qer~qa~4ql~8ql~0qY ~8qO~04qW where desirable subsequent to N~8qZ~0qF~0qA~q. the views of in Interested parties Prior owned l~qa~qz~qid~qs: however. a similar status ~08qV~qo~qc~2qh public hearings shall be held by ~00qM~qOL #a am soma ~qs~qu~8qb~qo~0qu~08qw~qa~qn of ~16qf~16qt ~qappft- ~qi~qn~qar be provided an a v~04qW~8q=t~6qw basis for ~00qOfil~qe~qs at Coastal Z~8qO~8qW Management In ~q0~q1~q1~04q4~0q6~qL ~8qP~0q6d~qe~qr~qal~2ql~qy ~qo~qw lands under the prowl- the ~qam to be affected ~2qb~0qy t~4qh~qe proposed (~q*) ~2qZ~qa order to develop a truly rem- dons ~qc~4q9 ~qt~4qh~qe ~0qP~qed~qer~qa~ql Committee on Zoo~q- sanctuary no sooner than ~4q3~8q4 days after It ~4qu~8qn~0qt~qa~4qt~4qt~8q" ~qa~12qd~qi~qam~qi~qs at ~qa~qs~qt~qa~2q"~0qt~8q" s~qa~qac~08qf~08qt~q- ~8q1~08qw~qe~qa~8ql Preserves program. issues a draft environmental Impact ~qO~00qW~6qS~2q" ~q2~6qW~qI~00qM VOL ~q39. NO. ~q1~q0~q9~q-~2q-~qT~qU~6qMA~qY, AM 4~q, 19~q7~q4 1~12q72 ~0 RULES AND REGULATIONS 1~9~~. t~e~qm~ent on ~qt~qh~e sanctuary proposal. It the granting agency. As a minimum. the search program may only be cha~n~s win be ~qU~qm responsibility of the o~4qf~4qt~e of grant document for each sanctuary after public notice and the ~op~o~ortUn ~qC~o~2ql Zone ~8qM~an~a~qg~e~qm~o~u~qt with the as- ~&~0qM~qU: of public review and participation 3~U d~at~anc~~e of the Applicant State~, to issue (a) Define the Intended research pur- as outlined in ~q1~q921.21. adequate Public notice of Its Intention poses of the estuarine sanctuary~, ~(~qb~) Individuals or organizations whi to hold a public hearing. Such public no- (b) Define permitted. compatible, re- am concerned about possible ~Im~p~r~o~; tice shall be d~qi~qmbu~t~ed widely, esp~e- 3tr~icted ~a~nd prohibited uses of the sanc- use or restriction of u~se of ~es~tua~n c~4q"y in the am at the proposed ~s~a~ac- tu~ar~y~. sanctuaries may ~pet~It~Ion the State m~a tu~qm~7: affected property Owners ~q=~q4 (~a) Include a provision for monitoring ~ageme~nt agency and the O~qf~qd~ce of Co~e~s; those agencies. organizations or ~I~nd~qiv~qid- the uses of the sanctuary. to ensure com- Zone Management directly for review u~a~qls with an Identified Interest In the pit&=& with the intended the man, ~eme~n~t program. ~a~qm~& or estuarine sanctuary Program (d) Ensure ready access to land use ~qj 921.32 ~qP~r~o~qp~m~qm ~qm~vi~ew. s~4qf~4qt~qa be notified of t~qh~e public hearing~. of t~qh~e sanctuary by scientists. students Trio public notice shall contain the and the general public as desirable and It Is anticipated that reports will name. address and phone number ~O~qf the permissible for coordinated research and required from the applicant State on appropriate ~qP~q*d~e~r~&~ql ~a~nd State O~qd~qI~c~qi~a~ql~s to education uses, as well as for other calm. regular basis, no more frequently th. contact for additional information about p~a~t~Ib~ql~e purp~o~g~q". annually~, an th~e status of each estuar~l~ the proposal~. (~e~) Ensure public availability and re~a~. sanctuary. The estuarine s~anctu~s Su~qb~0qp~r~t ~8q0~-~-~qop~er~st~qi~o~n 3o~n~a~qb~ql~e d1stribut~io~n of research results program will be regularly reviewed for timely use in the development of ensure that the obJe~ct~iv~es of the ~prog~qn 1921.30 G~e~n~e~r~a~qL coastal zone management programs. are being met and that the program Management of estuarine sanctuaries~- ~(f~) Provide ~a basis for annual review self Is scientifically sound. The key shall be the responsibility of the ~&~P~qPLI~- of the status of the sanctuary. Its value th~e success Of the estuarine s~a~nctuar~@ ~a~s~q= State or Its agent. However, the to the coastal zone program. Program Is to assure that the results r~e~se~s~irc~qh uses and management program (g) Specify how the Integrity of the the studies and research conducted must be In conformance with these system which the sanctuary represents these ~q"~q=~qM~sri~es am ~sv~z ble in guidelines and regulations, and others will be m~a~int~L~t~n~e~8q& ~L~orpl~em~ent~e~qd by the provisions of ~qi~nd~qi- ~qU~qM~C~qI~Y fashion so that the States c~.~, that prior ~(~qh~) Provide adequate authority ~a~nd develop and administer land and ~wat v~idu~al. grants. It is suggested Latent to enforce m~-n~a ~eme~nt policy Lad to the ~qw~i~L~at award, r~epre~s~e~r "Yes of use r~e~s~tr~i~cti~c~a~f~t use programs ~qfor the coastal zone. A the proposed ~s~qm~anctu~ary~y n~a~g~e-en~qt ~co~r~qd~qin~qgl~qy~, ~a~ql~ql Information and r~ep~o~r team and the ~8q0d~qi~ce of C~oa~st~alZon~e Man- 921.31 Chang" in ~t~qb~* ~q"~1~1~q"~0~2~1~7 Including annual~ reports, relating ~2~9~0~0~3~e~n~t most to discuss ~n~u~m~2~ag~e~qm~en~t boundary, management Policy or ~estu~a~0ql sanctuaries shall be part policy and standards. It is anticipated ~f~e~qW~a~f~Ch ~P~r~O~ql ~qt~h~h~e public record and available at ~i that the grant pro~v~qis~ql~ai~L~s w~qJ11 ~v~arr with (a) no ~app~r~ov sanctuary bou~nd~ar- Individual circumstances and will be in, management policy, in~8qdu~cun~g per. times for inspection by the public. mutually agreed to by the applicant and ~qm~0qA~4qd~qb~ql~e and prohibited uses~; and re- (I% ~D~qW~-~74~-~q=~S Filed ~5~-~-~3~1-~74~;~9:~5~7 ~2qM~qM~qW~qI~qA~qL &WPM VOL ~qN~6qM ~q1~6q"~0q_~q1~qU45~6q"~qY~q. J~00q" 4~q, ~q1~q9~q1~q4 173 FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 1977 PART IV DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ESTUARINE SANCTUARY Guidelines 175 ~0 ~qM~qO~P~qO~S~qM ~I~qU~L~A~S ~0qO~4qVARTME~0qNT Of C~0qOMM~4qM~8qM c~o~qn~ed~q3~qa~qs ~q(2~q) ~0qxy ~r~qw~qt~qi~qs~ng sw~4qm~qw~q% ~qi~ql ", ~'~6qG~e~n~o~ok~ur~s~qd~qA~qh ~, ~qp~q! ~2qf~2qt~r~at~q"~qd. A~n~qY ~qS~4qW~qA ~qW~8qd~,~qt~8q= Aft =USA ~qU~8qf~8qt~qf~a~r ~6qQ~qn~n~a~j~.~.~q@ ~qf~O~qL~qI~qM~S~: as~i~c~qs s~6qW~0qQ be ~*~qb~qU~qv~8qM~e~qd to tam a ~qI~0qL to am ~qt~s~o~ql~qt ~a~qg me so" ~2qM~* ~s~o~qn~c~qt~a- ~qf~qw arm" ~qW7 ~qt~S ~Z~0qM ~qOt~a~qb~qU~g~2qh~MI~2qC ~qC~qr~6qr~qj~6qM~2qN~0ql ~2q&~2qM~6qC~0qMA~6qR~qY ~6qG~6qW~6qO~6qC~qL~qV~0qM As a vault ~a~qg ~qV~qs~2qb ~n~e~ir ~qc~qm~qt ~qp 3~qW~6qO~qM 313 ~qo~4qU~qbw~qt~qm ~8qr~e~qd~qw~s~ql ass= ~q=~M~6qw~z ~n~qwr~e ~#~,~q~f~o~q=~&~C~4qw~qn ~r~2qw~qA~4q=~qg to ~e~qm~4qm to ~i~o~s~o~2qw ~qi~qt~a~qi~qm ~qw ~qt~qi~s~s ~qt~qh~e ~qS~0qw~qM may ~qp ~qO~2qw ~6qf~6qt~e~c~o~qd~qw~q" ~qO~o~r WOOD= ~T~a~ql~o~w~s. ~qZ~s~cAv~em~a~qn~qt ~4qM~cc~e~qd~qw~i~0qm ~qu~2qA r~e~. ~qat~s~2qu~2qm ~s~s~n~e~t~qw~qM~qi~qa ~a~c~e~qw~qd~qi~qng t~o ~q"~4q=~- I ~qA~qa~qp~qd~2qW~qm ~qm~2qW ~6qU~qSI~qM~qI~S~M~!~"~4qM ~s~w~qu~v~8q& ~4qM~e~qem~o~qu ~qw~6qM ~qb~@ ~s~v~s~qg~s~qb~q)~qA " ~qV~q" ~1~-~4~4~1~0~1 ~8qM~ca~n~z~q1~qg~0qu~ed ~qt~qr ~t~qh~e 3~o~C~r~4qU~qW~4q7~- A==: ~6qx~a~2qg~a~qn~a~ql O~v~e~n~c~2qk sad A ~qt~ql~qo~0qu CC t~qb~@ ~qP~U~qb~qH~O~S~2qU~qM at & ~qd~t~a~6qn ~d~qn~- ~qC~qO~M~O~2qW ~I~M~4qA~S~qS~qM not ~0qAl~s ~Z~qV~qO~qL~qIc~s~8qU~c~e~s ~qf~qW ~qp~qb~a~2qd~c ~0qn~e~qv~e~r~qc~o~qw~a~qs ~4~q9 ~v~qo~l~o~qm~w~l~4q"~O~qL ~qb~qn~qO~*~4q" ~4~0q"~0qM~U~qM~0qL ~qf~r~C~qO~O~l~s'~ql~l ~qg~r~q-~qb ~qw~2q= the A~S~S~O~C~qI~S~qA~O Ad~q=~qU~qU~S~C~qM~t~qA~r Me" ~qp~u~qb~q4~c to. do" In thin ~qf~qw~q= ~0~q9 an for coma" GO ~q3~q9~qa~n~s~qe~l~c~qm~qa~qt ~(~6q0~0q=~1~qc~q)~. ~l~e~qw to ~4~"~O~n~d~qm~#~6~1 ~6qM~8qm~s~8q" ~qS~qt~s~c~qal~qu~0qm ~q(~0qZ~0qM~q) I ~qA~6qC~0q=~6qO~2qN~: Pro ~r~4qw~q& JIM ~qb~qm ~qa~2q"~qI~c~qt~c~e~qd ~qf~qw ~ql~a~6qf~6qt at ~s~qp~e~c~qi~qf~qi~c~qu~qr CUM* d C~o~e~st~a~ql Z~a~c~qw ~2qU~ql~o~qn~qu~4qm~u~qm~qL P~s~0q" L 3~q3~6qM ~8qW~6qh~qi~2qm~qm~qm ~qPw~2q*~w~a~qr ~2qN~8qw~. Wash. ~q3~0qC~qI~qC~6qW~2qAR~4qY: This ~qp~qa~l~2qm~o~qd r~4qd~e ~qv~0qM ~qt~0qa these ~s~qt~q"~s. my ~qM~A~2qM~qC ~* ~z~o~qw~qa pre. ~2qM~q4~4qw~j~4qL ~0qc~0qc~. ME Tim ~s~qc~e~c~u~4qw ~qw~qt~2q= snow the ~6qN~a~4qg~a~n~0qg Oceanic and ~8qA~4qU~2~0~8- ~qI~qt~u~l~qt~a~8qw ~A~qC~qI~G~8qU~2qM~q&~qM ~qX~qM~0q= to a ~q2~8qW~2qO~L ~qb~q" be= ~c~qw~*~q"~4~qd to ~6qa~qw CC= at to ~l~o~f~f~i~qk~e a ~2qx~qw~- ~q=~qW~g ~qf~qa~4qn~qy ~qd~#~V~2qW~O~qq~g~qd ~qM~qd ~8qU~qW ~0qMkH COAL ~q~qn~t~qU~q7 ~qp~qh~e~2qf~2qt the ~qa~qc~qc~e~6qf~6qt~s ~q=~qn~c~qb~n~u~8q7 ~8qm~v~qp~o~q=~qL =a be ~qZ~O~qM ~qA~qc~a~n~f~i~qg~e~ol~o~qn~g as thin ~qj~qt~qM~qj~q=~8qa ~l~e~0qw~q"~'~0~1~q0~q- ~q$r~s~a~qt to ~b SUM ~f~qa ~qb~i~e~qw~o~n~e ~a~qwr~o ~s~qw~e~r~s, at Me ~, - ~s~qn~qd ~2qM~qA So" ~qf~qw of Win ~qs~qt~a~c~m ~q=~q1~0~4qM~8qA~R ~& ~qf~a~2q& ~l~o~qw~qt~a~t ~v~6qw~qm ~e~4qv~qo~qn~h~qi~s~s~qL ~qc~qac~qt ~n~o~v~u~q= at ~qt~qh~e low-am Mansell" ~qe~qa~6q" ~x~a~qc~e ~qM~a~n~s~qc~o~c~a~qm~qt ~0qM~4qw~q= mar and to ~qd~o~v~e~ql~4qM ~4, ~q-~4~q1~0~qM ~r~*~qL~O~C~Z~8qW~qM A= ~.~0~a~v~e~r s~a~ql~m~o~ql~qt an ~s~qp~qo~qu~g~a~4qv~q= ~q;~qU~N~0qL ~& ~qd~e~t~qa~qt~ql~e~qd ~qM~a~qn~a~qg~g~qw~i~v~a~s Dim ~qU~L~qd a ~N~X~I~8qM ~0 ~' ~4 and ~6~q1~1~qC~M~-~qM ~- ~U~q- ~q-~- ~r~qw~qm~z~v~0qh ~6q2~s~qm~e~qw~a~2qf~2qt ~qfw a ~8qw~a~qp~o~s~e~qd aft- ~qD~a r~e~s~qpa~qc~e~n to ~qS~2qW~@ ~qq~qo~qw~c~2qW~qm MAMMA s~u~qb~r~a~8qM~e~qd by ~a~t~qh~er ~a~qg~o~n~c~qi~qm the ~o~r~4q=~* s~L~c~ct~ca~r~q7~. developed ~qP~V~M~S~G~X~4qM to ~4~3~qC~OM~I~Z~qI~c~i~s ~s~a~n~c~t~u~s~i~r~qy ~r~qw~o~qu~l~qd~L the ~qp~q"~)~. Stu~q& Seca= ~q3~'~q13 of the ~6qC~c~s~s~4qM~q4 ~qZ~qm~e ~qB~2qU~X~N~8qW~B~- ~qM~qM~8qw ~r~e~qc~ul~a~t~ql~ecls ~8qx~w~v am sub ~qn~e~. I 9~q2~2qL~q1~q1 for ~qM~qM A~9~9 of ~q1~0qM ~qU ~&~qM~e~v~8qd~q&~8qL s~qnrc~qh can be ~6qf~6qt~o~qd~e~qd ~qt~qt is am be ~&~2qW~qm ~0qP~2~9~q06 to be Mated to ~qo~r~c~qer~s~qm ~8qw~a~qt~qu~qf~qt ~qr~ql~qA~6q=~2qC~q=~q=~q=~4qU~0q=~8qM~qb~e~,~v~c~r~qA. mar No" ~qb~q" ~t~v~8q"~O~qv~e~qd ~t~qu~s~e~e ~0qM go (a) A ~qgr~a~0qw maw be ~sw~ard~l~ed ~qm a before ~8qO~et~a~qb~Or ~2qL ~q1~2qW~2qM~. ~r~e~qc~qu~ql~a~0qg~8qm ~qp~u~r~s~a~qw~0qn to the ~6qN~&~4qU~qM~A~L~qi ~2qM~. ~qM~0qa~c~2qw~qn~qe ~qb~qu~4qb to ~O~qM~qW ~q" ~ ~qM~qM~O~qM~4q7 ~6qF~6qM ~q7~0q7~6q3~0qT~0q= ~6q2~6qM COX~- ~v~qt~qM~M~qU~N~8qU~2qM P~O~qU~4q= Act ~2qd ~6qU~2qO ~qMd Us to ~qp~n~0qf~0qt~2q=~qw~q7 ~qw~qv~ja~ql ~a~c~qq~u~4qb~qi~qt~ql~q= at TACT: ~q41~q4~11~3~0~q2l~qu~qd INS ~q9~9~0~0~0~q9~0q6~q"~qI~qm ~O~qt CUM As ~qz~e~t~c~8qf~8qt to t~qt~qw ~qP~2qW~qw~v~.L ~qg~r~q=~0qL ~2qB~a~qb~o~r~t ~qI~qL ~6q=~qW ~qp~qb~q7~a~6qf~6qt~ql 4R~f~W~d~W~.~q"d~* ~c~qa ~6q*~qw ~f~qa~r~qa~qv~o~qn~b~l~U~0q& ~T~o~qw~6qw~a~qk~ql~0qm ~qW~6qM ~qb~qa~q" ~q3~0 Amasses= %a- Of ~I~L Mat of am== ~6qP~*~qU~4qa sod ~0qf~0qt~qv~4q=~qm ~0qOr~w~a~2qf~2qt~qm~0qM Services~. am ~V~2qw~x~v, ~a~qc ~6qf~6qt~qn~qg~qm~* ~r~r~v~e~q=~06 ~6qC~o~n~0q"~qU~q"~o~t~a ~qW~8qM ~0qU~qM~qM~qU~qM ~0qOrd~0qf ~S~qM~8q&~qW ~6qQ~qW ~T~2qW~0qU Of 1~2~1~6q4 ~*~4qM~qW ~2qUr~e~ld~3~l Am OLIN ad ~2qC~O~G~0q"~8qM ~qZ~qw~e M~o~qns~qg~e- ~ql~ql~2q=~. ~0qM~4qW ~m~e~qm~o~qm~2qf~2qt~~qa~8qd ~8qW~8qf~8qi~a~qg~2qb~qM~4qa to ~q2~3 ~qD~o~e~s~e~s~s~qi~qm or ~a~c~qq~u~qg~v~qd b~qr the ~qS~2qW~qA ~z~qw~o~0q& ~8qn~8qm ~8qW~qh~2qU~6qd~qM~v~q= ~6qP~qu~qt~qw~a~qy~. ~6qP~L~q9~9 ~qt~qo~4qw~s~8qa ~a~qc ~8qU~U~qM ~ ~r~o~qc~ul~a~c~qil~l~qm ~qb~q" ~4q=~*~c~0qW~C~L~qC~qY ~qtw ~Q~qw In the ~z~e~q=~q=~q7 Cue ~6qR~M~ql~ql~qd~8q=J~8qL ~8qW~qw~qb~ql~o~.~2q0~0~1~q6 ~6q0~6C- 2~q0~2q= been ~a~w~a~qk~0qw~ad ~8qm~q7~8q=~c~c~0qf~0qt~2qt~8q;~'~q=~R~q" ~q*~6q= ~6qQ~6q= ~6qO~qw land to ~qtw ~n~o~wd ~s~e match ~alr~e~s~i~qt~qi ~0qF~S ~6q=~q2~-~q4~q3~q4~-~2q4~8qU). C~2qU~qM~qI~qM ~qA~P-~q10~q7 and It ~ql~qa~s b~e~qm ~qd~e~qt~w~i~s is t~qt~qw ~qS~0qu~2qWs ~qp~C~o~g~g~s~g~8qM~qe ~qMd ~q1~2 in ~& ~q;~r~c~- ~2qS~qU~6qP~2qP~6qL~q1~q3~0qM r~8qA~6qR~0qT ~U1~q2~041~qd ~qt~qh~8q" ~2~0 ~qM~qA~qI~G~V ~q2~2q9~6qW~8qC~qO~M~qW~q7 ~qU~l~L~- ~4qW~e~4qW~qd s~qt~&~0q=~L the ~qS~qb~0qM ~qm~. ~v~qM ~qM~r~8qA On ~6qA~0qm~e ~q4. ~qI~4qM~. ~0q=~0qW1 ~6qO~qu~p~. pea ~qv~4qa r~e~n~qo~6qw land a ~qm~a~qt~c~8qf~8qt ~a~8qw to ~qt~qt~qw ~c~z~t~0qm at ~qM~4qW ~s~qu~4qM and ~qA~4qX~qm~qa~n~2q*~q~0qf~0qt~c Dead~: ~qA~0qx~2qa~2qm ~q2~4q% ~qI~2qN~q7~. ~8~1~q0~q0~1~0 ~q9~q1~0q1~qM ~0qU~qw lent ~qf~a~r~o~qc~a~qn~e b~4qr ~4qU~qw (~q1~q4~2q0~2q" ~qV~u~qb~6qf~6qt~qwd ~q1~q3 P~L~rt ~8qM ~qm~- ~q0~2 ~O~dd~qo to ~qb~l~e~qt~qw~qb~e it In the ~S~a~n~c~- ~4qU~8qM~N~qL ~O~0qf~0qt~qe~m~qu~ql~qz~e ~q3~s~c~qa~qt~qw~qu~8qT ~4qO~qW~6qM~A~6qM~0qW ~0qT~. ~0qF. ~6qO~L~Z~C~qM~I~. ~qt~4qM~8qa~. ~2qA~2qn~qU~e~s~8qO~qm ~qf~qw a ~8qp~r~e~qg~o~a~qu~qm~8qT ~s~a- ~8q=~q=~q= to ~:~qb~qM ~j~e~c~t~qi~qm ~q3~q2~q2 ~4~q9 we A~qM~qd~6qd~0q=t~qA~qd~q=~qb~M~qW~4qV~0q=~qW ~q4~9~qL~I~8qM~qM Mg ~S~qh~6q" be z~qad~e ~q= ~qf~c~q= ~qC~O~S~4~qM~qL ~q7~A~qM ~6qU~s~n~a~qg~o~U~L~qM~S ~qA~c~q% ~4~q9 ~2qU~qT~2qL ~qf~d~r~qA~qd~e~si~n~qd~4qO~d~qg~qk~qM ~qS~0qP 4~q2~q4 ~Z~qV~qO~qU~C~I~8qU~qM ~qf~qW ~6qF~e~qd~er~i~L~qL ~s~q=~4qU~q=~z~j~c~g ~q" ~a~qm~e~m~qd~ed. f~qw ~qt~qb~qa pin al ~qm~qU~qg~qg~qi~s~6qh~- ~q1~q2 Is ~qp~s go --A to sound ~q1~q3 ~4~2q=~6qS ~6qP~8qM ~r~" ~ ~.- ~- ~- ~-~4~0~0 ~qp~r~o~qg~qr~A~n~0qw. ~- tag ~q9~G~qU~4qM ~qU~2qA ~q7~9~1~4~cl~e~qd~qw~e~s far ~8q=~0 ~S~2qd~qf~qt~- ~6qM ~s~e ~qf~a~qa~a~qm~- ~q(~0qW A ~8qp~r~o~qd~o~x~4q2~qm~4qy ~a~c~q~u~8q=~qm a=% ~qh~q, ~4qU~S~L ~qU~4q=~4q=~qC~0qL ~qU~8qA ~q=~A~q=~Lg~q=~qU~qM~Z ~G~q9 (~q1) ~q3W ~0qM~qI~S~2qM~qC ~2qMA ~0qU~qb~6qW Of ~1~2~0~4qM~M~O~2qU ~qM~2qW be made ~-~qW ~t~qb~* ~qd~G~2q&~1~q7~1~L~qL Of the ~I~s~t~m~o~z~8qzl~e ~S~qU~C~C~U~S~I~C~qI~M~S. and ~s~qu~qt~6qb~a~r~2qn~qy ~c~qt~qU~L~qc~qk~qa to r~qa~qd ~q= ~qfa~ql~ql~qo~qn: ~c~a~n~g ~4~q9: ~2qM~x~qd~qw ~u~qw ~S~u~qb~s~ec~qr~a~qm ~q3~q2~q1~(~ql) at t~qhl~e ~S~W~O~P~qM~O~qA~-~4~k~o~v~e~l~d (~q1) An s~qo~4qM~qis~a~ql at ~2qM~* ~ql~qw~x~qL or of t~qh~e ACt. ~4q2~q0 ~q3~0~C~qM~2~2~0q7 of ~2qC~*~qM~qM~qW~qW IS an- SOL ~v~6qw~0qM at Saw ~qf~or~l~8qm~q" ~U~qn of ~qt~qt~qo ~qI~S~0~q4~qL ~qu~qw~r~4qz~8qm to ~q=~L~qk~a ~a~T~M~qU~M.~8qW~e to ~qw~a~s~2qw ~C~M~A ~qP~qU~I~&~T "A ~4~6 IN= to be ~q=~o~qd in the ~s~a~qwt~u~qm~4qr~. SWAG ~6M~n~X~S Of ~U~qo ~qW ~q3~q0 ~q9~qW ~q=~0q=~q= of ~9~q= ~qO~N~A~U~I~qU~qM~q& thin east of ac~qq~u~ql~s~0qa~ql~q= ~qd~o~w~e~2qW~4qM~a~qu~4qL and ~q=~q= ~0qM~qo~v~a~c am ~i~n~ap~i~s~c~o~w~n~q-~2~q=~1 ~4~qc ~q(~6qM Zia ~qd~qw~2qd~4q@~@ ~4~q1 a ~6q7~qn~2qd~qw~q= ~0~q0~or~a~c~qt~qm ~0~q9 ~arc~qu~t~qt~q" ~S~qU~M~qM~qU~S~0qU~qC ~6qU~qL ~qu~qw~qp~qm~4qv~s~qm ~6qR~4~2qM~O~N~S~qI~qM ~0qA~S~4qU~S~q=~X~qM ~qu~t~qd ~2qR~qA~s~ql ~qP~r~o~o~qf~qt-~t~qy AL swum== ~8qn~qsm ~4qv~qm~w~4qw~qm ~qM~qL~4 3~6~0~0q"~q"~C~O~P~U~qM ~qd~A~U~q"~C~qU~M~M6~- ~qc~qo~qu~r ~qt~qh~0q" ~8qA~c~qq~u~8qN~qgt~qh~qm ~6qf~6qt~'4 A~C~C A= a%= =AT be ~S~qW~qU~qt~ed to Stu ~qw~q"~qU~p~qw ~a~s~e~. (3~q) the ~qd~o~w~8qd~o~0qp~qm~qz~8qU ~*~q9 a ~q=~z~c~:~u~s~x~4q7~, Stu" ~qm a ~I~M~I~qJ ~2~6~1~0~q4~0~0~8~h~4qe to ~d~qo~qw ~;~a~" ~qW~oo~n a ~l~e~g~a~n~s~qe~l~o~qu~g~s ~qV~qI~A~M~: ~qM~2~6~0~4q=~q4 ~b~a~0q" ~c~a ~a~c~qq~U~qI~qM ~qd~w~r~e~qi~4qM sad ~0qM~* AM ~&~qM ~1~0 ~C~OM~qM~O ~2~6~1~0~6~1~0~6~1~2~0~L Gomm= ~c~a~c~uZ~qZ~qI ~S~Z~OS~S All ~O~4qM~qM~qI~U~M, Sam~- (4~q) ~0q=~0q0 ~qd~e~v~e~ql~a~qv~o~qw~0qn ~*~qf a r~e~s~s~xr~c~qu ~x~u~qd ~0q=~L~z~q%~q= ~4qf~4qt ~qW~qd~er ~2qOfi~x ~M~c~qb~qm~t~qh~4qa sold ~S~M~M~- ~s~o~o~qf~qt~" ~a~qd~o~e~s~c~qh~o~o~s~ql ~4qx~O~qg~qM~qM~: ~a~qu~2qw~qw~. ~8qa~qn~l~a MIT be ~8qw~e~v~qi~qd~e~qd ~6qU~l~e I ~O~M~-~qM ~qa~g~a~n~f~&~L ~q(~q3~q) ~6q3~q0~6qf~6qt ~*~q%~qb~qw ~qw~t~qt~8qf~8qt~qy of a ~qg~z~t~qa~4qw-, ~qM ants=* ~*~w~qW a ; ~p - ~g ~4 at ~t~qt~o~qu. ~g~e~o~qj~a~0qg~. ~0qML~q= A~qP~qP~qO~qM~I~A~qM ~qM~r ~q;~qM~qMI~L~O~qW~q? ~A~G~qR~U~qM~- ~n~8qW ~G~OI~C~O~qM ~4~4 ~4~0qW ~qI~qf~qt ~0qU~g~r~a~v~l~t~qd ~4q= ~W~qM~- ~O~6qU ~-~c~qi~a~0qz~o~n~s~qh~qt~qc~e ~0 do ~qU~qM~qL ~6qM~0qW am ~0qp~w~a~qf~qt ~q1~q09~q?~2qW ~0qO~4q=~6qL A= ~8q=~qM =do ~4qM~qWJ~U~q=~t ~qO~u~r~qv~a~q" of Maw I ~q" 11 IS is ~8q=~4q0~q4~q- ~6~qC~0q= A~qP~qP~U~N~qU~qM ~O~qw ~qL~A~q" ~4~O~W~U~S~U~M~qM~qA ~q1~q0 do ~qs~qm1~6qw~qe~qe~qt~8qw~6qu ~qS~qh~qo~0qu be ~qr~qu~8qf~qu~qn~4qd~qe~4qd ~16qw ~2qz~qo~6qu t~08qw~qa ~4q;~qr~qv~0qg~2qn~qU~qc~qc~qL~q. ~04qm~qa~8qm to so= to ~qo~2qf~2qt~qs~2qm. ~qt~qs~qt~q4~00qw ~4qI~8qt~4q!~q%~qsx scour. ~qVMJS ~qOp~qor~qa~qll~qi~qs~qo~2qM As a ~qr~qer~qa~6ql~8ql at ~00qm~6qv ~q(~qi~6qc pp.= ~6qM ~qS~00q=~qf~q? ~q7~q0~q*~qW~qS~qC,~qf~qt~qo~qw~qt~2q" ~qL~6qUM~qNL ~2qb~ql ~qf~12q"~8qd~6q= to Is" Mg ~qa~qc~0qq~qu~04qU~qv~8qd for ~0qU~2qm ~q"~q"~8qV~4qI~6qM~6qM~0qU~0qCC~qO the ~qr~qe~4qc~qu~6qb~6qg~08qW~2qn~qg an ~08qp~qm~q:~q@~q. Phi' ~qM Gold it ~12qO~16q= ~qr~qe~4qq~qu~qer~8qm Suitt ~4qp~qu~qs~qed to be ~8qM~qad~8qi~2qz~qe~2qd to ~qS~4qp~qe~qc~8qu~6qb~0qt~qs~16qa~4qy al. ~qr~6qf~6qt~q*~6q=~qI~0qM~6qL ~04qU~2qM~6qM me ~0qg~2q=~ql~08q=~4qg al ~qa~qc~4qa~q-~qb~q-~qe~qh~6q- ~4q(~0q4~4q) ~0qI~0q3~00qw ~qa~08qv~4q;~6qU~qC~qL~08qU~2qM ~qS~12qh~qm~6qa~2qd ~qc~2qm~00q=~6qx~q: ~qTA ~08qU~8qU~4qM ~0qU~qL ~2qM~qa s~04qf~04qt~0qg~8qu: ~00qU~qL~00q= Vinson ~4qp~6q"~0qU~0qM~0qP~qS~4qU~qO~0q& (~2q2) ~24qV~qv~8qid~2qw~2qa~qo ~qt~08qh~04q" Me 3t~qs~6q" ~2qb~4qw ~qc~8qm~q, (~4qL) A~q1~q2 ~qt~q"~qI~6q"~qa~ql ~8qSrA~qM~0qZ f~2qqr S~qC~qA~12qf~12qt ~6q=~16q0~08q0~q- Sonoma ~0q0~q1-~00q41~q"m~qall~qe~qa ~2qd~qu~qc~qc~qed ~q@~q. ~qM~4qA~8qN~2qU~12qM~qC ~qw~qr~qa~8qh~qn~qL~0qa~2qm ~q0~8q1 ~04q= ~qa~qs~6qm~q, ~q-~qZ~2qW~0q7 ~04qM~0qP~qO~qW as ~qs~qw~q&~qf~0qw~0qt~00q= and ~8qU~8qN~qo~2qw~q. CUM ~0qd~qe~4qu~2qm~qk~qL aft sad Selected me at ~qt~4qf~4qt~8qw~qe ~4q=~0q=~4q= rep, ~0q1~08q= the ~8ql~6qw~q&~8qd to be ~qX~qC~04qM~qM~qM~4qL ~2qU~qM~0qA t~2qh~qo do. ~q911~q-~00qU ~0qC~4q%~q4~q84~4q" ~qU~qL ~6q0~q8 ~qA~qR~qG~qO~qD~6q=~qv~4qF ~2qW~qG~qI~qN~6q" ~qf~qo~2qul~qo~0qt~qa~qc~0qh~qo~qk. ~q4~6q" ~0qPIM~qA~04qW. ~q(~12qw ~16qz~4qm~qc~16qf~16qt~12qd~2qm at am ~8qO~8qM~q0~q0~q2~0q6 ~4qp~qn~qW~0qO~4qM~qEL ~4qM~4qd ~qr~2qa~q"~qL~ql~qc~4qh ~6q=~qc~00qa~qs~qg~qu~8q= aid ~4qp~ql~qe~qg~qr~qa~4qm low ~8ql~qo~qc~qa~qc~0qb~8qm ~04qM~qC~qD~qO~0qW~q, ~q(~08qW ~04qA~qp ~qS~qe~qe~2qm~2qd ~4qgr~qa~qn~qz for ~qt~2qh~qe ~2qW~qO~6qU~8qL ~4qW~q.~q- ~qA~qR~qF~0qUM~qM~qU~qN~qT~q1 ~qS~qM~qL ~qS~04qW ~q1~4q1. ~00q*~qM~0qM~qA ~q7~qR~qU~qs~qe ~00qW~4qM~qb~q- l~6qW~6q=~6qd~2qW~12q"~8q& ~qa~2qn~2qd SOL A ~6qZ~qB~0qO~q(S) ~qS~4qba~04qW ~q4~qM~4qAX~00qW~qJ~4qM ~qc~4qd ~q%~4qb~q* ~8qL~2qM~08q& ~08qM~qA ~8q7~q*~04q*~4qW~qJ~qL~8qi ~qJ~4qU~qS~qI~4qM ~qa~qv~qe~qn~qn~qo~qw~qi~qt Ain ~q4~q9 ~00qW~04qM no ~qM~qO~qN~qN~4qU~q4 (~q9~q0 ~q2~8qf~8qt~qL IN ~8qV~6qW~16qf~16qt~2qd~qSld~q* ~q6~q0 ~qW~qR~16qQ AS ~q1~q0~q, S~qM~qC~16qW ~4q;~0q&~8qW of ~qt~6qf~6qt~qe~'s~qc~qo~qx at the me v~qa~qn~qz~qo Shan ~2qw~qo ~8qw~6qm ~0qt is ~ql~qa~2qz~6qz ~q%~q4~2q=~4q) ~qP~q%~qA6 ~qz- ~qs~qt~qr~08qm. ~12qa~12qu~20qf~20qt ~8q1~6q1 WWI&" ~qN~0qO~6qW~6qA~qL ~00qM~qo~qc~qa~08qf~08qt VOL ~q4~08qL M~qI~0qL ~q1~q7~0q5~q-~qi~00qm~0qe~qA~0qr~q. ~04qM~6qM~qU~04qM~q'~qp~q. IV" ~08q17G ~0 ~qM~qP~O~S~I~qD RULES ~4~q= ~~3~) ~C~l~~~~id~~~~~= of the ~Pr~~~m~~d ~;~~b~L~l~ ~d~~~mi~. fair market value ~~~ ~~~~g~i~t ~w~q= the ~p~~d~r~~I we of ~~h~a~~ ~~~~~~~u~qT ~~~~~~d~I~~ to ~~qa~ ~b~l~~g~~~ ~P~~~IS~~I And ~~7~11f ~qF~A~L~~~U~qU~ Act ~;~L~~= ~U~=~I~L ~~m~q& ~=~~~r~qW~~ ~M~d ~~=~~~j~q@~ ~qgr~a~qp~l~qa~o Saba= ~~~t~~t~r~qm in I ~qM~-~I~L ~r~j~) ~qD~i~s~c~:~qW~qC~~, at research ~q;~r~o~c~qm~z~m~L ~qL~2~ encouraged to ~ex~z~e~n~ql ~(~q4~q) ~2qD~e~s~cr~2qW~qA~qM of the ~qm~a~ql~or ~qP~qh~qY~s~qic~a~ql. potential and ~t~qa~c~c~a~l~t~r~A~qd ~r~es~e~Lr~r~2qA aw- f~e~qM~8qW~&~. ~q9~4~0~q6~qm~qo~qb~qj~e~. ~qb~qu~qd~d~qe~qlc~a~ql ~4~9~6qA ~8qP~n~qI~z~a~qAl~a~ns or agencies. ~a~nd b~e~n~e~qnt~s to (~C) s~e~e~qd~o~c~i ~q3~q1~q5 grants may ~n~ot ~qt~w r~qu~o~urc~e~s at ~2qU~qm Pogo, I ~s~a~n~c~ql~a~s~0qm~. ~t~8qA~G ~O~T~Gr~A~qU C~O~&~qV~qA~qL ~2~qW~O Management ~S~qw~u~r~qd~ed t~6q0~q7~k~e~qd~er~s~qay~-~ow~n~e~qd I~g~a~nA~g~e: ~qt~qW~qW~q. (3) ~0~q9 ~2q*~0 ~a~s~c~e~s~s~a~4qm program QT~qw~- ~I~L ~s~4qM~2qW~qu s~ta~t~qu ~a~za? be ~0qx~qv~4q"~qd~ed or to acquire or QG~f~t~tr~QL ~&~2qW ~- ~(~q4~q) ~6qD~e~ec~r~qi~qp~qt~qi~o~qn of proposed ~qm~a~o~z~qg~j~@~- ~I~L T~I~MI~Z~ZI~UU~qT basis for ~qP~q*~qd~qu~q%~qa~qy~-~Q~qW~z~qW am the ~qu~n~c~t~uA~r~q7~. ~AM~N~Ut ~qtdC~qJ~IZ~Z~4q@ ~8qI~q=~qf~qt~u~qi~0qf~0qt ~t~qh~s manage- '-C~e~ts ~q=d~qw t~qh~o ~qpr~a~w~4qw~o~n~g of the ~qFe~qd~em (~q$) ~6qD~e~scr~qt~qg~8qa~qm of ~e~qdst~qing and Paten~- ~a~q- ~a~qg~qn~4qa and ~qPr~a b~u~qd~0qv~qt~q-~-~q4~n~- C~q=~q=itt~qn on ~2qE~c~o~i ~qg~qj~c~&~qL p~e~j~a~qc I ~qt~qI~A~qL uses of. and ~G~qM~qA~qI~c~qt~n ~qw~qtt~qh~qb~qL t~qb~a beta State and ~2qF~i~qd~qw~a~qL &bares. ~4qW~*~q9~r~A~Z~ZL am It It ware not declared in ~qat~u~art~n~e (3) Description of ~8qN~s~a~x~qo~qd or ~-~"~r~4~f~,~4~. sanctuary,. and p~at~an~qtI~6qM we restriction Paged land ~a~n~qd ~qw~a~s~qw us am ~C~o~qn~qt~r~als ~q1 921~-~6qM ~qCA~qm~qw~m~qd~ed~ql and ~c~on~qa~ql~c~t~s ~qt~qf am ~qU~q=~qt~qn~z~q7~ is ~qu~qt~&~qb~- for contiguous I~a~n~qd~s ~s~urr~ol~a~n~qd~qi~n~qg ~t~qh~e (4) S~2qf~2qt~qp~a~r~t ~qC-~qSa~qLe~c~qt~qi~o~qn C~.~-~qIt~&~r~qj~a-~q@ ~qu~s~qh~ed. ~2qM~,~qC~, 4 ~S~e~n~c~t~qn~4q" ~q(~qI~n~C~qi~n~qd~qi~"g ~f~f ~&~qp~qp~r~o_ ~a~l~"~a~nd~ed by ~c~h~q-~qC~qS~,~, ~2qM~e ~qd~0qM ~qu~nt~e~qw~. ~q(7) ~qZ~2q"~qt of protected ~2qdt~as~. ~i~d~t~h with- ~qpri~s~t~q& an ~a~na~ql~qy~8qV~a of Me ~qd~e~8qd~r~a~qb~qi~q;~ql~ql~qt~qy of In ~q1 ~q0~2q=~8q20 to ~qmd~- ~-~qA~4qn~qU~c~a~qc~ql~o~n~s ~qr~o In the ~qW~qI~C~a~s~qt~a~s ~q=~q=~qh~I~A~r~q%~qW ~4qM~I~4qW~q= ~qW ~q0~1~9~qC~qU~8qM ~8, =A=* ~qM~C~CIAr~qY ~qL~qU &~4qQ~a~C~e~nt ~0qM~qM~qL~4qW~4qW~q=~qU~7~-~%C~qQ~%~4qU~3~I~t~qI~o~z~I or land ~&~C~4qW~t~- ~qv~qi~qt~qb~qi~n ~o~qt~qh~i~er ~qF~i~qd~er~a~ql~. ~qS~qt~0qu~s. w ~0q"~s~qt~e ~qw~qm~q). am a=" to ~e~m~a~l~g~I~t~e~h ~e~s~t~u~a~qL~r~qi~qn~s ~S~q=~C programs. ~qV~2qW~c~8qA ~a~r~e located ~qt~qu the same (~q0) Assessment of the ~qUI~S~T~qI~s~s ~qv~2qM b~e r~a~v~qi~e~qw~e~qd ~qm~qd judged *I --~o~-~OC~CI~D~G~E~0~4 declaring ~O~r~8qS~er~ql~s t~o~c~ql~UdI~n~qg: region or ~qb~ql~o~qg~e~ocr~a~qc~2qh~ql~e c~ql~as~s~qi~6qf~6qi~c~a~8qu~qm ~a~nd ~q-~q-~ ~~ ~O~R~IC ~(~q1~q1) ~qT~6qh~* ~a~s~s~i~n~qn~or ~qt~n ~qW~qh~qi~2qf~2qt the ~qS~qt~0qV~qA this Arm an ~4~81~2~1~qW~I~S~C~i~e ~q0~6~q=~q0~q=~q7~. ~qUu~qdud~- s~o~ql~qlc~qiti~ed Me view of Interested parties. Ing (~q3) Section ~q92~2q= is ~r~0qm~s~e~qd~. a f~ol ~qt~qh~e ~e~c~o~n~o~c~a~ql~c ~q2~2~q0~ac~t am t~qh~o SOL, ~6qu~qm~: (~q9) In addition to t~qh~e standard~, ~8qA-~q45 ~r~qm~q=~qd~ql~n~qc ~a~n~a~n~su~a~ql~qtr ~a~nd ~qt~qt~s tax b~qu~qc r~ir~v~qi~e~w ~4qm~oc~ed~ur~e~s. Me grant ~0qw~qo~qllca~8qd~a~n (~q7) ~6q=~8~c~C~2~X~qI~q= ~qt~n~2qd~q=~qd~qJ~q=g cast ~a~nd I ~2qM~2qM ~8qP~s~qh~qU~, p~qw~-d~q.~q,~d~q. ~a~qb~ould be sent to t~8qU ~qSt~0qU~e ~6qM~i~qt~qw~q!~c ~2qP~r~qa~- f~e~s~s~qi~qb~6qU~2qR~qY of Alternative methods for ~a~c- ~q(~A~L~q) ~2qP~u~qb~qa~c ~qP~ar~t~qs~a~qi~qv~a~t~qi~A~qm ~q!~3~2 t~qb~a ~s~e~ql~e~c ~"~'~q"~2q"~a~n ~6q=~,~* for ~c~o~q=~qm~qt to ~8qWx~ar~t ~qq~u~qL~sI~qt~qi~o~n. and ~qpr~o~t~e~c~qt~qI~on of the an& ~qt~qt~q= ~a~qc an ~e~s~t~u~a~c~qt~qu ~sa~n~q=~A~r~y ~q1~3 ~re ~o~a~a~s~qP~ql~qi~s~c~qm '~e~ql~qt~qh s~qw~o~@~l~q- ~q'~q(~q1~q4 a' Me ~2qN~&- I 9~6q=~0q= ~qA~qv~qv~qH~e~s~s~qi~qm ~q(~qW ~s~qr~qn~u~a~qj~q@ qu~qir~ed. ~qI~6qh ~qt~qb~a ~3~e~ql~ect~i~o~n ~0q=~*~q=~S~L the ~s~e ~q1~q1~0~113~2~q1 ~qP~r~e~s~e~r~v~a~s~2qu~qn Act of ~2qW~2q". ~gr~O~qM~q& letting ~C~4q=~qt~qY (s~qf~qt 1~q92~qL~4qU~qO~) s~i~g~s" ~s~e~e ~(d) ~qZ~qA order to d~e~v~e~4qf~4qt a ~qtrml~qy rears- ~qt~qh~e ~T~qI~qM~3 of ~qP~O~N~qW~q9~q7 affected ~7~6~1~g~e~l ~s~e~n~qt~a~l~ql~q" scheme~! at ~e~s~t~u~a~r~qt~qm ~s~a~n~4qm~- (a) ~qA~2q=~q=~q9~qh ~a~n ~ac~qq~u~qis~qtU~qm grant ~a~qp- ~a~r~ql~e~s. the states ~y~N~o~w~u~ql~qd ~9~"~O~t~O their ~4qa~qsc~a~qt~qi~o~qn for creation at an ~e~x~t~u~a~r~qi~n~s~, g~cT~e~r~M=~q=t~L and Feder: ~sc~8qa~v~qt~qt~ql~e~s. This ~qw~2qM help to ~%~q= Initial Go=- ~s~e~q-~c~l~a~s and ~s~qh~aa sect the ~y~qt~e~q" at ~qp~a~3 ~.t~qy be- s~qi~qb~qi~qr Interested other ;=-am ~a~n~qd ~qw~qga ~O~qN~S~qI~qM~1 of ~-~6q=~qW ~qWC~M~L~T~q%~qW ~qU~qm ~*~qM~CL ~S~u~qb~a~e~qq~u~4q" ~2~8q"~qU~q"~qc~qi~a~q" may ~A~8qf~8qt~qW~q3~q=~q= ~q7~q21~0 latter ~qV~o~2qWd ~qt~a~8qdud~e~. b~u ~0qm~qc ~qor~0qma~n~ed In ~t~qh~s~, ~s~a~x~a~t region~. ~2qM~qw be ~q=~qb~CI~qItt~4~qd f~G~qa~DV~qIC~I~qS ~ac~c~6q"~4qU~q= and need ~a~qm be ~qH~c~a~0qf~0qt~e~qd to. ~V~r~qi~v~a~c~e ~c~C~L~q=~r ~a~r~t~ec~i~t to ~qW~qhic~qt~z ~a~s~qi~qg~2qm~M~8qm~qg states Were ~0~q9 In ~0~9~q=~qU~q1~1~2~4 ~2~WMC~c~0~s~r~q7 ~a~n~qd b~u~4q=~q=L social and ~t~a~v~qh~%~qm~a~i~g~nt~, ~c~a~qm~u~ql~qt~i~ed should be ~qI~n~qd~qI~c~a~qt~i~e~qd~. for ~add~qi~qt~qi~o~a~2qW operational ~qf~und~qL As In. Masted In I 9~8q=L t~qh~e~s~s ~, ~m ~1 ~q=7 in- ~O~r~qS~SI~O~qLZ~I~C~qI~O~US LIZ the area of the site be ~q9~q21.~q22 A~r~qv~qD~e~a~8qd~a~s for load ~s~e~4q"~qi~m~qi~. ~2qd~u~2qf~2qt ~l~qd~i~u~ql~n~qi~s~c~r~e~qc~qi~qn ~c~qW~t~a ~a~qw~qa~s~a~r~qy to tag ~c~o~n~a~qi~q4~e~r~ed for ~s~s~ql~q=~qZ~2qd~qL T~2qh~8qb ~s~o~q)~q,~c ~qd~qM ~qP~@~qM~s~s~. ~qW~qO~M~4qACC ~t~qh~* S~a~q=t~q=~q7 and to ~4qM~Ot~e~c~qt the t~G~4q4~G~n CC ~qf~qt~q" ma~qY ~qb~o ~a~c~c~o~q=~qr~1~4~-~hed, ~qt ~6qW ~qA~c~qa~u~qls~qt~qt~ql~oz~i ~8qv~a~n~qts will be m~ad~s to ~*~q1~0q0~4~q9~2qM of ~t~qh~e ~@~c~o~qW~T~4qQ~q= ~8qZ~Z:~4~0~0q0~q" Whatever means ~t~qb~* ~s~o~u~qW~0q=~C tacit acquire land and fa~c~qU~ql~t~qi~s~s for ~e~sc~a~n~x~qi~qm management ~4qM~0~q4~2~2~qM~q& ~c~o~qa~qtt~a~qt ~C~qI~O~N~S~IS ~4qW~4qW~*~qP~r~ql~q=~*~. but stag Include ~; s~m~a~c~qt~u~ar~ql~es that have ban t~qua~r~q~ug~qhly at r~e~s~e~arc~ql~a ~qv~2qM act ~n~a~g~i~n~a~qlly ~~2q4~6 ~qj~6qG~-~qd~0qz I"" ~q=~0 public ~qb~d~u~z~qt~m~qg In the arm. ~2~q1~C d~qu~c~r~qi~qb~8qw t~m a ~4qM~l~qa~i~n~qiz~q=~8q7 ~a~c~qq~n~4~w~4~g~q- by ~s~ec~c~qu~qm ~q3~q1~q3 grants. am at ~qM~qh ~qh~e~a~r~qt~ag ~I~qb~qA~qa ~qu~s~c~qiu~qd~e, ~qt~a~qf~o~l a- s~qo~qp~qu~c~a~8qd~o~qm or ~qW~qh~qW~V ~e~qq~u~qi~v~al~e~c~it (~qb) An" the ~C~r~e~scl~a~n of an ~q"~t~o~ar~qt~n~e ~qM~S~4qU~qM AS t~o t~qb~A dam ~q;~qI~a~c~r~- and sable ~qr ~2~&~0qu~q= Is ~a~v~a~qg~ai~qal~qc A~qV~P~qU~C~S~4qU~q= for ~AM~OCC~U~S~2~0q7 ~art~a~qh~ql~2qb~qb~4~qd under ~qt~qb~qd~s Me~- ~qm~a~0qn~er~. ~a~n~qd ~s~qh~a~qa be ~p~a~qb~qu~s~qb~e~qd !a ~t~q: am acquisition grant s~qb~a~qn be ~qm~s~2qf~2qt an ~q9M~C~qL ~9~9~0~q1~qI~C~&~qC~O~M~s ~(~qI~P~C~q= ~qE~qF ~q424) ~qf~o~r ~0qW~0q=~C~qI~qM~qI area m~a~qd~qi~a~. rat ~qh~q"~0qr~.:~a~qg ~s~qh~a ~qB~qF 424 application~, f~o~r ~6qF~id~e~ral ~s~a~qd~st- ~qP~q*~1~q1~1~0r~2qu ~a~d~s~qt~s~qmL~acl~e ~C~qn~q= be hold no ~q=~q=~q= ~8qm~q= is d~0qM ~qf~z~qa~o~p ~s~oc~l~e ~(~c~o~n~s~t~r~a~lc~Z~q1~1~0~0, ~0qW~a~qgra~qm~q)~. McGraw. ~qf~qw ~S~O~C~qI~S ~0~9~0r~a~c~qk~l~ac~a~ql grants Me ~qt~qb~o ~qP~a~6qu~c~a~qg~az~z of ~q=~qt~ql~-~-~q& ~% in ~qI~q=~qW~Z~qL ~T~s~y~t~f~f~m acquired ~qP~u~r~J~u~an~qt to ~s~h~f-~o~'~c~' =!ad* as least the ~qf~ol~ql~aw~qi~z~i~qg in. (~qb) ~2qM~qW ~8qO~qf~q1c~e of ~qc~o~s~s~ta~q; Zone Mar this s~u~qb~s~e~c~c~ql~az~z an ~ql~e~qs~qi~qs~0qm~a~st~s costs ~x~ad formation: ~Agl~u~m~q= ~CC~2qC~2q=~8qC shag ~qpr~e~qo~sre ~qd~r~a. ~qt~qh~d~qd~r fair market ~v~8qW~u~qa developed ~ac- (1) ~qr~qd~e~n~s~qi~ql~ql~c~a~qt~o~n d t~qh~e ~qb~o~u~n~qd~s~X~q7 ~e~n~qd ~2q=~6qW ~C~o~v~qir~a~z~in~ic~a~q=~q1 ~qL~4q=a~c: ~-~0q=~v ~c~o~r~qd~8qf~8qt~qg to ~qP~8qW~qW~%~qI ~a~qv~qor~a~qls~o~qd standard& (=AV) ~- ~q=1~0~2~0q0 ~qP~4~r~C~&~t~q=I~n~C to t~qb~a Ate ~qd~quL~qLI~qT s~s may be ~'~"~,~,~t~-~A~e~qd as -~q-~~h Me value of ~(~2qZ ~qS~qp~e~c~qt~qdc~a~2qd~a~us of t~qh~e ~r~e~s~i~v~arc~qh and l~e~ct~ed ~qf~a~r ~qd~i~s ~e~s~t~ua~r~t~a~s ~q=~q=~q=~ar~qy ~C ~ql~a~n~8q& d~a~n~s~t~Ad to ~qU~qm State and cash do- ~I~n~S~I~M~S~q6~0~0~2,~0~0~2 ~0qW~W~qa~A~q=~X~. Including =an- ~0qW~qW~qt~4qW ~qv~ab~qu~g ~qP~a~s~0qu~c~qt~qp~at~qi~o~n !A the s~e~l~l~e ~a~s~c~qio~ns ~q=~a~7 ~&~4qW~* be ~u~s~s~id as --~1-~4~1 ~qZ~qf ~4~8q=~9 ~6~61~0~2 ~a~qnd ~t~8~c~qh~qn~qi~q~u~qm am of ~t~qh~qm site~. and ~s~qh~a~qa d~qb~i~l~qr~t~qb~u as state ~S~qh~I~qM~q2~q7 owns land ~qW~8qa~ql~c~qh is to ~(3) ~6qD~e~ca~qd~6q" ~qb~udg~e~L these an ~a~qV~0qM~G~qV~r~qI~s~c~q& CC= may how be used ~qt~c~L Me s~a~q=~t~qm~qu~0q7. the ~v~a~ql~u~i~s at (~q4~q) ~2qD~qIS~C~M~311~011~1 ~0~q9 recent And ~4qW~O~qj~e~c~qt~e~qd public hearing t~n the ar~e~s, of ~q=~c~qh ~qzte ~qW~4qW ~qW~O Of t~qh~& land ~qI~qW~0qW~qW ~4qW t~qh~e State ~qW~e ~0~q9 ~8q=~4 ~$~3~q=~q=~q=~4q7~- ~qw~qt~i~ql~ic~qh both ~t~qh~e draft ~e~a~v~qi~r~o~n~qm~e~n~=~qa ~qL~r In ~a~rd~a~s to ~t-~4-~4~6 such I&" In Me (~q5) -~2qP~arc~e~qt~w~ed ~t~qhr~e~s~qt~s to t~qh~e ~qt~at~egr~qlt~q7 ~qO~qw~t ~s~c~a~c~a~u~s~e~nt ~C~2qV~2q=~) and the m~er ~J~s~C~C~t~qM~L~T7~. ~a~s~qa~ql~qt~8qU~qi~z~ed ~a~v~qw ~t~qh~s ~q=x: ~q2~q0 at ~qt~qh~e s~a~n~c~a~u~k~r~qy~. Of t~qhI~N ~4qW~O ~S~s~qL~ec~t~ql~q= ~q=a~F be addr~e~qne~qd ~qy~e~a~qm may be need b~qY ~qt~qh~e State as ~2qf~2qt~6qL~q1~q4 ~qt~qh~a~qf~qt ~qt~z~t ~s~0qu~an~qd~a~l~a~qm ~8qC~qC~8q=~2qx ~1~q1%~z~qa ~qb~L~C ~qm~a~c~c.~1~%. ~2qM~qW ~T~2qW~q= a~qg ~ql~a~6q@ ~qo~urc~qha~v~ed ~qb~qT ~q- ~'~W~-~4 sod ~qJ~A~qM~qI~q& ~qm~c~8qf~8qt a ~qh~o~qu~ql~n~g it: ~(1~) ~qT~qh Ica ~'~1~8, ~t a ~qS~qt~a~qw within the ~qb~o~t~u~s~qd~a~r~l~e~s of (a) ~4qW~qI~qM~9 ~qP~8qW~4~M~q%a~qy~.~G~qv~Z~qAd ~l~a~n~d~e ~qM~e ~2qD~qC~T~-~q ~L~s ~q=~qU~qv~v~e~r~qma~qL or ~(2~q) ~8qX there ~&- =a- to be a need for further =for= ~4qO~0q= or ~qf~qW ~qt~qh~s ~4q=~2qW~2qW ~qv~2qW~% r~e~4qW~L~r~qd t~o latter the pond ~S~O~C~A:~%~t~qw~qi~s~e ~qV~6qu~s, in a part at ~or a~qd~ql~a~c~a~qn~t to ~qd~qw arm ~qd I ~qf~a~r a ~qp~r~a~qdc~a~qt~ua~ry ~a~c~q~u~qi~l~0qm~o~n, ~qd~s~s~qI~4q=~qW:I~@~qn as an ~qa~f~fc~6q@ land ~&~Cq~0q=~0q=~q= g~r~q= IS being ~C~o~l~d~qi~8qd- ~t~a~f~f~i~X~4qT~. or ~W~qtI~O~qM ~t~qk~qW ~C~o~n~qV~r~qA ad land ~s~i~ad ~o~r am Or M~O~V~O ~qM~o~oc~%z of the at* s ~qar~qe~2qd ~2qM~qA~0q7 SAM be used as ~6q=~6qW~qA~8qd~6qL ~4qV~qa~qt~qer ~q9~q0~q0~q8 *11& ~qs~qt~qa~qc~8qi~qz ~qI~qw~qR~qA~qQ ~8qt~qs ~qn~qe~qc~qe~qs~qa~04qw ~6q= ~6ql~qa~qc~qt~qed. or ~q(~8q3~4q) ~4qt~2qf such a ~8qh~qe~qa~qz~04q=~0qg is ~q- (~2qb~0q) ~4qA~qZ~qL ~qa~qc~0qa~qul~qa~4qi~8ql~4ql~qo~qn s~0qp~4qod~qc~qa~qt~4ql~qa~qz~qi ~qs~2qb~qo~20qW~6qd ~4qD~qR~qO~qP~q-~qP~qO am ~qa~qsc~qar~qa~8ql ~qs~qy~q. Within ~0qt~08qw ~q4~q1~q2~q0~q5~00q"~8qd ~0qf~6qa ~q-~qT~4qt~0qt~04q=~qs (to either the s~qe~8qj~qe~q,~q@ contain the fallowing ~2qb~16qd~qo~qx~2q=~qS~qX~8qI~qG~qC~0qL~q. s~qa~qn~qa~qc~8qn~08qa. Me State ~qa~qf~qt~q-~16qW~2qd c~qo~quc~qac~qt the t~qC~00qX ~q9~q1~q2~04q=~0q7 or (C~12q= ~0q?~q2~0q7 an ~q&~2qC~qe~qc or,. (~8q1) ~16qC~qo~qs~qc~qr~4qI~0qp~04qo~6qn of ~2q=~q7 ~16qd~qi~qa~qn~4qg~qe~qs ~8qt~qi~qs pro- ~6qP~12qW~2q&~q,~8q%L ~qs~4qc~qo~qn~04qa ~2qm~qa~4qu~qs~qta~4ql~qa~4qi~qn~4qx ~qc~qa~qi~qs~qcr~qa~2ql ~q*~8q9 1 1 ~0qP~q&~12qM~q. or (4) ~8q@~0qor ~qo~qt~8qb~qar ~00qM ~8qP~qO~8qNC~2qI ~qSI~8qM~qC~qC~qU~qB~q17 ~8qt~qZ~2q= US" ~08qM~qI~qI~qN~qK~qW~qA~qI~2qd ~4qt~qn ~12qUw land to ~qr~qeq~qu~qe~6qn ~qc~qo~qo~0qp~qer~qs~0qt~4qI~8qm In ~08qM~qav~4qi~2qd~q- ~qG~qW~qQX~q'~qL ~12q2 ~2qI~qI~qI~8q&~2qL Such ~2qh~0qo~4qu~0ql~qn~qg shall b~qo ~4qt~qt~qe ~8qU~6qN ~04qM~qI~6qU1~q3~q1~4q1~00q=~4q7 ~q&~qC~0qQ~qU~4qI~qP~0q1~0q11~q01~q2 ~4qCr~qa~qn~qs ~qA~04qm~16qm~q- Ing ~qc~qo~qo~qr~8qd~08qw~qa~qs~qa~8qd ~2qma~qll~qs~04q"~qIl~2qm~qo~8qC~qt ~qV~qo~ql~qi~2qm-~q, ~2qW Mom than ~4qs~4qo~q-~8qd~00qm ~8qf~qd~2qa~qc~6qw~6qm~qg the c~qa~qsl~qo~2qm T~2qZ s~qu~qj~8qd~qz an ~qs~0qo~0qpt~2ql~qe~qs~qs~4qi~qo~8qn ~2qb~qa~qs not ~2q3~qac~2qh ~2q1~2q=~08q0 and SUM ~qr~qe~0qa~qu~qs~qa~0qL and ~12q*~q0 man= of On ~qC~4q@ and =a sc~qo~qn~qer ~0qt~8qb~q. been ~2qm~qad~qs. ~08q=~q0~q1~q1~q3~q1~q0~q1~qC~4qL~qa~qn a" ~qs~ql~6q@~qp ~24qP~qed~qe~qr~qil~q, axe= ~qr~qa~qs~0qp~qo~8qn~qo~8qw ~qg~qh-~6qW be West~q- 1~2q3 C~8qIA~0qV~qS ~q&~12qf~12qtw ~q&~qV=~qc~qOr~qi~2qm notice of ~qsu to that ~0qJ~2qa soft a ~04qu~2qd~08qw ~q8~2q=~8q1 ~q4~2qM~qE~qS~qI~6qM to t~2qt~2qw ~12q0~6q9~6qL~8q= CC ~6qb~qear~4qt~qng has been ~16qW~8q= In ~0qt~8qb~qa ~qar~qe~qs, ~0qgr~qa~qn~qs ~qA~0qP~0qP~8qL~2qIc~qs- ~2qC~8qQ~qG~qz~08qW ~2qZ~8q=~q0 ~04qU~04qh~qn~q&~0qg~8q=~qa~qe~qX~00qM ~8q<~6qX~16q= ~0qV~16qf~16qt the ~4qW~qW~qW~4qW~qZ~4qM ~qo~0qf ~0qU~q%~qe ~qSe~4qLe~qe ~00qZ~qo~qn, should be ~00qm~qo~qv ~q(2) of ~qow~qn~qer~qs~8qi~qs~12qm ~4q;~q&t~q. ~0q(~2qb) When ~qs~qv~qx~2qd~0qt ~04qx ~q-~q, ~0qP~q'~q, cat or an- ~08q=~4q9 Maw~q- ~4qt~qor~qn~qs~q. ~0qPr~qo~0qp~qo~qr~6qu~qa~2qf~2qt ad Wed ~8qa~2qw. ~qP~0qR~0qO~04qNAL ~0q1~0q1~6qW~04qO~08qW VOL 4~0q2~q* ~q14~q9~4qL 1~0q7~0q3~4q-~q4~q1~0q0~00q"~0qT~q, ~0qSW~qI~6qN~qO~00qM 9~q. 1~00q"~q7 1~00q77 Wednesday June 279 1984 Part I-V IRWFF 0 Department f Commerce anic and Aftespheric National Oc& Administration 15 CFR Part 921 Naftnal Estuarine Sanctuary Program Rigulation3; Final Rufe - 179 ~0 ~2~6~qW F~d~qw~l Register VoL 4~9. No~ 12~5 Wednesday, June ~27, 1~9~qM Rules and Regulations ~qO~qRPARTM~qE~4qN~qT OF ~8qC~8qO~0qW~qA~qI~8qR~8qC~8q9 ~2qn~q3~0qm of the Coastal Zone Management would be chosen. Section ~q92~q1~. 4(b~q) of the Act 1~q6 ~4qU~-~qq.C~. 14~q4~8qn~q(~qi~q). The National 1974 guidelines provided that~q!~'var~qi~ous ~0qN~qa~4qd~qo~n~al ~4qO~qc~s~0qw~0qf~0qt mid A~qb~r~0qA~qsph~qer~0qk Estuarine Sanctuary Program has bow ~sub-c~ate~qgo~r~qi~e~s will be d~ev~elop~'ed and A~c~qh~i~qd~i~t~qi~s~qt~i~od operating under guidelines published utilized as appropriate." ~q1~q5 C~qF~8qR Part 921 Juno 4.1974 (3~q9 ~qF~qR 1~q9~6q=~q) and proposed In 1~q9~q8~q1. a study was undertaken to regulations published September ~qg~.~'1~q9~8qn assess the original biogeographic [docket No. 40315-30~q1 (42 ~qFR 4s~6q=~q). classification scheme and make ~4qM ~0qd~e~n~or~qal Ba~8qd~4qWound mc~omme~n~qdatio~a~L as necessary. A National Est~i~j~ar~qi~n~i~s Sw~0qK~6q*~qm~4qy Program system with 27 subcategories was, R~4q"~0qW~qat~qion~s On August ~q3. I= (48 ~qF~4qR 3~q5~q2~6q=~q@ proposed. The subcategories ~qfl~qi within ~. NOAA published proposed regulations. the original scheme and further define A~4qG~qeN~qc~qr. Office of Ocean and Coastal for continued. in~qpl~em~e~ntati~on of the the coastal uses t~o Mum adequate Resource Management (OCRM~q). - National E~st~urin~e Sanctum ~qP~qm~0qr~am sanctuary representation (Clark. National Ocean Service (NOS). National pursuant to Section ~q3~q1~q3 of the Coa~sta.1 Assessing ~qL~q@~@ ~qlV~qa~qt~qi~qan~a~ql Estuarine Oceanic and Atmospheric Zone Management Act. 1~q6 UJ~qS~2qZ 14~q81. Sanctuary P~qm~qgr~o~qm: Action Su~qmma~ry~@ Administration (NOAA~qL Commerce. (the Act~q@ Written comments an the March 1~q98~6qZ cited. as The Clark Report). A~cT~u~0qm Final rule. proposed regulations won accepted The Cla~r~q* Report also. recommends s~qu~qm~qmA~m~qr. These final regulations revise until October ~2q& 198~q3. These comments consideration of an estuarine typology existing procedures for selecting and have been considered In P~qm~qPa~r~qi~z~4q* these in evaluating and selecting sites. The designating national estuarine final regulations A summary. at typology system recognizes that there ~* 'a sanctuaries and provide guidance ~qf~qd~r ~qM~. - ~6 -- ~qt~s an t~qh~e proposed us significant differences in estuary their long-term management. Site ~qr~4q4~2qd~atians and N~8qOA~0qNs responses are characteristics not related to regional identification and selection is to be presented below. location~. Such factors include water based on a revised biogeographic The final regulations establish the ~soum~e. water depth. type of circulation. Program's Mission and ~8qC~r~o~a~ql~s and' revise 'inlet dynamics. basin configuration. classification scheme and typology of the procedures for ~s~el~ectiz~0q* d~e~si~qgn~ati~n~0qs watershed type. and dominant estuarine a~r~g~aL The regulations piece a -and operating national ~s~e~qt~qw~qu~ql~s~qw ecological community. poster emphasis on management sanctuaries. planning by individual states early i~qi~t Th~8q;~qf~qin~a~ql regulations adopt the the process of evaluating a potential. ~qI~qI~qL Refinements to the R~e~qju~ql~ad~qm~qa for revised biogeographic ~c1~ql~is~s~4qf~4qf~4qi~cat~qi~on site~. The regulations reflect a the N~a~qd~qmal Es~qtua~ri~qm S~a~qw~.~4qW~a~ry scheme and the recommendation to prop s~qion ~qE~r~om the initial ~qP~f~4q"~I~sm ~- ~% consider typology i~n Sit@ selection (~see identification of a ~s~qit~qw~-~qthr~oug~qh the Based an ~qc~ep~a~n~anc~e in ~op~er~st~qi~qi~0qw the~, ~q1~:~q9~4q=~q1~. designation ~qP~V~O~C~S~S~qL and continued P~n~4q*~q= and comments on th~a ~qvr~o~qposed - (2) Site D~esi~4qpation management of the sanctuary by the i~e~qg~qi~qlati~o~n~s. a number of r~efi~n~am~en~t~s in' ~_~' Eligible states may apply for state after Federal financial as ~sistan~c~q* operational procedure; and policy have p~r~e~ac~qqu~isitio~n awards t~o~-~aid in selecting has ends& The ~r~e~qg~u~ql~a~qti~qm~s provide for bow designs& The final regulations an estuarine site in conformity with the regular programmatic evaluations of tm~6q@t then ~qm~qf~qi~n~qM~qMt~l6 ~qw~qh~qi~c~qt~i ~c~ql~L~qw~4qf~4qf~4qicat~qi~on sc~qh~om and typology sanctuary performance. Clarifications in ~I~nc~qt~u system. A description of the site the financial assistance application and -AL ~4qD~e~6qf~6qtn~qS ~qt~qh~e ~6qM~s~0qe~an and Goa~4q& of selection process to be carried out ~by award process ~qb~ave also ~qb~e~e~qmmada. the state. including a provision for ~0qv~qn~4q=~0qm ~oA~T~qs: These regulations am public participation in the process, must effective Friday, October ~6q& ~q1~q9~2qf~2qt This The Mission Statement and G~O~N~qIS f~o~r be submitted for NOAA~'~s approval. This delaye~c~qL effective date will allow - ~i the continued i~qm~qp~ql~a~qm~e~ntatio~n~.~q6f the ensures that the procedures for the site sufficient. time for the C~on~qgres~a to enact National Estuarine Sanctuary Program selection process are planned prior to ~ql~e~4q*slatio~n pertaining to th~e conduct of SUM th~s importance of designating implementing the selection process and the National Estuarine Sanctum estuarine area. through F~ed~er~a~4qktat~e approval of the pr~e~acquisiti~on award. Program if it ~ch~oo~s~q" to do s~qm If ~!~n~m~qp~n~v ~eff~a~4qm ~qf~o~r ~qt~o~n~qg-t~G~qM Figure. 1 depicts the entire designation necessary. the effective date of these- ~n~i~s~earc~qh and educational ba~n~e~qf~qits. ~q)~r~o~c~e~-~%~q& ~- regulations will be postponed~. and ~* Though broad in scope. they establish a After selection of a site. a draft n~oti~c~e'~thereo~qf published in the ~qF~e~qd~ar~4qd ~qbram~ew~or~qk within which specific management plan is prepared.. Requiring Register~. in compliance with the notice- P~"~0qW~qm activities am ~c~0~n~qd~i~l~c~q'~O~qd~- Th~e the development of a comprehensive provisions contained in section ~q1~q2 of the Mission Statement and Goals an ~qdr~aft ~r~n-~n~a ~em~ent plan in the Coastal Zone M~an~s~qe~e~qm~s~et Act. ~q1~q6 adopted by the final regulations p~r~e~acquis~qiti~on ph&" is designed to ~qU.S.~4qQ 14~q6~q3a. ~8qR ~q9~6q=~0q4 guarantee that ~qoa~4qd~6qy in the estuarine FOR ~qP~qU~qR~qT~8qN~6qM ~24q& ~20qR~q#~qv~20qW~q0~qH of t~0qh~qe p~8qr~qv~qc~qv~28qd~8qw~4qw ~2qj~4qb~qi- sanctuary designation process the state Op. Nancy Foster. C~2qh~0qi~0qs~6qE Sanctum ~36qW~2qK~q-~20qd~qj~28q* D~qe~qs~0qipa~0qti~qa~4qg and Operating ~6qa~6qm~qsid~qer~qs management ~0qp~qolic~2qie~8q& an ~6qPr~qo~24qv~qa~4qm~qs Division~q. Office of Ocean and ~24qE~qs~qtu~qa~qr~2qi~qf~qt~qe ~4qs~qa~qn~qc~0qt~qud~16qd~qe~qs acquisition and con~qs~qu~8q=~2qdon plan Coastal Resource Manes 1 ~qr~qn ~qi ~, t. NOAA~2q/ ~4q(~0ql~qa~qc~4qb~qj~8qd~20qWg sc~0qh~24qW~24qW~qa~qs a~qnd priorities). NO& 33~12qW Wh~2qit~qe~4qhav~qen ~4qS~08qL NW~q. ~4q(~6q1~6q) Revision of the Biogeographic ~qS~4qu~qL~2qd~4qin~0qg requirements~q. a research Washington. D.C. ~12q=~2q3 (202~6q) ~8q63~04q4-~8q4~12q=~2q1~2q6, Classification Scheme and component. interpretive and education ~qSUP~qP~qL~qE~2qM~6qO~2qM~8qM ~qI~qM~qP4~q0~qN~8qUA~qT~qI~0qO~8qW. Estuarine Typolo~0qgi~qe~qs. plans. future funding and other resource The ~4qI~08qM guidelines identified ~0q11 requirements. and alternatives. Draft L Authority ~2qb~6qio~20qpo~0qgr~qa~6qp~4qh~4qm region* from which and final environmental impact This notice of r~qin~qal ~qrul~qemaki~qn~2qg is representative sites throughout th~qa statements (EIS) are prepared analyzing issued under the authority of Section coastal wa~8qp~4qq~qr~q3 of the United States the environmental and socioeconomic ~q-1~04q80 ~0 F~d~ra~l ~qR~~$~L~~t~r Vol. 4~9~ No. 12~S Wednesday. ~j~~~~~2~7~~~1~9~64~ Ru~fe~qr and ~qke~julaiioi~s ~i~S impacts of establishing a sanctuary and- draft ~qg~em~ent plan and the final~. - ~q(imb~qJ~ect to pr~o~-d~esi~qg~nation con~st ~!ruc~: implementing the draft management ~qE~4qM the site enters-an initial acquisition po~ql~ql~qd~qie~q& see ~q1 922~4qM~qI~, prepare the ~0q& plan. ~qT~2qU ~qE~2qM ~qt~s prepared in accordance and development phase. I~2qI~e state is management plan. and initiate o~n~sit. with ~2qyatio~nal. E~nvir~omm~ental Policy Act then eligible for an initial acquisition research and education p~r~o~qgr~a~n~qm A ~8qMA) procedures. including provisions and development award. During this these tasks are to be carried out in for public comment and h~eari~qbgs~. phase. award hinds may be. used to conformance with the NOAA-appro~, Following NOAA approval of the ~qpu~qmh~as~e land. construct =or facilities draft management p~qla~qm COGS ~3~4~3~0~-~a~q" 26504 Federal Register/VOL 49, No. 125/Wednesday, June 27, 1984/Rules and Regulations Figure 1. National Estuarine Sanctuary Program Designation Process AWARD STAGE PUBLIC INPUT Preacquisition Site Selection Public Meeting Award (- 921.11) on Site(s) Approval of Site by NOAA (L- 921.11) Development of Public Meeting; Draft Management Plan and Public Hearing on Draft EIS the Draft EIS (- 9l21.12) NOAA Approval of Draft Management Plan (- 921.12) Development of Final EIS Final: EIS (- 921.12) Initial Acquisition Preparation of Public Meeting and Development Final Management Plan: on Final Plan Awards Acquistition of Key Land and Water Areas; Minor Construction (- 921.21) Final Management Plan Approved by NOAA Other Findings (- 021.30) Sanctuary Designation (- 921.30) Operation and Implementation of Management Award; Final Management Plan; Subsequent Acquisition Acquisition of Remaining Land; and Development Award Construction Potential Research (- 921.32) Awards Programmatic Evaluation Public Meeting(s) (- 921.34) on Evaluation ---------- ---- ---- --- -- 182 ~0 Federal Register / VoL 49. No. 1~Z~5 / Wedne~da~q@~ tune ~27, i~g~qU~/ Rules and~Re~gulation3 26~~ T~qh~e task under the intial acquisition regulations ensure that a state will have by the states. in conjunction with and develop-ant phase should be adequate fl~qo~qdbil~qtty in l~o~n~qg~q4~a~rm NOA~4qA. are -~-~n~qd~a~qt~e~qd by these completed within two y~eam At this operation of an estuarine sanctuary to regulations as an integral part of site point. NOAA must make formal deal with c~qh~an~4qWn circumstances~. The selection. designation. and ma~na~qg~e~rn findings~. as specified I ~q0~q2~6qL~4qX that the regulations require more information The Program's purpose in to e~st~abl. final management plan has been about the sanctuary. particularly selected estuarine areas as sanctuar~qi completed and is approved. that the key through the development of a site- to serve as natural gold laboratories land and water areas as specified in the specific i~4qZ~q;~nt Plan~. prior to each provide Opportunities for l~o~n~qg~qte~r~qm management plan am under state stop in ~6qZ~6q7d ~qgr~o~c~e~s~s. In this research. education. and ~qint~erp~retat~qic control. and that a memorandum of manner. it is expected. that decisions Because of this~, the present and f~qutu~r u~nderst~an~qdin between the state and affecting the sanctuary and management u~qm of such an area ~a~re certainly an NOAA concerning the state's long-term. priorities will be planned for in advance~. important factor, in considering w~qh~a~t~ql commitment to the sanctuary. has boom rather than in an ad hoc. fashion. It should be a national estuarine signed~. After NOAA makes these IV. S~UAIM~0qM Of Comments, sanctuary. - findin8s. -the sanctuary is considered the Proposed dons and It in a~qi~qm important to emphasize "designated". The state than begins implementation of the final management NOAA's R~e~s~qp~e~m~u~qm the Program does not involve broad plan~q@ including the construction of Comments were received from 17 ~- scale ~r~e~qg~u~qLat~qio~n~.on land woo apart f~r necessary facilities and additional land sources. C~qomm~ent~er~s included Federal that already undertaken by the state acquisition. ~q7~8qU state is also eligible for and state agencies, representatives of Proposed by the state under its own operation and management awards to the oil and ~qg~as industry; representatives applicable authorities~. Multiple use o provide assistance ~i~n implementing th~e of the electric utility industry. and national estuarine sanctuaries is final ~. plan. environmental and public interest encouraged (see I ~q9~2q=1~q(d)). Resource tions also provide groups. AD comments received are on protection ~qI~q& however. the highest procedures for the ~qp~r~o~4qp~a~qmmatic, file at the Sanctuary Programs Division. priority ~q80~4~11~, of the National ~qEs~qt~uari~n~t evaluation of a sanctuary durin~qi~qLth~e Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource- Sanctuary Program and-am must be penod-of the operation ~a~n~qd management management. 2o~2qn wr~qiscon~sin Avenue. compatible with long-term resource awards (or under the initial acquisition Nw, Room 334 wa~s~qh~qin~qg~qto~qm D.C. ~6q=~6q& protection. Within national estuarine and development award if the sanctuary T~qh~e comments are available for review sanctuaries, states may impose cer~ta~i i~s not designated within two years), and - at that of~qf~qI~c~qL Each of the major issues regulatory controls to ensure the for a continuing. ~8qW~ann~i~al review of an raised by the commenters has been continued protection of sanctuary estuarine sanctuary after Federal summarized and NOAA~q:s response resources. Areas proposed for ~qhw~4qAin~qg has expired~. Procedures for pr~ov~qi~qd~s~4q& -A the relevant subheading ~qd~8s~qi~0qm~q"~O~n am evaluated through the withdrawing designation. if a sanctuary in this section~q: E~qI~qS process with opportunities. for pu~l fads to meet established s~6qundard~s. comment. have been added (1~q9~q2~q2 3~4q4 ~8qS~oc~0qd~o~n-~qb~2qy~- ~.~qS~e~c~0qd~qw A~nal~qy~s~0q" To foster scientific studies within impact an Existing Sanctuaries national estuarine sanctuaries~. NOAA is Subpart~* A~-~qL~.~-C~en~er~al setting aside funds f~qo~r research within One that t~qh~e final, r~e~qg~nIa~qti~ons, to the ~i~qm~s of. ~8qs~ec~6qd~o~n ~qa~2qn~4qa-~6qM~qiss~qi~o~n and Goat& sites with approved final - ~g~em~ent plans~. This is a separate category of the c~qh~an~qg~e~s.o~n a~3~qd~a~qt~qi~ng sanctuaries~. ~q(~q1) Several ~c~o~v~i~qm~ent~e~r~s~rs~u~qppo~rted ~L financial assist~a~n from the operation ~. ~0qA~qm~qP~O~n~qm ~0qTh~e Chang" In procedure Program Mission and Coals and f~ounc and management or acquisition and reflected u~t the" regulations will them to b~e a substantial improvement development support. no research improve the Program's operation and the over the ~qI~2qV4 ~qgu~qid~e~l~in and ~q1~8q7.~77 funding is described in Subpart ~4qL ~a~8qf~8qf~e~ett~v~e~qi~qm~qp~ql~e~qm~entat~qi~qm of national regulations~. ~qF~qlnAn~e~4~a~l assistance ~r~e~qq~u~qi~r~s~n~i~g~ot~g-and estuarine Sanctuaries Over t~qLI~D~q& They Response~: The Minion and Coals procedures have been revised. The will therefore be applied to ~qed~st~qing were established t~e guide continued programmatic information required for sanctuaries to the degree practicable. effective implementation of the Nati~c each ~2q" of award is specified ~qin the ~4qA~t~qb~4q& ~0qPar~qt~qi~c~qipa~6qd~on Estuarine Sanctuary ~qPro~qgr~am. Pr~o~qgra~@~, appropriate ~s~ec~qt~qio~n~o-~qin pr~e~a~cquisition ~qc~qq~qwr~qien~c~s over the past several year (Subpart ~qS~qk~, acquisition and' Because of t~qhe potential impacts development (Subpart ~4qC~q@ and operation resulting from an area being designated,. led to the d~evel~q6pment of ref~qinement~i and management (I ~q9~2q=~q3~q2~q@ General as a national estuarine sanctuary. one designed to improve the original financial assistance information is ~c~o~qm~qm~d~qnt~e~r noted that the -am- pr~o~v~qiti~ed in opportunity for the participation Of The concept of a national estuarine In summary~q. ~0qrr~e~2q@la~qt~qlons include interested persons should ~qb~ir provided. sanctuary does not easily merge- with more standards and guidelines for states ~24qT~4qbA ~qc~qomm~qent~qer encouraged NOAA to that of existing natural resource. to ~4qfo~4qllow-~6qin developing and ~qa~0qp - a a ensure that states amply wit~4qb the protection programs. such as wildlife national estuarine sa~qan~qc~4qt~quar~6qy, ~2q" well conditions of I ~0qJ ~2q9~12q=~8q2~4q(~8qd~4q) and ~2q02~08qL~8qI~40qAd~4q). r~qsf~0q@~0qg~qs~qs at parks. National estuarine an additional g~qai~4qda~4qlin~qes for NOAA in T~8qh~qe c~qomm~qent~qer that a sanctuaries am designed to ensure the Program~q. Based on Carew review of all ~8qbl~6qi~qsh~qed and protection of a natural habitat unit in ~0q- ~q_~q_U1 ~qdi~qs~2qa~ql~qs with potential Industrial activities be which la~qr~qi~20qtt~qarm research and several states with estuarine undertaken to ensure a well~q-balanced educational projects can be focused. A sanctuaries~q. NOAA has found that the decision an the site's suitability for primary aim of these research and lack of guidance raised many designation as a national ~qa~qs~0qb~qu~qirin~qs education projects is to provide n~qew~qn~qf about what an estuarine sanctuary. Information to states that is useful for sanctuary should ~0qb~4q& the state's role in ~16qR~qe~qsp~qo~qn~qs~8qw N~28qOAA agrees with the d~qec~8qis~2qi~qo~qnmaki~qn~6qg concerning the . developing and operating a sanctuary. comment an the ~2qimp~4qm~6qunc~qe of public development or protection of its coast and how ~0qd~qe~qc~2qwons should be m~qad~ql~qL The p~qa~qxtic~qipation. Public participation efforts and associated resources. ~0 2~qr~~qW ~qr~~d~w~qW ~It~~q*~qw VoL 4~9; No. I Wednesday, June 2~7. ~1~9~6~4 ~qRu~fe~ and ~qRe~jula~ii~n~s National estuarine s~o~qnc~qu~qmi~e~s am not NOAA disagrees with the co~qm~qm~e~nter owned by a state or conservation group. established ~qy r~ec~r~e~s~qti~o~na~ql ~6qG~6qW ~-~6qL ~I~~qW purpose of the goal is to In this way actual ownership would not pursuits. Although ~-~-t~qi~qb~ql~e uses am ~sn~our~qv ~qd~a~e~qpr~o~qt~e~c~qt~qi~on of ~s~o~qb~ec~qt~ed be as important ~a~s the sits's vain to the ~a~n~c~ou~va~qg~ed. Sanctuaries am also not estuarine ~ar~o~o~q& F~ed~er~a~ql~qlst~a~qt~e Program intended solely to ~ach~a~n habitat for a cooperative ~o~8qf~8qf~or~qts, to ~ons~qw a such ~0qP~.~qN~qP~O~qM~qC N~qC~qLAA believes that the single species by modification of th~e protection an ~qa~n~qpha~s~i~z~ed~: the Federal inclusion of representatives of all natural character of the ~estuar~qin~a~r rule passes MGM then ~qg~qm~n~qt~*~-~qm~- national estuarine variations would ~qb~e system ~2q" but includes c~on~t~i-i evaluation Impracticable from a ~F~"~d~qw~n~qg~e~tn~en~qt I~2qU final regulation& Including the and coordination of research ~a~n~8qd Perspective~, it should be noted that NOW= and Goals. are designed to ~ed~uc~at~qtan to ~on~s~ur~i~a ~qd~8qw the sites remain control of estuarine~ land and water clarify the d~e~qf~qin~qi~qda~t~: and ~2qf~2qt~ic~qd~o~n of a as natural ~qf~qi~eldlab~o~r~st~or~t~es consistent area* is only o~n~s, facet in s~e~a~c~8qmar~qy~ national estuarine ~s~a~n~c~qt~ua~rY~. with the ~qU~4qs~qi~s~qLa~qt~qiv~e ~qU~L~2qN~U~8qL d~e~e~i~0qV~at~qi~qm P~n~qn~qw~qdes already owned ~q(~q2~q) Another ~C~o~qm~qm~e~n~qt~er~. ~n~o~qw~e~v~er. N~2qOA~8qA has. based them revised by ~8q" state ore conservation suggested that the section an Mission regulations an the Act and its legislative may not c~ou~tpris~e a natural unit or have and Goals. which replaced t~qh~e~.~"P~o~qll~c~qy h~qi~2qo~8q"~. Through ~qo~tp~er~qi~e~nc~e, with ~qt~qh~qe the research and educational foundation and Obj~ect~q2v~e~4qr section of the 1074 Program NOAA ~qh~a~s ~i~n~sd~o ~c~o~r~qta~qm required by the Program Such areas are ~qgui~qd~a~qlin~s~q& expands the ~r ~- ~qP ~ o~qi the ~r~a~2qf~2qt~e~n~t~e~n~qt~qo to the process~: In fact. by already in a protected status and are ~qPro~4qp~qm in ways ~n~o~qt o~ri~8qona~qll~qy ~qi~n ~~~~ 4~0~0qml~qi~c~qitl~qy p~qm~v~4qW~ql~ng fat S~e~eda~t~i ~q3~q12 available~ for research ~and educational T~qh~e co~n~in~i~ont~e~r suggested that Goal 2 ~o~v~al~u~st~qi~o~n~s~ (as ~qm~0qp~qr~e~qd by the Coastal ~qp~urpos~q~q& along with those regional ~qC~q=~qw~qn~T~qd~ng research) was ~a~qd~e~qq~u~at~qw n~a~qg~e~n~i~o~n~qt A~ct~qj as, ~s~o~a~8qWn~qg t~qa representatives comprising th~i~r ~4qNat~qf~o~n~4qW and that the ~o~qth~qw t~qhr~o~o s~qho~u~l-~i be ~c~o~qu~r~c~qhn~a~qt~e research aid education ~qf~r~ou~t Estuarine Sanctuary system Adding ~' delete& T~qh~e c~o~u~n~n~e~n~qt~er suggested t~qhat the national. ~8qW~v~e~qL the ~qI~l~t o~0qp ~qh~a~s ~qm~e~8q" these sites to the Program my not serve the am ~qI~o~a~qL concerning ~ql~on~qg~-~qt~er~ut significant s~4qa~id~e~s, to ~qf~qi~8qO~8qU the ~qb~o~n~9~qf~qi~cial purp~o~o~qm Thus, while the ma~na~qg~e~qa~qmt ~qpl~a~z~u~tin~qg ~s~qb~ou~ld be left to ~8qQ~n~qS~r~o~s~si~o~n~a~ql ~qh~i~qt~a~nt (am I I ~q9~2q=~q(~c~q) biogeographic classification scheme sets the National Marine Sanctuary Program ~a~n~qd ~0q=~q3~q4~q1~q@ the initial p~u~z~z~i~n~ot~er~s within which O~r ~8qV~qA~qt~II ~C~O~M~O~2qU~qI ~qU~qM~W ~qP~qN~qO~qM~qM~X~- ~qT~qh~qO~, ~q(~q3~q) am reviewer felt that the idea at detailed oft ~qn~ql~*~0qd~q= ~q=~qd analysis is c~o~i~nm~en~qt~er ~qf~qi~x~-t~qh~qm suggested that the~, -~q-~d~qi~n~o~qt~qi~n~qg research and ~e~qd~uc~ati~qm ~, ~qf~m~l- itsh~ould not be ~q6~qmu~qddered a" ~qj~o~&~qL involving ~o~n~qh~an~c~0qo~m~2qw ~a~qi '- and in ~qt ~q9~6q=~q(c~q) was al~o~6qm Many other ~qf~ac~qt~or~r ~q=~qw~qt be public awareness through ~' in~qt~erpr~e~qt~at~qi~8qm a ~qi~qw~qd ~qU~q1~94, but ~a~ql~t~ould be ~c~ar~e~2qMy ~1 mom d~er~ed~. should a~ql~s~o~.b~e dropped even though it thought~ out and developed a ~6qVVI~qthi~n ~r~e~8qgon~s without an estuarine was recognized that suck ~qint~ar~qpr~e~qd~v~e with individual states. sanctuary~. however~.~- the ~n~on~-a it~qi~o~n efforts often stem from ~s~ci~a~n~qt~8qmc. ~4qx~qw~qp~oj~&~o~a~c.N~2qO~4qM is ~n~ow in tha alternatives suggested by the --- ~r~a~B~O~V~ICb~m ~8qR~A~S~6qf~6qt~. t~qh~e ~q=~qM~qM~d~n~qt~l~r p~ro~a~qm of developing data plan fat c~omm~e~nt~er wi~qU be ~u~qd~ql~qlz~e~qd to the ~q"~6qO~0qp~4q"~8qW that the fourth ~qj~oa~qL i~n~v~o~qlvi~6qf~6qt coordinating research and education~. greatest degree possible. stimulating F~ed~eral-~stat~e cooperation ~8qW~. Comments from states ~a~n~2qd other ~q(3) Another c~o~qm~qm~e~qnt~er was pr~a~i~qm~ot~o the management of estuarine t~or~e~f~ft~ed group are being actively concerned that ~qim~qp~ql~e~n~t~an~qta~qt~qi~o~n of the areas, should be dropped Since it ~so~qHcit~8qW In ~qpr~e~qp~az~qin~qg. this ~qpl~qm ~qph~qic ~8qdas~si~8qf~8qi~c~at~qi~o~n scheme on allegedly provides the Federal (4) Several c~o~qm~qm~e~nt~ers strongly do is of ~ana Sao ~qp~e~r moon would ~qg~o~v~ar~i~nn~ent with mom authority than, ~R~qO~qP~1~1~1~ ~8qU~-~1~1~C~O~qF~-~qI~q&~0qM~-~q2~q(~qd~q)~O~qf lead to too many ~as~qt~uari~n~e sanctuaries~. needed. The ~c~o~nu~n~ent~er supports this~, ~or~s ~8q-~q- ~qm~al~q"pl~e ~q=~0 of estuarine ~m~a~d~q~F~m~a ~8qR~e~s~qp~o~ns~qw As d~at ad in 7~q7~qW ~4qC~ql~a~i~4q* view by citing legislative~, history t~qw s~anc~qt~qm~u~qi~e~s. O~qW of the ~$a~z~o~e assert that the Act ~"~o~uth~o~rt~qm Federal~, ~c~o~m~u~n~d~o~r~qt~qm~qa~ql~e~o ~ ~H~qP Fri ~F ~F~q1 the ~4qA~qsp~o~2qm the~. ~cl~a~a~0qd~qf~qi~cati~o~qn ~s~c~qhar~n~e and ~qgra~4qw~s-~qi~a-~2q" but makes no ~a~qtt~qm~qat to statement ~qh~L ~qS~@~c~qd ~qS~2qM ~q1~q1 that the ~qtua~rin~e t~0qMlo~qgy ar~sd~a~z~qi~0qp~e~qd to ~dimi~r~d~S S~qU~8qf~8qt authority through ~qF~ad~on~2q4 lift s~e~qh~qm~qd~qm ~qP~r~oc~o~qn ~F ~4 1 ~11 ~-~qdw the P~qn~0qW with an array Of ~qP~r~o~qm~qp~qt~qi~o~n~.~" sit~0qW~s c~o~n~s~0qp~a~qt~qi~qbi~qNt~qy with ~qcd and sanctuaries broody r~a~qf~qf~e~e~qdv~e of our The ~sa~qm ~C~0~1~0~n~i~gn~qt~qa ~qg~a~n~e~r~8qa~qy p~ot~qm~q%~8qW Ind ad ~qw~a~qt~qo u~s~e N~s~6qda~6qe~a ~a~s~qtu~e~qd~n~e zones~. Only with this ~C~O~Ut~qI~0qV~U~B~U~S diversity of sites. can the Pr~o~qgra~z~u question& the need for the National ~- ~qb~e~n~s~qf~qi~cia~ql ~r~es~e~a~r~4qa and Estuarine Sanctuary Program and need ~4qP~qA~0q*~a~qw~qwN~4qO~2qA~6qA ~qb~Ls~qOr~qw~0qo~0qr produce ~qf~qb~rr~qi~v~qi~s~qia~ns to the ~qc~qds~0qf~0qt~qg program co~n~t~a~titt~ed to the concept of -'do's, user educational ~qP~qM~6qW~0qU Useful In ~CO~q"tal The c~omm~e~nt~er encouraged N~4qOAA to in ~e~a~8qf~8qt~a~r~qi~n~e~sanc~qt~uar~qi~e~s as long as the ~sc~qis~qi~o~n-~qk~i~n~g There an presently 14 - ~ex~a~v~o~qdn~e the legal and ~ac~qt~e~at~qk~q6~a bases for which t~qh~e s~a~nc~qt~ua~r is~, biogeographic c~o~qs~qi~o~n r~o~qP~qmanted in the ~P ~ and ~i~na~qin~qtai~ne~8q& ~8qm~t~er~e~qf~or~e it ~6qW~qi~qm~s~. for, the estuarine~- ~a~r~qy ~0qP~4qW (4) Another ~c~o~n~n~e~e~nt~o~r ~4qUa~I~8qW that ~qh~qY to ~ansum that the regulations c~onf~or~i~n to is' ~q9 that ~I~6qf~6qt ~9~0~ql~e~c~qt~qI~O~D ~O~4qf~4qf~O~r~8qf~8qt ~s~md~a~qf~qi~q@ including ~6qV r~o~qg~qi~ons. and ~q;~r~ov~id~qi~n~qg for the intended "A" of the Coastal ~qz~o~qm ~c~qi~a~s~s~qi~qr I 'I I ~- me ~qg~qi~qt~qe p~qa~qr r~qo~16qp~00qm No" has~. ~qextened Management A~qc~0qL ~20qR~qa~qmp~qo~qn~qo~8qw The mission ~qa~qnd Goals ~0qt~0qh~qo-P~0qro~20qw in on unwarranted manner. described ~8qb~q& Section ~08qZ~12q= an to ~qow way ~28qC~4qja~8qW~4q#~4q%~6qc~qn~16qd~2qW ~20qS~qC~6qh~qo~qs~qe~8qa ~6q(~8q1~6q) ~24q01~q11~q1 s~0qta~0qt~q@ ~4qT~28qM C~qo~qu~qn~qn~qo~qo~4qt~qg~qr~q, ~qr~qac~qc~qo~qu~qn~qa~qn~8qd~qed instead an amen as of die Rad~00qw ~q- - I, ~q- that N~24qQAA6 ~qa~qs~qo the ~qc~4qi~qe~qs~qs~4qi~0qf~0qic~qat~4qio~qn they ~qt~qe~4qll~qect the l~qo~6qg~6qisl~qa~16qd~qv~qo Mowry and a ~6qn~48qo~6qm~4qb~qe~q.~qt~qw~qv to allow ~8qf~2qor~qt~qn~qo~qr~qe ~qs~qt~4ql~qe~qs in the ~4qP~ql~qo~6qs~qt ~28qD~qo~qw~qe~8ql~qo~16qm~qe~qn~0qt synthesis of the Pr~qo~6qgr~qan~qt'~qs post ~0qP~qe~qr region based an the ~qe~qst~qo~qa~qm~6qi~qn~qe Plan ~8qf~2qa the National~q, ~0qb4~qor~8qm Sanctuary ~2q@~q-~q-- @I ~4qT~8qh~qe~8qm~qe~qn~qn~qa~qg~qi~4qt~qa~qr~qn~qo~28q" Program which relied an eight ~qr~qe~44q*~qo~qn~4q& ~8qc~qc~2qi~8qm~2qi~qe~qnc~qe and need f~qo~qr b~qe~4q= p~qoilc~0qy ~q'~qY~qV~qW~qU~qR~8qW~qO --- ~0qs~quicl~qa~qnc~qe. Coal ~8q2 ~qand:3 are both ~qv~qa~28qf~28qt that only by several sites per ~q-~24qA~qs~qsp~qo~8q"~8qM ~0qF~2qAt~qm~qa~qr~2qi~qn~qe sanctuaries. in ~qm~qu~qm~qa~qg ~qa~qt~2q=~q& both education and interpretive region could all significant national order to be ~4qb~qo~qn~qa~4ql~24qk~6qi~qa~0qi for ~4qlo~qa~16qt~qte~qrm ~qe~16qf~16qf~qo~qr~qt~qs~q'~qa~0qm ~qna~qt~qu~qr~qa~6qi Outgrowths of variation be included~q. The ~qc~qonun~qant~qer research and ~qed~qu~qc~qa~0qt~8qi~qoni~qal ~6qp~qu~qr~12qm~qs~qe~qs. science~q, ~36q7~qh~qe ~4qf~4qi~12qm ~20qP~qa~6qL Involving that ~qa~qg~4qa~6qi~4qS~28qM ~q-~qc~4qq~qo~16qM~qa~qn war should ~qn~4qd~0ql~qa~qc~8qt the Notion~q's c~qo~qnsta~2qk. areas. ~0qi ~6qp~0qt~qs~qn~qn~6qi~qn~20q& represents a not always a~2qit~2qw~2qm~16q&~qe The b~6qi~qa~0qg~qeo~4qgr~qa~4qp~4qk~qic~q: ~qc~8qh~qis~qs~qi~8qf~8qf~qe~qat~6qI~qO~qU s~qc~0qb~q*~4qm~qG for achieving~q; ~8qw~qe~qs~qt~qa~q* ~qP-~q1 pip I ~2qi~qn~00qot~0qh~qe and estuarine t~6qy~6qp~qo~0ql~qo~6qgi~2qf~2qt In' ~0qm~q,~q.~qj~6q.~6q. ~24qOty National ~28q&~04qM~8qOt~qn~qe, Sanctuary Prop= developed him this Promise as ~qV~0q-~q1~q0- ~q-~q-~0qt~4qh and ~qa minimum a~q0~qb~qa~qitnt, of W~qA~qS~qI~4qS ~0qt~4qh~qo~qg~qo ~8qa~4qt~6qm ~q&~q& ~qa~6qp~6qp~qn~qrpr~2qia~08qw that me demonstrated in no ~24qC~8qW~16q* ~16qA~qe~6qp~qo~q:~0qt In R4 ~0 Federal Register / Vol. 4~9. No. ~I~qM / We~d~~~~~qday, June ~27, 1~984 Ru~fes a~x~d Regulations 2 ~qid~e~n~qd~0qh~0qf~0qtg sites for potential m~ari~n appropriately occur during the EIS a significant Federal action for the sanctuary status. eight regions won pr~o~c~es~q& but the ~c~o~qm~qm~ant~er suggested purposes of the NEPA EIS r~equir~em ~qu~s~6q& but for administrative purposes that states may wish to involve Federal ~'~q(3) One comm~ent~e~r noted that ~air ~qm~6q&~qw than r~e~qp~r~es~entat~qiv~en~e~s~a. On top agencies with special ~qv~qq~qw~qrd~qw earlier resource protection is a primary of this scheme a detailed marine during the sit@ selection process. program goal. the regulations shou~ql~. classification scheme. developed solely Response~: The regulations r~equim that specify that the. plan detail for marine areas and illustrative of the states seek the views of Federal responsibilities for surveillance ~a~nc N~a~qd~ot~qe~s oceans. w~a~s applied~. As a ~- agendas as wed as other parties early ~qt~i~q@ enforcement of human activities. result of this process~, twenty-nine sites t~qh~e site selection process (~se~s ~4qA~s~sp~o~ns~qw NOAA agrees and the were selected by NOAA f~qo~r placement ~qi I ~q9~6q=~q11~q(~qd) and ~6qU~2qL~qI~4qA~2qO~8qM. Federal r~e~qg~ol~qi~qtions (at J ~q9~q2~2qL~q1~q2~q(~qb)~q(8)) have I on the Site Evaluation List ~qC~qm ~q4~q8 ~qF~qF~_ agencies will also b~e actively involved revised to require that r~esponsibilit 3 ~q(~q2~0qm)). in the management planning process for surveillance and enforcement b~i S~e~c~0qdo~n 9~2qM~8qA~q(~qb~ql~q-~8qC~o~ar~8qd~na~0qd~o~n With and ~8qE~4qM development ~q(~a~q" i ~q0~q2~2qL~q1~q2 (d~q) detailed in the management plan. the ~4qN~ad~onal Marine Sa~nc~qtua~r~q7 and (~e)~q]. (4) One comm~e~nter questioned ~qth ~8qP~f~o~qgm~n~L One c~ommen~qt~er was ~2q5~q"~0qd~o~n ~6qa~6qm~qs~q-~qs~8qu~e ~8qs~6qd~e~c~qt~qi~qa~qm ~q(~q1) usefulness of the NOAA~-~stat~e concerned about the possible Several states suggested that the memorandum of understanding ~q(M~qC duplication of time and effort if an area regulations address m~qv~qI~qt~qi~qp~ql~e~a~sit~e which Is required as part of the in established as an estuarine sanctuary national ~es~qi~qm~r~qi~n~g san~ct~u~a~r~ql~e~q& management plan (see ~q1921.12 (a)~q(~,~r and a marine sanctuary. The comm~ent~er ~6qA~qpp~onsw Section ~q9~q2~2qL~q1~q0~q(~qb) has been and (~qb)(~q101). The c~omme~nter ~3u~qgges requested that NOAA address the revised to specifically reference that the MOU could not be consider possibility of adual designation and multiple-site systems within the legally b~i~n~c~ql~qi~n an ~qf~ature legislature: means -by which both programs could National Estuarine Sanctuary Program~. ~4qA~qmp~ons~qc The MOU emphasizes coexist without generating serious (2) One c~omm~ent~er urged early and significance of establishing an e~stu~a problems. frequent public involvement in the sanctuary and recognition by the at; ~0qA~qm~qp~o~n~s~qw Section ~2qM~qIA~q(~qb) Is intended designation and ~qm~,~,~,~qa~sn of national and Federal government of the long- only to ensure that the National estuarine sanctuaries. It was suggested commitment to management of the ~i Estuarine Sanctuary . and that whom the proposed regulations in accordance with the a~qgr~eed-u~qpon National~. Marine Sanctuary ~4qf~4qt gr~a~rn limit notice to the local media (for goals and objectives. The MOU ~spe~.~" work closely together. this is example i~qn I ~qO~2q=~2qM~q(d) ~C~qM~U~qM~qM~0qM out. at the beginning of the proc~e~a~&, par~qd~cu~qLar~qiy tr~u~s in term of preliminary site ~s~ol~e~ction~qh notice should roles of the Federal and state management planning research aim be made in the Federal Register governments. and what is expected projects~. and ~aducat~qi~o~qn/~qint~erp~r~etiv~e since not all parties interested in the ~e~sc~qh party. It will clearly indicate t~ql activities~. It is also important to note ~j~a~z~o ~q-~q1 designation live in the each ~qi~s aware of its c~ommitme that the Programs are not duplicative ad~qja ~qi area and the Program has a and party ~. billti~es at the b~e~qg~6qW~n~qin~qF and could save complementary ~r~0~s~qp~a~qm Purposes~- ~qT~qh~qe regulation~- have been broad national ~qI~nt~e~r~e~s~2qL ~qt~qh~e process. The MO~4qU emphasizes t clarified to Provide~, that the boundaries ~0qA~e~sp~ons~qw ~q1~4q1~0qb change has been, mads~. lands acquired and the National of the national marine and ~e~s~qt~marin~e~- (No I ~q9~6q=~q1~8q9~2qd~2qM Estuarine Sanctuary Program most sanctuaries would not overlap. ~e~y ~4qs~e~c~0qd~o~n ~q0~q2~qL~qI~qZ-~4~0qwa~n~a~8qr~qm~e~qnt Plan continue to be used in a manner though they may be adjacent (similar to, ~2qD~ev~qe~qd~o~qpm~e~n~qL (~q1~q) One state noted that consistent with sanc~8qMar~qy purpose& th~qe case whom a National Wildlife I ~q9~q2~6qL~q1~q2~2qf~2qt concerning ~a~qg~em~e~n~qt (a) Several states approved requi~r: Refuge abuts a National P~a~r~qk~q@ plan- development. s~qb~o~u~'A include a the management plan early in the description *(the s~a~n~c~8qMa~ry process as a guide to future decision Subpart B~q-P~qmacqui~sit~qi~qon~: Site administrative structure as a required before th~e expenditure of ~s~ubsta~n~qd~a Selection and Manag~qpm~ent Plan an component. It w suggested that f~qun~g~qi~s. Other c~omm~entars. however. Development the plan should at low out~qiln~e t~qh~e ~qw~qq~w~es~s~e~qd concern, that requiring th~E ~0qSdC~0qd~V~H~-~2q=~.~q1~2qa~q-~4qG~#~qMM~qt (1~qYO~VA State 's~8qu~8qf~8qfs roles far research~. education/ preparation of a draft m~a~n~a ement suggested that the ~qS~6qK~qO~2qW Federal sham interpretation~. and enforcement. prior to any c~c-~r~a~itm~e~nt to the site. was~,~not enough to. accomplish the goals ~0qP~l~e~sp~ans~e~: NOAA agrees and NO~0qAA could lead to the waste of of th~e~qI~n~qsa~c~qqui~s~qiti~on award (~e~qg~4 site language to this affect has been added extensive staff time, public ~' selection and draft MI~L~aa~qgm~ent. plan at I ~q9~q2~8qL:1~q2~q(~qb)(2~q@ participation~. and resources. development) and recommended that a ~q(~q2~q1~~8qOn~e state su~0qM~4qpst~ed that an ~4qa~qm~qp~qm~qm These regulations are small 3~11- be set aside for site selection~. environmental iz~nP~e~c~qt st~At~e~qm~e~n~qt not be predicated upon ton years of ~exper~qie and that other funds t~o prepare the ~qd~r~a~qf~qr r~equi~r~e~qd-~qi~n all cases. Rather. in lea in administering the National EMU~' plan be negotiated between the sate complex situation& the flexibility to Sanctuary Program The regulations and the F ~8qVV~U~rnm~en~q; based as prepare an environmental assessment intended to rectify many of the pr~ob~, the proposed sanctuarys ~qc~2qmp~4qi~2qm~8qty- should be left open. that have occurred in specific ~16qR~qe~qsp~qo~2qm~2qe Based an past ~qe~qv~q"~qw~q"~qU~qH~qU~2qM ~24qR~qesp~qa~qa~2qw NOAA disagrees Based an sanctuaries in the past. Many of the~qs the ~qS~qa~8qm~qa~qn~qn Federal funding ~76q@~76q@ ~qe~qx;~qp~qari~qenc~qe with the program~q. an problems could have. been f~qC~4q=3~q@e~qn ~qi supplemented by state match. is- ~qan~qv~6qi~qz~qo onto) assessment is ~qn~qot an overcome by thoughtful~q. pr~qe-sanc~qtua~q. adequate for site selection and draft adequate mechanism to My consider Warming- Thus. NOAA is strongly plan development. Additional funds to th~qe ~qenv~16qf~16qt~qo~8qm~qe~qn~qt~qa~4ql and ~qa~8qx~2qi~qo~qg~qcon~qo~2qmi~qc supportive of developing a ~04qman~qa~6qgem complete the final plan am available impacts ~qo~,f a proposed national estuarine plan early in the decision process. ~6q7~0q1 under the acquisition and development ~qf~qlanc~0qt~qu~qa~qr~0qy~q. particularly where a concern that NOAA is not comm~2qi~0qtte~qc award (~qa~2qn I ~6q9~2q2~6qL2~40qU management ~80q0~q0~0q8~6qm~2qm is being~q. proposed. the state during t~4qh~qe draft mana~0qgeme~qi ~0q(~2q2~6q) One ~qc~qomm~qe~qnt~qer suggested that Further. it does not provide for the plan p~qy ~qr~q, can ~@ is unwarranted given ~16q&~q. specific r~qef~qer~qen~qc~qa~qt to the used for extensive public review required procedures specified in the re~6qgul~qati~qc~qi Federal agency coordination ~4qb~qe included through the NE~0qPA ~6qp~qr~qoc~qes~8q& We believe NOA~16qA~6q:~qs ~00qf~00qt~qan~qc~8qi~qs~qt~q, commitment be~2qg~4qir in Subpart &.Such coordination could that designation of any site qualifies with the pr~qe~qacquis~8qit~8qion award for sit ~0 ~2~q&~q= ]Federal ~qR~~q&t~qw / VOL 4~9. No. ~qW / W~i~qdn~esday,~ ~j~=~e ~27~ 1~984 / Rules and Re~j~qWa~ti~n~ selection and continues through all the. large capital expenditures until a Brad pup the ~a~2qf~2qf~e~cti~v~an~es~s~,~o~qf the ~q-~.~q-~a~ntal stags& NOAA may plan is and substantial san~c~qt~o~8qWs program, support up to ~o~n~qv~@~qha~6qf~6qf of the tow Cosa acquisition has been (2) The same comm~e~qn~qt~er as in ~q(1~q) also Of ~qU~0qW~qA~6qW~S~2qf~2qt A ~qp~q%~r~qd~C~U~qla~F sanctuary~. ~. questioned the value of a program NOAA'~qs programmatic commitment to a ~2qS~e~6qW~o~qm ~q9~q2~0q=-~2qO~qp~er~u~0qd~a~n and evaluation after Federal funding expires~. Proposed sanctuary begins with ~4qM~qm~a~q1~qr~O~qM~qM~qL~. ~qL~f~f~0qW~q1,~1~0~1~a~n~qt~a~0qd~o~n Of ~4qd~e ~4qA~*~4qW~n~qm The required evaluations approval of a aft and continues through Management P~ql~a~qm ~q(~qi) One state will ensure that sanctuary ~ob~qf~ectives~. as t~qh~e management plan review and the ~q$2~q50 cap an federal specified in the ma~na~qg~e~t~a~4qnt ~qp~qh~qm are preparation of t~qh~e E~4qM If the still being attained and that proposed for operation and management Proposal is approved~. and if the ~4qW ~q92~6qL~q32~q(b~q) should be modified boundary changes ~qv~2qW amendments to requirements of the ~4q* ~4qq~u~qi~s~qi~qtion phase to provide f~a~r additional ~qI~qtInd~t based ~0~0 the management plan can ~qb~e reviewed. an met. NOAA will proceed with and. The evaluations will ~a~qm~q=~* that the establishing the site " a national ~. Is designed to purposes for which the sanctuary was ~O~stu~l~n~0q*~qw sanctuary. assist states in ~es~qta ~e~stuar~qi~qf~qt established continue to be met and that ~4qD~e~qti~s~ql~o~n points early. in the process ~S~a~n~c~qt~u~a~r~qld~:~8~6 an provided for an the site meets the criteria of the national provide opportunities for either party t~q6 initial period ~qi~qm ~qt~a~qt~qio~n; System. withdraw before too ~qm;uc~qh time and thereafter the sta~qt~qo must assume After ~qF~edaral funding expires. the effort have been committed~. responsibility for continued operation. state is required to submit an annual (~q8) In terms of I ~q9~0q=~q2~q(b~q)(~q7~qL one, ~8qs~e~6qw~a~f~f so ~u~n~8qd~a~J~2q7 ~2qC~-~qA~q=~qS~*s spa. t an the sanctuary. The report will c~omme~ntar suggested t~qhat the schedule ~a~nd~0qA~qm~e~ad~4qm~a~n~qt~s to the M~qb~o~a~qg~e~qm~e~nt detail program successes and for acquisition. required as put of the P~qla~qm (1) Several states requested that accomplishments in implementing the management plan. was useful as ~AL this section be modified to apply only to ~qS~uid~a, but not as a rigid planning law~asp~e~qcifica~qlly~s ~qt~at~qh~e policies and activities described in the sanctuary management plan. The report document s~an~ct~u~a~0qm~. and ~n~o~qt~-g~e~n~s~tr~a~ql also should propane a work plan for the ~4qR~e~sp~ons~qw NOAA views the- environmental quality laws such as for next year of sa~n~'~c~qU~uLr~qy operations and acquisition strategy as a flexible ~s~qix and water.' describe the st~a~qt~s'~q&r~ol~e in ongoing ~qp~i-~qM~y~q- tooL It do*& however. identify ~0qA~qmp~o~n~s~e~r Section ~2qM ~qh~a~s been ~ key areas where ~a~c~qq~t~qd~ait~qia~n, should be c~ql~a~r~qi~qfl~e~qd to railed this point. sanctuary ~qp~n~0qw~qm~q& inadequate annual focused and acquisition ~qp~r~qior~6qM~as ~q(2~q) O~n~s c~o~qmme~n~qt~ar recommended t~q1~qhat ~r~e~qp~o~r win ~8q"~4qM a ~6qW~-~scal~e developed. The strategy wi~2qf~2qt also public notice and opportunity to evaluation with a sit~e-v~qis~qit. In addition. contain alternatives ~q(~qInc~ql~u~qd~qrn~qg boundary comment be provided in all cases whom an a periodic basis~. NOAA will also changes) if selected priority are" ~qb~o~qw~qu~ql~a~4qd~e~s am changed or --~na~qg~qe~qm~e~nt conduct a ~8q&~8q3~q4~ca~ql~& Section eventually cannot be a plow an amended under I on-= evaluation with a site visit. one ~c~o~qm~qm~e~n~qt~er tow that ~qt~qh~e ~qT~qh~e ~4qF~4qq~qP~C~qO~2qW regulations ~8qS~e~8qa~qt~i~o ~2qX~0qm~qi~6qs~.~-~6qW~4qa~4qdr~a~qw~a~ql~o~qf ~6qD~*~qq~4q*~0qW~2q&~qb~qA ~q(~q1~q) ~qS~e~q"~N~I~qL r~ev~qi~or~qw~e~qn ~2~" ~"~n I ~R~qt~s far the draft management provide that ~qi~qf NO~8qAA determines it-is suggested that the section an the plan should reference three additional n~ac~e~s~s~qm~0qT~, p~uhl1~qc notice and an withdrawal~, of d~s~s~qi~q=~-~qtio~n be mod' ~ed elements. ~a~ql~ql of which were ~qi~n~c~qi~ad~ed in ~V~V~V~W~q"~M~1~"~qt~qY for I ~q- ~8qW on boundary the ~qI~8qV4 ~qg~uid~eli~n~e~2qt (~q1) ~0qD~efl~o~ql~qd~o~nir of ~e~f~t~.~o~qa~qf~qt and d~i~an~qg~e~s to the &&I to allow ~qt~qh~e applicable state to permitted~. ~e~qmp tibia. restricted and ~qP~qI~qM will be provided~. participate in decisions regarding the ~qpr~o~qbibrit~ed uses; (21 a monitoring plan to Mai require public notice disposition of property~. ~an~s~ur~s~, that the integrity of the ~s~an~ctu~a~0qq and ~a~ppa~t ty ~2q&~P~c~m~qw~n~qm~qt ~a~vA in ~4qf~4qi~qmp~o~qn~s~e~r The state will of course be is maintained: and (3) a description of certain cum preparation of am consulted by NOAA in any d~e~qds~qw~u the authorities which wilt be put in ~s~av~qir~c~um~e~nt~id assessment ~qT~qh~us~i~- the- regarding property disposition. which place to manage the Sanctuary and ~c~qh~qw~qi~n~qt~e~nt of ~qd~qw~qw ~r~ag~2qwat~qi~ons is to will be carried out ~a~cc~or~8qd~ng to enforce t~qh~e policy and ~a~s~o r~e~st~r~qi~c~qd~o~n~s~t p~r~ow~i~qld~e for p~ub~ql~qi~c~qwt~qi~c~s mime - Att~s~-~qh-~e~nt ~6qM of ~8qO~qh~4qf~4qf~4ql ~4qOrc~u~ql~ar A~-~q1~q0~8qZ ~4qA~qmp~o~qw~s~: A resource ~qJ~a~p~p~i~n plan a~qppli~ca~qb~qb~L~-~qT~qh~er~e may. ~qhow~e~v~qw be Revised~, ~a~qnd these r~e~0qv~qdati ad~y~.~- (2) ~qS~e~"~n~-~8q6 ~qm~v~2qk~qw~qm questioned~. in requirement ~qh~a~s been d~ed (we times ~v~w~qh~qa~s changes~; to the m~an~a~6qp~qm~ent ~q� ~q9~8q=~q1~4q4~qb)(~q9~q1) which encompasses plan an and will not ~r~eq~u~qa~t suck, die event of withdrawal of sanctuary elements (1) and ~q(~q3~qT~. A monitoring plan notice~. method of disposal for should be included as part of the ~4qS~s~c~t~6qk~n ~2qM~q7j~q#~q-~,~qp~qm~qgn2~qw E~va~qlu~at~qi~o~qm pr~op~e~: t~qy hold ~qi~n l~e~s~s-th~a~n~-~qf~e~e simple or research plan (an I 9~6q=~q1~0qA`b~qX~q3)~q). ~q(~q1) On~s ~c~ol~o~ol~ent~e~r specifically ~c~o~ntr~a~qU~ed by a ~ql~e~q"~L questioned t~qh~e value of Section ~6q=-~2qq~6qW Response Section ~q92~qL~q2~q1~q(~e) [which ~'Subpart~ C~q-~0qD~ev~el~o~qpm~ent and ~o~w~n~qh~qo~qd~a~g~qw of sanctuary p~qo~qforma~n~c~qe was ~q# 9~2q=~-~4qW~e~ql in the proposed ,Preparation of the ~qF~qi~n~a~qi Ma~na~qg~a~z~i~e~n~qt the Continental~, stated ~qt~qh~0qm r~e~qg~u~qlati~on~a~ql ~4q*culd be followed to the plan r~epa~r which an r~qe~0qq~qu~qi~qs as a extent ~qit a~qpp~qli~s~q*~q. ~qL~e~a~s~eh~o~qld and other S~qe~16qW~qa~qn ~2q9~2qr~12q=~0q-~20q4~qa~24qW~8qa~2q1~24qA~8qa~0qp~qm~0qk~20qW~qb~8qv condition of the award. am real~q, in ape t~0qj interests pu~qtc~4qh~qa~qs~qed in and ~28qD~qe~8q"~4qJ~qap~8qm~04qW A (~6q2) Oft st~qe~4qt~qs~q. ~qad~2qa~24qpa~0qt~qe for NOAA~q'~qs purposes. whole or ~6qi~qn part with federal ~0qf~0qi~qz~qads are noted ~24q6~04q" the ~4qUm~6qi~8qt of ~0q5 ~qP ~q- ~q- of the~q. ~8qP~qer~2ql~qatm~qa~qn~qc~qer~qe~0qp~qa: am at ~qs~qubl~qect to the ~0qpr~2qm~16qu~2qi~qon~qs of Attachment initial acquisition and ~8qd~qe~qv~qe~8qk~20q*~qu~8qw~4qA ~qi ~0qh~qa~40qW ~4qfl~qut s~qu~qc~8qh~q.~qs~0qp~qo~qt to do not K OI~6qN~28qG ~2qC~28qk~6qc~36qa~qsr ~20qA~qr~q-~16qW~16qL R~qe~qv~2qi~qs~qs~24q& awards which may ~8qb~q* ~8qc~6qq~2qmnd~qed an address ~8qd~2qa ~qs~qo~qac~qi~8qf~8qt map ad depth of (3~4q) A~qn~qoth~qarstat~qe requested that the -ins construction activities which aid ~12qW~qou~qs~qs waded to. &seem the deed lan~0qSu~qe~20qp be tow t~4qt~qen so that a in implementing p~qortio~qn~qS of the effectiveness of sanctuary op~qe~qr t~2qi~qon and state would be "entitled to retain title to management plan may not be adequate opportunities ~0qb~qt ~6qh~qo~0qp~qrov~qem~qen~qL In property which the state determines is ~0qf~qo~qr ~2qm~qu~6qi~0qt~8qi~2qpl~qe~q-~qnit~qs ~qS~8qY~00qM~8qM~4q& addition ~0qd~qa~8qnn~6qg an evaluation~q. no longer needed for grant purposes~q. so ~20qA~2qmp~qo~qn~qs~2qa~qr After careful consideration. ~2qi~2qnd~6qi~qv~2qid~qu~qa~4qL~qs ~qor~6qgr~qo~qup~qs that me. or should long as the property is used for other NOAA. has determined that ~qo~qn~qc~qe~qs~qs~qez, ~8qb~q4~qL involved ~0qi~qn sanctuary management purposes ~qappr~qo~qv by ~20qN~24qOAA as being construction can be planned f~4qo~qr ~qa~qnd or am ~qo~20qf~20qf~qect~qe~0qd by ~4qd~2qw sanctuary ~4qu~qe consistent with die sanctuary ~2qp~qr~qo~8qgra~qn~qL~q" i~qn~qc~4qh~8qul~qa~20qd~q'as pan of the initial award. ~qc~qo~qo~4qt~qe~6qc~qed This. provides N~28qCAA with When prop" purchased T~8qh~qe intent of this restriction is to ~8qU~8qmit valuable ~4qf~4qi~8qm~qc~0qib~qa~qck that is necessary to in fee simple Or ~0ql~qa~8qwtha~qa~q-~0qre~qe Simple is 1~12q86 ~0 Federal Register Vol. 4~9, N~~ l~qa / Wed~e~day~ June 27~ 1~9~84 ~/ Rules and Regulations ~2~6~5~1 no longer used for ~qtha purposes~. of the Subpart ~qF-~8qG~e~n~eral, Financial is somewhat acid. It was su~qg~qi~d~sted, t~ba National Estuarine Sanctuary Program A~s~sist~a~n Provisions the ~c~qt~r~c~umn~au~qtral range should be ~2q&~q5 NOAA is required to dispose of the (~q1) One state criticized the exclusion. rather than ~0q= property according to t~qh~e~-~qp~r~ov~qisions ~qo~qf of land as state match for the operation ~0qA~esp~o~z~@~qw For the reasons indicated Attachment ~2qX ~2qO~4qb~8qM ~6qC~ql~qm~ular A~-1~q0~8qL and management awards. ~q7`h~e state the above. response, we decided to Revised. Then provisions an found such an occlusion to be an undue -continue with the proposed system essentially the same as stated in -constraint upon management and (3) Another reviewer stated that in I ~q9~2q=~2qM (e) of the ~qf~qi~n~a~qt regulation& operation ~a~qlt~e~qr~na~qdv~es available to Group 11~q1-Transition Areas. the (4) One c~omm~ent~e~r suggested that states. description of coastal marshes and specific criteria and -an appeals. ~* A~e~s~qp~o~n~e~qw In order -to maximize the coastal mangroves as the only coastal procedure ~qC~qrn~cludLn~qg public notice of the support provided to a sanc~qo~u~0qn during w~e~qdand n~a~qition an" is too narrow. proposed withdrawal of designation) be its early years. NOAA has precluded - Other w~et~qta~nd areas (marshes. swamp, added to the regulations. land as --~4q" for the operation and bo~qlp) should be included. ~4qA~espo~ns~e: As s~qp~e~0qd~qA~ed In It 921.34 ~aw~6q"~. and ~q9~6qM.3~6q& N~8qOA~8qNs ~con~t~h~q-~i~i~n To a reasonable ~4qA~qmp~o~n~s~e: A new subtitle "Coastal state match should relate to the Marshes and Swamps" has been ad~8qd~ec ~qiv~aluatio~in of sanctuary performance purpose of the particular award. Since ~q(4~q) Another ~c~om~qm~ent~er stated that t~qh win examine the state's p~e~0qf~0qforman~c~r In- the purpose of the *operation and typology did not appear to contain upholding the ~qm~a~qidat~e of Section ~q3~q13 of ~i provide ~qforth~e criteria which adequately describe a the Act. the national Program goal& and sanctuary's op~e~qntio~n and - ~.~- Gr~e~a~qt~qLak~e~s~-typ~e site.. the policies established in the implementation of the management Great Lakes areas can fall it ~qila~n. Specific criteria ~2qW plan. the u~s~e of land ~0qRe~qsP~o~n~s~e: as match is under Class ~qE~qL Group ~qLB (Bum judger thew factors cannot be a inappropriate. particularly since land Str~uc~qtur~e~qy, LC ~qa~nl~at Typ~e~q@ I.~4qD. (Bottom enum~er~s~qt~ed~.. bu~qt~qw~4qM be examined an acquisition should be well u~nde~rwa~q3~r Com~qp~o~siti~o~n~qy~. Group I~qI~0qA (Clrc~8qWat~qio~n~qk. ca~qwb~6qr~-~cas~qe b~e~4q" Section ~q92~q1~2qM Vella prior to ~qt~qh~e State~'s receiving an MC ~q(~qFr~ashw~at~er~qt and Group M- out a procedure for withdrawal of . operation and management award, The ~2qC~qh~e~qm~qi~c~a~qL designation. ind~n~e~r~1~r~, an appeal t~o t~n~" a~ql~qlowable categories of match (see Assistant Administrator for Ocean ~qf~q9~6q=~q1~q(~*~q)~q) provide the state with V~. ~8qO~qd~qw Actions Associated W~qIt~qh t~qh~e~,~ Services and Coastal Zone- ~s~u~8qf~8qf~8qi~r~i~ant flexibility. ~0qP~qM~qP~O~S~2qW ~4qRul~am~a~qk~qi~n~qg ~6qM ~"~O~qn~e~qm~i~n~"t. (~q3) One state ~qq~u~qw~qdoned who would AP~q9~4nd~qrx 2~6-E~qatt~l~e~ri~qm TYPO~8qW~qS~qY (A) ~4qCl~qo~s~t~qi~6qf~6qi~qb~a~6qd~o~n Under ~4qE~x~e~q=~qd~q*~e decide the ~"~qm~ur~e~nt fair market value of (~q1) One r~evi~e~s~v~er stated that in Croup O~rd~qw ~q1~6q= leads slated for withdrawal of. M-Ch~e~qm~qi~qcal. the ~ql~y~r~opo~sed salinity~- NOAA has concluded that thew designation in ~q1 ~q9~2q=~q35~q(~e~ql~q(i~qj [now limits. won particularly confusing. The regulations am not ma~ql~o~t because they I 92~qI~2qM~q(~e~qX~qi~q)~q)~. It was recommended that reviewer note* t~qh~at a salinity zon~o ~of ~q%~q0 will act result ~qI~qm an arbitration ~s~y~s - of three pp~qt t~q*2~q0 ~0qM~4qW ~qis very important because ~q(~q1), An ~a~n-~q1 affect on. the, ~e~qmn~om~qy ind~ep~end~e~nt~-a~~- ~o~r comparable~, ~qm~q=w~qm~qS~G~W~~ ~.~qW~_~ ~qP ~0~9 1 water$ ~qi~m~r of Sim minion or more: ~sy~s~qo~qm be es~8q=~8q= but. the proposed (;)'A major increase in costs or ~qpri~c~L-~, R~e~sp~o~n~qm Fair 'value would ~qb~er~' ~0qZ~8q==~I~qt~s t~qM broad t~o d~e~s~qa~ql~qb~i~f for consumers~, Individual Industries. determined b~2qr an independent appraiser this. The ~r~e~v~qi~qtw~er ~I~n~0qA~nd~ed the ~qF~eci~sral. state or local government (eg.. ~c~arti~qf~qi~ed: ~r~e~a~ql~.~-~qPr~o~qp~er~qt~qy or ~qf~qo~ql ~qrt~e~8qM~e of sali~nit~qy~-r~a~n~qg~e~s, from agencies. or geographic regions: or ~r~e~qp~r~a~sen~qta~qd~v~es~q@and.~c~srti~qf~qi~ecl b~6qr~e ~ql~v~qa~vd~uc~qt~qi~c~0q@ M~a~r~qt~u~eB~q1~6~q1~0~0qV by GSA ~8qW~qW~8q* (3) S~qI~qg~n~qi~8qf~8qi~cant adverse effects on. responsible official of th~s, state. as. ~0qM~o~sb~0qr~. co~qmp~e~qt~qit~qi~o~0qm employment. in~qi~e~@~s~qtzne~n~qt provided by A~qttac~8qAm~ent F of OM~qB~. pr~odu~c~qtiv~qit~6qr~. innovation or an the ab~qilit ~0qC~qI~q=:da~r A-~2qW~6qL ~qfta~v~qi~s~sd.~@~, saw ~qW~q" ~7~j~q" of "or ~qSu~qbp~a~r~qt ~0qE~q-~0q4t~esea~r~c~qh Funds of United S~qtat~es~-based, enterprises to' ~e~m~a~j ~ ~ ~ I ~-~~ c~om~qp~e~qt~e-wi~qth fo~r~si~4qp~@~.based enterprises ~qU~q:~3~1~5 oleo ~qm~q~ -or. in domestic or wcp~o~4qf~4qt -ark ts. . ~q(~q1) Several. ~r~evi~ew~e~t~qz s~u t~ed. that ~3A mown&* ~W~=~q@ -am Them final roles - ~ex:ist~qI~ng research hinds be offered on. a ~q1~2qW ~- ~q%~2~% ~P~O~qW~N~&~W ~o~n~c~h~o~m ~"~a~qw~. percent Federal basis; ~qL~e- without a ~r~y ~W ~1~8qz~. COP I ~qf~qt~s~o~qw. procedures for selecting and processing ~1~0~q% potential national estuarine sanctuaries state match requirement~. ~3~0 ~0~q;~8 ~a~m~m~u~n~qw~. ~. ~0qA~e~sp~i~qi~qns~e~: Section 3~q2~qS of t~qh~e Coastal ~>~q=- in a~c~c~o~qida~nc~e with a revised Zone Management Act requires that an~. Poo ~Y~4~0~W~qW~L ~k ~1~qW~L ~U~b~qw do ~qf~qt~o~qw ~d~w ONO" ~4~q0 biogeographic classification scheme anc ~qh~incis to coastal states for nations ~- ~V~4~qf~qt ~A~L We=% ~q~~. ~a~m~qm ~U~W~A~W~L estuarine typ~olo~qg~qi~e~q& These rules estuarine sanctuary purposes be ~6~1~L establish ~&~: revised process for provided on a ~qf~qi~2qf~2qt~-~qf~qifty watching basis. ~0qA~qm~qp~o~n~a~qw p~o~qly~qba~qn~n~e should b~e 3~q0 ~2qW ~id~en~qd~qf~q@~qn~n~qg, ~qd~qo~n~qgn~ati~n~qg and ~a~qgin ~q(~q2~q) other comm~qint~ers s~m t~ed that to is ~qppt t~qha, ~qI~0qr was a typographical national estuarine sanctuaries. They w~qf~ql funding l~0qim~qa~qn ~qa~qnd th~qe~0qt~qota~0ql, research arm N~24qOA~16q& considered the information ~qna~qt result in any ~0qd~12qk~4qf~4qt-~qt economic or budget be discussed in the ~qr~qe~20qf~32qd~qa~6qd provide& but has decided to continue to environmental ~qe~28qf~28qt~04qo ~8qi~4qm will they lead Response~q: ~8qF~qu~qad~4qin~0qg limits and the total we the proposed salinity ranges which. to my maim indirect economic or an ~28qf~28qi~qo~8qn ~24q&~qo~8qJ~ of Federal hinds for ~qr~qes~qsa~q:~32q6 In national ~qo~08q" ~24qW~8qw~28qd Waters and environmental impact& estuarine sanctuaries will vary ~24qf~24qt~4qm ~20qa~q9~4qf~4qt~qedr~6qi~2q" ~44qM~qe~40qW~8qm~8qd Wood, ~08qW~32q4 This Is ~0q(~24q3~0q1 ~20qA~qd~16qT~24q9~qd~0qt~q0~qr~2qY~0qF~0q7~q&~qx~28qW~4qU~4qt~6qy Act Analysis year-to-year. thus. thes~4qe~8qf~4qi~0qg~qur~qes are not the standard lim~qn~qo~2qlo~4qgy test used in included in the final regulations~q. NOAA college. The table used as an example is The General Counsel of the will~q. however. distribute information from a ~8q1~16qM paper. the salinity table Department of Commerce c~qor~4qd~0qf~6ql~qed to about t~8qh~qe relative binding limits and used in the typology is t~8qh~qe widely the Small Business Administration that ~8qbu~qi~8qdin~4qg totals. Such information will be accepted ~q"Venice ~4qSy~qst~qa~24qW adopted in this rule w~6qi~8qn not have a cant sent to states with national estuarine economic impact o~qt~qi a substantial san~qct~qu~qa.~12qhes and to other interested ~0q(~6q2~0q) The same reviewer also questioned number of small entities. Thus. parties. the ~6qpH values suggesting that a p~24qH of ~2q&~8q5 regulatory Flexibility Analysis i~qs not ~2qJ~8qL~8q1~08q3~04q7 ~0 ~2~6~qn~O Federal ~qR~~S~qW~~ VOL 49, No. 1~2~5 W~~d~e~d~qiy~ ~Ju~~ie 27, Rules and Regulations required for this notice of final ~6qf~6qt~qb~qo~ar~qt ~6q0~-~,~qS~qW~q4~8q*~r~2q" ~qD~qu~2q*~qw~qu~o~n ~anc~qt id see from one sanctuary are made ~r~u~ql~e-~qk~qi~n~qs The ~qn~qgul~at~qi~o~n~s set forth ~2q%~4qf~4qt~s~e~qq~u~er~i~qt ~qo~qp~qu~l~qd~qw available to th~ers in the system. The p~roc~edu~qm~s for i~qd~s~0qi~qdf~qyi~n~qg and Sec. network that~o~2qwill be established will designating ~na~qt~qi~o~2qw "~qt~uarin~o ~4qC,.~4q= ~qD~e~si~qon~ation of National Estuarine enable sanctuaries to exchange sanctuaries. and managing sit" once Sanctuaries~. designated~. ~qV~0qn-~4qU Supplemental acquisition and. information and ~r~q"~e~arc~qh data with each These rules do not directly affect development awards~. other. with universities engaged in ~1~4~sma~qll government jurisid~qic~qti~o~ns" as ~q9~4qM Operation and ~qm~ana~8qp~8qm~e~nt: estuarine ~res~oa~rd~L and with Federal ~. Implementation of the Ma~n~a~qg ~t Plan. and state agencies~. NOAA~'s objective is defined by Pub. L 9~q6~-3~q3~8qc the ~q2~0q=~8q= Boundary cheap& Am~en~rim~en~qm to a ~S~qy~stem-wid~e program of research and Regulatory Flexibility Act and the rules the Manapm~ent Plan~. and a~2q"t~qi~o~n of monitoring capable of addressing the will have no effect on small busin~e~ss~e~qL ~qmul~t~qi~qp~ql~e~-~s~it~s components~. management, issues that affect ~ql~o~0qWerm (C~q) Paper W~o~j~8q* Reduction Act of ~qL~6qM ~0q=~q1~-~q3~6 P~r~op~um evaluation. productivity of our Nation's estuaries. (Pa. ~qL~. ~q9~0q&~q5~2qu~q) ~qg~qz~qL~q3~4qL ~4qWit~qh~r~qir~awa~qf ~q(d) Multiple ~q=~qu are encouraged to These~. regulations d~o~'~no~qt impose any ~q3~2q~ ~q9~q-~q4~qk~q"~qu~r~c~qh ~qF~qw~t~8qf~8qt the degree compatible -with the information requirements of the type ~q9~q2~q1A General~. ~' Sa~qWtu~ar~qy~'s overall purpose as provided ~q22~qL4~2 Categories of potential research ~qi~n the management plan and Consistent covered by Pub. L ~qg~qo-~6qn~qi other than protects~; evaluation criteria. with subsections (a) and (b), above. Use those already approved by the Office of- levels are set by the individual state and Management and Budget (approval ~2qS~qd~q*~qW~qt ~qF~-~2q44r~qw~r~a~ql ~qF~qb~qw~x~4qM A~s~si~qa~m~qm~e P~r~ov~qi~s~qi~on~o analyzed in the management plan. The, -number ~q0~q6~q4~q8~-~6q=~q) for use through sanctuary ~qma~qw~qg~ement plan ~q(3e~e September ~6q= ~q1~6qM ~q92~4qL~8q% Application information-, I ~q9~2q=~8q1~q2~q) will describe the uses and ~q9~8q=~q1 Allowable casts. ~q(D~q) National ~4qE~nv~qi~qr~o~r~ta~qi~e~n~qt~a~ql~qP~a~qL~qi~c~qjr A~c~qt~. ~4qM~8qM ~qA~qm~qm~u~qh~n~ent~s to fl~u~e~n~c~qi~a~ql ~s~a~f~t~s~ta~qm establishes pri~o' r~lt~qle~s among these us~6q6. awards. The plan shall ~qident~2qf~2qfy uses requiring a N~4qCAA has concluded that publication Ap~6q;~ndix ~i-~2qZ~ql~o~8qp~o~qg~qi~n~-~qp~8q6~qc Classification state permit. as well as areas where of these -rules does not constitute a scheme u~s~e~s.~'ar~e encouraged or prohibited. In major Federal action significantly Appendix ~qZ~m~-Typolo~8qa of National E~s~u~qar~qi~n~g, son" ~e~n~n tua~ne~s am-intended to be a~4qf~4qf~ect~qi~n~qv the quality ~qdf the human Areas open to the public: low-intensity environment. Therefore. an ~4qA~a~qd~qw~qd~8qW~. ~qS~qw~- ~q3~23~8qK ~ub. L 92~-~4qM as recreational and interpretive. activiti~a~ms ~e~nv~qir~oam~ent~i~al impact statement is not a~qM~M~M~qd~@~6q* ~0q0 ~qS~t~qkt~. ~q=~0qW (1~q6 U.~6q&C. ~14~6~1(l)). a~r~qe generally encouraged. I ~. required. ~4q&~qd~8q*~qw~qt~6qA~q-~4q4~qa~i~@ (e) C~;artain --n~qipulat~qiv~e rese~ar~qth List at s~u~qb~qi~e~8qd~s in is ~qC~qF~6qR Pan ~6qa~ql activities ~qm~ay be a~ql~qlowed~~o~n a limited. ~q� ~4qU~qL~q1 M~qI~s~qs~qi~on ~qw~4qw ~q9~o~s~qh~L basis~. but only if specified in the Administrative- practice and The mission of the- National~, management plan and only if the: proc~edu~0qm Coastal zone. Environmental E~s~qtua~r~q= Sa~q=~qtuary Program is t~qb~o activity is consistent with overall protection~. Natural r~es~qou~rc~e~s~.~8qWet~qh~an~d~s. ~a~stab~"~-~qN~q-~s~nt and ~qL ~qthr~o~u~qg~qhr sanctuary purposes and the sanctuary ~R~e~qm~e~n ~q(~qF~e~qd~e~r~e~qL Domestic ~qA~S~a~qi~s~t~a~nc~e Catalog F~ed~e~r~al~-~4t~a~qt~s, ~.cooperation. ~qof ~- national resources an pr~o~qtec~qt~8qa Manipulative research ~ac~qdv~qit~qle~s~@ require the prior Number ~q1~2.420 ~qE~s~tu~a~r~qu~qw Sanctuary P~to~qgr~a~qm~ql- system of ~a~S~qt~qo~lri~n~e sanctuaries Date& F~e~qbr~u~%~:~q7 ~ZL ~0qM~L ~- r~epr~e~s~e~n~qta~qd~qw of the v~ari~ou~s~.~.~.~.~'a~n~qi approval of the state~, and N~4qO~8qA~6qA~. paw ~qN~qL woe a~r~8qA~qw~qt~uar~qin~qe typ~qf~qt in the United States. Habitat manipulation for ~qms~o~q=~e LA~q=~q4~4~a~n~g Ad~m~qi~n~qis~tr~o~t~or~qf~o~r ~2qOc~a~q= Services E~a~qt~t~qW~qi~n~e sanctuaries Will be Ma~nag~qF~q=~0qW ~qpU~r~qP~O~S~q" i~s n~ot permitted. and C~q=~s~u~qdZo~n~e~qi~q@a~n~o~4qpm~e~n~& . ~~. ~. ~estab~qU~shed to provide opportunities for within national estuarine sanctuaries~- A~c~c~ordin~6qoy. ~q1~q5 C~qFR Pan is long-term research. education. and. (f) While the Program is ~aimed-at revised. an. follows: ~qi~n~qw~r~F~qM~I don. protecting ~na~t~qu~qt~al. pristine sites, NOAA ~q(b) ~0qF~4qUgoa~qls of-the Program for MCO~0qV ins that many estuarine areas PART-~q921~q-~q4~q4~6qA~0qTIONAL ESTUARINE out this mission ar~e. ~- ~, have undergone ecological change as a ~0qZ~0qV~q4CTU~2qA~0qAY PROGRAM ~4q&~.~n resource protection by -r~esult~o~q(hu~qmn activ~qitie~q& Although REGULATIONS~ im~qp~qf~qi~rme~ntin~qS a long-term management restoration of degraded areas is not a ~qS~0qw~q"~P~er~t A~-4~e~n~era~ql plan tailored to t~qh~e site~'s specific ~qprima~r~qy~-purp~os~e of the Program~. some ~r~e~s~o~u~r~c~e~qw restorative ~activ~qi~l~qd" may be permitted ~a~i~r~- (2) Provide opportunities for ~qlo~ng-~qte~qm in an estuarine sanctuary a~s specified in ~qM~a ~0qW~as~i~on and Scale~. ~qm~qi~s~0qm~qi~ql~qi~c and ~edu~r~4qAti~onal programs in the management plan. 92~q= D~e~qf~qt~rut~i~o~rm ~est~uari~qm areas to develop information- ~q(~qg) NOAA may provide financial ~9~q= National E~s~qmar~qi~n~e ~qS~a~n~qa~n~ar~qy for improved coastal d~0~2qd3~qi~onmakin~qg~: assistance to coa~2qn~0qd states. ~i~2~at to ~qSta~qg~e~o~qgra~qp~qi~u~c ~qC~qL~a~s~s~i~ql~ql~cad~o~n Sc~qh and (3) ~E~n~b~s c~e, public awareness and exceed ~q30 percent of a~ql~ql actual costs. to E~s~u~uu~quw ~qT~qy~qpo~ql~o~qs~qb~al~s. ~qund~qerst~qe~qn~q-~4~q1~qn of the estuarine assist in ~qth~qe designation and operation ~q9~00q=4 Relationship to ~qo~qt~6qb~qar ~08qp~qov~0qi~qs~4qh~8qm~q-~qof ~6qd~8qa env ~0qb~qo~-nm~qe~qnt through resource, of national estuarine sanctuaries (see. ~12qC~qo~qasta~2qi Z~qb~0q@~qw M~qan~qs~12qp~qu~qn~qat Act ~qa~qn~6qd~q-to- t~08qM ~8qN~q&~0qd~0q=aL ~00qM~4qe~qr~0qi~4qm S~4qo~qc~qo~ql~qa~qr~4qy program, in Program= and section Three types of awards to ~8qF~qed~qer~qal-~qs~0qt~qat~qe cooperative an available under die National on ~2q3~12qf~12qt a ~qI~qf~qf~qi~ql~q.~q-~4qa~qn efforts ~0qf~0ql~8qf ~2qm~qf~qf~qi~qna~8qz~32qf~32qt estuarine ~q&~2qM~qe~2q& ~0qF~qu~qstuarin~qe Sanctuary program. The a~qnd ~04qM~qa~qn~qeg~qer~qn~qer~qK Plan ~8qO~qe~qv~qe~0qi~qo~04qp ~4qw ~4q(c) To assist the states in carrying out ~0qp~qi~2qw~qe~6qq~qu~6qis~6qi~16qd~qo~qn award is for s~2qi to ~q2~6q=~q10 C~qe~qn~qe~qr~qal. the. Rowe 'a goals In an effective selection and draft management plan ~6qU~q1.~q1~q1 Site selection. manner. the National Oceanic and preparation~q. The acquisition and ~00qM~q-~00q= M~qeft~qa~04qpm~0qf~0qtt PISA ~2qd~qe~0q"~2ql~qo~4qp~6qm~qa~qr~qit. Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) d~00qv~qa~4qlopm~qe~qn~0qt award is intended s~qu~0qb~4qp~qert ~8qc_~q4k~qx~qp~04qA~qe~04qw~4qw~q%~q, ~8qo~4qw~q4~qs~qi~qopr~qi~4qwt~q, ~qar~04qw will coordinate a research and primarily for land acq~quisiti~qo~qu and P~qi~qe~8qp~4qe~qa~08qf~08qt~qia~0qt~qth~qe~08qf~08qt~qed~qi~04qf~04qt Plan educed an information exchange construction purposes. The operation ~q9~q2~qL~6qW General~q. ~q- throughout the national estuarine and m~qa~qn~qa~20qp~2qm~qe~qnt award provides funds ~00qM~00qM Initial ~qa~qc~qt~8qm~qi~qs~qiti~qo~qn and development sanctuary ~qs~16qM~qe~0qm As part of this role. to assist in implementing the research. swards. NOAA will ensure that information and educational~q. and administrative ~0 Federal Resister / Vol. 4~9~ No. 1~2~5 / Wednesday, June ~27~~q1~9~84~ / Rule. and Regulations 2~q&~ MENNEN SOMEONE program detailed in. the sanctuary and. to include a variety of ecosystem Financial as~i~qistanc~e, application management p~q1~qm Under t~qh~e Act. the types. A biogeographic classification procedures am ~sp~ecift~ed in Subpart ~qF Federal share of funding for ~s~nationa~ql sc~qi~l~e~n~i~s bated on regional variations in. ~q(b) In selecting a ~sita~. a state may estuarine sanctuary shall not exceed the nation's coastal zone has been choose to develop. a multiple~-~oit~e At the conclusion of Federal developed. The biogeographic sa~n~c~qu~qmy ~r~e~qf~qi~e~ct~qi~ng a diversity of financial assistance. funding for the classification scheme is used to. ensure habit~a~8qf~8qt in a single biogeographic long-term operation of the sanctuary that the National Estuarine Sanctuary r~e~qgi~o~qm A mult~qi~qp~ql~6q"t~a sa~r~ic~tu~ar~qy also becomes the responsibility of the state~. System includes at least one site from allows th~e state to develop (h~q)~l~a~n~qd already in protected status. each ~r~e~qg~qia~qL The estuarine typology complementary research. and by another Federal~. st~a~qt~s. local system is utilized to ensure that sites in educational program within the ~qgo~v~qanm~en~qt or private organization can the Program reflect the~ wide range of multiple components of its sanctuary. be included within national estuarine estuarine types. within t~qh~e United States~. M~u~qitip~ql~e~-~s~qit~e sanctuaries are treated ~i sanctuaries only if the ~qm~a~i~n~a entity ~6qf~6qt The biogeographic classification one sanctuary in term of ~2qf~2qf~2ql~i~an~c~qi~qal c~o~n~i~q-~its, to long~-term ~no~n~am~qi~ni~qp~qi~qdativ~qe ~sc~ql~i~am~e~. presented in Appendix ~q1. assistance and development of an management. Federal lands already is-, contains 27 regions~. Figure - graphically overall --~m~a~qgemant framework and protected status cannot comprise the depicts the b~qio~qg~eo~qgraph~6qk regions of the plan. Each individual component of a key land and water areas of ~qi sanctuary United S~t~st~q"~, proposed m~a~qit~qipl~e~-~t~qite sanctuary sh~e~q[ (see- (c) The typology system is presented be evaluated separately under I ~8qa~8qu Dom ~2p~2p~p~ in Appendix ~2qZ ~q9~2q=~8qn(c~q) air p~e~4qf~4qt of the site selection process~; A state may propose to (~qk~q) ~wA~c~4qr means th~e~-Co~quta~qL Z~on~qa I ~2qMA ~qR~ai~n~qdon~s~qi~8qO t~D ~-~qP~io~v~qi~s~qi~qa of establish a m~u~qlt~qipl~e~-s~qf~qte sanctuary at Management Act. as ~am~end~e~qd~.~~q1~q5 U~.~8qS.C~. ~qu~qn~qc~o~ss~8qw~2qun~em~e~n ~qg - ~i~qAct~snc~qit~* time of the initial site select~qiom or at ~q14~q31 ~e~qt~'s~e~0qv~. Section 3~q1~4qX~qI~q) ~of the Act 1~q6 ~qV~qw N - I ~4qU I ~q3~qm~qm~qu~s~ery ~qP~r~o~qq~c~qw~L any point in the development or U.S.C. I~2qWI)~. ~e~0qitabl~qi~sh~e~s th~aL National (a) The Nati~o~nak Es~8qt~u~qi~0qf~0qt~qe Sanctuary operation of the estuarine sanctuary. Estuarine Sanctuary Program,' Program In intended to, provide~- even aftez Federal funding f~0~V the 3in~qE (~qb) "Assistant A~A-ini ~qtr~a~qt~o~4qr ~8qVLA~q) information to- state and" and other component sanctuary has ~ex~qpir~qid. If t m~ea~n~e the Assistant Administrator for- entities involved in ~c~8q&~f~st~al zone state decides to develop ~a~-m~uitipl~e-~sit Ocean S~amc~es and Coastal Zone management ~qd~e~cis~qio~n~qm~a~qk~8qf~8qt pursuant national estuarine sanctuary after the Management. National Ocean S~e~qr~6qA~qm to the coastal z~qm~a management A~2qa ~ql~qe initial acqui~sition~and dev~vlopment National Oceanic and Atmospheric ~4qU~2qaC. 14~q6~q1 ~e~qts~e~qq. Any coastal state. award in made on a single sit~i~L th~qo Ad~r~ai~ni trat~qi~on.U~.S.~4qDe~qgartm~ent of including those that do not have proposal is subject to the requirement Commerce. or h~qis~q1~qhe~r successor or approved coastal mom management set forth in J ~q92~8qL~4q= It should be n~ote~c ~qi~s~s~qi~qs~t~u~qm under ~v ~n ~! ~H ~9 30~q6 of ~qth~* Act. is however. that the total funding for a ~q(~c~ql~. -coastal ~sta~qt~a~q-~qmea~n~s~ a state of eligible for an award ~q-~4qW the National ~inu~qlt~qip~qle-~s~i~qt~e sanctuary remains at the tha United States in. or. bordering on. t~qh~e Es~qt~u~arin~aSa~n~c~qt~i~l~ary ~qP~i~t~0qW~qo. (see ~qS~0qu~qO~6qU~2qM~. limit the funding for. At~qh~u~i~4qf~4qt. P~qecifi~r- at Arctic Ocean~. the ~q9~2q=2~q(~e))~q@ of a mu~qLtip~qle~s~sit~e sanctuary ~8qG~U~qI~qr~of~ql~,~q4~6~qx~qi~C~o~. ~qL4~4q4 ~4qW~n~r~i~f~qf ~qS~o~u~n~c~qL or (~qb) Whom feasible~, t~qh~e ~4qNa~qt~qi~o~n~2qd also limited to t~qh~e S~6qL~0q%~6q= standard one or more of the G~qmt Lak~a~q& For the. Estuarine Sanctuary Pr~o~6qpam, will be ~q(s~e~a purposes of this dtl~e. the term. a~qLs~o; in clo~s~e~-co~o~rd~qi~nati~on with th~e includes Puerto. Rica. the Virgin ~8qW~qM~6q& conducted ~s~qa~8qv~a~8q"~L Guam. the. Commonwealth of the National M~qi~qdn~e Sanctuary Program (a) A state may use up to ~qS~8qM00~q0 in N~qb~rth~er~2qi Marianas~, and. the ~0q7r~qut ~qr~qr~qf~qt~ql~e ~4qM of the Marine ~qP~r~o~qt~e~c~qt~ql~on~6 Federal ~qpr~ea~6qw-i~qd~o~n funds to e~stabli Territories of the Pacific Island& and Research and Sanctuaries. Act. a~qw and implement a site selection pr~oces~.~, American Samoa (see ~q1~q6~~4qU-~4qS~4qC ~4qU~2qW~q4~q)~q@_ a~qm~qi~n~qd~ed. ~ql~qe~q@ U.~8q&~2qC 143~q2-~qt~q434~q@ ~&~8qW which is approved ~qby NOA~6qA~. ~q(~qd~qj -Estuary" m~e~a~na t~qha~qrpar~qt of a. administered by NOA~qAL ~q7~q1t~qi~s ~qUr authorizes t~qh~e ~qS~s~c~r~at~e~r~6qy of ~8qC ~.~o~qm~qme~r~c~e~ to ~q(b) In Addition to the requirements ~qd~qm or ~qi~tr~eam or body of water having designate. ocean~. waters as marine forth in Subpart ~qF. a request for Feder unimpaired connection with the open sanctuaries such funds ~qf~qo~r site selection must c~ql~ontai~n t- sea. where the sea water is measurably areas for their conservation. following programmatic i~n~qformatio~r~r diluted with fresh water derived fr~o~a~r recreational~. ecological~. or esthetic ~q(~q1~q) A description of the proposed sit [and drainage. The term also includes value& National marine and estuarine selection process and how it will be ~e~stuary-typ~e areas of the. G~a~eat La~qk~as. Sal I I I ~ ~, ~oes, win, not ~o~v~2qd~qiap~. tho~-~2q* they implemented in conformance with the we I~qf~qf U.S.C. ~q14~q54~q(~4qn may ~qb~4~r adjacent biogeographic class~qificatf on scheme a~r ~q(~s~qT "National ~qE~stuarina, ~qS~a~nc~qt~ua~r~8qr typology (I ~8qN~4qL3~qY~, means and are& which may include~, all- ~0 w the key- land and water portion at ~5~4~11~0qm~ar~qt ~0q6~0~q-~qp~i ~e~a~c~qqu~qi~s~qid~qa~t Sit~q& (2~q) An identification of the site an ~qS~g~qk~qw~qd~qw and ~6qM~q=~qW~q9~qW~n~q"~qt p~ql~a~r~i selection agency and th~e potential estuary. and adjacent transitional are" Develop Wit management a~6qs~qe~qncr~q. and and uplands constituting to the ~qext~8qw~0qt (3) A ptio~qn of how public feasible a natural unit, at asides as a I ~08qm.~0q1o ~2qa~qs~qn~qev~qa~4qL participation will be incorporated into natural field lab~qo~qra~0qt~8qwy to provide long- (a) A $tat~qe. may apply for a the ~0qp~qy nc~qes~qs (see I ~2q92~4q1.11~2q(d~0q)). tam opportunities for r~qes~qea~qrc~56q4 pr~qeacquisiti~qo~qn award for th~qe purpose Of (c) As part of the site selection educational~q. and interpretation on the. site selection and preparation of ~6qp~qr~qo~qc~8q"L the state and NO~12qAA shall ecological relationships within the area documents specified in 192~4q1.12 (draft evaluate and select the final site~0q(s). ~0q1~4q1~2q1 U.S.C. 14~8q34~6q(8~2q)~6q).~q. management ~6qp~20qk~qn and ~qs~qa~qv~8qi~qr~qo~qn~0qme~qntal NOAA has final authority in approv~4qin~qs I ~08qu~0q1~08qj~q. I- ~2qa~qs~0qu~8qm~0qin~qe ~2qs~4qo~8qn~0qa~4qm~4qy impact statement ~4q(EI~4qS~4q)~4q@ The total ~2qi~qt~qich sit@& Site selection shall be guide ~32q*~q@ ~qf~q:-- ~00qf~00qt~-~qU~qn S~qch~6qo~6qm~6qa~qmd Fe~0qd~4qwal share of t~6qh~qe pr~qeac~2qquisit~4qi~qon by th~qa~0qf~qo~4qllowtr~qi~6qg. principles: ~76qT~2qv~00q@ award may not exceed S~16qK~8qO~12qM of which ~0q(~8qt~0q) The site's benefit to the National (a) National estuarine ~qsan~qct~qua~qr~qi~qe~q&ar~qe up to SMOO~4qM may be and for site 'Estuarine Sanctuary Program relative t chosen to reflect regional di~8qf~8qf~8qer~qe~qr~qic~qes selection as described In I ~2q9~2q2~12qL~8qIL the biogeographic classification 3Che~qrn ~0 ~~5~ ~F~qW~~al R~i~qlist~r / ~qVoL 4~9~~Nd.~12~5 ~/ W~id~ne~id~iy~ ~T~~~i~i~~2~7~~i984 Rule's and ~l~qV~~qr~~lat~ion~~s and typology set forth in 1 ~q9~2q=3 and ~q#~q92~q1.12 ~8qU~n~s~i~a~qg~em~ent~qi~l~ql~an~-d~e~v~is~qio~4qp~im~i N~o~t~e.-~6qW~o~rm~atf~o~u an preparing a Appendices I and ~q2~: - (a) After the selected s~qi't~o is a~p~p~zov~ed ~qp~r~e~qu~qm~qi~n~ar~qy ~a~n~qg~qi~n~s~eri~n~qg ~l~o~qp~qm ~q(~8qM~q) is ~q(~q2~q) ~q@~2qM~e site's ecological by NOAA and the state. the state may provided in ~'E~n~qs~qin~e~er~qin~qj and ~qC~o~nstr~a~cti~o~n characteristic& including its biological request the r~a~qw- ~6~nder of the G~uld~ai~ql~i~qm ~2qW Coastal E~n~qa~8qV Impact pr~eacquisition ~qhu~ids to develop the draft ~qPr~o~qor~a~n~s ~0qA~qpp~qil~can~ts- (4~q2 ~qFR ~4q"~4qM (19~0q"~q1~q)~. productivity. diversity of flora and. which is supplied to award recipients~: fauna. and- capacity to attract abroad ~% management Plan and environmental I range of research and educational impact st~qat~em~e~nL~'~8qM~o request must be (7) An acquisition plan identifying ~t~q1~qi~o interests. The proposed site should. to A ~qy the information ecologically key land and water areas of the maximum extent possible. be a specified in Subpart F and the following the sanctuary. priority acquisitions. and natural ~s~qy~s~qt~em~a programmatic information: strategies for acquiring these areas. This ~. (~q1) An analysis of the site based on plan should identify ownership patterns (3~q) Assurance that the site's the bio~qg~eo~qgr phic s~c~qh~e~qm~q/typolo~qgy within the proposed sanctuary boundaries encompass an adequate discussed in I ~q9~6q= and set forth in boundaries~; land already in t~qhe~6qVublic portion of. the key land and water areas Appendices- I and 2~: d~omai~qm an estimate of the fair market of the natural system to approximate an (2) A description of the site and its value of land to be acquired; the method ecological ~q=~it and to ensure ~o~2qf~2qfect~qtv~a major resources. including location. *(-acquisition. w the feasible conservation. Boundary size will very proposed boundaries. and adjacent land alternatives (including les~q&t~qhan-fee greatly depending on the nature of the uses. Maps. including aerial techniques) for the protection of the ecosystem~. National estuarine photographs. am require* estuarine area; a schedule for sanctuaries ma~qg~qinclude existing. (3) A description of the public acquisition with an estimate of the time Federal or state lands already i~n a participation process used by the stat~qd' required to complete the proposed protected ~qitat~us~. where mutual benefit to solicit the views of interested pa~r~qd~e~s. sanctuary, and a discussion of any can b~e enhanced. ~s~ee I ~q9~6q=~q31~q(~0q0~0q4 a Summary of comments. and. if anticipated problems; Importantly, however. NOAA will not int~e~qnt~st~o issues are involved. N~o~qw~.-~8qM discussed in I ~q921.1~1~q(c~qX3~q). if approve a- site for potential Sanctuary documentation that the ~8qG~ov~ernor~q(s) of protected lands an to be included within the sta~qs~u~s that is dependent upon the ~- the other aff~qec~qt~e~qd~'stat~e~q(s) h~a~s been proposed s~anc~rt~m~u~qy~. the state must. inclusion of currently protected Federal contacts* ~qd~em~o~in~s~tra~t~e to ~qNOAA that the site meets ~qd~t~a Lands in order to meet the requirements (4) A ~qUst~oof a~ql~ql. sit~a~s~q@~cons~qtd~er~ed and a criteria for national estuarine sanctuary status ~8qW~qd~e~qp~an~qd~e~nt of the inclusion ~o~qi such f~or ~6qknc~qtU~6qM status (such a~s k~e~qy land brief statement of the basis for not protected lands and water areas). Su~c~qh~.~qland~s may only' selecting the ~non-p~eaf~qerr~ed sites: and ~qb~e included within a Sanctuary to serve (~q3) A draft management plan outline (8) &resource protection plan as a buffer at for- other an~0qdlI~4qM (s~e~s subsection ~q(~qb~qJ below) and a~2qx detailing applicable authorities. purpose= ..outline of a draft memorandum of ~i~n~c~qiu~qm~n allowable uses. uses requiring ~q(41 ~qT~q1~qw site's imp~a~rtan~e~w for research~. ~u~qm~qb~er~standin~qg (MOM between th~e state. a permit and permit requirements. any in~8qR~ud~qi~0qn ~q;~1 ~. ~.~. ty to ~qvusting research and N~4qG~0qAA detailing t~qh~e ~qF~ed~er~al~-stat~o restrictions an ass of the sanctuary. and. facilities and educational institutions~: miss ~qi~n sa~nctuar~qy-ma~nagem~ent during a strategy for sanc~qt~i~tary surveillance (Comment: NOAA to d~e~v~e~qlop~u~4qg more the period of federal ~qA~q-d~i~n~qg and and en~qfo~r~c~qm~a~ent of ~8qk~qi~8qb use detailed ~Cr~qit~er~qi~a for Selecting potential- ~q0~4q*~0~114~qin~qg t~qh~t Stat~0qW3 ~q1~O~U~qg-t~@~r~qM restrictions~. including appropriate national estuarine sanctuaries band commitment to operate and m~an~a~qo~s, the government enforcement agencies; upon research c~qhara~q6~qtar~qis~qd~c~s. Once~, ~s~e~n~c~qt~u~r~a~qy. ~q(~q9~q) If applicable~. a restoration plan those c~r~qiteri~s are d~ev~elop~e~c~qL a notice of ~. ~.(~qb) After NOAA. approves the state's describing those portions-of the site that their availability will ~qb~t published ~i~n the request t~o use the remaining ~- m~ay require habitat modification to, Federal Register)~. ~qP~ra~s~qo~ql~u~qi~qs~6qw~o~n ~qf~a~nA- the state shall restore natural candid and (~q3~q) The site's compatibility with begin developing a draft management (101 A proposed memorandum of understanding (MOM between th~e state p~qla~qm The plan will set out in detail: existing and potential land and, water ~q(~q1~q) Sanctuary pals and ob~qj~ec~qtl~y~qm and NOAA regarding the Fed~er~al~-stat~qi~p uses in contiguous area= ~a~nd management issues. and strategies or relationship during the establishment (51 T~qh~qi site's importance to education actions for meeting the goals and and development of the national ~- and in~qter~qpretiv~e~-~eff~orts. consistent with objectives~: ~- estuarine Sanctuary. and ~qW~I~qP~qM3in~qg the the need for continued protection of the (2) An ~a~qd~qm~ir~d trati~v~e section- k~qm~q#~4~s~q= ~co~qmm~it~ine~nt by the state to natural system inc~qlud~qi staff raise in arl~q-~On trad~o~qm maintain effectively the sanctuary after (d) Early in the site Selection p~ro~c~a~s~qL research. ~o~qd~u~c~a~tt~o~n/~qi~nt~g~r~qp~r~otat~ql~q= and Federal ~qR~n~i~anci~al assistance en~qd~q& In the state must seek the views of affected ~sur~v~a~qi~l~l~an~C~g and ~e~0qd~o~r~C~g~qm~e~o~L ~c~an~qy~qm~etion with the ~6qM~0qO~0qU and where landowners. local ~qgov~ernm~ent~L other (31 A research pla~q& including a possible under state law. the state will state and Federal ap~qn~qc~6qi~qo~6q% and other monitoring ~qr~6qL~qe~qs~2qi ~qc~qo~qu~qs~2qid~qer taking appropriate parties who are interested in the a~qr~48q*s) (4) An in ~qar~6qp~qt~64qi~64qdv~qe p~8qi administrative or ~8ql~qe~0qg~6qi~qs~4ql~qat~2qi~qv~qo ~4ql~qic~4qti~qon to being considered for s~qal~qecti as a interpretive~q. educational a~qn~4qd the l~qon~6qg~0q4~qor~8qm prot~qec~6qdo~qn of the potential national estuarine sanctuary. ~4qc~2qK~2qma~8qt~6qi~qo~qnal ~qs~qett~qv~qit~6qr~2qa~0qt ~q- ~6qm~6qoc~4qt~qu~qary~q. The ~qI~16qM~24qO~20qU Stall be signed After the lo~4q@~qal government and ~qm~qW~qi~q4~qs~qm (3) A Plan for public access to the prior to sanctuary designation. ~0qIf other landowners have been contacted~q. at- ~q' sanctuary~q; ~16qM~20qOU~qs ~qa~qr~qg necessary (such as with a least one public meeting shall. be hold in ~0qE~6q6~4q1 A ~qc~qon~qstr~quct~2qi~qo~08qR plan. including a federal agency or another state agency). the area of the proposed site. Notice of ~q- proposed construction schedule. and draft of such M~24qOUs also must be such a ~4qm~qe~qet~qt~qn~16q& including th~qe time~q. drawings of proposed developments~q. If a i~qn~24qd~qt~8qf~20q&~0qd in the plan. ~q- piece~q. and r~qol~qev~8qi~qent subject matter. shall visitor center. research center of ~qan~6qy (c~0q) ~8qR~qe~0qS~6qu~qil~0qin~0qg th~qe preparation of an be announced by the state through the other facilities are proposed for environmental impact statement ~6q(EIS) area's principal news media at l~qe~qast~q'13 construction or renovation at th~qe site. a ~qu~qnd~8qw the National Environmental Policy days prior to the date of the meeting and preliminary engineering report must be Act on a national estuarine sanctuary by NOAA in the Federal Register~q. Prepared~q: proposal. the state shall provide all ~2qJ~2qL~12q90 ~0 Federal Register / Vol. 49~ No. 1~Z~5 ~t We~ine~~q&y. ~ju~e~~27~'1984 / R~~r~is and ~qRegu~latio~hs ~2~5~~ necessary information to NOAA ~q1~q9~q21.21 ~qIrt~qit~qial ~ac~qqu~8qMit~qion and Title to t~qh~e property conveyed by this d~( concerning the socioeconomic and development ~aw ~. shall vast in the (recipient of the CZMA environmental impacts associated with (a) Assistance is provided to aid the' Section ~3~1~q3 award or other Federally- implementing the draft management recipient in: (~q1~q) Acquiring lend a~nd ~a~v~v~r~o~v entity] subject to the condition ~q0 ~t~qh~e property shad remain part of the plan and feasible alternatives to the water areas to be included in the ~qF~e~qd~orall~qy-d~e~s~qi~qgnat~ed (name of National plan. Based on this information. NOAA sanctuary b~ou~ndari~e~qv ~q(~q2) minor Estuarine S~a~nctuary~ql. In the event that the will prepare the draft E~8qM ~- construction. as provided in paragraphs property is no ~ql~a~0qqw included as part of th (d) Early in the development of the ~6qM and (c) of this section; (3~q) preparing sanctuary. or if the sanctuary designation draft management plan and the draft the final management plan. and ~q(4~q) up to which it is pan is withdrawn. than the ~8qM~8q& t~qh~e state shall hold a meeting in the the point of sanctuary designation. for National Oceanic and Atmospheric area or areas most affected to solicit initial management costs- ~.~*.~qS~@~. Administration or its successor ~a~qg~e~n~c~qy~@ in public and government c~om~qm~qimts on the implementing the NOAA approved draft ~c~qmt~unc~qd~o~u w~tth th~e State~. may ~c~qwr~c~qi~s~e~qa~: n~e ~em~ent plan. preparing the final -of the following rights regarding the significant issues related to the disposition of the property. proposed action. NOAA will 'Publish a- management plan. hiring a sanctuary (~qi) The recipient my be required to notice of the meeting in the Federal manager~. and other staff as necessary, transfer title to the Federal Government ~qI~r ~qR~a~qg~qist~er and in local media. and for other ~qm-n-~qs~emen~qt-r~e~qlated such cases. the recipient shall be entitled t: activities. Application procedures are compensation computed by applying the (~a) NOAA will publish a Federal specified in Subpart ~qF. recipient's percentage o(~qpa~r~t~i~c~qi~qpation in t~q@ Register notice of intent to prepare a ~q(b~qJ The expenditure of Federal and cost of the prop= or Project to the curre~r OEM After the draft EIS is prepared' state funds an major construction fair market value of the property~: or and Bled with the Environmental activities is not allowed during the (ill At the discretion of the Federal ~8qf~8qtt~ection Agency (EPA). a Notice of initial acquisition and development Government. (~a)~'t~qh~e recipient may either b~. Availability of the DEIS will appea~r~qm~' directed to sell the property and pay the the Federal ~qR~a~qg~6qU~qtw. Not less than 30 phase. ~qT~8qU pr~e~qp~a~qm~'~qH~a~n of architectural Federal C~ov~emm~ent an amount computed days after publication of the notice. and engineering plan& including applying the Federal percentage of speci~4q&~qAtio~n~q& for any p~qwp~o~s~ed participation in the cost of the original ~qpr~a~qi NOAA will hold at least one public - construction- is permitted. ~qi~n addition. to the proceeds fr~am the sale (minus actual hearing in the a~qi~v~a or areas most -in construction activities~. consistent and reasonable selling and dx~-~u~8qt~qv~qq~qm~ns~e~.~- affected by the p~qt~op~o~sed sa~nc~qt~z~ary. ~qI~q!~qh~e with paragraph ~q(c) of t~qh~qi~s s~ec~qt~qi~q6~n also any. from the sale ~qpro~c~e~eds~q4 or (b) the ~- hearing will be hold no sooner than Is ~ad ~qAraft recipient may be permitted to r~a~tam t~it~ql~* a~ql are allows& The NOAA~-~a~qppr~ov paying the Federal Government an amount days after appropriate notice by NOAA management plan ~i~qqu~a~qt however. computed by applying t~qh~e Federal percents of the meeting has been given in the include a construction plan and a public of participation in th~e mot of the original. principal news media and in the Fed" access plan before any award funds can pro~4qp~qa to the current fair market value at t, Register~. After a 4~q3~-d~a~qy comment ~qb~e spent on construction activities~. property. period. a final E~qI~qS i~s prepared by. (c) Only minor construction activities No~t~e;-Fair market value of the property NOAA. that aid In implementing pardons of t~qh~e m~qut be determined by an independent nana~qg~em~ent plan (such as boat r~am~qp~o~. ~a~qppr~a~qis~qwa~nd~c~arti~qf~qi~ed~qby~n~i~e~s risible~ ~0q&~6qf~6qta~8qf~8qt C~q-A~o~qq~6qW~6qd~6qW~4qm ~0qD~e~v~2qW~a~2qW~qw~qW~1~q4 I of th~e state. as provided by ONO and nature trails~q) am permitted under ~O~qf~qf~qi~q" ~qm~6qW ~6qf~6qt~qopw~at~qi~on of On F~qin~e~qi the ~qi~6qw~qt~4qw acquisition and d~ev~el~o~qp~qm- ~qC~qu~c~2qd~qu A-~i~4qm R~e~v~qis~2q" Attachment F. III g~*~n~m~qm~qt Plan- ~a~qw~a~r~C~qL No more than five (~q3~q) percent of ~q(f) Prior to submitting the final ~q1~q221.20 ~8qG~qw~qW~M~qL the initial acquisition and development management plan to NOAA for review ~,After NOAA approval of the sits. the award may be expanded on such. and approval~. the state should hol~4q&a draft management plan and the d~qi~-~aft facilities~. NOAA must make a specific public meeting in the area affected by determination~. based on the final E~qIS,~'~- the ~as~tu~an~n~e ~3anc~qtuar~qy. ~0qNOAA will MOU. and completion, of the final E~ql~4q& a that the construction activity will not be publish a notice of the meeting in the state is. eligible for am acquisition and, detrimental to that ~qm~viro~qw~n~enL ~qF~ad~er~i~a~ql ~qR~a~qgist~e~r and in the local medi development award to acquire land and Except- as specifically- provided in water areas for inclusion in the ~rr ~4q&~qd~qM~0qm~qt ~0qD-~qS~ar~qv~ic~qb~qm~qy ~qD~0q"~qgr~i~atf~a~n a sanctuary and t~c~r construct r~es~e& ~qh and paragraphs (a)-~q(c) of this section. educational facilities in accordance with construction projects. to be funded in ~qs~u~qb~s~e~qq~u~e~8qm ~6qO~qP~Q~qM~2qw~n the draft ~qm~s~, ~n~a~qg~emen~t plan. The whole or in part under the acquisition I ~4qM.30 ~qD~o~@~4qW~qw~qd~qm~of National Es~U~qm~n and development award. may not be ~qs~qo~m~m~s~erl~e~s. acquisition and development award has initiated ~qM~qr~qd the sa~n~c~qt~u~e~r~qy receives (a) The AA shall designate an area a two phases. ~qLm din initial ph~&~S~q& state formal d~es~ipa~t~qi~c~t~u. see ~q1 ~q9ZL~-3~4qM performance sh~a~ul~4q& work to most the a national e~s~qtw~irin~er sanctuary pursua~n criteria required for formal. sanctuary ~qN~o~qw.-Th~e~i~, of ~qt~h~a~qn ~r~eq~u~qir~s~t~qd~o~nt~s to Section ~q3~q1~q3 of the Act based upon designation. ~2qL~qe- acquiring the key ~4qW~4qW and the phasing ~a~q( the acquisition ~an~qd written findings that the state has met and water areas as specified in the draft develop award is to aware that the following can ~q.diti~qo~qns: - ~0qnb~qst~qa~qnt~8qi~qa~2ql progress in acquiring the key land Management plan aid preparing and waters areas Me b~qe~qn~qa made and that a ~6q(~8q1) A final management plan has bee final p~4qh~8qm These requirements am final management plan is completed before approved by NOAA~q. specified in I ~8qg~08qn~q-~08qM~6qL The ~6qinit~28qW- ~0qm~qa~4qj~qo~qir su- an ~qop~qen~qt an ~qc~qo~qnstr~quct~0qi~qo~q& Once (21 Sanctuary construction and acce~qs acquisition and development phase~q. is substantial ~qpr~qo~8qo~qt in acquisition ~4qh~qa~qs been policies~q. I ~2q92~8qI~08qM~0q(~0qb)-~0q(~44q4 have been expected to last no longer than two made. as defined by the state in the ~4qf~qo~4qn~qo~6qw~qe~4qd~q: years after the ~qsta~00qn of the award. If management plan~q. other activities guided by (3) Key land and water areas of the necessary. a longer time period may be the anal management plan may boon with proposed sanctuary. as identified in t~2qh~qt negotiated between the state and NOAA ~qa approval~q. ~2qm~qa~qn~qn~qe~qw~qm~qent plan. am under state NOAA. After the sanctuary is ~0qr~qe~0q) Deeds for real property acquired. c~qon~0qt~qr~4qi~2qk and Idesignated. funds may be used to for the sanctuary under acquisition (4~6q) An ~16qM0~16qU between the stat~qe~q'and ac~2qqu~4qn~qe any r~qemai~qr~qu~qn~48qf~0qland and for funding shall. contain substantially th~qe NOAA ensuring a long-term construction purposes. ~4qf~4qq~4qf~4qfo~qv~08qAn~2qg provision: commitment by the state to the ~4qJ~0qL9~96q1 ~0 ~qZ~I~qS14 Federal~ ~qR~~sista~r Vol. 4~9.~ No. Wednesday, June ~2~7~~~19~64 / Rules and R~~gulat~f~orts sanctuary's effective operation and not listed in the. management plan ~or will tr~qi~0qW ~& ~qI~t~il~ql~-~s~ca~ql~e management implementation Us been signed~. final EIS require public natic~o and the audit with a sit~e~-~v~qi~s~qit. On a periodic ~, (b~q)A~n~ot~qi~c~a~o~qid~e~s~qi~qgnati~qm~e~qta~- opportunity for comment in certain. basis. N~2qOAA will also conduct a full- national ~e~st~u~qar~qi~qn~e~-~qu~nc~qt~uar~qy will be cases. an environmental assessment scale Section = evaluation with a site placed in the Federal~, ~qR~*~2q*~2qW and in the may be required~. When public notice is visit and public meeting. local media. required. NOAA will place a notice in ~q(c) The term ~"state control" In the Federal R~o~2q*~8qw ~o~qf any proposed d~e~6qf~6qt~s~s~qdo~n~@ I ~6qM~2qL30~q(~a)~q(3) does not necessarily ~ch~an~qn~es in ~qia~n~qi~qt~ua~ry boundaries or Upon a finding by t~qh~e Program r~oqu~qir~s that the land be owned by the proposed major changes~ to the final Me through its programmatic state in fee simp~qi~qc L~es~s-~qt~qhan~-~qf~e~e ~- management plan and ensure that a evaluation (~qJ 92~q1.34) that a ~n~at~qi~o~na~qL interests and re~qs~u~qlat~ocy measures may notice is publisb~ed In t~qh~e local media estuarine sanctuary is not meeting the suffice where the state ~qm~e a sh~o ~2qM As A~i~sc~u~, in. I ~q9~q2~q2~-~q10~2qf~2qt a stat~qo mandate of section 3~q1s of th~* Act. the that the lands a ~qm~*.a~8q&~qq~qmt~a~qiy control may choose. to develop a m~ultipl~e~-~sit~e - national program goals at the policies consistent with the ~qP~qW~0qW~S~qM Of the national ~e~s~qt~i~a~z~z~o~a sanctuary after the established in the management plan. sa~qutt~l~ar~0qf~.~- ~~.~1p~itial acquisition and development NOAA will provide the state with a ~qf ~q9~q2~-~t~8qi~-~qL ~qS~U~qP~qP~qN~qM~B~4q~~. and award for a single ~qa~8qw has been ma~qa~e. written notice of the deficiency. Such a, ~qP~u~qb~ql~qi~qcn~a~qti~c~ao~qi the proposed addition in -notice will explain the d~efic~qi~encie~s-~qin. ~. ~qd~e~v~e~ql~op~o~qw~N awards the Federal ~qR~e~qg~qlstw and local media. the state's approach. propose a solution After sanctuary designation~. and as and the opportunity for comment in or solutions to the deficiency and specified in the approved addition to the preparation of either an provide a schedule by which the state plan. the state may request a environmental assessment or should remedy th~e~:d~e~qf~qi~6qdency. The state supplemental ac~qq~ui~s~i and ~en~v~qir~t~i~o~n~t~e~nt ~qin~qq~u~i~4qa statement an the shall also b~e advised in writing that it development award ~qf~or-~c~o~n~s~qtructio~n and proposal will be required~. An may comment an t~qh~e Program Office's acquiring any remaining lan~t~qL environment" impact sta~qt~em~en~qL if finding of a deficiency and most with Application ~qp~t~o~c~ed~ur~es: am ~0qq~qw~0qd~qf~qi~8q" in ~r~e~qqu~qir~e~qdw~qi~8qf~8qfb~apr~epar~edi~qna~. Man-~ prop. ~offici~aLs t~qv discuss the ~qf~qi~n~qd~qin~qS Subpart ~qF. Land ac~qq~u~qm~qd~qm must follow with section ~qR~2qM~qI~qZ and will also include and seek to remedy the deficiency. t~qh~e ~Y~-~O~c~q@~qd~u~z s~qP~@~qM~qf~qf~@~qd ~qr~6q2 ~q1 9~q2~q2~6qM~q(~4q4 an ad~qm~qi~ni~x~8q"~qtiv~e ~qBr~am~ewo~r~qk for t~qh~e ~qP~0q*~qL~qf ~qt~qh~e Issues ~can~qdot be resolved 1~q0~q21~.~q32 ~q0~q0 do - and -- I ~M m~ult~qi;~2q&~-~o~0qf~0qt sanctuary that describes within a reasonable t~6qW~qm the program I ~- ~t~o~d~a~v~a~qt~qo~qw~ql~qe ~~q0~1 ~qP~qi~qM~L the complementary research and. ~qP ~8qO~2qf~2qf~2qic~s will make r~ec~o~rnma~nd~at~qi~o~qn (a) Af~qtw t~qh~e sanctuary is formally educational programs within th~qe r~e~qg~a~r~qd~ql~o~qgw~q4t~qh~qd~rawal of~.de~sig~nation to, "Actuary- If NOAA determines b~as~a~ti d~e~s~qi~qg~n~a~qt~e~c~qL t~qh~e state may apply for on "a of the project and the the AA~. A notice of Intent to withdraw a~s~s~qistanc~e~r to- provide for operation and ~qd~e~6qW~qg~qm~qd~c~n~qL with an opportunity for managem~en~qL The purpose of this phase issues associated with the additional comment will be placed ~qI~qn the ~qF~e~qd~ar~4qd in t~qh~e~. national; ~estuar~qi~qm ~sa~n~ctu~s~u~2q7 - ~. si~qr~qk that an ~en~v~qi~qk~o~tun~a~nta~ql assessment ~qR~a~qv~qls~qtl~qw~@ process ~qi~s to implement the appr~ov~e~t~qt ~qi~s~-~s~u~8qm~4qd~e~n~qt to ~a~s~qt~a~qb~qli~s~qh a ~qm~u~qn~qt~qp~qi~&~-~s~qi~qt~s, Cc) no state shall be provided the final m~a~c~s~qgu~r~q@~ent plan- and to~.tak~e the~. ~qM~C~qV~qM~0qM~- th~e~s~: the sate shall develop a necessary steps to c~u~m~qn~qe the ~atinu~ed revised management plan. as described opportunity foe ~a~n informal hearing in ~qf 9~6q=~q2~q2(~qb~ql~q@ ~4qT~qb~e r~a~w~qfud management before the AA to consider the ~qP~qm~6qVax~L effective operation of the sanctuary ~- Office's recommendation and finding of after direct Federal s~upp~o~r is p~ql~a~4qb w~qdl~-a~8qd~4q&~v~qn the s~an~ct~uary-w~qid~e deficiency, as well as the state's ~c~o~nc~qlud~e~c~qL scale ~a~n~qd ~o~qb~8q*~qdv~e~s and the additional ~qme~nt~s an and response to the ~q(b) Federal funds of r~a~qla~qt~qf~o~n~s~qh~4q* ~qt~o t~qh~e original, ~c0M up to ~qS~6qM~2qM to ~c~om~qp~o~n~e~s~0qw~s recommendation and. Ending. be m~atc~qh~m~e~qd "a ~stat~qa am available sits. ~q(d~q) ~6qV~qi~qlt~qh~qi~n 30 day after the informal ~qf~av t~qi~t~e operation and management of the ~qJ~8qU~qI~4qJ~q4 am Marina- die AA shall issue a written national estuarine sanctuary ~8qO~qp~e~r~a~qd~qw (at P 1 during the term of the. decision regarding the sanctuary. ~qI~qf a ~a~n~qd management awards am subject to the following ~qI~qh~n~qita~t~qi~o~n~s~; operation~. and ~qm~a~r~t~a~qg~em~e~nt award (or d~ecis~qi~qm is ~qm~e~4q& to withdraw sanctuary (~q1~q1 No. more th~an.~q$50~2q4~2qW in Federal ~qw~id~qw t~qh~e i~n~'~qd~a ~acq~ui~a~qtt~qio~n and d~qesi~qg~nat~qia~n~. the procedures ~3p~e~c~i~qf~qi~e~qd funds per an~nua~qt ~aw~ar~c~qh a~nc~qt development award, if the sanctuary is Lett ~8qM ~qM ~e~q@ regarding the disposition of (2) No more than ten percent of the not d~e~stp~a~t~ed within two y~ear~s~qk will be. real property acquired w~I~t~qb~, federal total amount (state and Federal shave) ~e~v~v~qi~t~i~at~ed an~n~u~a~qd~qy by the~, Pr~o~qgran~i ~8qk~u~qds shall be followed. o~qf each ~opera~qd~o~qf~qt and gem=#. Office ~a~n~qd periodically in accordance ~'~"~q"~O~_ with~. t~qhe provisions of Section ~q3~q2~q2 of the SOW ~qE-R~qe~s~e~ar~ch ~0qA~qrx~qis award may be used for ~c~o~os~qtr~ac~qt~qi~o~n~- Act -to determine c~o~qm~qa~ql~l~e with the type activities ~q(~qL~e- ~q3~q10~2qA~2qM conditions of the award and overall ~q1 ~4qM~8q"~.~4~q0 ~qG~qM~I~qW~I~qL ~qp~e~r ye~a~r~qt. p~so~0qp in the (*I To s~qd~n~qm~ql~at~e high quality research ~q.~4qf ~04qM.33 ~08qf~08qt~0qw~qv~0qd~qa~qi ~4qV I ~0q% ~qa~qn~qi~qa~qn~0qd~4qm~qa~qe~00qf~00qt ~qZ~8qM~q&~0q9~q@~8qM~qs~04qm plan- W ~6qi d~qe~qsig~qs~qi-t~qed national estuarine ~qt~qa~qi~qsw~qa~ql~qu~0qn~8qg- -~qs ~52qM Ta mom ~qe~28qf~28qf~qe~qct~0qh~2qm sanctuary ~qs~qsnc~04qf~04qt~8q@~qwr~6qi~qs~6qa NOAA may find research ~0qP it Moral~60q& after the m~q&~36qW federal. ~4qf~qundi~qz~20q* an a ~qc~qomp~qsti~12qf~12qt~qe~q-~4qb~qa~qs~6qis to sanctuaries (a) ~24qV~qi~qa~qn~2qg~qes in sanctuary b~qo~qundar~6qE~qs~qs~q. ~8qX~6qp~qi~qp t~8qh~2qw state is ~qr~qe~0qqW~qr~qed to submit having an ~qappr~qov~qul final management and major changes to the final - ~q" an Annual r~qep~qo~qs~0qt an the sanctuary. The pla~2qm Research funds are intended to management p~0qia~qn~q. including state laws report should dated program ~qs~qucc~qe~qs~2qm ~qM~qap~6qp~qort~q, significant research projects or regulations promulgated sp~qeci~4qf~4qica~0qf~0qly and accomplishments in meeting the that wig lead ~0qt~qo enhanced scientific for ~qth~qe sanctuary. may ~4qb~8qe made only policies and activities described in the u~qnd~qers~0qt~qa~qnd~qin of the sanctuary after written approval~q. by NOAA~q. ~24qN - sanctuary management plan. A work ~qenvir~qo~qz~qim ~8qL improved coastal determined to be necessary. NOAA may p~6qhu~qs. d~qeta~4qd~6qing the projects to be d~qecisi~qo~qn~2qm~qa~4ql~qt~2qi~qn~4qg improved sanctuary require public notice including notice in undertaken the next year~q, to meet the management or enhanced public th~qe ~6qF~qed~4qwa~6ql Register and an opportunity Program Scala and the ~qsta~qt~qn~q*s role in appreciation and understanding of the for comment. Changes in the boundary ongoing sanctuary program& should also sanctuary ecosystem~q. Research involving th~qo a~qcqu~4qis~4qi~qt~4qi~qt~8qm of properties, be included. Inadequate annual reports opportunities ~8qw~0qi~6qH be identified in r~qina~2ql 152 ~0 Federal Register / Vol. 49, No. 12~5 / Wednesday, June 7.~7~~1~984 / Rules a~nd ~qRe~g~qWa~ki~qd~s 26~Z management plans for national (3) Research quality (La. soundness of applications must contain back up da estuarine sanctuaries~. Research funds approach~. environmental consequences. for budget estimates (Federal and nor wig b~e used to fill obvious voids in ~ex~qp~eri~e~nc related to m~et~qhodolo~qgies~q@ Federal ~shar~es~q@ and evidence that th~f available data. as well as to support (4) Importance to the National application complies with the Ex~ecut~qi creative or innovative projects~. Estuarine Sanctuary Program~: Order ~q1~6q= "Intergovernmental Rev~qi (~qb) Research funds are provided in ~- (~q5) Budget and Institutional of Federal Programs." ~0qW addition. addition to any funds available to the Capabilities (La. reasonableness of applications for acquisition and ~- state under the operation and budget. sufficiency of logistical support); development awards must contain~: management or acquisition and and (1) State Historic Preservation O~8qf~8qf~8qic development awards. Research funds (a) In addition. In th~e case of long- comments; must be matched by the state. consistent term monitoring projects. the ability of (2) Appraisals and title information with ~qJ ~q92~q1~6qM(~e)(~qii~qi) (-allowable costs"]. the state or the research grant recipient (3) Governor's letter approving the Individual states may apply for ~qfu~s~i~d~in to Support the grant beyond this initial ~san~c~4qMary ~qpr~op~osa~qh and for more than one research project per funding. ~q(4) Written approval from NOAA o~qi sa~uctu~4qM. Su~qb~4qp~6qa ~qF~-~-~4qG~qw~qm~0q* ~qF~qb~qu~n~c~4qW the draft or final management plan. ~qJ ~q921.41 Categories of p~o~qt~e~4qM~8qW A~qs~qs~qi~o~2qU~qr~ic~e P~rov~qi~qs~qi~qa~0qm T~qh~e Standard Form 424 has been approved by the Office of Mana~qgeme~z (a) While research funds may be used ~q1~q9~q2~q1.~2q0~- App~qd~o~a~qdon~qk~i~qt~qa~n~qa~qd~qa and Budget (Approval number 0~q648- to start-up long-term projects. they ~q@r~e (a) The maximum total Federal ~q01~2qM) for use through September 30. not intended as a ~so~u of continuing, funding per sanctuary is ~q$3~6q4~0qK~qO~2qW for 1~q9~2qM funding for a particular project over the p~r~e~acqu~qisit~qion. acquisition and f ~q92~q1J~qI A~ql~ow~s~8qW~e costs. time. Emphasis will be placed an ~ development. anc~qt~opera~qtion and projects that are also of benefit to other management a~v~iard~s. The research (a) Allowable costs will be sanctuaries in the system Proposals for f~qun~din under ~q1 ~q9~6q=40 i~s excluded from determined in a~q=~rd~2n with OMB research under th~e~,~qfoll~owt~ug categories this total~. CIrc~u~qlar~s A~-102. "Uniform will be considered-. ~q(b) Only a state Governor. -or his/her Administrative Requirements for designated state agency. may apply for Gra~nt~s~-~qin~-A~qid to State and Local ~q(i~q) Establishing a Data Base and national estuarine sanctuary ~ ..-;.I . Governments". and A~-~2qV~, ~'~0qTri~nciple~s Monitoring Program (~e~qs~.. studies related assistance AWa~r~r~q[~m~L If a ~A~t~A~t~e is ~. D~eterminin ~4qC~q4s~qts Applicable to c~r~a~n to gathering. and interpreting baseline participating in the national~, Coastal and Contracts with State. foul and information on the estuary. Funds are Zone Management Pro~qg~am. the recipient Federally Recognized Indian Tribal available to establish a data base and of an award under Section 32~q3 of the Cov~ernm~e~nts~"; the financial ass~qi~stanc: monitoring ~s~qy~su~q= however the ~q1~011~q8~- Act shall, consult with the state coastal a~qgr~e~e~qm- these regulations~; and.~oth~e tam support for such a system must be ma~na~qg~em~en carried out as, part of overall sanctuary t agency regarding th~e Department of Commerce and NOAA im~qplem~enta~qt~qt~a~n~qk, a~qp~qpli~calt~qion. directive~q& The term "costs- a~qp~q@~ql~qies to (21 Estuarine Ecology ~q(~e.~0q&~. studies of (c) No acquisition and development both the Federal and non-Federal the relationships between estuarine award may be made by NOAA without shares. the approval of the Governor of the (~qb) Costs claimed as charges to the species and their ~environn~i~en~qt. studies state. or h~qi~a~ql~qh~e~r designated agency. in award must be re~ss~qmab~qb~L beneficial of biological populations community which t~qh~4~qr land to be acquired is located. and necessary for the proper and relationships. studies an factors and (d~q) All applications are to be efficient administration of the ~qf~qi~nanc~qia processes that gov~qe~qn the biological submitted to: Management ~a~nd Budget a~ssi~stan award and must be incu~rre~f productivity of ~qt~qh~i~s ~es~qtuar~qy~qr~. G~c~ou~qp~. Office of Ocean and Coastal~. during the awards period. except as. (3) Estuarine Processes (eg.. studies Resource Management. National Ocean provided under prea~qgre~eme~n~qt costs. on dynamic physical processes that S~ervi~c~qa National Oceanic and sub~q"~ction (d). influence and give the estuary its Atmospheric Administration. 3300 (c) Costs must not be a~ql~qlo~cable to or particular physical characteristics. Wh~qit~e~qh~a~v~e~n St- ~6qNW~_ Washington. D.C. included as a cost of any other including studies related to ~4qd~qi~n~ia~8qm ~2qW~2q= ~qF~edar~ally~-fi~n~a~r~iced program i~n either t~q! patterns of watershed drainage and (e) A~n~-~ori~qg~qi~nal and two copies of the current or a prior award period. freshwater inflow. patterns of water complete. application must be submitted (d~q) Costs incurred prior to the circulation within the estuary. and at least I~2qM working days prior to the effective date of the award studies an oceanic or terrestrial factors proposed beginning of the project. The (pr~ea~qgr~e~emen~qt costs) are allowable ~an~qi that influence the condition Of estuarine Application for Federal As~sis~ta~n when specifically approved in the waters and b~otto~qm~q@ Standard Form ~q424 (Non-~c~onstruction financial assistance agreement For no. (4) Applied Research (eg. studies P~ro~qgr~a~qm~ql constitutes the formal construction awards. costs incurred designed to answer specific application for ~6qpr~qea~qc~2qq~quis~qit~6qio~qn. operation more than three months before the management ~6qqu~qes~4qt~qi~qo~qn~qs~0q@ and and management and research awards. award beginning date will not be ~6q(~2q3~2q) Socioeconomic Research The Application for Federal Assistance approved. For construction and land studies on ~0qpatt~qe~qrn~2qe of land use. Standard Form 424 (Construction acquisition awards, NOAA will eva~4qlua sanctuary visitation. arc~8ql~qu~2qm~4qlo~4qgi~qcal Program) constitutes the formal pre~qagr~qe~qem~qe~qnt costs on a ca~qse-by-~qcase research). application for land acquisition and basis. (~4qb) Proposals for research in national development awards. The application (a) General guidelines for the ~qa~qo~qn- estuarine sanctuaries will be evaluated must be accompanied by the Federal share are contained in OMB in accordance with criteria listed ~6qb~qol~qa~qv~qr. information required in Subpart B Circular A-~0q1~8q0~08qZ Attachment F. The (1) Scientific merits: (pr~qeacq~quisiti~qon). Subpart C and Section following may-be used by the state in (2) Relevance or importance to ~8q92~8qL3~4q1~4qL (acquisition and development). satisfying the matching requirement: sanctuary management or ~qcoastai~q- and ~6q1 92~4q2~08q= (operation and (~4q1) ~24qA~qvac~0qqu~6qi~qs~2qido~qn A words. Cash and d~qecis~2qio~qnmaki~qn~12qx management). as applicable. All in-kind contributions (value of goods 193 ~0 ~z~qwl~f~L Federal Register / VoL 49. No. ~I~qz / Wednesday, ~I~q=~ 2~7, ~qM4 / Rules and Regulations and services directly benefiting and dml~opment award. The value in ~qw~tc~a~s~s East Florida (S~qL John's R~qi~v~qwto Cap* specifically identifiable to this pan of of the amount required as match for the Canaveral)~. the project) are ~a~qf~qlawab~qh~L Land may not initial award may be used to match WON ~qh~M~qV~qM be used as match. subsequent supplemental acquisition ~0q& Ci~ar~qib~ib~e~e~n ~2qr~a~ql~qw Canaveral to Ft. (2) Ac~qq~u~0qW~qf~qfan ~a~nd ~8qD~ev~e~q1~4qq~:m~en~qt and development awards for the ~qJ~e~qf~qfi~er~s~o~n aid ~s~o~ut~qh~qI~6 Awards. Cash and in4~qd~nd ~c~on~qt~ribu~qd~o~ins estuarine sanctuary~. to. West Florida ~q(~qP~qL Jefferson to C~oda~r are a~ql~ql~owable. In general~. the fair market (3) ~8qQ~qp~er~a~4qf~4qt~n~r and M~a~n~a~qg~e~n~ta~n~qt K~ay~q@ value of lands to ~qb~e.includ~ed within the Awards; ~4qa~qw~e~ar~c~2q* ~2qA~qw~8qd~q& cash~, ana~in- ~qL~o~u~qi~s~2q@ sanctuary boundaries ~a~nd acquired Mad contributions (directly b~en~8qati~qn~qg ~8qn. Panhandle Ono ~q(Coder Key to Mobile pursuant to the Act. with other than and ~s~qp~e~c~qL~qi~qk~qa~qily id~en~qti~qf~qf~abl~e to, this ~qB~a~2qO ~. ~. Federal fund- may be used as m~a~qt~r~qI~L~- phase- of the project~q)~. ~oxc~e~qp~qt land. are ~qi~8qZ ~6qMIssi~s~s~qi~qpp~qi Deft ~qR~qA~ob~qd~s Bay to The fair ~8qm~qi~qm~qi~a~l~qt value of privately allawa~qb~qh~L G~alv~a~qmo~a~q@ d~on~a~2qW land; at the time of donation. as a Western G~6qWf ~q(Galveston to M~qw~tic~a~n establishment by an independent I ~2qU~qI~6qM ~qA~s~s~er~8qW~qm~e~e~qn~s to ~q0 ~&~qp~qp~r~a~qi~s~e~r ~a~nd Certified by a responsible ~qU~8qW~4qM~n~qf~qt ~ ~ ~1~4L official of the State (pursuant to ~8qO~qN~8qM Actions requiring an amendment tG~' Circular A~-102 Revised. Attachment ~qF~q) the financial assistance award. such ~q1~0q4 Southern California ~8qN~e~x~qi~can border to Pow Concepcion). ~- ~qr may also be used as match. Appraisals a request for additional ~qF~ed~er~a~qk.fu~nds. ~qi~8ql Central ~2qCa~ql~6qf~6qi~a~n~qd~s, (Point Concepcion to must be performed according to Federal revisions of the approved project Cape ~8qM~a~n~qdac~qin ~1. appraisal standards as detailed in budget. or ~qo~ct~e~ms~qi~on of t~qh~q6 performance ~4qM San F~ra~nd~qw~o Bay. NOAA regulations and the "Uniform period me be su~qbm~;itted to NOAA an Appraisal~' Standards for Federal Land Standard Form 42~q4 ~q(~8qO~qN~4qM approved Acquisitions." Costs related to land number ~q0748~;~-~6q= for we through 17. Middle Pacific (Cape Mendocino to the acquisition~. such as appraisal& ~qI~s~6qW September 30. I=) and approved ~qi~z~b ~qC~olu~n~i~qb~ql~e Rival. IS. Washington Coat (Columbia ~qR~qi~v~qw ~qw ~qf~i~e~ss and ~surv~ey~m may also be used as Writ&* v~qo~qm~m~s~qm Island). match. Land. including submersed lands~. Appendix ~q1~q-~4q4~4qu~0qp~ap~qh~qi~c ~4qC~8qks~a~8qf~8qf~8qica~qt~qi~qo~n ~T~4qz Pop" s~o~o~n~qd. already in the state's possession~. in a Color ~qL~A~t~qk~qm f~4qa~6qrpr~ot~ec status consistent with the purpos~qm of the Nati~on~aL ~qE~stu~ar~qin~i~s , A~c~o~6qd~qT~qo~r ~8qM Western Lakes (Superior. ~8qMchip~qa Sanctuary Program. may be used as ~0qL Northern ~qc~o~ul~qt ~6qd Maine ~q(Eastport to the z~qi~-~qE~a~s~t~er~n Lakes (Ontario. ~qEri~e~q@ match only if it was acquired within a. ~qS~qh~e~ap~sc~o~t R~qf~v~ar~q@ one-year period prior to the award of ~qj~. ~qS~t~p~o~t~qh~qo~n ~6qG~0q&~o~qf ~2qM~a~qi~qw~'~q(~qS~6qW~8qMscot River ~qF~qI~b~0qM preacq~uisition or acquisition funds and to Cape C~od~ql. ~8q=S -~1 Ala~s~qi~ca ~8qM~r~qi~nc~e at Wales w~qt~4q& th~a~r intent to establish a national WOW to Cook In~ql~et~qt~. estuarine sanctuary. For state lands n~ot~* ~qZ~qL~8qA~4qk~u~qd~qm Islands (Cook ~qI~6qd~e~t to Bristol in a ~2qM~6q"~r~ot~ec~qt~ed status ~q(~*~4q4~. a state ~qL ~qS~o~u~t~qh~qw~o Now E~v~A~qja~nd ~q(~0qC~ap~ir~6qC~od~. to. B~s~qy~q@~- park containing an easement ~qf~qb~r ~qs~e~n~qtl~qy~. ~2qH~0~0~2q4 ~qS~&~6q&~4qA~r~c~qi~qY~c subsurface mineral ~ri~qght~s~qh~. the value of a~qh~qa~qd~6qf~6qir A~qd~e~a~8qf~8qt ~q(S~a~qm~ql~qy H~oo~ql~qk to Cape Hat~t~er~v~a~ql~L 2~0q& Northern A~0qW~6qM (Bristol Bay to the development right or fw ~q8~ value ~qD~a~i~n~arc~a~t~qi~o~n ~qP~o~qt~o~t~q@ may be used ~q" match ~qi~qf acquired by at donated to t~qh~ir state for f~n~8qdu~s~qio~n within ~6qC~qao~2qM~a~qim the sanctuary. 2~0qL Hawaii= Island~q& A state may initially u~s~e as match same R~qj~q@~ar~qu ~q2~0qL ~8qW P~ac~2qd~c ~f~.~I~.~qW~L land valued-at greater than th~e F~e~qder~al~q@ ~r Soo* A~qd~a~u~8qf~8qt ~qEs~a~l~qi~t~qf~qt~.~ql~qt~qi~,~.~q@~qr ~qW~qS~L ~qJ~o~qb~8qw~s ~8qV~-~qEa~s~tIM~qM~qP~@~C~qi~2q&~t~&~I~A~r~L~& share of the ac~qq~m~qfs~qitfo~t~r and am 3~0~14~h4~*~4~0~. ~04q194 SUBARTIC 2 2 4 JORD 131 0 COLUM91 GREAT LAKES 21 CALIFORNIAN (w, @14; 92 13 2 UISIANIA INSULAR 27 Floure I 019989graphid Regions of the UnItod SIP105. ~0 2~6~3~1~8 Federal ~qR~~qz~L~~qm~~ Vol. 49~ No. 12~5 Wedhe~da~y~ June 27. 1~9~q" Rules and Regulations App~qa~qW~Ix ~?~,~q-~qT~qy~0qW~I~4qM of N~a~qti~c~s~o~a~l 2~. ~qS~qw~qd~t~s~ast Ar~v~as:- Floral dominants IL Coastal Sw~a~qmp~0qk These am wet lowland Estuarine Areas include M~qy~r~i~4qw, ~qBd~q=~qh~a~qd~qo, and ~2qf~2qi~ez. a~r~qm that support mosses and shrubs ~q& W~a~s~qom Atom A~qd~e~n~o~s~tom~qa together with ~6qW~2q" ~0q"~q" such as cypress or ~qT~qh~qi~qf ~4qqP~*~4qW~6qV System ~r~e~qd ~qd~2qP~I~qR~qMt ~-~qA~qM~O~6qO~qP~qhy~ql~O~& ~a~nd ~B~ruc~e~qd~8q"~gus an the ~qV~A~qM ~qd~qi~0qf~0qf~qu~t~qw~qo In ~e~s~t~a~qw~qi~qm ~c~qb~a~qm~c~t~qw~qi~s~t~qi~qa that dominant ~qf~ql~ar~a~ql Species~. r- ~qC~o~o~o~qn~al Mangroves~: This ecosystem are not necessarily related to regional r- C~oa~t~t~a~qi ~0qO~t~a~s~s~ql~an~a~8qk This ~ar~e~s. which an @Mar a daily. ~V~"~W~"~9~U~G~qM regular flooding location~. The purpose of this t~qy~qp~s of sand dunes and ~qw~a~s~t~a~ql ~qf~qi~e~t~s. has monthly~. or seasonal b~e~0q" has low wave classification is to maximize ~s~c~qm~8qpt~e~qm flow rainfall ~qC~qto to 30 inches ~2qW year~q) and action~. and is dominated by variety of salt- variety in the selection of ~n~a~f~lo~n-' estuarine ~0qW~4qp amounts of ~h~um~a in the soil. Ecological tolerant tr~o~e~s. such as the red mangrove ~sanc~t~u~8qm~e~s~. Priority will be given to t~qh~e ~qP~'~q"~4~n~c4 ~q(~2qM~qAw~qp~qh~a~qm ~a~r~a~0q*~@~q@ black mangrove Important @way ~t~a~qm type ~q" ~4qM ~a~qf ~4 ~qM~q0~6q6~qW Of $Mai SUM of community ~q(A~r~qic~a~qm~qid ~mi~t~qida). ~and the white mangrove u~n~r~op~f~a~s~ont~ed. in the sanctuary System It development~. Dominant v~ag~e~t~ati~o~n~-~qI~ndud~e~s ~q(~qL~a~8qr~i~n~c~z~qa~c~T~qia ~fac~r~qw~o~xa~q@ It is also an should be noted that any one site my ~qm~qi~qd~-~qgr~a~s~s~es ~q(~q2 to ~4 feet ~t~o~6q" such as important habitat for large populations of represent Several~: ecosystem "a or ~qA~qm~qw~8qq~%~qh~qi~4qkAp~8q*~qy~r~o~j~%. ~qU~6qd ~6qC4~q1~G~qM~O~V~qi~qI~qf~I~L ta~qil~ql~, ~6q" i~n~v~ort~a~qb~r~at~e~s. and birds~. This type of physical characteristics~, View (5 to ~q4 fee ~2qW~2qM such as ~qS~qp~ar~f~t~qm and @captain can be found from central Florida Class~; ~2qT~2q"~s~o, tr~e~q" such as the. willow ~q(~6qS~a~6q& I" ~c~qb~s~4q" ~t~u ~U~A~U~V~qW~X South Texas to the islands of the ~q(~8qP~O~qP~UA~W ~western ~qP~e~c~qi~qnc. d~q&~0q%~qx~qf~e~v~q@ T~6qW~@ am is divided Win four ~qD~. ~6qM~qar~t~qi~b~6qW ~qO~l~v~a~c~qh~e~qw Tb~ql~a ecosystem has A~.~,~2qV~a~,~7~&~j~qm F~o~l~o~o~t. W~o~o~qd~qh~qw~2q& ~qT~qb~qi~s ~o~qf ~r ~q8~q1~,~1 ~- with the ~qf~ol~qi~a~vvi~c~i~qg typical strand ~qi died= ~qbi~at~a of microscopic animals. ~ec~o~s~qy consists of Sped" vegetation~: bacteria and un~i~c~e~qiluar algae along with that have developed und t~qh~e influence of L ArC~t~qic~q/B~or~e~a~qk ~2qZ~qI~qY~qMU~M~; m~e ~~cro~s~c~api~c ~crus~t~a~c~a~quts. ~qm~a~qU~qu~qk~& and salt spray. It can be found on coastal uplands ~qL N~o~r~t~qh~e~a~st~q/W~e~st: ~qA~A~qwwp~qh~2qd~a; or recent f~e~att~ir~e~s. Such as barrier islands and ~q& Sou~qd~i~s~as~t~q/~2qG~ul~qt U~n~qiol~qe ~a~n~qd warm with a d~etr~qit~u~s~-~qb~a~s~e~qd nutrient cycle. 4. ~4qMid~-At~q[~4nt~4qW~6qG~u~6q& ~qSp~a~r~a~qw Patent~. This am also includes t~qh~e driftlin~e b~each~s~ts. and may be divided into the ~q0. ~6qC~M~qU~qM ~qT~qU~R~2q&~qw ~qT~qh~qi~a ~ow~qry~s~u~qm which communities found at ~8qW~6qO ~qdd~e levels on the ~qt~6qW~qk~m~w~qt~2qn bi~om~e~s: is found along the Arctic ~a~nd Boreal waste of beach The dominant organisms in this ~q1. ~2qN~o~qf~qt~qh~e~r~n~. ~6qC~8qW~qf~qW~V~qW Forest ~qB~qi~qa~qm~qe This is an am of predominantly ~ev~er~2qp~qo~i~s such North America~. is ~6qd~qw~a~6qdi~er~qi~qnd by low tam ~qL~n~c~qlud~e crustaceans such as the as the ~at~qk~a s~q9~qm~c~a ~q(~qP~qf~qc~va~q@ grand ~qR~r ~8qW~qi~e~e~q@ temperatures~. a short growing mesa& ~a~nd ~4q=~4q;~ab (~qE~8qm~e~r~qi~t~a). am~qphi~qp~ad~s and white cedar (~q7~q7~qm~qi~a~qL with poor Some ~qp~erm~a~qh~qw~qL producing a ~qk~y~qw~I treeless (G~amma~r~qida~0q4 ghost crabs ~q(~2qO~c~qyp~od~e~q). and development of t~qh~e shrub ~a~nd hub layers- mat community made up of mosses~. ~qU~qA~*~u~s bivalve m~a~qllu~qm such as the ~c~o~qq~u~ina ~q(D~o~n~ax~qj but high a~qm~n~i~a~ql. productivity ~qv~id pr~o~qwm~i~sc~a~qd ~qh~a~n~th. s~qbru~ql~qw grease& sedges. rushes. and and said dun ~q(~qS~qp~is~u~ql~a and m~qa~c~tr~a)~. Seasonal periodicity. ~'--~q-~-~U-~w- ~a~n~qd dw~a~6qd woody plants~q; E. ~qI~n~t~or~t~i~qd~~al Mud and Sand Raw These ~qL moist ~qr~e~f~f~8q"~A~r~qm ~qf~qh~qf~q=~0q"~6q%~W~qW~6qW~q) Canniness species include ~q=~d~c~q/al~qp~qi~n~s piano areas are composed of unconsolidated~. high ~8qCx~ti~qf~er~ou~n Forest B~qA~qm~qm Found along t~qh~e Such as ~qZ~n~8qw~@~0q&~q= ~qw~qsru~qm and fi~et~i~qda ~n~a~qf~qt organic content sediments that function a~s~.~4; ~w~es coast of North America ~qt~qr~om California the t~qi~c~ql~s~ons C~e~ir~ur~i~d~.~a~n~qd~2q4~ql~ad~om~a~. and short~-term s- ~qg area ~qf~or.n~utr~qi~s~t~its a~nd to Also~'~q- this am is dominated by ~c~o~o~qd~gm herbaceous plants such as ~qP~a~t~e~n~t~qi~qVa organic urban& ~4qM~acr~o~qp~qhyt~es are nearly ~qh~a~s a r~eladv~*~2q4 Small seasonal range~. high ~4~4q6~6q*~n~&~q= a~nd A~u~qb~qw c~qh~awa~sm~a~r~u~s. absent i~n t~qh~qi~s~o~qw~ey~st~em. although it may be ~qb~-~q-~'A~lt~q!~qp with rainfall ranging ~qho~qm 30 to 130 Common species ~cm t~qh~e coastal b~e~ac~qk~qir~8qW~qg~u~s heavily ~c~o~ql~a~n~qn~ed by ~qb~e~nth~ic diatom& ~qd~qt~o~o~.. i~n~c~qh~a~s. and a w~ell-d~ev~e~ql~op~e~qd , ~t~-~qW~-~-~qy of Of t~qh~e high arctic dew" ~qI~nci~ad~i~s ~qDryu~r flagellates. ~2qM~an~u~qm~qmu~s~.b~qlu~e~-~qg~r~e~e~n and green vegetation with an abundance ad mosses and ~qi~f~i~t~er~qgr~I~0qM~qI~d and ~qS~q&~l~qd~qf~qt~8qw ~O~qP~qP~O~qW~'~qO~qf~o~ql~qia~. algae. and ~c~qha~s~qmo~s~qynth~et~i~c purple sulfur other ~qm~a~qis~tu~r~s-t~a~qt~er~a~t~it plants. ~. ~qT~6qW~o an ~a~qm be d~qiv~qid~i~qs~qd tam ~t~q@~v~a ~qm~a~qm bacteria~, ~qT~6qW~W~S~qY~S~qN~qM may support a r~emp~er~a~t~e ~qD~o~4qddu~a~qw ~qF~q~ B~qI~qW~qw This ~su~qb~2qd~v~qi~sio~n~s: considerable population of gastropods, blow is ~ch~ar~act~er~u~nd. by abundant~. evenly ~L Low ~2qM~a~qd~r~a: ch~ar~e~e~qf~qt~r~qi~qn~qd by a ~6qW~6q& bivalve& and ~qp~o~ql~y~c~qh~a~o~t~qm and may serve as distributed minis" moderate temperatures. ~qq~qM~2qW mat of living and u~n~id~ec~ay~ed~ a ~0qh~edin~qg am for a variety of ff~sh and which ~exhib~t a distinct seasonal pattern. ~v~a~8qp~qa~ti~qm often w~it~qh~-w~at~er ~a~n~qd d~o~n~ed~,wit~qh w~a~qdin~qv bir~qd~e. In ~S~a~n~2q& the dominant fauna w~el~ql~-d~e~v~e~ql~o~qp~ed sod b~i~at~s ~and ~qb~qw~qb and shrub~. panda when ~n~o~t ~a~n~qd inci~qmi~s the wedge shalt D~on~ax the s~q"llo~qp layers. and numerous plants which produce ~qL~2qW~0q*~q7~qU~n~qd~r~qx~s~qb~4~qi~w~sr~*~s ~qw~r ~qp~tf~o~r~a ~qP~#~c~qM~L ~h~6qa~n sheds ~qr~e~ql~qd~n~qe the heart urchin pulpy fruits and ~auts~. A distant subdivision of Scanty growth of Mums and grasses~. with ~2qZ~z~qh~qi~n~2q@u~a~L the lu~qgw~o~r~qm A~r~e~n~qico~ql~qo. this b~i~am~e is the Pine ~ed~a~qp~qh~qi~c ~qI~qb~r~o~s~t of the ~u~nd~ar~qtyin~qg ~qic~qe wedges forming raised southeastern coastal plain~. in which only a polygonal areas. sand dolls: D~end~qms~tar~. and th~e~,~s~ea pansy ~8qA~qnti~ql~ql~qa In ~qm~u~2q& faunal. dominants adopted to small pardon of the Ann in occupied~ by L ~6qC~a~n~qO~2qW C~qU~0qf~0qf~&- This ~o~qw~a~qy~et~s~qm is an low ~q=~q1 Levels include the t~qw~e~qb~o~2qWd climax vegetation~. although it has ~2qW~8qM areas important nesting site for many as and sham A~qm~qp~ql~u~i~qn~t~a~i the boring c~qiam ~qP~ql~a~qy~qd~qb~i~t. the c~ov~q" by e~qd~a~qp~qh~qi~c d~i~q-~A~X birds. It consists of communities of deep am scallop ~qP~ql~o~o~o~0qM~qw~t~qm the quahog ~4. B~r~o~ad~-~ql~e~a~v~v~qd Evergreen Su~qb~a~pp~qi~c~ed ~qh~erb~ac~e~s~ou~s. ~qgr~am~i~n~a~qi~qd. or low woody ~qp~qL~a~n~t~o M~a~rc~e~nar~qm the ~sc~qhiu~r~qid worm ~8qU~r~qw~qh~qi~qs. the Forest B~qi~o~n~t~e~s; The ~-~mi~r~, c~qh~a~qn~c~t~er~t~atic ~o~qf this (shrub& ~qh~G~at~qI~L ~*tLj 01~3 the t~o~p ~O~r~-~0~q1~0~0~q1 ~qM~qk~qy~' blame is high m~o~q4tur~s, with Las pronounced mud sued ~qN~qo~s~s~qwu~s. and the sea cucumber differences between winter and Summer. ~ql~qoc~es exposed to salt spray. There is a' ~q7~8qW~qY~O~qM Examples are the hammocks of Florida and ~qF I~n~t~er~e~fd~al Algal Beefs. Then are hard the Live Oak forests of the Gulf and South So~. ~S~6qW~qM~9~qM~(~0~S along the Ma~n~2~d edge that a~r~e At~qiantic ~qwast~s. Floral dominants include ~I~8q"~qM~o~e~qmt~qi~v dominated by macroscopic a~qL~qg~qf~qt usually ~0qp~n~e~s~. ~qm~a~qg~n~a~ql~ql~e~qm bays. ~qb~o~qu~ql~d~s. Wild ~2qG~t~o~8qW~8qO-~2qn~u~o~s~qid~qwA~qn~a~s ~- ~. t~qh~a~qdo~qid~. but also filamentous or u~nic ~qI~qlular u~i tamarind~. strangler ~0qf~0qt ~qg~omb~e ~qUm~qb~o. and A. C~o~m~qa~6qd ~qA~8qf~8qt~v~qh~qw Those an Weiland ~qF~.- ~qf~qi~n~s~o. This ~al~qmu~tc~qiu~qd~e~s the rocky ~4q"~4q=~qa dominated by ~8qgr~qa~qs~qe~4q" ~8qM~qo~qsc~qo~qo~q)~q. Sedges, coast ~qd~qd~e~0qp~x~qAs that fail within the int~ertid~al ~12qL Coast ~2qS~8qhr~qu~6qb~2ql~qa~qn~6qd~qe~qr This IS a ~qV~qa~qn~qs~8qit~4qio~qn~16qd z~0qma. Dominant fauna of then a~qr~0qm are ~4q(~2qC~4qy~2qp~qer~qe~qc~qo~qs~qi~qa~0qL room ~2qU~0qw~0qm~qe~qc~0qm~6q@ c~qa~qt~qt~0qu~8ql~qs, am ~2qb~qe~qtw the coastal~q. I Is ad (T~8qyp~2qhac~qs~qa~qe~8q@ ~qe~qnd a~2qd~qi~qs~qr ~qgr~qami~qn~qa~0qi~2qd sped" mussels~q. Periwinkles~q. ~q1~q0~q2~q. woodlands and is ~q-7 Woody and is subject to ~qV~q"~qM~qM~qP~qA~qW~qV~qU R~qo~qod~qin~qg by either ~qe~qn~6qd ~12qddt~8q=L Three r~qo~8ql~qi~qo~qn~qs as apparent species with multiple sum a few centimeters wit at freshwater. Ito ~qs~0qw~qa~4qy~qst~qem may b~0qw ~qL A~08q%~qr~2qd~qm~4qm La~qt~0qf~qa~qid~qe ~8qA~qoc~2qk~4qy Shares~q: It is in to several m~qo~qt~qer~qs above the a. - into (a) ~0qOd~qal. which~, is this region that the community structure is developing under the. Influence of nit spray periodically ~6qBood~qed. by other nit or brackish best ~2qd~qe~qv~qo~2ql~qo~04q"~08q& The dominant algal ~q9 ~q'~qa~qs and occasional sand burial~q. T~8qhis includes water ~32qM ~qm~qa~qn-~qtk~8qi~qal ~0q(1~8q1r~qes~8qhw~qat~16qf~16qt or ~20qM Mai ~0qi~qn~qi~qs~2qt~qad~qe ~16qC~2qh~qo~qo~2qd~qr~qu~qs at the low title ~8ql~qe~qv~q*~2qL~8qFu~qcus thickets~q. Scrub~q. scrub savanna. ~4ql~qi~6qnth~8qLa~qnds.~q. ~6qk~qe~qs~4qhw~qa~qt~qer. ~08qr~qn~q*~0qn are essential habitats for and Ascop~8qh~0qy~8qf~8ql~qu~qar at the m~qi~2qd~q-~qd~4qd~qal level. and and coastal chaparral~q. Them to a great ~qm~04qW important estuarine species of ~2qf~12qM ad L~qa~4qmu~4qm~qna and other k~qe~8qlp-~8ql~4qi~6qk~qe algae just ~q- variety of ~qshr~qu land ~qv~qe~00qp~qt~qat~qi~qon ~qex~4qh~qibi~00qf~00qt~0qS ~0qi~qnv~qo~qt~qt~qob~qi t~qosa~qsw~qe~4qila~qos~8qb~qo~qr~qe~4qb~qird~qs~qa~qn~4qd bit, the ~qt~qat~qert~0qida~8ql. although they can be regional ~qs~8qp~qe~4qc~6qo~qc~0qi~qt~04qr w~qat~0qa~8qf~qaw and serves important ro~4ql~qa~qs in exposed at ~qex~qtr~qe~0qm~qo~8qi~4qy low tides or found in ~qL ~04qN~qo~8q"~4qh~qer~qn Am= c~4qh~qar~qa~qct~qor~qt~qa~qn~8qd by ~q. ~q, stabilization~q. ~6qdood. control. water very deep t~4qid~qe~8qpoo~8qi~qs. ~04qHud~8qe~qan~qz~qa. various ~qorin~qsc~qo~0qm s~0qP~qG~qc~6qw~qL and p~qar~8qd~8qica~qd~qo~0qw and nutrient transport ~qa~qnd ~0qL ~8qS~qo~qu~qt~4qh~qe~0qm Latitude= The communities in ducks" Of ~00qM~6qM~qO~qM ~4qP~qR~6qW~qU~qL a~qn~2qd6~4qA~qO~6qM ~qs~q9~qo~qr~qa~4qel, t~8qh~0qi~qs~q-r~qa~04qp~qa~qn an reduced in ~qc~qo~0qm~qp~qar~qLso~qn. to ~0 Federal ~qR~~qOst~r VoL 4~9. No. 12~5 Wednesday. June z~7~ 1~984 Rules and Regulations ~2~6 those of t~h~e northern latitudes and possesses confined w~a~tw~o-~ab~o~ad~a~nt ~qMa~r~i~n~s~ grasses~. L ~qC~O~S~qM ~qP~A~M~i~ns ~a~s~t~ua~r~8qr~. Whom a ~q=~0~01~8~11~0~q6 ~qM~o~s~it~ql~qy of ~s~qi~n~4q@c~a~qll~ad at s~qb~o~6qWl~s~4qk ~a~nd ~qf~o~v~a~n~qi~ql~qe, as& water movement drow~qm~id valley consists mainly of a s~u~4q* . ~6qm~q@~u~qm V~o~w~n. b~6qW~2q"~qM~E6 and ~r~ed alp~e. is r~ed~i~a~c~6q" with thin consequent ~*~qf~qf~qac~ts of ~2qd~qm~qm~e~qL the ~qf~qi~qm of the ba~qm is ~qf~a~l~ir~qly and ~sm~a~qg th~alla~qi~qd, ~qbr~o~qm a~ql~qg~a~s. pollution bet" ~qmr~a ~s~ov~ar~e in thin am than ~qj~0~6qp~ql~qu ~qf~a~qm~o~2qn ~& s~i~qm~qp~0qW ~c~o~n~a~t~i~qd p~qla~qm~s, 3. ~6qr~qmp~qx~0qd ~a~s~id ~qS~0qW~0qM~qm~qp~qx~0qd La~8qd~q&~j~qd~qm ~qT~6qM in ~ox;~qm~6qW co~s~i~s~t~a~ql ~s~u~n~q& ~4~8~0~qM~qY~. W~qh~o~n a channel is flooded with ~qI~i~M~a~n~t~2qW~2qd In this MOM ~qI~$ very reduced and ~q& Bar~. Boys an larger c~o~n~qf~qic~qC~ed, bodies of ~S~um~ar~qw~a~s ~v~qi~qb~u~t~er~qi~e~s~. an ~q4r~e~qgul~ar, es~t~u~qm contains Sw~a~s~ir~c~o~n I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~- algae sock ~4~111 water that are arm to the ~s~e~s, and receive r~esul~qm ~qb~ql~a~ny estuaries of the ~e~ast~ar~s Un, ~qP~O~I~D~qM~6qO~qM and ~6qV~2qd~qw~qd~qm~qm~n~qw~q& as inn as strong ~t~qi~qd~6qw ~0q&~qw. whom s~l~i~t~a~u~qs~c~a~t~qi~o~n is States we of we type. ~qgr~e~qw~s ~a~ql~qg~a~s ~v~nth c~a~ql~car~i~so~n~s particles such as the flushing action a augmented ~0qL A*& ~qF~at~a~or~qi~e~s that f~qb~ir~qm in ~alc~ingate ~2qH~a~ql~qh~m~*~qd~L ~a~nd ~n~um~aro~u~s other ~2qp~o~qm ~r~ed. river Bays ~q"~2qM in size and in ~A~qf~qt~e~ql~i headlands dint ~a~l~ql~ar~o~s~t~s with deep and b~irow~n ~alp~qa type of ~al~m~ir~a~qf~qt~o~o~t. Shaped Team ~qMul~qd~6q" from ~qg~ql~a~8qda~ql ~s~c~o~. 4~. ~qA~qk~a~qb~o~qym~e~s~4qt A ~c~o~n~ql~qi~n~ed coastal water am called ~qF~q;o~rd~q& They generally possess body w~qit~qi~t, ~na~qnaw. restricted Islets and with rocky Sam or v~o~r~qy thin ~v~e~n~e~a~r~e ~9~q1 ~qmil, A. Su~qb~ad~n~qi ~qh~qA~i~i~ird~qbo~a~t~im~s~; ~qT~qh~qi~s "stem Is a significant ~0qb~e~e~qb~qm~t~or in~qf~qi~a~qw ~c~a~n be characterized by ~4 ~q=~qM~6qW~0qWa~0qW ~qI~g~qy~4~qf~qf O~qf SON classified as an ~amb~oym~en~qt. Them areas with deposition generally being restricted to& of la~8qM pieces ~o~q(r~oc~qk ~8qO~qa~qd~qw ~o~6qf~6qt~qi~ct~qi~c have man 'Wow ~t~qh~a~s b~ey~s. am the hand w~qh~qo a the main river ~e~n~t~em, ~qa~6qW~m~q) ~a~nd is faced is association with C~o~qm~qp~a~ir~ed to total ~q4~o~rd volume. r~qiv~qw ~-~1 _~, ~d usually ~sm~a~qd~er and ~o~qb~s~i~ql~qlow~er~. ~qh~av~o low ~6qWal ~qd~qi~s~c~qh~a~r~2qV is $~qw~a~6qI ~6qQ ~t~n~a~ny ~qn~o~r~qds ~qh~e~,~,~* ~q8~qi ~ l~qa~a~0qf~0qtr~e~s~t ~m~a~0q*~4~* submarine action. ~a~nd am s~o~qb~qj~ec~t to s~ed~ql~qa~t~entat~qi~o~n. restricted ~6qW~a~ql ranges at their mouths. dip and ~qf~qto~r~qds ~an~qd~qi~s ~usu~s~t~qUy cove L ~q7~q7~qd~0qd Mina~. I~0qU Iowa ~qm~qw~0qA of a ~o~qn~st~al. with ~qa~s~e~qm~qb~qU~qm~8qp of s~qp~o~n~qv~i~es. no fans. river is, I to as a ~qddal river. ~qT~qh~e s~qd~qls~. or Wrenching sections of the bottom biva~qk~q"~L hard corals. ~t~qw~oca~qu~s, ~a~nd other coastal water ~ex~t~o~od~s ~qf~qi~r~o~n~s the "a which limit bee movement of water. often attached ~4~0qM ~n~i~m~qm~e A s~qig~2q@~qf~q"~qN~qM of or estuary river discharges to ~qmal~cin~qg river am large ~qw~qi~t~qhr~e~s to ~t~qh~l estuaries in z~o~a~ny pus of the w~a~i~qr~qld, ~qw the ~& p~o~qt~0qM~as f~a~r~u~qp~o~qw~q@ "them is ~. t~q1da~qi pri~e~qw, The dampest portions. am in th ~cys~t~or ~qn~oL a type of ~qn~qb~4qM~2qW ~qb~qu~qd~qb~ot~t~o~qw. Bait content in do w~o~o~qf~qf~. forming a- ~i~i~qi~qi~qi~q; fr~on~L ~U~qP~$~U~q"~qM~.~r~q-~qA~e~s when ~m-~i~n~ium depth ~~ad of a~qm~e~qm~qb~ql~8q"~qM of ~o~i~t~8q"~i~s~qi~sm~a A combination of ~qUdai action and ~qh~q"~qh~qw~a~t~e~r ~C~qM ~qM~8qW from ~q8~q00 ~qM to ~q12~0qW m. while all b~qi~va~qlv~e~a~qL it is band now an o~udlow ~qma~qk~qm ~qdd~a~ql Avers w~al~ql~-~qBus~qhed.T~qh~qe d~ep~th~o~qm~i~n~a~qll~qy, ~t~o ~qf~r~O~qM 40 ~qM to 1~30 ~qM~. ~qw~qh~qa~2qW~s mouth in a ~@~S~qm~a ~0qd~qa~t~id~er~at~e wave 3~- ~qB~qw~l~qb~a~qw~v~qd~f~qd ~4qF.~S~a~ja~rr. The" result ~qf~qt~c ~a~ct~qi~n~qa salt content~. ~a~nd turbidity. ~qN light t~q1d~al river bum my be a simple channel or a th~o development ~0~q, ~a~n offshore ~qb~a~qm~e~r~. ~a~u levels am ~s~u~6qf~6qf~6qi~c~qi~a~0qm~-~& cove of complex of ~iz~qi~qb~u~i~t~a~iri~m~e~, ~ama~qd associated ~qd a as a beech str~qw~6qA ~a ~qI~ql~i~n~e ~*~q1 b~am~er ~is~qhu~td~o ~qc~ab~o~qy~o~qm~i~L. m~i~e~r~s~qh~qk~o~nts. tidal flats. an . a and ~att~sc~qh~o~i:l macroscopic 41~1~4q*1~46 variety ~a~qr~o~t~qh~er~s~. I ~. ~r~e~6qd ~qf~O~f~q=~qd~q=~g~b 4 ~qd~u~s of moraine, d~e~qb~qm ~a~m~6q* a kelp. may aim be found. L~qj ~qV~- L~e~8qp~qow an confined ~co~es~t~a~ql the subsiding r~e~a~qw~a~n~ts of a deltaic ~ql~o~qb~i~L I ~6q& ~qs~0qw~8qa~0qw~-~6q%~4qf~4qt~qb~*~0qM~qW~qW ~2qW~0q* bod~qi~qn ad w~a~i~qm ~qi~0qm~i~tl~e restricted ~ql~i~el~qm to the basin in aft~e~n partially exposed at low t~qi~q6 characteristics of d~qds~ ~e~rn 3 ~1 an an ~o~qm~qm~0qg~qw~t~t~0qm~e~qt ~-~i~qs IIII and i~s~qm~a~c~ql~o~s~ed by a chain of a~qf~qf~qe~qbor~s bar unconsolidated ~qI~8q"~qw of of sat. ~qb~qd~qi~a~qw~. WOW harbor Wan& ~qbro~qk~qm at intervals~, by i~2qwe sand. day. ~a~nd gravel~. high ~qb~p~'~q-~C~qh~q. name in a PON!, ~qf~qi~e~s~qh~o~c~qL relatively st~o~8qp~m~ot ~qbo~qd~qi~8qj Thaw ~qb~qm my be ~or~t~qh~er deposited ~o~8qf~8qf~qW~x l~a~v~o~ql~& and ~sn~e~ar~o~2qW ~c~o~od~qit~qio~n~s ~o~2qf~2qt~e~s of water~. Sedimentation is ~qupid with a grant ter my be coastal down that have b~eco~n~u ~ex~qi~s~it~qi~n~qg b~e~q" the s~qu~2qbc~s~: ~qh~il~a~cr~op~qhy~qm an ~qP~O~qM~qU~&~qI for basin shoaling~. S~qhom am *Am isolated by we level rises~. either $Pam at ~ab~o~m~s~qt. a~ql~qt~qh~a~v~0qo a lover, of ~G~6q"~qm~qW~$~qb~qy~. 4~. ~qI~ql~i~c~h~u~qm~qA~qs~i~a~wr~qy~: Then are coastal ~qb~en~th~qic ~qm~qicr~o~ol~qg~a~i~s, my be, ~qi~qf~qu~qs~qht ~q7~. Poll W~e~L~qh~o~a~qd~qw Unique to ~qi~qnd~e~n~t~or~e~s that haw ~qM~or~n~i~ed through t~ac~t~o~, levels ~ar~s~ ~O~2qW~qS~C~qi~qM~L ~qT~qh~e ~qf~qi~n~s~e~6qd ~q=~qm~qm~m~qw~t~qy is Pacific i~sl~a~nd~i~L t~qh~ql~ow~e~qdm~a~qd ~typ~s. found~, ~qp~q@ ~s~oc~qh as slippage along a fault ~qH~i dominated by ad~"~o --~a~n p~o~qp~e~ql~ad~o~m of deposit show ~qm~a Wed in ~v~o~qi~c~a~n~qi~c cow ~r~e~s~e~s~s~i~n~CL ~q(Son F~qn~i~nc~ql~aco B~s~qy~q@ ~qf~ol~qd~ql~qin~qg ~qw movement I I Including P~a~ql~qy~c~qh~a~n~i~t~i~o~n' ~qb~ql~q"~qd~v~i~i~i~q& ~a~n~6qd farm a&& monk ad pow ~qdr~e~qm~2qp the ~s~or~t~6qWs bedrock oft~e~a with a ~qW~8qW in& ~qb~u~rr~ow~r ~c~m~qn~t~a~a~s~g~qm I ~ ~qd~qw~a~c~t~or~qis~t~qics of the cra~l~i~a~rr~atb~er don ~ql~q!ro~e~o ~o~qf fr~o~s~qh~i~e ~qr~. ~qS~, Mow This ~s~qy~s~qu~qm is lowed in ~qnd~ql~o~qw~a~t~qu~ql~c~m~L plod ~i~qm~qm~s~e~qb~qb~l~qg~o~o exhibit ~4qL ~4qV~*~qA~qm~2q* ~6qA~i~t~a~n~o~r~8qr. T~qh~e~s~e~-~co~o~st~a~qi b~qb~8q&~c relatively ~s~qb~all~a~qw ~qw~o~qw ~q(~qI~qM ~t~qb~qm a ~t~i~m~4qm -monk of ~v~o~qi~c~an~8qk process( ~qd~qi~st~ql~ec~t ~s~a~m~i~s~iti~o~n ~qw~qbi~ql~e the ~qf~qi~t~u~n~a~ql of open water. a I below ~qm~e~ni~n, Tow ~qdd~a. It is, an am of ~c~o~qm~e~t~qi~b~e~e~qw~A~l~i~m~a~qy ~ql~i~n~qj~a~qd~s ~q&~O~a~qh~qw~at~a~r~. an d~o~4qw~as~si~ons~t ~orcr~at~ers ~t~qhat have direct ~c~c~m~g~qm~*~qIY high ~8qW~RIMA~q7 prod~oc~t~qic~qe t~qhat ~qb~r~a~ck~qi~a~ql~L ~a~s~i~qd~qj~o~r marine~, species, ~qE~X~&~M~6qO~qC~. and/or with the ~ql~a~vvid~e~s food and r~o~qf~qi~q;~qs; A* a d~qi~v~eruty of A~n~n~qW~o ~8qb~qi~6q" A~qn~qa~4qf~4qt~qm Samos. ~o~c~a~m~s, ~qm~2qW my or my ~n~o~it have surface ~qf~au~s~a~l~ql groups. ~s~op~e~qd~6qav ~4qp~v~o~n~qf~qla and, ~ad~idt L A~n~2qd~qw~qU~qm~qS~qy~s~i~t~sm~or Thomas" co~ss~6qW continuity with ~str~e~am~a These formations, ~qR~qWL and~.~qin ~s~o~qm~a~i ~qm~6qo~o~m~s~- mamma and we ~a~q(br~acki~s~qh water form in lava am unique to ~i~s~l~e~a~r~l ~&~r~a~qn -of v~o~qican~qic o~n~g ~t~u~r~qd~e~s. Along ~th~s~, ~8qMor~2q& ~4qA~qd~a~n~4qf~4qt ad Pacific. ~o~r~e~qi~ev~qo~6qw ~qf~o~o~d~qd ~qM~o~0qk have C. ~qI~n~ql~e~g r~qyp~s: Islets ~qi~n v~an~ou~s forum are co~n~s~t~e. this ~s~e~8qw~a~s~s ~2qz~4~a~t~er~qv~i~i~i~a~ri~qm~. l~a~t~O~2qW~6qd Pon of the ~G~8~f~t~qA~qd~oQ environment~. only a ~qm~qd~w~qw~qf~qm~qw~a~m~qm~s~c~qd~qm to d~qw ~oc~o~qm A b~u~it-~s~qi~qm~qm ~qd~2qM ~2q&~M~U~qN~d~o~e~s. ~qD~qi~8qf~8qf~qu~qt~o~qg boa My ~T~o~4qp~ql~a~qm to a certain ~4~qM~ta~n~qL the ~v~d~qi~o~c coast ~ar~e~s~s. ~8qMa~qk~i~qm~e and ~8qD~qAp~qA~a~n~qd~ql~er~i~o I estuarine in having no surface continuity and magnitude of ~qUd~a~ql ~e~xc~qla~n~qge, ~t~qh~e dog" Predominate~. The ~qgr~a~m~e~s~s to b~o~i~th areas ~qw~ql~qt~qh ~s~t~r~o~on~s~o or ~o~c~o~qm we "Sam is a( m~qix~4qW~2q& ~a~nd volume of ~qdi~s~c~qh~ia~rp to the support a amber o~qf~v~2qo~qp~qhy~8qf~8qt ~- ~. c~qh~a~r~i~e~c~t~e~r~qi~s~s~id, by a distinct b~qiod~e community, There in ~qf~ou~ir~qma~to~ir ~i~typ~es of ~qi~nl~o~t~qn Class ~8qZ~q-~8qf~8qtysic~i~qd ~2qC~q6~qm~K~qf~qt~qd~sdc~b dominated by b~o~ot~qhi~c ~2qA~8qW each on ~t ~8qU~n~n~w~V~q*~qM~2q& An ~estu~s~0qq with a wide. ~8qA~8qW~DIC~qA~1~1~1~4qW~U~qM t~qh~e mineral ~encr~a~s~t~qi~m~qs ~i~n~v~i~estr~qict~ed law typically has slow ~C~qU~qM~A Grow ~qA~-~2qC~4~0~q4~8q4~qh~r ~qS~c~qhi~so~t~qh~i~r~4qf~4qt ~a~nd the~, vascular plant ~8qAupp~qia no significant t~urb~u~qi~e~nc~e~.~-~a~nd ~ve the ~qf~@ A. Buis r~4qn~qm Coastal water basin ~o~c~c~qw ~qm~a~n~a~qm C~qh~or~ac~t~or~qi~sd~qo ~ql~qa~w~q& which ~qw~9~qh3bi~qt effect of ocean waves. and local ~qdi~s~t~i~qz~qb~er~i~c ~t~o a ~v~qw~qW~qy of ~a~qbap~es. s~b~i~a~o. depths. and ~a~qb~qi~qg~qh~l~a~4qw which serve to modify the shoreline. These "a discussed mollusks ~qT~qh~o~o~qd~qu~qm ~a~n~qg~ql~ec~t~o~t and r ~s~at~uar~t~es am partially mixed. as the open below will comment of do cement ~qc~qa~qr~4qi~qa~4qm the sm~qa~6qt ~qr~qed ~q1-~q1-~4qp ~04qM~qe~qt~qa~2qb~qo~qt~qo~qo~0qm mouth, permits ~08q*~q0 incursion of marine wait ~qL ~12qZxpo~0qm~2qd ~12qC~q.~0q"~8qM Sam ~qr~qo~08q& formations ~qa~qr ~8qA~qm~8qb~qs~qo~qc~qt~qo~qo~2qd~4q)~qi~8q1~qaf~qe~qc~qe~qi~6qn~8qV~qe~qn~qj~qo~2qb~qt ~qa~qn~8qdt~4qh~qa~8qf~8qf~ql~qo~8qb to ~qc~qo~qn~qs~00qk~8qU~qr~qo~8qb~8ql~qe ~8qd~0qi~qa~qt~qe~qn~qc~qes, upstream ~2qb~qa~qn~08q" sand =*sand* ~qa~qn~2qd AMC d~qe~8qp~qan~2qd~8qin~8qg an the ~00q&~12qW amp~8ql~0qi~qf~qt~12qW~qo and some~q. ~qO~qO~0qM ~q11~8q111~q0~6qM ~2qf~qMMt~q@6 W~8qh~4qk~2qh a~0qM a to t~6qh~qe s~qu~qadv~8qic~qon~qem~qs, A~2qf~2qt~2qh~qo~qo~40qo hand ~qt t~2qh~qo~qr gradient. ~2qt~8qh~2qil face of o~qc~qe~qan-s~qto~qn~qn~qs. The sand benches ~q- w~qo~qr~12qK ~2qd~4qw ~12qW~36qO ~12qW~qa~qi~qnd~qs, of the ~8qp~qaci~8qf~8ql~4qi~4qar~qs, the ~0qL ~4qA~qs~qs~qir~04qk~qt~qo~qc~2qt ~8qR~qe~qs~qu~4qi~qctk~qw~qi~qt~qs of ~qe~qs~8qf~8qt~qa~qr~qi~qe~qs ca. am very ~qr~0qmli~6qm~8qm although ~2qd~4qw dames lying only ~0qw~qa~qss within t~4qh~qe U.~12q& w~4qb~0qm t~8qhi~qs system exist in many ~2qf~qo~qr~qi~qn~qs: bars. barrier islands. ~4qfu~qst behind die beaches am ~2qk~qo~28qo~12qk and easily can be ~8qf~qa~qu~qnd~2qi~q. Sot& sill& and mom Restricted ~qi~qr~8qd~qe~8qu re~qq~qui ~8qd~qa~6qm~4qg~qs~08q& T~2qh~qo dunes~; save as a mad storage L ~08qB~qos~0qw ~2qS~qb~qu~8qm~0qm ~4qF~qA~qtu~qary ban= may in decreased ~qeir~qcu~ql-t~qi~qo~qn. more pronounced them c~8qh~qi~12qdst~qabil~0ql~qs~qo~6qn ~qofth~qe result from t~8qh~qe drowning of ~q4 river valley longitudinal and v~qe~qr~qucal ~qsali~qtuty ~0qSr~04q"e~qn~qt~qs~q. ~qG~qo~0qn~qb~qa~8qh~qo~6qM~8qb~6q=~qL ~8q(coastal plains ~qe~qstua~qr~qry~0q@ the drowning of a and more rapid sedimentation. However. if L Sheltered Cxw~q& Sand or co~qt~qai barriers. ~2qO~qac~qt~qa~8qir valley ~0q(f~4ql~qo~qr~8qd~0ql~q@ the occurrence of an the "Mary mouth in ~qr~qe~qst~qnct~qed by bu~qi~4ql~ql up by normal forces. p~6qm~qw~04qW~qo sheltered offshore barrier ~2q(~8qb~qar4~6qm~qand~qed ~qas~qo~qu~qtr~qy)~q. some d~qe~0qp~6q"d~qo~qn~qal f~qe~qa~qrt~qu or land closures. the mom ~0qw~qa~0qid~qe ~qa bar or red whom t~8qh~qs tectonic ~0qp m ~qP a (tectonic ~2qnt~qu~qary~0qL or incoming ~qtid~qs may be hold back until it ecosystem takes on many char~qa~qc~qt~6qo~6qut~qic~qs of v~qO~4qi~qc~qO~qnic activity ~0q(~qv~qG~4qi~qc~qw~qu~qc ~qds~qtu~qM~q1~q17~0q@ ~qs~qudd~qe~qn~4qLy breaks fort~4qb into the basin as a ~12q1~2q:97 ~0 2~q0~qM ~qFed~w~qW Rs~q&~t~a~ Vol. 4~0~ No. ~1~q2~3 Wednesday, June 27. I~qM Rules and~Re~gulation~s ~d~2q" "am or ~qb~or~s, ~qS~e~0qa ~c~or~r~en~t~o exert ~qt~6qd~q&~G~qd~6qA~I~0q& This is typical of "Mari" z. ~qS~u~qbsw~qf~q= w~a~t~o~w. T~2qw~o refers to th~e Profound ~s~qa~qw~qa an the mature of t~qh~e -with a Sam$ ~qb~e~s~qhw~a~t~er ~qi~n~0q&~o~t nut is precipitation that ~qb~a~s been absorbed by the substrate~. turbidity~. and b~qi~ct~o of the estuary~. ~c~o~qm~n~x~m~6q* found in bay* formed bout mad and ~st~or b~o~qb~qw the s~u~r~qt~ac~e, The ~~. ~q&~qp~2qs~o~qm~e~e~n~qe~qp~qu~qm~a~n~g~a~qt~qh~qd~a~qt~z~ar~e~u~x~u~all~qy ~*dr~aw~a~s~6qe ~8qf~8qt~er ~v~0qd~qi~sy~s. ~0q*~w~0q& and other d~qi~s~u~qibuti~o~n of subsurface water depends on ~~qp~qp~osit~at~qh~e~qm~o~u~t~h~s~o~qlm~aj~or~qd~w~a~t and boom Thus is ~4 not ~qm~o~v~e~qm~a~n~t of ~qk~ic~a~ql climate~. t~o~qp no and the porosity Permit ~4qf~4qt~er water to flaw into the ~a~qm ~4q=~tw ~o~u~tw~a~6qM at ~qd~qwt~o~qp layer and and permeability of the ~u~nd~er~qiy~qin~qg sails and Sedimentation and d~ep~os~qi~qd0~f~t, an ~qM~qW~qM~1~1 Saltwater at the t ~g - ~g a layer. ~r~e~v~ul~tift in a rocks~. There an two ~a~qm subtypes of 4. ~qT~e~f~i~4qW~qM~4qM ~0qa~n~t~a~qm~qa~s~"~0qO me outward ~a~s~u~s~qport of surface o~rpa~qi~sms Surface water. ~* ~* tale" an formed by storm and --~y and n~at L~aw~ard transport of b a - ~- - a. ~2qV~a~qd~qw~e wa~t~a~i~n This in. water in the sod ~s~qi~l~qi~qft p~o~si~t~qic~e. depending on ~qGdal flow, the- ~a~qq~qp~n~qm~l~n~L type are above the water t~s~0q"s, Its~ v~o~ql~u~qm~i~t with depth d the s~o~o and wand w~a~t~s~r~L t~qh~qo ~8qL ~2qA~6q%~*~.~e~q&~a~qd~q)~qF~e~0q& E~s~qu~qm~qi~ss of this to t~qh~e mail. is subject to ~c~on~s~id~a~i~lbl~e ~qb~e~qq~u~e~ncy d ~sw~qm~L and the. amount of found whom w~e~qtw movement ~q1~qb ~.~1~. ~qa~qm~0qw~1p~1p~2p~p~p~2p~p~p~ ~- ~qflu~c~sUat~qi~on~. a flushing rate ~qi~o law. ~alth~o~u~qs~qh ~qb~. ~6qG~i~v~a~ndw~a~t~e~r This Is water contained in ~qI~qL~.~qR~O~O~qM ~6qC~amp~a~8qd~2q&~qW ~6qr~q" ~qt ~a~qd~qf~qi~c~qb~qm ~e~irc~u~l-t~qic~qa to ~qpr~a~r~v~qid~e the-bomb ~6qW the rocks b~e~qi~a~rw the wain tow Is ~u~qn~a~l~l~qy of ~C~O~qM~qP~4q"~qu~qm ~e~qt ~a~s~t~uar~4qb~a a I ~, ~ to the =I, capacity. This Is ~G~om~i~n~c~e to ~- more ~a~6qW~a~qmL~y~a~ql~q@ than v~ado~s~e water. ~a~n~qd ~qM~8qO~O~qL and ~c~o~qm~qp~ql~a~x ~s~ed~qim~e~n~ta~t~qa~n a= ~amb~a~qy~qm~ent~s and bays locking ~q4 p~o~o~r~al~qly Wows t~qh~e top met Ph~qic relief of the ~e~qb~a~qm~c~t~o~r~qi~s~qd~c of most c~o~s~a~6qw pad sop* of ~qf~qi~qf~qt~qhw~a~t~e~r hum Lod ~r~e~qg~qi~a~qm with~ k~rw ~r~vii~s~qL ~qS~e~qd~qh~o~ont~e an SOL ~qb~u~td. being high below bills and sl~op~8qM into derived through the hydrologic ~qp I I of ~qL~e~6qp~o~n~n~q& An estuary of this ~4q" is. Valleys~. I ~~2p~ ~ ~. ~a~r~os~qi~o~n. I, ~an~s p ~4 and deposition carried on ~qd~u~q"~c~o~g~i~8qb~e~qd by low rates of water ~6qG~qm~up M~q"~6qM~e~8qW~c~a~ql by t~qh~e ~qm~e and t~qh~e save= m~o~v~qo~o~0qm r~e~s~ul~8qf~8qt~qo bon a lack of Now ~e~s~t~qu~2qf~2qf Mouths. Where the. ~0qf~0qt~s~qh~qw~a~t~qw ~qi~m~0q6~qm and a ~qlack~*~o~qf A. ~2qS~m~4qW~ir~. This ~qM~qd~ec~ts a l~ex mixture ~m~a~qh~qat~qi~n~qg ~qF~, ~- ~- of the ~s~e~s build spits or ~c~qw~qha~n~qg~e because of the ~4qq~2qr~qk~a~0qf~0qt ~3~0~1~1~0~qw of s~el~t~s.~.t~qh~e mad abundant ~qb~2q" sodium other depositional ~qfi~e~s~u~qm~qm the ~6qg~qw~qm ~qO~0qW ~qt~m~0qW ~m ~1 ~m ~qo~ql t~qh~e logo= to me ~s~qm ~- d~qdor~6qM~L and Is a very critical factor in t~qh~e Substrates of the ~qn~qf~qt~qu~q* am Sandy. The ~qC~qh~c~ul~a~t~qi~a~qm w boom m~a~ql~or d~z~qi~v force ~t~s, distribution and maintenance of many bo~tt~e~m~a Sediments ~qi~2r~th~qi~v am am ~qN~U~M~qA~qT w~qh~0qA is the major lin~u~2qf~2qt~ql ~qf~o~c~t~or in b~u~qgo~qg~qic~a~ql- ~a~s~t~u~a~r~qh~qm ~o~r~qs~anism~s. Based an salinity. them co~qa~l~e, with ~& ~qg~r~e~qd~u~a~qd~a~n toward Am IN ~2p~1p~p~p~~qy within lagoons. we two basic ~e~stu~ar~qi~n~s was and ~e~t~4qO~t p~a~rt~qi~2qd~e~m.~qi~n t~qh~e head ~o~qrt~qh~e ~q"~O~tary~. In the ~8q1 ~q-~q2~q7~6qd~q;~4q; This is the Mae important different salinity zones ~q(~qv~tpr~es~s~ed in puts head ~t~o~ql~qm and other scums d reduced ~6qf~6qtw. ~s~c~o~2qkoca~qi factor ~qi~n an ~e~r~qm~a~z~qy. as It a~6qf~6qf~e~c~t~o ~qp~o~r~4q*~o~u~qm~m~qd~q-~2qm~t~q@ fins Silty sands ~az~a d~ep~o~s~qi~t~a~6qt Send water, ~qv~ochan~2qp and its vertical ~2~1~1~0~q0~0 ~0qL ~6qP~o~w~2qdr~e ~e~x~a~qm~8qr~. This is an estuary in ~a~qp~os~qi~t~qio~n aeon MY to -wider or A, ~qp ~M d~a~t~e~rm~qin~e~s ~t~qh~e - - I d t~q1d~2qW eats which ~i~q@~qh~qi~0q& the ~qb~a~shwat~qo ~qin~2qa~qm ~4qW~a~qd~ql~qic~qi~e~n~t to ~q8~, ~, I whom Velocity is ~n~m~qb~qw~o~6q& ~qm~8qW~qb~o~o~s~t~qg~po~s~s~id ~a~n~qd ~qn~qb~u~m~n~4q* with, ~e~sch~.~' ~g~o~qtK~in~g ~qm~r~6qA~qu~n~qg in~ a pattern of ~q2. A&* At the base ~ql~o~v~e~ql d a ~qM~quzz our ~qd~6q" ~c~qy~c~ql~q& r~4qM~a~ql action ~a~8qp~qin~s~t t~qh~e volume of ~- ~4qw~qa~v~es~4qm Salinity t~ow~qa~qd t~qh~e ~e~xt~u~a~r~qy m~ix~-~qA its mouth. the I ~, - m- is -_ ~"-- ~F~.~~A~qM~qP ~r~4qh~er water discharged ~4q!~2q! an ~qm~c~qm~, ~Z~VS~M~6qf~6qt - it ~qi~s~c~qha~rac~t~ar~8qb~ed by law ~qw~ry~ql~s~o~. at ~q1~0~0~9~0 ~qM~u~qd~L ~S~6qk and ~qW~2qP~4qW~C ~qd~o~4qwt~u~s as a Vary co~nc~o~n~v~ada~n in the doom waters ~a~nd ?soft ~O~qL ~p ~M inn ~an~qd~i~t~o~o~m~qp~o~r~t &"a the 1~1~0 wail as t~qh~e ~c~o~usi~qd~e~s~ub~ql~i~m organic content in bottom ~s~n~q"~qM~qm~a~ch~a~v~and ~.~-~G~qd~e~c~o~qm~qp~o~o~qit~8qw~o. ~qm~o~2qv~qit~u~qd~e ~O~q(~qd~qw~4qf~4qt~qw ~an~6qt~0qw~e~ql ~qm~o~qg~q&~qT~qI~qd~qw ~s~ed~qi~qm~e~a~l~L log inside t~qh~e ~es~u~qm, ~a~n~t~r~a~nc~e~i t~qh~e b a - - a ~u an usually d~o~ec~tib~ed in of their ~c~q7cl~e L ~qA~q%~qV~6qW~qM ~a~s~aw~6qr. This to bond in'" owes'" consider" ~qq~qu~n~6qf~6qt~qm of saw mod~. ad ~qt~qh~o~2qf~2qt ~r~e~qt~a~2qf~2qt"r ~qh~e~qi~s~qh~'~a ~qb~L the United I ~l~2qi~6q" Which ~q6~q=~qm ~qb~2q6~2qd flats, is ~qi~qic~qk~n~u~m~c~qi an the basin at ~2qP~8q"~qM~6q"~qdy ~qM~6qM ~q0~' "hat ~s~e~qf~qt~s~4q" ~l~a~qp~qp~m ~qSt~&~qN~L t1d~or~qb~e~qi~qg~qht ~r~op~i - dust my ~qe~t~c~o~o~qd ~qf~qi~l~s~qhw~at~er in&-. co~qmm~a~n~qiy ~qb~e~2q* up in ~s~m~um~a~qi~n~e, b~a~m~qi~n~s. an ~v~a~g~o~6qv~qI~qmt1d~qw ~qM t~o~e~s~t ~?~u~0qW~8qf~8qt~qg in increased salinity tff t~qh~e offer Composed at ~qi~o~a~s~qa c~o~or~m~e. ad ~6qf~6qt~e mad and The ~qdd~qm a~qid~qm~u~0qO co~qmp~ql~a~r~- falls into~, p~qw ~0qd-~t~qb~e basis~. ~a~sp~eci~a~qgy if t~qh~e ~a~s~tuar~qy sa~n~c~qL often dividing the original ~c~qb~a~n~qm~qL ~q'~q_I~qac~e Fell ~4q& ~2qAo~c~qL- Rocks usually occur in am@ ~4qL ~0qV~qA~r~n~a~qk ~qT~6qW~o ~i~sfi~n to ~& da~qd~qy A ~qk~m ~qm~a~n~6qA is ~r~e~s~u~qic~t~ed so that Mal saw is wb~o~s~e ~t~qh~e Sulam r~o~n~s ~qm~4qO~2qd~qY ~0~4~1~01~1 a ~st~q"~qP water ~ql~a~v~a~qL ~qd~0qm ~c~a~n be ~o~qb~s~e~t ~v aloft the ~qt~a~qb~qo~qA~qt~ed. Then am t~qy~qp~qica~qf~qf~qy TOT salty gradient with its ~c~oar~e~s materials ~s~qh~o~m~e~qf~qi~n~s, Than is one h~qi~qs~qh We and ~o~n~qrk~qm ~qC~qhyp~or~qb~al~qi~n~a~qL moderately ~qw~t~qy~2qp~qut~e~qd at derived tons t~qh~e bi~qg~qh~a~v~o~qi~e~va~qd~o~qw w~qh~q;~qM ~6q6~8 t~qid~e~qp~ard~a~qy~-~n~e~qk~qT~qh~8qM ~qd~8q"~qW~qL and ~qp~o~ss~o~m~s bottom Sediments that am - gas= Slam a greater~. The ~ql~a~t~qs~er ~qh~a~qsm~e~n~t~s ~4qL ~qs~qa~m~qi~8qd~qw pow ~qi~n ~a~2qVu~qdc con~qm~L an usually found ~qm "low ~qM~ea~s ~qw~or the ~qd~qw a~n~qd fan in water that ~c~a~m~6qb~e ob~s~qe~v~e~qd ~q& ~0qS~a~0qf~0qf~n~qi~qt~qy ~s~o~n~e~s ~q(~qw~8qW~a~s~s~e~qd in ~qp~0qW~qk Sulam ~qM~O~U~6q& along the ~s~qb~o~w~e~ql~qi~qm a. ~0qB~q@~qp~qm~q*~a~qu~n~v~-~q@~qr~qut~e~r than 40 ~qppt. 4. ~2qO~qy~S~t~o~r ~S~qh~M~6qI Thr~qo~u~4q&~ut a "for ~qP~o~rd~a~a I ~saw r~2qu~m~v ~2qn~qds A ~t~t~e ~6q& ~2qA~m~qb~e~qf~qi~n~o-~0qO pp~i to 30 pp~L ~o~qr~t~qh~e ~qw~o~ri~qd. the ~4q"~I~t~a~r Mat is a~m~m, ~G~q( ~t~qb~t ~0q&~qw~qm~qd~q@ i~n water slowed= to wind aid a. ~qA~8qf~8qt~c~qh~a~qU~n~s~: 30 pp~t to. 0.3 pp~t. most x~qi~qg~n~qif~qi~c~a~qm features of ~as~"~qM~r~qi~e~s. ~M~o~v~a~ql~ql~qy SUM @went& where i~n~qf~ql~u~s~u~qm ~o~q(~qb~qma~r ~qdd~e~ar ~q(~q1~q) ~qh~q4x~i~o~e~u~qb~a~qlin~e-~qSr~e~a~t~er than 30 ~qp~qpt but ~qb~ei~n~qs f~q6~un~qa am the ~g of t~qh~e ~s~e~qf~qt~qa~4qrt~a, is law ~qi~qm then the ~a~qd~6q*~0qW ~s~k~0q"~qIn~a~l ~s~e~s. a zone ~o~q(~qm~od~e~r~st~e wove a~c~qd~q= Solt content. ~6qC ~6qA~qw~qh~w~a~o~v~r Acc~ord~qt~o~qg~-~t~o~'~n~e~ar~ql~qy ~4~q4 the (a) P~6q*~qh~&~qU~ns~q-~0qn ~qv~2qp to is ~qV~qV~L and turbidity. It is often a maim in ~qd~e~2q&~8qo~qm advanced~. it Is inherent t~qh~at all (31 ~8qU~n~s~ch~a~qlin~e~q-~q1~q8 p~qvt to 5 ~qV~qP~L ~r~oo~qd~qi~qfy~qt~o~qg ~e~s~t~uarm~e c~urr~o~u~t ~my and ~qam~i~4qd~qa need ~qh~o~s~qi~tw~a~t~e~r. ~%~2qA~4qk~qk Is drained (4) ~6qO~qU~q@~D~qhA1~qh~qM~-~-~q4 ~qV~0qP t~o ~G~0qA ~qPP~L ~N~qw~im~i~tn~t~a~t~qi~o~n~. anti may occur ~q" ~a~n ~qk~o~o~m the Wed aid m~o~s~s~ur~abl~qy ~qd~qi~ql~u~t~s~e ~qd. ~qL~i~o~u~i~e~v~er Less than 063 ~qVp~L ~8q6~o~u~4qp~t~e~qd Island or peninsula oriented ~scros~e Seawater ~t~D ~qa~m~e~t~s a brackish ~c~o~m~id~qi~t~qi~qm L ~qp~8qH ~qf~qi~e~qs~qi~o~v~er This ~4~0 ~'~qM~i~c~s Of ~th~e the Make ~q. or ~v~qi~qa~qv-~qd~8qw~r~8q@ Para" to ~- t~qb~a direction~. of ~th~e ~c~a~n~qu~i~L ~qi~qt~qu~qb~qwa~t~qw an estuary as ~n~qm~qf~qf ~qh~v~qM ~r~ic~qh~o~qm of ~qn~u~qm~qi~n~e waters an~qd fall the i~m~od either Was a I I a~nd~ql~or into three main categories~: ~20qG~0qvuP ~08q9~6q-~08qa~4qy~16qd~0qv~04qw~qu~4qp~6qj~08q* ~qs~qa~2qb~qo~qur~2qf~qac~qe scum ~00qt ~2qA~0qw~8qb~16q* Wawa with a pH of less than ~q5~q-~qS A. ~0qC~8qL~q%~q%~12q*~qr~4qb~0qi~qL~6qw ~q1~0q1. ~0qs~qar~6qf~4q" Wiser This is W ~qs~qt~qm~qe flow over ~04qL~20qC~2qh~qmc~qum~qn~qe~qa~qtru~6qkA~qo~qc~qu~6qd~2qit~0qi~qo~qn who the took ~20q*~q9 Vowed in the forma of ~qe~qa~qv~qem~qs. Local pit I boom ~8q&~8qS to ~q7~q.~4q4~q. ~6qa~qm~qo~2qb~0qw ~qt~qvr~2qf~2qi~qo~4qM~q_~8q@~12q"~_~q4~qC~0qd~8qM~6qw~16qW and ~qv~qo~4qd~qm~4qd~4qm In ~q0 to ~2qd~08qq~qm~qn~2qd~00qM ~00q"~4qM ~qt~2qh~qe & Aa~qx~6qd~8qf~qa~qw Waters -~12qf~12qt a pH ~8qS~qt~qea~qt~qer than ~qoc~qe~qa~qn~08qk ~8qF~qM and Sam ~0qm~qo~qn~q, ~2qf~2ql~qu~4qx~qti~qo~qn~qs~q: name ~12qd the ~qo~16qw ~8q(Porosity ad ~qs~qo~2ql~qo~16qul~qt~8qy~8q)~q. ~04qM ~qn~qu~qt~qr~0qi~qe~2qw ~q1 am plankton ~2qd~8qi~qm~0qp~qers~qal. d~qo~8qg~qr~qa~qg~qu( ~4q-~2qe~ql~q.~q- ~qS~2qk~08q*~qL ~qT~qo~4qg~qs~qt~qa~0qd~qo~qn~08qa type mad ecosystem ~q0~q1-~qh~0qm~0qs ~qs~qa~0qu~qni~qt~4qY ~qC~qO~qGI~qV~qO~qL~qP water ~8qd~q@~qv~qj~qs~8qj~qc~4qj~4q=~qo~qn~qL local ci~8qlm~qat~0qi~qc~q.-~q-~qd~qi~q-o~4qw~0q- and ~0qv~2qM~qO~2qM ~4qw~qix~16qf~16qt aid mom and intensity of pr~qe~qc~4qi~2qp~0qi~08q"~4qM ~q0 ~q.~qUJ~8qM cam ~4qx I I APPENDIX 2 I Massachusetts/Town of Mashpee - South Cape Beach Agreement I I I I I 11 I I I I I I I I I 1 199 I AMENDED AGREEMENT Agreement entered into this 29 day of June in the year 1981, by and between the Town of Mashpee and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts acting through the Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Management (DEM) pursuant to Chapter 1058 of the Acts of 1971, as amended whereby DEM is authorized to acquire by gift, purchase or eminent domain South Cape Beach in the Town of Mashpee. WHEREAS, the aforementioned parties entered into an agreement dated September 22, 1980 by substituting in its entirety therefor this Amended Agreement and all the provisions, covenants, and condition wherein contained. IN CONSIDERATION OF the-mutual covenants herein contained and expressed and for other good and valuable consideration the parties-mutually covenant and agree as follows: (1) That development and use of the park shall be limited to bathing, sunning, hiking, fishing, nature interpretation, non--;motorized biking, and associated passive enjoyment through recreational use consistent with the fragile ecology of the site, which shall expressly exclude overnight camping, and private vehicles, except only as provided for in paragraph (4) below. Any proposed recreational use not specified in this paragraph shall first be submitted to South Cape Beach Advisory Committeefor it review and recommendation. (2) That all park facilities will be designed, sited and maintained so that they do not harm the natural and scenic qualities of the area. The Executive Order for Barrier Beaches of Governor Edward J. King signed August 8, 1980, (attached as "Exhibit A") shall be incorpor- ated by reference into this Agreement and the Department will undertake to enforce all its provisions throughout the area desig- nated as South Cape Beach State Park (3) That the Department will manage the fragile wetland, dune and upland areas of the site to prevent erosion and to preserve critical habitat and the area's natural scenic qualities. Local ordinance and bylaws now effective will be incorporated into 'and made part of the park's rules and regulations and shall govern and control, provided no legal conflict exists. No park rule or regulation will permit an activity or use otherwise prohibited by the rules, regulations and bylaws of the Town of Mashpee in existence as of the date of executiion of .this Agreement. (4), That the Department may allow vehicle access to designated service roads for the sole pupose of access to fishing areas to persons over sixty years of age, those suffering from ambulatory disabilities, or holding disabled veteran status. Said access shall be by permit only, restricted to a maximum of six vehicles at any one time, and such travel shall be allowed only between the hours of sunset and sunrise. Such vehicles shall be limited to designated ways and shall in no circumstances be driven off the designated route onto sand or other unimproved terrain or used for overnight stays. Any violations of the permit provisions shall, upon finding of violation by the South Cape Advisory Committee, cause the revocation of said permits. In the event the above provisions are deemed discriminatory under the law, such use of vehicles shall be prohibited altogether. In no event, and under no circumstance shall there ever be an increase in said vehicle use above the 6 maximum herein provided for. (5) That parking shall be limited to several landscaped sites, with a total maximum capacity of no more than 400 vehicles. Buses will be allowed by permit only. Such parking areas shall be finished with a permeable or semi-permeable material acceptable to the South Cape Beach Advisory Committee. The parking area shall be, if at all feasible, on land purchased in fee by the Department. Failing the reaching of agreement for such negotiated purchase, the Department will exercise rights available for taking by eminent domain. In any event and however acquired the Department will promptly initiate and expeditiously support legislation which will authorize the Department to deed, subj ect to conservation and other restrictions contained herein, said land to the Town of Mashpee for a nominal consideration of one dollar; and the Town,covenants, in turn, that it shall promptly execute a renewable lease to the Department for a period of 99 years for a nominal consideration of one dollar, said land, which lease shall contain a right to re- entry for breach of any one of the covenants and conditions con- tained herein. It is expressly covenanted and agreed that no other land within the park other than that specifically designated and identified in.accordance with these provisions will be used as a parking area or for purposes of public parking. (6) All Town owned land acquired by the Department will be acquired by Deed of the'Town conveying the subject land in fee simple. (7) Any land in private ownership purchased by the Department for parking purposes shall be subject to a restriction limiting use to the Department to 400 cars; and all the other condition contained in this Agreement. (8) The Department shall be responsible for a management system for traffic control on Great Oak Road and its point of intersection with other roads leading into the Park, to insure orderly traffic. (9) The acquistion by the Commonwealth of 432 acres, more or less, is an express condition precedent to the legal existence of this Agreement. In the event that the acquistion by'the state is less than 432 acres, this Agreement may, at the exclusive option of the Town of Mashpee, be terminated and declared void. The parcel of land to be acquired is the Southerly portion of the the Town of Mashpee, bounded on the West by WAquoit Bay, on the South by Nantucket Sound, and on the East by Great Flat Pond. (10) That primary effort shall be made by the Department to negotiate purchase of the aforementioned privately owned lands. (11) That recognizing the possibility that all such privately owned lands within the proposed boundaries of the Park may not be able to be acquired through negotiated purchase, the Department will consider the exercise of its power of eminent domain. (12) That any specific taking by eminent domain would be considered only when efforts for a negotiated purchase have failed despite due diligence by the Department to reach a settlement; or when title to the land in question is of such unmarketability that remedial title action would be impractical. (13) That the Mashpee Board of Selectmen will grant the Department eminent domain authority by appropriate vote for the purpose of acquisition of the proposed South Cape Beach State Park. (14) That as a result of the proposed development of the Park, it may be necessary for the Department to acquire all municipally owned lands within the proposed boundaries of the Park. These lands include the existing town beach, a portion of Great Oak Road and other isolated parcels standing in the name of the Town of Mashpee. (15) That such acquisition of town owned lands would be in the form of land exchange in which the Town would received from the Commonwealth land of equal value adjacent to the existing town beach. In con- junction with any exchange, the Department will make improvements to Great Oak Road, from its intersection with Red Brook Road all the way to the Beach. In addition, the Department will assume costs associated with the relocation of the town beach, including the cost of a new access road, parking areas and necessary fencing and other essential.improvements. Said town beach will be to the east of the, state beach in the area of Great Flat Pond and shall consist of approximately 30 acres and shall have an ocean frontage of approxi- mately 1700 linear feet. (Map attached and incorporated by reference "Exhibit B"). (16) That the town regards as recreation/conservation lands, all properties which may be transferred to the Department in any land exchange in conjunction with the establishment of the Park. (17) That the Department will reserve a suitable site on Great River, Waquoit Bay for future use and development by the Town of Mashpee for construction for a boat launch/pier.facility, the metes and bounds to be mutually agreed upon by the Town of Mashpee and the Department. The area, or site, is to be no less than 10 acres with access to and from Wills Work Road. The Department will construct an improved access road to said facility and will seek on behalf of the Town of Mashpee such state funds that are available for municipal boat launching facilities. In furtherance of the above, the Department will initiate and support legislation transferring title of said site to the Town of Mashpee. In the event such legislation fails of passage, the Department will lease such land to the Town of Mashpee for a period of ninety-nine years for nominal consideration of one dollar. (18) That the Department shall at all times continue to recognize a South Cape Beach State Park Advisory Committee comprised of eleven (11) voting members and four (4) ex-officio, non-voting members. The voting membership of the Committee shall consist of the following eight (8) residents of or representatives for the Town to be appointed by the Board of Selectmen of the Town, and one (1) resident of or representative for the Town of Sandwich, Falmouth, and Barnstable to be appointed by those respective Boards of Selectmen. The non-voting membership of the Committee shall consist of one (1) representative each from the Office of Coastal Zone Management and the Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and Recreational Vehicles to be appointed by their respective agency heads, together with the sitting State Representative of the Third Barnstable Representative District and the State Senator from the Cape and Islands Senatorial District. All succeeding members shall be appointed in the same manner as stated above. The terms of all voting members shall be (3) years. (19) That the Committee shall continue to be responsible for making recommendations to the Department on such matters to include, but not be limited to, park management and operations, rules and regulations, design and plan review. The Department, when possible, shall submit to the Committee for review all architectural and -design plans and construction plans for facilities including structures roadways, and parking areas in an effort to accomplish the project. The Department will include a clause in the project's design contracts providing for periodic review by the Committee during the duration of the contract. The provisions of this agree- ment shall not be amended or changed without the express consent in writing of all parties thereto, except as otherwise provided for in paragraph 20 below. Except as provided for in such amendments this agreement shall be for a term of ninety nine (99) years. The parties agree to renew those provisions contained herein which otherwise expire by operation of law. (20) The passage of legislation, by the General Court of the Commonwealth, incorporating and adopting all the terms, provisions, conditions and restrictions contained in this Agreement shall be an express condition precedent to the legal existence and enforceability of this Agreement, to the contemplated transfer of Town owned land to the Department and to the Authority for Acquisition of land to be granted by the Board of Selectmen of the Town of Mashpee. In the event that all the terms, provisions, conditions and restrictions are not incorporated and adopted into legislation, the Town, at its sole option, may elect to terminate this Agreement, or in the alternative amend this Agreement to conform to the legislation as enacted, in which event the Agreement, as a-ended, shall be binding upon all the parties thereto. (21) The acceptance of Deeds by the Department to Town owned lands shall not be deemed, and in fact shall not be legally construed to be a full performance and discharge of the terms, conditions, provisions and restrictions of this Agreement; rather, it is expressly agreed and understood that this Agreement and all iis terms, conditions, provisions and restrictions shall survive the delivery of Deeds, and shall thereafter be fully enforceable in all aspects thereof. (22) It is expressly agreed that the terms, conditions, provision and restrictions herein contained shall be specifically enforceable, in law or equity, by a Court of competent jurisdiction, and that standing in any action shall be given to the Town of Mashpee or to any ten (10) citizens domiciled in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. CERTIFICATE OF VOTE At a meeting of the Board of Selectmen of the Town of Mashpee, Barnstable County, in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, said meeting being held on July 15, 1981, having been duly called and a quorom being present and voting, upon motion duly made and seconded, it was, VOTED: That the Commissioner of Environmental Management be, and is hereby authorized, pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 132A, Sections 3 and 3A of the General Laws, and Chapter 1058 of the Acts of 1971 as amended to acquire by eminent domain all that land as shown on a two sheet plan entitled, "Plan of Land-South Cape Beach - Mashpeei Mass. -. prepared for Dept. of Environmental Management - Scale 1" - 200' Feb. 16, 1976 - Briggs Engineering & Testing C0.11, on file with said Department, provided however, that no land owned by the Town of Mashpee shall be taken. The approval and vote hereunder is expressly subject to and conditional upon the full performance and com- pliance by both the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the Department of Environmental Management of the terms, promises, covenants and conditions all of which are included and incorporated into a written agreement entitle "Amended Agreement" dated June 29, 1981 between the Town of Mashpee and the Common- wealth of Massachusetts acting through the Commissione@ of the Department of Environmental Management, a copy of which agreement is attached hereto, incorporated and made part of the Certificate !of Vote; the approval and vote hereunder is also expressly conditional upon the passage of Legislation by the General Court of the Commonwealth incorporating and adopting all the terms, provisions, conditions and restrictions contained in the agreement dated June 29, 1981. The Board of Selectmen reserve to itself the unconditional right to rescind and cancel the within vote for breach of any of the conditions above stated. (Signed by Mashpee Board of Selectmen) I I APPENDIX 3 . I Waquoit Bay Area of Critical Environmental Concern Designation Document I I I I I I . I I I I I I I I I I - I . 2W e - 40, 101"?,monwea&lz ole-1 &."admise,16 J&jac"ta ovar EDWARD J. KING GoVERNOR JOHN A. BEWICK SECRETARY Designation of Waguoit Bay as an Area of Critical Environmental Concern and S222orting Findings Following an extensive process, including nomination, research, informal meetings with local groups, public informational meetings, public hearings, on-site visits, and a formal evaluation of all assembled data, I, the Secretary of Environmental Affairs, hereby designate Waquoit Bay an Area of Critical Environmental Concern pursuant to the authority granted to me by G.L. c. 21A, s. 2(7). I also hereby,.find that the Waquoit Bay ACEC is significant to flood control, the prevention of storm damage, the protection of land containing shellfish and fisheries; public interests pr6tected.by the Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, 940. 1. Boundary.of the Waguoit Bay ACEC The Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) extends from the extreme southwestern end of Dead Neck barrier beach (mean low water, MLW) and extends straight across the entrance channel to Waquoit Bay by the shortest distance to the mean low water line of the western side of the entrance channel. The ACEC boundary then follows the MLW line in a westerly direction (excluding the western jetty of the Waquoit Bay entrance channel) to a point approximately 1370 feet (straight line measure) from the westernmost tip of Washburn Island. This point falls on a line perpendicular to the MLW line of Vineyard Sound and tangent to a segment of shoreline which is both the southeast MLW shoreline of Eel Pond and a western edge of Washburn Island. The ACEC boundary then follows that perpendicular line to the intersection with the western MLW shore of Washburn Island. The boundary follows the MLW line along the Washburn Island to its extreme northeastern point. The boundary then extends from this point north into Waquoit Bay by the shortest distance to the 6 foot depth curve (datum: MLW). The boundary follows the 6 foot depth curve in a northerly direction to the point of intersection with a true azimuth.bear'ing'line of 1500, drawn from the southwestern most point of shoreline of the un-named pond east of Seapit Road. From this point of intersection the ACEC boundary then follows this above-mentioned bearing line in a northwesterly direction to the southwestern most point of shoreline of the un-named pond east of Seapit Road and continues along an extension of lug this straight line to the intersection with the 100 year flood boundary still east of Seapit Road. 209 The ACEC boundary then follows the 100 year flood boundary in a generally easterly direction including all%of Bourne Pond, Bog Pond, Caleb Pond, parts of the Quashnet River and Red Brook and all of Witch Pond, Fells'Pond, and Jehu Pond. At.the point of the fifth-intersection of the 100 year flood boundary with Great Oak Road, the ACAC boundary extends west on the northern side line of Great Oak Road across the 10 foot contour line (datum.: mean sea level) to the second intersection with the 10 foot contour line (MSL). The ACEC boundary extends from this point in a northwesterly direction along the 10 foot contour line (MSL) to the point closest to the eastern shore (MLW) of the Great River. From this point the line extends by the shortest distance to the eastern shore (MLW) of the Great River. The boundary then extends in a northerly direction along the eastern shore (MLW) of the Great River to the western most point of the entrance channel to Jehu Pond. The boundary then extends due west to the 11LW line on the west side of Great River and following the MLW line northward to the boundary between Monomoscoy Island and the adjacent northerly salt marsh. The boundary follows a northwesterly trend along the southern edge of this salt marsh, crosses Monomoscoy Road, and continues along the southern edge of this salt marsh to the intersection with the MLW line on the eastern side of Hamblin Pond. The boundary continues in a southerly direction along the MLW line on the east side of Hamblin Pond, across the northern channel entrance of the Little River and continues along the MLW line on the northern edge of Seconsett Island to the intersection of the HLW line and the town boundary between Falmouth and Mashpee. The ACEC boundary follows the town boundary to the intersection with the MLW line on the eastern shore of Waquoit Bay. The ACEC boundary extends from this point ina southerly direction along the MLW line, around Seconsett Island and then in a northerly direction to the point of intersection (Point A) with a true azimuth bearing line of 2900, drawn from the point (Point B) along the MLW line on the eastern shore of the Great River which is also the northernmost point (Point B) of property along the MLW line on the eastern shore of the Great River as described in the Plan of Land, South Cape Beach, Mashpee, Mass., prepared for the Department of Environmental Management, Scale 1"-200'. February 16, 1976, Briggs Engineering and Testing Co., Inc., Norwell, Mass., as revised March 31, 1976. The ACEC boundary then proceeds southeasterly from Point A along the previously described true azimuth bearing line of 2900 to Point B and continues in an easterly direction along the northern boundary line of said Plan of Land for South Cape Beach to the intersection with the southern,' side line of Wills Work Road. The ACEC boundary follows the southerly side line of said Road to the intersection with Great Oak Road and then follows the southerly side line of Great Oak Road to the intersection with 100 year flood boundary. The ACEC boundary follows the 100 year flood boundary in a north- easterly direction to the intersection of the southerly side line of Great Oak Roa@. The ACEC boundary then follows the southerly side line of said Road to the next intersection with the 100 year flood boundary. From this point, the ACEC boundary follows the-100 year flood boundary in a southerly direction to the southernmost extent of the 100 year flood boundary in Mashpee. The boundary then extends due south in a straight line to the MLW line of Vineyard So%_,nt and-thence in a westerly direction along the MLW line along South Cape Beach to the point of origin. Also included within the ACEC boundary is the land along the upper reaches of the Child's River. The ACEC boundary begins at the intersection of the northerly side line of Rt. 28 and the 100 year flood boundary on the eastern side of the Childs River. The ACEC'h6undary proceeds northerly along the 100 year flood boundary on the eastern sIde of the Childs River to the point where the 100 year flood boundary crosses in a westerly direction the Childs River. The ACEC boundary then follows the 100 year flood-boundary on the western side of the Childs River in a southerly direction to the point of intersection with the northern side line of Rt. 28. The ACEC boundary then proceeds from this point in an easterly direction across the Childs River to the point of origin. Within the boundary the following exclusions exist: 1) The existing Waquoit Bay navigational channel (6 foot depth, Mean Low Water) extending in a northerly direction from the entrance jetties of Waquoit Bay to the head of Waquoit Bay. Specifically, this measn the channel delineated by existing U.S. Coast Guard buoys (See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, nautical chart #13229, 15th Ad., February 3, 1979, page C, Waquoit Bay and U.S. Coast Guard navigational buoys). Where the channel is unmarked by buoys, the west channel boundary will be delineated by a straight line drawn from buoy C-7 northerly to the western edge of Bourne .Pond. This channel would extend no.further than 100 feet to the east of the west,channel boundary and not exceed a dredged depth of 6 feet below mean low water. This channel will extend no further north than the present Falmouth town landing (near Seapit Road). 2) The existing Seconsett navigational channel ext ending from U.S. Coast,Guard buoy N-6 (see NOAA nautical chart #13229, 15th Ad., February 3, 1979, page -C, Waquoit Bay and 'U.S. Coast Coast navigational buoys) to the entrance of the Great and Little Rivers, Mashpee. The southern boundary of the Seconsett channel extends from buoy N-6, southeasterly in a direct line not to extend beyond Seconsett point. The width of the Seconsett channel will not exceed 100 feet ftem. the southern boundary line. The Seconsett channel.will not exceed a dredged depth of 6 feet below MLW. 3) The existing small culvert beneath Monomoscoy Road, M@shpee. 21l II. Designation of the Resources of Waguoit Bay Waquoit Bay area is an extensive and largely unaltered resource system. Among the natural components of the',Tystem are many specified as Significant Resource Areas (SRA's) in the Massachusetts CZM Program. These include a long barrier beach system, dunes and sandy beaches, many acres of salt marsh, pro- ductive shellfish beds, a large estuary, anadromous fish runs and floodplain, erosion and accretion areas. The area is a spawning and nursery ground for many marine species, as well as an important habitat for upland apecies and waterfow The beaches, dunes, and salt marshes provide protection against storms for low- lying inland areas. The region clearly meets the regulatory criterion of the ACEC Program, that a region proposed for designation must contain at least five of the specified Significant Resource Areas. 11I. Procedures Leading to ACEC Designation The Waquoit Bay Area was first proposed for ACEC consideration by local citizens at a CZK planning meeting over two years ago. Active planning commenced in March 1979. Meetings on May 3. May 24, and August 2 were held in Falmouth and Mashpee and attended by local officials and local planning boards, committee members, owners of the area's three marinas and some property owners. On August 2 a proposed boundary was unanimously endorsed by the six officials and marina owners present at this meeting. On July 9, 1979, a letter nominat- ing the-Waquoit Bay-Estuarine System as an Area of Critical Enviornmental Concern was submitted by the Selectmen, Conservation Commission and Waterways Committee/ Harbormaster of the Towns of Falmouth and Mashpee. After reviewing this nomina- tion, the Secretary of Environmental Affairs decided, on August 21, 1979 to proceed with a full review of the proposed area. Notice of the receipt of the nomination request and a public hearing notice were published in the Environmental Monitor on August 22, 1979. The public hearing notice also appeared in two-local newspapers: The Cape Cod-Times and The Falmouth Enterprise. Additional information an the region was collected by the Coast-@,!, Zone Management office staff in consultation with local officials, town boards and natural resource officers. The results of this research were forwarded for comment and review to the Selectmen, Conservation Commissions, Planning Boards, Waterways Committee, and Natural Resource Officers and members of the CZM Citizen Advisory Council for Cape Cod. Copies also went to interested individuals and were available to the general public upon request. Informational articles about the proposed nomination appeared in the local newspaper. A final informational meeting was held at Mashpee Town Hall on August 30, 1979. A public hearing was conducted on September 27, 1979 in the Falmouth Town Hall. The recorded testimony was largely favorable and an informal vote was 50-3 in favor of the designation. As the result of a number of concerns raised at this meeting, on-site visits were also arranged. On October 19, eighteen citizens and officials toured Waquoit Bay by boat following existing main navi- gational channels. In addition, CZM staff conducted site visits with individual landowners who had concerns. 2 1 02"" A second public hearing was'scheduled for October 25, 1979. A public hearing notice was published in the Environmental Monitor on October 22, 1979. The public hearing notice also appedred in the Cape Cod Times and The Falmouth Enterprise. The hearing record remained open until November 7, 1979 for those persons who wished to submit written comments. After careful consideration of all public comments, final boundary modifications were defined. IV. Discussion o.f Factors Specified in Section 6.48 of the CZM Program Regulations Prior to designation of a region as an Area of Critical Environmental Concern, the Secretary must consider the factors specified in Section 6.48 of the CZX Program regulations. Based on research and information from local residents, I find that the following factors are applicable to the Waquoit Bay Barrier Beach System. Quality of Natural Characteristics: This estuarine system is a relatively large unaltered physical and biological resource. Its-unpolluted water attracts a wide range of finfish species and nurtures large numbers of shellfish. The undeveloped stretches of.Washburn Island and Dead Neck accommodate contiguous environments of beach, dune, marsh, and low wooded hills. Minimum alteration of the natural features of this area will allow them to-function at their maxi- mum capacity. These undeveloped expanses also contribute significantly to the scenic beauty enjoyed by users of the area. Public Health: The high water quality currently existing supports many important activities, including swimming, boating, fishing and shellfishing. Clean water must be maintained to ensure the safety of the recreational users of the area. Activities that would degrade water quality would have both envir- onmental and economic consequences. The barrier beach formed by Washburn Island and Dead Neck acts as a natural storm buffer to protect the property of shore dwellers within the system. Development of this barrier would impair its natural form and protective function. Uniqueness: An estuary, where fresh water inflow meets and mixes with salt water, is the most significant of all coastal features in the amount and variety of biological production. The largely unaltered Waquoit Bay estuarine system makes this area both a highly significant and uncommon feature of the Massachusetts coast. The availability of nutrients supports a great number and variety of species. These conditions provide excellent opportunities for scientific research. In a study conducted in the late 1960's, the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries determined that of nine sample estuaries in the state, Waquoit Bay supported the greatest diversity of estuarine-associated fin-fish. Currently, a biologist from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution is studying the genetics and distribution of quahogs in the estuary. Productivity: The region contains diverse and viable populations of fish, shellfish and waterfowl. The biological productivity of this area is sustained by its ponds and salt marshes which contribute large quantities of nutrients to the coastal food chain. 2 1%". *1 Imminence of Threat to the Resource: Alterations which could severely impact the natural functions or teduce productivity of the components of the Waquoit Bay system have been considered for the area. The ACEC designation would focus attention on the area'a'stgnificant environmental and economic resources, and would serve is a guide regardinr future activity in the area. Irreversibility of Impact: Because the estuary has only limited access to the open Sound through the narrow cuts at the east end of Washburn Island, the entire basin is susceptible to inadequate flushing. The discharge of pollutants into this system would tend to remain concentrated rather than to disperse. As a result, impacts on shellfish and finfish could be severe, thereby damaging an important economic resource of the V'aquoit basin. Other habitat alterations such as filling or removal could also severely affect sensitive spawning or nursery areas, thereby decreasing the abundance of valuable commercial, recreational, and aesthetic resources. Economic Benefits: This ACEC brings significant inc ome to Falmouth and Mashpee through tourists and area residents who purchase shellfish permits, the use of area services such as boatyards, and the wholesale trade in shell- fish. Any alteration in the area that threatens to disrupt its utilization and/or attractiveness carries a potentially detrimental economic impact. Damage to the groundwater is also an important consideration because the shore- dwellers depend on private groundwells for their fresh water supply. Supporting Factors: Residents, business persons and other users of the ACEC agree that the area carries environmental importance, economic utility and aesthetic qualities. Groups at many levels, including local residents, town authorities and state administrative agencies, have voiced their concern about the need to preserve the undeveloped portions, particularly Washburn Island and South Cape Beach. John A. Bewick Date Secretary of Environmental Affairs APPENUIX 4 Massachusetts Notice of Intent to Prepare DEIS and OMP; Published in State Environmental Monitor on May 8, 1984, and Notice of Pre-Acquisition Planning Activities Published in State Environmental Monitor on November 23, 1981 (ZAm0A* Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Office The Massachusetts Coastal Zone"Management Office (MCZM) will be working with the Sanctuaries Office of the U.S. Office of Ocean and Coastal Resources Man- : gement to develop a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the pos- ible designation of Waquoit Bay and some adjacent uplands in Falmouth and Mashpee as a federal Estuarine Sanctuary. Preacquisition Planning and Fea-- ability Study activities were reviewed under EOEA #4256, noticed in the Monitor of 23 November 1981. On 23 December 1981, the Secretary of Environmental Affairs found that these planning activities did not require an Environmental Impact Report under MEPA. Notice of-the availability of the DEIS for review, when completed, will be published in the Monitor. At this point MCZM Is soliciting public comments for the scope of activities and impacts to be covered in the DEIS. Written comments,should be forwarded to the MCZH Office', attention Steve Bliven,'within 21.days of this notice. Additional informati'on on the project may be obtained.from Mr. Bliven at 727-9530. 100 Cambridge Street, Boston,, MA 02202 (617) 727-95@O 217 P. 1 APPENDIX A COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ENVIRONMENTAL NOTIFICATION FORM 1. SUMMARY A. Project Identification 1. Project Name Waquoit Bay Estuarine Sanctuary Preacquisition Planning and Feasibility Study 2. Project Proponent Mass Coastal Zone Management office Address 100 Cambridge Street, Boston, MA 02202 B. Project Description: (City/Town(s) Falmouth, Mashpee 1. Location within city/town or street address Waquoit Bay vicinity (for further site details see below and attached map) 2. Est. Commencement Date: 1 January 1982 Est. Completion Date: 30 October 1982 Approx Cost $ 56,780 Current Status of Project Design: 0 % Complete C. Narrative Summary of Project Describe project and give a description of the general project boundaries and the present use of the project area. (If necessary, use back of this page to complete summary). The proposed project involves a planning and feasibility study for the designation of a National Estuarine Sanctuary within the Waquoit Bay areas of Falmouth and Mashpee. Work will include planning only; a MEPA filing is requied because the Concern (ACEC). An additional MEPA filing will be required prior to any implemen- tation of any Sanctuary plans. The National Estuarine Sacntuary program allows states to acquire, develop or operate estuaries to be set aside "to serve as natural field laboratories in which to study and gather data on the natural and human processes occurring within the estuaries of the coastal zone". Such data will be used in making management decision in coastal areas. Multiple uses can take place in the sanctuary as long as the activities do not detract from research and educational uses. The planning activities will assess feasiblity and majory issues and concerns in such a designation; refine boundary proposals; develop management plans and/or programs for research and eduaction; investigate acquisition techniques (either in fee or through restriciton); and do real estate appraisals. This information will be used for future public consideration of a potential sanctuary designation. The area to be initially reviewed generally corresponds to the Waquoit Bay ACEC and includes Waquoit Bay, South Cape Beach, Washburn Island and the marshlands around Hamlin, Jehu, Flat and Sage Lot Ponds. A map is included wit this filing. Copies of this may be obtained from: Name: Steve Bliven Firm/Agnecy: Mas, Coastal zone Management Address: 100 Cambridge Street, Boston, MA 02202 Phone No. (617)-727-9530 THIS IS AN IMPORTANT NOTICE COMMENT PERIOD IS LIMITED LEGAL RMCE NarICE OF UMM M SMUT EWIRONMENTAL NMFICATION FORM The Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management (CZM) office hereby gives notice that on 13 November 1981 an Environmental Notification Form (ENF) was submitted to the Secretary of Environmental Affairs under the provisions of MEPA, MGL. Ch. 30 ss. 62-62H inclusive, for a feasibility study and the preacquisition plaxming period of a possible National Estuarine Sanctuary designation for the Waquoit Bay vicinity in Falmouth and Mashpee. Copies' of this ENF will be available from Steve Bliven, CZM, 100 Cambridge Street, Boston, MA, 02202. This ENF will be available for public inspection during business hours at the MA Unit, Executive Office of Environmental Affair&, 100 Cambridge Street, Boston, MA 02202 and also at the office of the Falmouth Town Clerk, Town Building, rear of 173 Main Street in Falmouth and at the office of the Mashpee Town Clerk, Great Neck Road in Mashpee. Public notice of the filing of this ERF will be published by the Secretary of Environmental Affairs in the Environmental Monitor. A Wmty day period for submission of public comments will follow the 53lication of notice in the Monitor. Please write or call the MEPA Unit at 727-5830 for information on publ'LC Comment periods and how to subscribe to the Monitor. Steve Bliven Mass. Coastal Zone Management APPENDIX 5 Excerpt from the Washburn Island Preliminary Management Plan of April 1983 - "Conservation and Recreational Uses" (Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management) Conservation & Recreational Uses CARRYING CAPACITY The Relative Carrying Capacity Map measures the ability of the island's natural environment to absorb future recreational use without being damaged. Some areas on Washburn Island have a high capacity to absorb future recreational activity while others would be severely impacted by only a slight increase in use.* A sound master plan for the island's future should be based an a good understanding of the site's carrying capacity in order to assign future activities to the most ap- propriate locations. Certain portions of the dense pitch pine forests in the island's interior appear to be most tolerant and amenable to recreational use- These areas have been given a "high" carrying capacity rating on the map. Though fire danger is a problem in these areas, the pitch pine forests with hardy grass and shrub under- story could support carefully planned passive recreation without significantly losing their*lpresent quality. Some possible future improvements include a comfort station, dispersed camping areas and pedestrian trails. These uses wo uld be screened by the dense, absorptive pine forest, which is more resistant to erosion and vis- ual degradation than the more open areas on the island. The high carrying capacity areas within the pine forests are also well above dangerous flood and velocity zones, and are located away from the important visual and envi- 223 39. ronmental zones located earlier in this report. This zone of high carrying capacity would logically be the center of future development use of the island. Areas of "moderately high" carrying capacity generally occur in the pitch pine forests as well, though these zones contain a more fragile and scenic herb uhderstory. Past fires have often occurred in this portion of the forest, so particular care should be taken here to avoid fire hazards. The moderately high carrying capacity zone could support hiking, nature study, some carefully controlled camping, and perhaps a few well-sited struc- tures. Future users of the island could be encouraged to travel from their arrival in the high carryina capacity zone through this moderately high carryinq capacity zone on their way to the more fragile areas of Washburn Island. In this manner, intensity of use would be gradually dispersed.from the durable central upland portions of the island to the sensitive barrier beaches and marshes to the South. This would re- sult in only limited, dispersed use of fragile outlying zones such as the dunes and salt marshes, while high ca- pacity areas would become the focus of major trails and activities. The "moderate" carrying capacity zone, generally cover- ing the northern and central shores of the island, could support carefully controlled seasonal uses such as bath- ing, hiking trails and nature study areas. More inten- sive development would be prohibited here, tfiough the arrival dock would of necessity be located at some point along the shore. The weakest link in the ability of this zone to absorb future uses consists of the highly erodable coastal banks and fringing milt marshes. Ped- estrian traffic in these areas will have to be confined .to established trails and, where necessaly, to construc- ted stairs and boardwalks. 40. 9"A The "low-moderate" carrying capacity zone, located pri- marily in the southern portion of the island, consists of fragile dune and salt marsh vegetation presently pre- served in wild, untouched expanses of seashore. Excess- ive use of this zone, possible with even a few as three hundred visitors a day, could drastically alter the pri- mitive and untrammelled quality of this area. Access to this area by large groups of people should therefore not be actively encouraged. Major access points to the island should be located well away from this zone, and pedestrian paths 'leading to it should be carefully de- signed to keep visitors away from the most Critically sensitive areas. Strict and enforcable criteria for future use should be prep ared in order to allow for its future enjoyment by as many people as it will rea- sonably support. This opent- treeless area is especial- ly vulnerable to visual intrusions. Finally, areas of "low" carrying capacity - primarily the salt marshes - should be restricted from most future uses. These areas can support only occasional pedestrian access. Sustained traffic in the marshes would quickly result.in the death of salt marsh grasses and the rapid erosion of the soft, peaty soils. The flat, open salt marshes are the most visually sensitive zones on the island. THE MASTER PLAN The Preliminary master Plan for Washburn Island directly responds to the implications in the Regional Context and Site Analysis portions of this report. The Waquoit Bay area is becoming increasingly devel oped, especially the land directly onthe coast,,-..Reserving Washburn Island for recreation and conservation is fundamental in help- in4 to preserve the region's environmental vitality and marine resource values. This report recommends that Washburn Island be allowed to remain largely in its present state. Minor improve- ments will allow the island to absorb limited recreation- al use by local residents and a limited number of visi- tors. Proposed uses have been carefully planned to re- spect the island's natural resources and physical carry- ing capacity. Priority has been placed on maintaining Amental and visual quality, rather than the current enviror accomodating large numbers of visitors. The property should be managed in conjunction with South Cape Beach across the Bay. South Cape Beach provides a beach front park with easy access by car, and will be de- signed to accomodate parking for up to 400 vehicles. Washburn Island, on the other hand, will be managed for more limited use, primarily passive recreation such as hiking, nature study, etc. Access.to the island will be by private boat from So. Cave Beach. Wooden docks on the east and west side of the island would be built to accommodate boat traffic to the site. Here, a small interpretive display of maps and information will greet the visitor, and from here trails lead out to the north and south portions of the island. A few private boats could also be allowed to dock. From the beach, access up the side of the island would be through an area previously graded by the militarv. Possible tent camping is located in the plan on the is- land's eastern-side. This location is accessible to the landing point while being isolated from the development to the west, and is on a more durable portion of the land. The main comfort station is located between the camping area and the main accieiss point. The desireability of allowing limited camping on the site will have to be looked into carefully before makinq a final declsiwr.. 43. The proposed trail systen, utilizes the old main road as the western north-south trail. Cross trails are provi- ded to a similar trail along the east side of the island through the upland forests. The system is layed out to minimize impact and yet bring visitors into contact with a variety of landscapes. People will be directed by the trails to cross the zones of low carrying capacity around the main salt marsh to the south by using either the western old-road route, or hard sand and a raised boardwalk on the eastern side of the marsh. A few overlook structures are carefully located to take advantage of good views and interpretive features. Unsupervised swimming will be allowed on the major south- facing beach, and fishing can take plhce at the mouth of Eel Pond and Waquoit Bay. A carry on/carry off trash policy would be in effect. Least Terns have been observed nesting on the barrier beach in the southern portion of Washburn Island. In order to protect this significant island resiaent, por- tions of the beach should be closed during the mid- summer nesting season. Boardwalk design and location should facilitate this protective management activity. PARK MMAGEMENT If Washburn Island is acquir ed by DEM in the near future, the Department proposes to staff the island with volunteer "island managers* during the summer season of 1983. The island manager system, used successfully for several years in the'Boston Harbor Islands, allows environmental interns to staff an 44. 2Z7 island 24 hours a day, Providing guidance, maintenance and site supervision around the clock. The island managers, usually college students majoring in environmental or recreation fields, would be supervised by full-time DEM staff based at South Cape Beach State Park. Permanent staffing of Washburn Island would begin in the summer of 1984. Estimated permanent staff would include one seasonal park supervisor, two seasonal interpreters and two seasonal skilled conservation helpers. These positions would be filled during the peak season (May through September) with wintertime supervision provided by full-time staff b ased at South Cape Beach. SUMMARY Washburn island is a property of unique environmental, scenic and recreational value. Its protection from rapidly increasing development pressures is of major concern to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. This report has described Washburn Island's resources in detail, and has proposed preliminary plans for the preservation of the island. Because environmental protection is the primary concern, control of visitor access to, and use of, the. islAnd.. is.. of key i=ortance The Washburn Island master plan has accommoda'ted this need to maintain remoteness and to minimize disturbance of the site while providing for a certain amount of controlled public access. Visitor numbers on the island will be regulated by-the low volume of boat traffic reaching the site from the mainland. Access to the island will be encouraged at the designated landings in the central portion of the site, so the more fragile southern portions will receive proportion- 22R ately fewer users. Structures and associated develop- ment will be limited and inconspicuously sited. An emphasis will be'placed instead on the interpretation and enjoyment of a natural, remote and undisturbed envirorment,-cluttered with as few buildings as possible. Since Washburn Island's abandonment by the military at the end of World War 11, natural processes have been working to reclaim the landscape. This -report pro- poses a master plan and management policy for the site that will encourage this process of natural reclamation to continue. The island, now an invaluable assett, will continue to appreciate in scenic, environmental and recreational value in future years if given the opportunity. 46. 229 APPENDIX 6 Water Quality Provisions for the Waquoit Bay Area of Critical Environmental Concern 231L '&am@majle Awl COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT Policy 2 of the.Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Program calls on environmental agencies of the Commonwea.1th to " Protect complexes of marine resources areas of unique productivity (Areas for Preservation or Restoration (APRs)/Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs); ensure that activities in or impacting such complexes are designed and carried out to minimize adverse eFfects on marine productivity, habitat values, water quality, and storm buffering of the entire complex". Under these provisions, upon designation of an area as an ACEC, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering, Division of Water Pollu'tion Control (DWPC) classi.fiqs attainment standards in affected water bodies at the highest levels and incorporates strict anti-degradation standands. These act to prohibit 1) new industrial discharges and the discharge of hazardous substances and 2) direct discharges from new sewage treatment plans. Marine water segments within Waquoit Bay and connecting water bodies have been designated SA(the highest attainment standard) and as Low Flow Waters (the highest antidegradation level) by DWPC as a result of the ACEC designation. MASSACHUS COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AND FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT V 1978 Michael Dukakis, Governor U. S. Department of Commerce Evelyn F. Murphy, Secretary National Oceanic and Atmospheric Executive Office of Environmental Affairs Administration Eric E. Van Loon, Director Office of Coastal Zone Management Policy 2** Protect complexes of marine resource areas of unique productivity (Areas for Preservation or Restoration (APRs)/Areas of Critical Environ- mental Concern (ACECs); ensure that activities in or impacting such complexes are designed and carried out to minimize adverse effects on marine productivity, habitat values, water quality, and storm buffering of the entire complex. Along the coast of Massachusetts are found.complexes or si,@nilicant resource areas and other coastal environments which are unique for tneir contributions to marine productivity as evidenced by: (a) high natural productivity or potentfally high productivi'_r shown by the presence of: 1) known spawning grounds for fish 2) shellfish beds, 3) commercially valuable plants, 4) anadromous fish runs, and. 5) feeding and breeding areas for waterfowl or birds:dependent on coastal resources. (b) high water quality or-potential to.meet highest water r.uality standards. Marine oroductivity, together with other factors, such as scenic '!Lality, historic' significance, storm buffering capacity, recreation v,-..Iue @-nd the presence of or habitat for rare, threatened or endangered specie3 nake such complexes likely candidates for designation as Areas for Preservation or Restoration (APR)/Area:s of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC). The provisions of Policy (1) will, of course, apply to wetlands within the APRs/ACECs. In addition, activities which will damage the resource should not be introduced into such areas. Activities which will be categorically prohibited below mean high water within the water bodies comprising the APRs/ACECs,include the following: new industrial discharges and the discho Wge of hazardous sub stances (once-the water segments are classified anti-degradation), (2) new dredging except for maintenance of existing channels or for enhancement of shellfish and other marine productivity, (3) disposal of dredged mate rial,except in instances when the material may be used for beach noutishment, dune stabilization, o*: marsh creation. (4) direct discharges from new sewage treatment facilities, (once the water segments are classified anti-degradation). --**Federal Consiscency will apply after such areas have been officially desiznar pti - " _6 r_*, Policy 2 The siting of new municipal sewage treatment plants shall also be pro- hibited within designated APRs. If activites are Provosed for an area which is related by natural pro- cesses (for example, littoral currents. tides) to the APR/ACEC such that the activity would impact the APRACEC, applicants for federal or state funds or permits shall be required to demonstrate that the proposed activity will not adversely affect the characteristics cited in the official Secretary of Environmental Affairs designation of the area. The Energy Facilities Siting Council, in conducting its review of energy facilities proposed for APRs,will give prime consideration to the need to prevent adverse environmental impacts in these areas. (See Policy and the Attorney General's Memorandum Opinion tex*t,and footnote 29." APR/ACEC designation will also trigger other special protection mea- sures for the area, including: Priority application of the Coastal !:etlands Restriction Program to the salt marshes, beaches, shellfish beds, dunes, and barrier beaches within the complex, including some restriction of contiguous upland areas where necessary to ensure full nrotection of the APR. Application of the Inland Wetl ands Restriction Program to protect anadromous fish runs if they exist in the complex. The designation will also give the area high priority for receipt of open space acquisition funds, Policy (24), and implementation of the Scenic Rivers Act, Policy (11), and for acquisition and management as a wildlife area by the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife. The designation of an area as an APR/ACEC, however, does not prohibit or eliminate existing uses. IMPLEXEINTATION The authorities to provide protection to wetland resources within A?Rs are essentially those used to implement Policy (1) with the exception that some contiguous lands within the APR may also be restricted if necessary to provide sufficient protection to the wetlands. Tidelands licensing will be used to prohibit new dredging and disposal as provided in (2) and (3) above. Each APR designation will be formally accomplished through desig- nation of the area as an Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC), pursuant to the-Secretary of EOEA powers under MCLA Chapter 21A, (this process is outlined in Section 6.1 and in the 21A regulations). This latter designation essentially means that greater scrutiny will be given to state funded and permitted projects proposed,.for the area, as the categorical exemptions for smaller projects from the reporting and review requirements of the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act will be removed. Such designation will also signifv to the Division of Uater Pollution Control that CZM recommends classification in ttassachusetts Water Quality Standard Regulations of all water basin segments within the complex as SA and anti-degradation waters, if they currently are not so classified, in order to maintain high water qualitV and implement (1) and (4) on the previous page. Policv 2 As shown on the preceding map, ten areas are currently proposed for APRACEC designation. Determinations with resoect to designations shall be made during the first year of program implementation. Primary State Authorities Inland and Coastal Wetlands Restriction Programs (MGLA C. 131, S. 40A and C. 130. S. 105) Wetlands Protection Program (MGLA C. 131. S. 40) Waterways Program (MGLA C. 91; C. 21A, S. 14) Ocean Sanctuaries Act (MGLA C. 132A, SS. 13-17) Division of Marine Fisheries (MGLA C. 130) Division of Water Pollution Control (MGtA C. 11. SS. 27, 43) Energy Facilities Sitng Council (MGLA C. 164) Division of Fisheries and Wildlife (MGLA C. 131, S. 6 and Chpater 839 of the Acts of 1971 - acquisition powers) Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MCLA C. 30, SS. 61-62H) Designation of Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (MGLA C. 21A, S. 2(7)) Outdoor Advertising Board'(MGLA C. 93, S. 29 and C. 93D) Self-Help Program (MGLA C. 132A. S. 11) Department of Environmental Management (MGLA C. 132A) Public Access Board (MGLA C. 21,. S$. 17-17A) Primary Federal Consistency Section 404 Permits (P.L. 92-500) Section 10 Permits (Rivers and Harbors Act, 1899) NPDES Permits, Section 402 (P.L. 92-500) Policy 3* Support attainm ent of the national water quality gtals for all waters of the coastal zone through coordination with existing water quality plan- ning and management agencies. Ensure that all activities endorsed [email protected] policies are consistent with federal and state effluent limitations and water quality standards. FaIdaral rnnciaraneu Policy 2 3 AREAS OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (ACEC'S) The Massachusetts program for identification, designation, and protection of critical areas. by Steve Bliven Revised through December 1982 Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Office Richard F. Delaney, Director 100 Cambridge Street Boston, MA 02202 PUBLICATION :16029-57-200-12-82-C.R. APPROVED BY: JOHN J. MANTON, State Purchasing Agent 238 Agency: Division of Water Pollution Control Department of Environmental Quality En gineeriag (DEQE) Water Quality Standards Reference: Mass. G.L. c. 21 9. 27 314 CMR 4.00 et seq. Purpose: To enhance the quality and value of the water resources of the Common- wealth through the designation of uses for which the waters shall be main- tained and protected, prescription of quality criteria required to sustain the designated usage, and, where appropriate, prohibition of discharges. General Procedures: The Division classifies the waters of the Commonwealth and establishes parameters for each class. The classification procedure in- volves setting attainment goals for the various water bodies. Standards to prevent or minimize any degradation are established and testing cri- teria are provided. ACEC: The CZM Program calls on the Division to classify waters within ACECs at high quality -standards, SA in marine waters and B in fresh (see below), and to 'incorporate strict antidegradation standards. This will serve to eliminate discharges of hazardous substances, new industrial discharges and direct discharges from new sewage treatment facilities. Class SA Marine or coastal waters assigned to this class are designated for the uses of protection and propagation of fish, other aquatic life and wildlife; for primary and secondary contact recreation; and for shellfish harvesting without depuration in approved areas. Class B - Fresh waters assigned to this class are designated for the uses of protection and propagation of fish, other aquatic life and wildlife; and for primary and secondary contact recreation. 2n9 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS WATER RESOURCES COMMISSION DiviSION OF WATER POLLUTION CONTROL MASSACHUSETTS WATER OUALITY STANDARDS 3. pH Shall be in the range of 6.5-9.0 s-.andrd units and not more than 0.2 units utside of the naturally occurring range. 4. Fecal Coliform Bacteria Shall not exceed a log mean for a set of samples of 1000 per 100 ml, nor shall more than 10% of tne total samples exceed 2,500 per 100 ml during any monthly samples period. except as provided in Regulation 2.1. C. Coastal and Marrine Waters the following additional minimum criteria are applicable to coastal and marine waters. For Class SA waters: Parameter Criteria 1. Dissolved Oxygen Shall be a minimum of 6.0 mg/l. 2. Temperature None except where the increase will not exceed the recommended limits on the most sensitive water use. 3. pH Shall be in the range of 6.5-8.5 standard units and not more than 0.2 units outside of the naturally occurring rarge. 4. Total Coliform Bacteria Shall not exceed a median value of 70 @0TN per 100 ml and not more than 10% of the samples shall exceed 230 MPN per 19O ml In any monthly samplIng period. For Class SB waters: Parameter Criteria 1. Dissolved Oxygen Shall be a minimum of 6.0 mg/l. Temperature None except %@here the increase will not exceed the recommended limits on the most sensitive water use. 3. pH Shall be in the range of 6.65-8.5 arid not more than 0.2.units outside of the naturally occurring range. 4. Total Colifornia Bacteria Shall not exceed a median value of 700 KEN per 100 ml and not more than 20% of the samples shall exceed 1000 MPN per 100 ml during any monthly sampling period. except as provided in Regulation 2.1. For Class SC waters: Parsmeter Criteria Dissolved Oxygen Shall be a minimum of 6.0 mg/l. 1. Temperature None except where the increase will not exceed the recommended limits an the most sensitive water use. 3. pH Shall be in the range of 6.5-8.5 standard units and.not more than 0.2 units outside the naturally occurring ranges. 4. Fecil ColLform Bacteria Shall not exceed a log mean for a set of samples of 1000 MPN per 100 ml, nor shall more than 10% of the total samples exceed 2500 MPN per 100 ml during any monthly pling period, except as pruvided in am, Regulation.2.1. PART 4 ANTIDEGRAZATION PROVISIONS Regulation 4.1 Protection of Existing Uses. In all cases, from ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- existing beneficial uses. Regulation 4.2 Protection of High Quality Waters. From and after the date these regulations become effective, waters designated by the Division in Regulation 5.5 whose quality is or becomes consistantly higher than that quality necessary to sustain the national goal uses shall be maintained at that higher level of qualitY unless Limited degradation is authorized by the Division. Limited degradation may be allowed by the Division as a variance from this regulation as provided In Section 4.6. Regulation 4.3 Protection of Low Flow Waters. Certain waters will be designated by the Division in Regulation 5.41 of these standards for protection under this section due to their inability to accept pollutant discharges. New or increased discharges of pollutants to waters so designated are prohibited unless a variance Is granted by the Division as provided in Regulation 4.6. Regulation 4.4 National Resource Waters. Waters which constitute an outstanding national resources as determined by their outstanding recreational ecological and/or --sthotic values shall be preserved. These waters shall be desingnated for preservation by the Division in Regulation 5.5 of these standards. W----- -- designated may not be degraded and aren ot subject to a variance procedure. New discharges of pollutants to such waters are prohibited. Existing discharges shall be eliminated unless the discharger is able to demonstrate that: a) Alternative means of disposal are not reasonably available or feasible; an b) The discharge will not effect the quality of the water as a national resource. Regulation 4.5 Control of Eutrophication. The discharge of nucrie. cs, primarily phosphorus or nitrogen, to waters of the Commonwealth will be lim -ed or prohibited by the Division as necessary to prevent excessive cutrophicat on of such waters. Theta shall be no new or increased discharges of nutrients into lakes and ponds. or tribucaries thereto. Existing discharges of nutrients nutrients which encourage eutrophication or growth of weeds or alga shall be treated. Activities which may result in non-point discharges of nutrients shall be conducted in accordance with the best management practices reasonably determined by the Division to be necessary to preclude or minimuze such discharges of nutrients. Regulation 4.6 Variances. A variance co authorize a discharge in water designated for protection under regulation 4.2 may be allowed by the Division where the applicant demonstrates that: 1) The proposed degradation will not result in water quality less than specified for the Lass; and 2) The adverse economic and social impacts specifically resulting from imposition of controls more stringent than secondary treatment to maintain the higher water quality are subscancial and widespred in comparision to other economic factors and are not warranted by a comparison of the economic, social and other benefits to the public resulting from maintenance of the higher quality water. In addition to the above, the applicant for a varience -- ----- under discharge into waters designated for protection under Regulation 4.3 must demonstrate that: 3) Alternative means of disposal are not reasonably available of feasible. In any proceeding -where such variance is at issue, the Division shall circul ite a public notice in accordance with the procedures set forth in G.L. c30A. 93. Said notice shall state chat a variance is under consideration by the Division, and indicate the Director's tentative determination relative thereto. To the extent feasible, the variance proceeding shall be conducted as part of any pending dicharge permit proceedings pursuant to G.L. c.21, 43. In any variance procedure, the burden of proof relative to Justifying the variance shall be an the party requesting the variance. Any variance granted pursuan: to this regulation shall not excend beyond the expiration date of the permit. PART 5 BASIN CLASSIFICATIONS AND MAPS Regulation 5.1 Description of Contents. This part sets forth the procedures and guidelines the Division must follow in classifying the waters of the Common wealth, and the classifications themselves. The procedural rules for classifying are contained in Regulations 5.2 through 5.4. Regulation 5.5 contains maps and tabulations identifying the assignment by the Division of ,each segment to one of the classes set forch in Part 3.3 of these Standards, the designation of uses and associated criteria for the segment and the imposition of special limitations in regulations 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 to chat segment. 243 j 3 6668 141M 4589 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1