{"Bibliographic":{"Title":"Biennial report to the Congress on coastal zone management Fiscal Years 1990-1991. Volume I: Executive Summary.","Authors":"","Publication date":"1992","Publisher":""},"Administrative":{"Date created":"08-20-2023","Language":"English","Rights":"CC 0","Size":"0000050079"},"Pages":["HT\n392\n.U35\n1990/\n1991\nATMOSA\nv.1\nAND\nBiennial Report\nNOAA\nMOLIFY\nto the Congress on\nUS\nOF\nCoastal Zone Management\nVolume I: Executive Summary\nSeptember 1992\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE\nNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration\nLIBRARY\nNational Ocean Service\nOffice of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management\nOCT 2 5 1994\nN.Q.A.A.\nU.S. Dept. of Commerce","HT\n392\n435\nDEPARTMENT ENT OF COMPANY\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE\nThe Under Secretary for\n1990/1991\nOceans and Atmosphere\nV 1\nWashington, D.C. 20230\nSTATES\nOF\nJUL I 4 1992\nThe President\nPresident of the Senate\nSpeaker of the House of Representatives\nSirs:\nI am pleased to submit the Biennial Report of the Office of Ocean\nand Coastal Resource Management, National Ocean Service, National\nOceanic and Atmospheric Administration, pursuant to Section 316\nof the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C.\n1451 et seq. ) for fiscal years 1990 and 1991. The report\ndiscusses the progress made during these years in administering\nthe coastal zone management and estuarine research reserve\nprograms and the problems encountered.\nSincerely,\nJohn A Knows\nJohn A. Knauss\nLIBRARY\nOCT 2 5 1994\nN.Q.A.A.\nU.S. Dept. of Commerce\nATMOSPHERIC\nAND\nNOAA\nCOMMUNITY\nTHE ADMINISTRATOR","The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is\nrequired to submit a report to Congress not later than April 1 on the admin-\nINTRODUCTION\nistration of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) of the preceding\ntwo fiscal years. Pursuant to Section 316 of the CZMA, as amended, this\nreport discusses the progress made during Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991 in\nadministering the National Coastal Zone Management (CZM) and National\nEstuarine Research Reserve Programs and the problems encountered.\nThe document is comprised of two volumes. Volume I provides a\nsummary of the CZM and estuarine reserve programs and describes the\naccomplishments of state CZM programs in selected national interest areas\n- coastal hazards, wetlands protection, coastal water quality, public\naccess, and waterfront redevelopment. In addition, Volume I describes the\nhighlights of CZMA administration during the biennium, including imple-\nmentation of the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990\n(1990 CZMA Amendments), and delineates future directions for these\nefforts, including coastal management issues of national importance and\nadministrative planning.\nVolume II highlights NOAA administration of the CZM and\nestuarine reserve programs and states' accomplishments during the bien-\nnium. Chapter 1 includes a brief description of the CZM program and\ndetails NOAA's implementation of the key provisions of the 1990 CZMA\nAmendments, including the Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program,\nthe Coastal Zone Enhancement Grants Program and the new procedures\nfor evaluating state CZM and estuarine reserve programs. This chapter\nalso describes NOAA's activities during the biennium regarding Federal\nconsistency actions.\nIn Chapter 2, individual state CZM programs are described, high-\nlighting significant accomplishments made during the report period. Each\nstate listing includes a summary of program accomplishments, significant\nprogram changes and evaluations of the state's performance. Chapter 3\npresents a description of the National Estuarine Research Reserve System\n(NERRS), including its mission and structure. Program accomplishments\nduring the biennium are provided in detail, as well as reflections on future\nprogram directions. Chapter 4 describes each estuarine reserve. Informa-\ntion is provided on reserve resources and facilities, important improve-\nments during the biennium, education, research and monitoring activities,\nand state performance in managing the reserve.\nThe status of state CZM programs is provided in Appendix A.\nLIBRARY\nAppendix B itemizes state funding under sections 306, 309 and 315 of the\nCZMA during fiscal years 1990 and 1991. Appendix C summarizes\nFederal consistency appeals. Guidance regarding processing fees for\nOCT 2 5 1994\nFederal consistency appeals is provided in Appendix D. Proposed regula-\ntions implementing sections 309 and 312 of the Coastal Zone Act\nN.Q.A.A.\nReauthorization Amendments of 1990 are printed in Appendix E. Finally,\nUS Dept. of Commerce\na list of the estuarine reserves, the reserves' acreage and the year of desig-\nnation is provided in Appendix F.\ni","TABLE OF CONTENTS\nBiennial Report, Volume I\nIntroduction\nI.\nThe Value of the Coast and its Resources\n1\nII.\nCoastal Management Program Overview\n2\nIII.\nCoastal Management: Contribution to the Nation\n4\nProtecting Life and Property from Coastal Storms\n5\nWetlands Protection and Preservation\n7\nCoastal Water Quality\n8\nPublic Access\n9\nWaterfront Redevelopment\n10\nIV.\nNational Estuarine Research Reserve System\n11\nV.\nCZMA - The New Agenda\n14\nCoastal Water Quality - Tackling Nonpoint Source Pollution\n15\nFocusing on Priority National Issues\n16\nThe Future Agenda\n17","T\nhe Nation's coasts are among America's most valuable and diverse\nresources. Extending over 95,000 miles and bordering three oceans\nThe Value of\nand the Great Lakes, this narrow strip of continent, where land meets the sea,\nis used for diverse, critical and often competing uses. The waters off the coast\nthe Coast\nare among the most biologically productive regions in the Nation. Coastal\nand its\nwetlands and estuaries provide the nutrients, nursing areas and spawning\ngrounds for 70 percent of the commercial and recreational fisheries harvest in\nResources\nthe United States. In addition to providing critical habitat for fish and wild-\nlife, coastal wetlands help reduce flood damage and serve as natural filtering\nsystems to protect water quality.\nFish and wildlife are not the sole inhabitants of the coastal zone. Over\n50 percent of the Nation's population already lives along the coasts, which\ncomprise only 11 percent of the total land of the United States. Coastal areas\nare the most densely populated in the U.S., supporting more than 750 people\nper square mile. This figure is expected to increase by 15 percent over the\nnext 20 years. Most of America's large metropolitan centers, such as San\nFrancisco, Seattle, Chicago, New York, Boston, Miami and New Orleans, are\nalso located in coastal regions. These centers bring a vast array of industrial\nand service activities to this limited resource area.\nThe recreation and tourism industries, which stimulate billions of\ndollars in economic activity, also have a large stake in coastal areas. Along\nsome coasts, recreation and tourism are the dominant industries, attracting\nmillions of Americans annually to coastal beaches and estuaries for recre-\national enjoyment. Several of the Nation's manufacturing facilities are also\ndrawn to coastal areas, due to the dependence on access to water transporta-\ntion and port facilities. These leisure and trade industries are vital to the\nNation's economy and provide jobs for many Americans, but also put addi-\ntional strain on valuable coastal resources.\nConcern for the condition of America's coasts has grown rapidly over\nthe years, spurred by accelerating demands for development in coastal areas,\npopulation increases along the coast, and severe degradation of the environ-\nment. Burgeoning population creates growing demands for commercial,\nresidential, and recreational development, placing tremendous pressure on the\nNation's coasts and coastal resources. Lives and property are continually\nplaced at risk from coastal storms and natural erosion processes. Coastal water\npollution has increased and the productivity of estuarine ecosystems continues\nto decline. The influence of coastal development is observed in the increase\nof closed shellfish growing waters, which are affected by urban runoff and\nmalfunctioning septic systems. A recent National Oceanic and Atmospheric\nAdministration (NOAA) study disclosed that 18 of 23 coastal states are\nexperiencing an increase in closed shellfish beds. Coastal wetlands loss also\nThe report, entitled \"1990 National Shellfish Register of Classified Estuarine Waters,\" was\nprepared by the Strategic Assessment Branch, Office of Ocean Resources Conservation and Assessment,\nNational Ocean Service, NOAA, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, Maryland 20852.\n1","continues. The U.S. loses 40,000 acres of coastal emergent wetlands annu-\nally. The State of Louisiana is experiencing the largest loss, with over 50\nsquare miles (approximately 32,000 acres) disappearing each year.\nT\no address these issues, Congress passed the Coastal Zone Manage-\nCoastal\nment Act (CZMA) in 1972. The goal of the CZMA is to promote\norderly development and protect the Nation's coastal resources to provide\nManagement:\nsuitable housing for people and areas for recreational enjoyment, opportunities\nProgram\nfor maritime and commerce, and preserve and protect living resources. With-\nout rational, balanced management, the economic growth and development of\nOverview\nthe coasts could be jeopardized. Since 1974, the Federal government has\ninvested over $700 million in the CZMA, which recognizes that all levels of\ngovernment - Federal, state and local - have a common interest in the\ncoasts and must share the responsibility for effectively managing coastal areas\nand resolving conflicts between competing uses.\nThe CZMA established a voluntary partnership among these units of\ngovernment, with states and their local partners on the front line. States have\nthe lead role in developing coastal zone management (CZM) programs which\nare specifically tailored to meet their individual needs, but also take into\naccount the broader national interest in wise management of coastal resources.\nThe Federal government provides financial assistance and policy guidance\nand assures that the broader national interest is considered in the framing of\nstate and local decisions.\nTwo kinds of Federal incentives are built into the CZMA to foster state\nparticipation: (1) Federal matching funds, which help states meet the cost of\nimplementing and enhancing CZM programs, and (2) Federal consistency\nauthority, which requires that Federal actions and federally permitted activi-\nties be consistent with a state's federally approved CZM program if those\nactions or activities affect natural resources, land uses or water uses in the\nstate's coastal zone.\nAt the Federal level, the CZMA is administered by NOAA², which\nprovides financial assistance, policy guidance and technical assistance to\nstates in establishing and implementing the CZM programs. Additionally,\nNOAA assures that state programs comply with Federal guidelines and na-\ntional goals by providing continuous oversight of the programs, with in-depth\nformal evaluations of state performance at least every three years. NOAA\nencourages public involvement in this evaluation process.\n2The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is part of the U.S. Department of\nCommerce. Within NOAA, the CZMA is administered by the National Ocean Service's Office of Ocean\nand Coastal Resource Management.\n2","To date, 29 states and U.S. island territories (hereafter, \"state\" refers to\nstates, territories and commonwealths) have developed federally approved\nCZM programs, which balance local, state and national interests. NOAA\nexpects the number of participating states to increase in the near future. Over\nthe past two years, NOAA has assisted the States of Ohio, Minnesota, Georgia\nand Texas with the development of CZM programs. The State of Indiana and\nthe Republic of Belau (formerly Palau), a trust territory, have also expressed\nan interest in joining the national program.\nSTATE COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS\nNOT PICTURED\nKEY\nN. Mariana Islands,\nApproved\nGuam, Puerto Rico,\n29 Approved Programs\nVirgin Islands,\nDeveloping Pgm\nAmerican Samoa\nCover 94% of Nation's Coastlne\nPalau\nNon-participant\n(84,117 miles)\nThe approved CZM programs encompass 94 percent of the Nation's\ncoastline. These comprehensive, state-operated programs seek a balance\nbetween preservation and protection of coastal resources and the development\nof those resources. The programs cover a wide range of issues, including:\nreducing the risk to life and property from coastal storms and erosion\nby directing coastal development away from hazardous areas and\ndeveloping evacuation plans and early warning systems,\nprotecting dunes, the first line of defense against storms,\nprotecting wildlife and fisheries habitats,\nregulating land use impacts on water quality,\nincreasing public access to our Nation's coastal resources for recre-\national enjoyment,\nassisting cities in revitalizing urban waterfronts,\n3","assuring that industries dependent on coastal locations, such as ports,\n.\nmarinas, commercial fish landings and boat repair yards, are not pre-\nempted by land uses that do not require a waterfront location, and\nresolving complex interagency conflicts that can arise in land use\ndecisionmaking.\nA\nlmost two decades have passed since the establishment of the\nCoastal\ncoastal zone management program. The experiences of the last 19\nyears demonstrate that this Federal-state partnership is working well and is\nManagement:\nproducing measurable, beneficial changes in the management of coastal\nContribution to\nresources. Despite the continuing challenges, the 29 states with approved\nCZM programs have made substantial progress in responding to threats to\nthe Nation\ncoastal resources, including the loss of marine resources and wildlife habitat,\nand decreased public open space. State CZM programs have also made sig-\nnificant strides in addressing shoreline erosion problems, including planning\nfor the effects of future sea and Great Lakes level rise.\nThe state programs also promoted water dependent uses of the coast,\nsuch as ports and marinas, commercial fisheries and recreation. Examples of\nthis progress over the last two years are documented below. States have made\nimprovements in ocean resource planning, special area management planning\nand improved government operations. Volume II of the Biennial Report on\nthe CZMA for FY 1990-91 provides detailed information on these and other\nstate accomplishments.\n4","oastal states play a positive role in reducing the risk to life and\nC\nProtecting Life\nproperty from coastal storms by detering development in highly\nvulnerable areas of the shoreline. States adopted setback regulations (cur-\nand Property\nrently, 13 states have setback requirements for coastal development), laws to\nfrom\nprotect dunes, construction standards, evacuation plans, and early warning\nsystems in an effort to protect coastal development from natural hazards.\nCoastal Storms\nPerhaps the most notable progress over the last two years was in\nresponse to a series of major storms along the east coast and in the Caribbean.\nFor example, throughout 1990 and 1991, CZM program offices in the Virgin\nIslands, Puerto Rico, and South Carolina responded to the disastrous effects of\nHurricane Hugo, which struck in September 1989. CZM efforts included\nstreamlining the permit process for reconstruction, providing technical assis-\ntance through workshops, evaluating evacuation techniques based on storm\nsurge models, and modifying and implementing a South Carolina law enacted\nto prevent reconstruction in high hazard areas. In response to Hurricane Bob\n(summer of 1991) and a severe northeaster (fall of 1991), mid-Atlantic and\nNorth Atlantic state CZM programs assisted with coastal cleanups, damage\nassessments, and the revision and implementation of shoreline protection and\nmitigation measures.\nOne highly successful effort that developed into a new initiative for\nthe national program was the volunteer technical assistance provided to the\nVirgin Islands in February 1990, in response to the crisis created by Hurricane\nHugo. The storm ravaged homes, businesses and infrastructure in the terri-\ntory. NOAA, in cooperation with the Coastal States Organization, dispatched\na team of state coastal permit experts to the Virgin Islands to assist in recovery\nefforts. John Meyer from Florida, Michael Slattery from Maryland, and\n5","Charles Jones from North Carolina, spent three weeks in the Virgin Islands\nworking with Virgin Islands' staff. The team conducted field inspections,\nevaluated environmental assessment reports, and processed major and minor\ncoastal permit applications. These collective efforts helped reduce the over-\nwhelming workload that resulted from the widespread damage, thereby speed-\ning recovery efforts.\nA legislative outcome of this well-executed response to the Virgin\nIslands crisis was the inclusion of a provision in the 1990 Amendments to the\nCZMA which authorized NOAA to provide emergency assistance to states in\nthe aftermath of disasters. This provision has proven extremely useful. One\nyear after the amendment passed, NOAA assisted American Samoa in the\naftermath of Hurricane Val, which struck the territory in December 1991.\nNOAA provided travel funds for emergency personnel from the Hawaii and\nCalifornia CZM programs to assist in the territory's rehabilitation efforts, and\nsent a scientific assessment team to the territory to evaluate impacts of the\nstorm on the Fagatele Bay reef system.\nOver the past two years, state CZM programs have also addressed\ncoastal natural hazards through the following mechanisms:\nThe American Samoa CZM program worked with the U.S. Soil\nConservation Service to develop a strategy for mitigating the effects of\npotential landslides. In addition, American Samoa trained other territo-\nrial agencies on methods for reducing risks from landslides.\nFlorida conducted research projects to implement post-disaster\nredevelopment planning along its beaches. Information generated from\nthis research will be used to develop a statewide policy for redevelop-\nment after disasters.\nThe Hawaii CZM program completed a shoreline management plan\nfor Oahu, which lays the foundation for preserving the Island's natural\nresources and certain beaches threatened by erosion. This activity is\nDUNES\npart of a multi-year statewide beach management program aimed at\nidentifying coastal erosion trends and developing plans to preserve\nOahu's 66 miles of sandy shoreline.\nThe Puerto Rico CZM Program assisted in the development of hurri-\ncane evacuation plans for the San Juan metropolitan area. Areas of the\nterritory that followed the draft plan suffered no deaths during Hurri-\ncane Hugo in 1989.\nThe Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council adopted\nregulations which established post hurricane and storm permit proce-\n6","dures. A 30-day moratorium is now imposed to provide time to assess\ndamages, determine changes in natural features, and identify mitiga-\ntion opportunities, including purchase. These emergency procedures\nwere effectively implemented during the two major storms that struck\nthe Rhode Island coast in late 1991.\nThe Virginia CZM program developed regulations for barrier islands\nthat address cumulative and secondary impacts of development. The\nstate will submit the policy to NOAA for incorporation into the Vir-\nginia CZM program.\nThe Washington CZM program developed a sea level rise response\nprogram, which forms the nucleus of the global warming component\nin the state's Environment 2010 project. Program activities included\nconferences, workshops, technical and policy studies and public\ninformation efforts.\nI\nn recent years, state CZM programs have placed a renewed emphasis\nWetlands\non wetlands protection. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the states\nfocused on establishing basic wetlands protection programs. However, the\nbasic programs, even if implemented well, were not enough to totally protect\nvaluable wetland resources. In many states, vast acreages of the most critical\nwetlands were destroyed long before regulatory programs were put into place.\nDuring the last two years, many new statutes, regulations and initia-\ntives for wetlands protection and restoration have been developed and passed\nby the states, signalling a growing level of state interest. American Samoa\nand the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, for example, devel-\noped comprehensive management plans for wetlands. These plans identified\nand classified wetlands, defined authorities and established strategies to\nenhance the protection and management of these important ecosystems. In\naddition, Maryland and South Carolina established new programs to address\nnon-tidal wetlands.\nThe focus in many states shifted to restoring lost wetlands and enhanc-\ning those that have been damaged. Connecticut and Delaware are both imple-\nmenting multi-year wetlands restoration projects. To date, thousands of\nwetlands acres have been restored by these states; much larger areas are\nscheduled for restoration. In the Great Lakes, Michigan adopted a new wet-\nlands policy with a goal of creating 150,000 new acres of coastal wetlands by\nthe year 2000.\nStates also developed plans and guidelines for mitigating wetlands\ndamage. These guidelines have proven useful to the development community\nby explaining what is allowable and how developers can become active\n7","participants in wetlands protection programs. Wetlands management and\nmitigation plans similarly assist the states in laying out priorities for preserva-\ntion and restoration. In the past two years, Alabama, Delaware and Missis-\nsippi created new wetlands mitigation manuals. State CZM programs\nlaunched education and technical assistance programs to increase public and\nlocal government awareness of the value of wetlands protection. Washington\nState, for example, focused on providing improved technical assistance, public\ninformation workshops and educational materials to local governments.\nStates deemed some wetland areas SO valuable that the CZM programs\nestablished wetlands preserves and created special area management plans.\nSince 1990, New York designated preserves on Long Island, along the Hudson\nRiver and adjacent to the Great Lakes. Wisconsin conducted a special wet-\nlands inventory of lower Green Bay and plans to prepare a special area\nmanagement plan for the area.\nA\nlthough coastal pollution was not a major focus of concern in the\nCoastal\nearly stages of CZM program implementation, some states made\nsignificant contributions to water quality improvements through their CZM\nWater\nprograms. Existing water quality programs focused on point sources, yet in\nQuality\nmany instances, the sources of pollution are not as easily identified. Since\nstate CZM programs have been directly involved in managing land use and\ndevelopment activity since program inception, they provide a unique ability to\naddress the more diffuse\nnonpoint pollution, which\naccounts for half of the\npollution in coastal and\nestuarine waters.\nCongress recog-\nnized this strength by\ncreating the Coastal\nNonpoint Pollution Con-\ntrol Program, a joint\nNOAA and Environmental\nProtection Agency initiative, as part of the 1990 Amendments to the CZMA.\nStates will develop these programs through 1994 (see the following section,\n\"The New Agenda,\" and Volume II of the CZMA Biennial Report, for more\ninformation on the coastal nonpoint program).\nMany coastal states have already begun to address issues related to\nwater quality. Methods used by the states range from developing stronger\nlinkages between CZM and water quality agencies to creating extensive citizen\nwater quality monitoring programs; for example, in the past two years, several\nstates, including New York, Rhode Island and South Carolina, made\nstormwater runoff an integral part of the state development review processes.\n8","Recognizing the widespread nature of the water quality problem and\nthe lack of state capabilities to deal with all facets of the problem, some states\ndeveloped programs to involve citizens and local government in the CZM\nprograms. Alabama and Virginia initiated citizens' water quality management\nprograms for Perdido Bay and Chesapeake Bay, respectively.\nCoastal nonpoint source pollution is not easily controlled using exist-\ning jurisdictional boundaries, whether state or local government. To address\nthis problem, state CZM programs engaged in the following activities:\nMaine developed an estuary-wide water quality education and man-\nagement program that involves several local governments.\nWisconsin and Washington developed management programs based\non watershed boundaries, rather than local government boundaries.\nWisconsin identified priority watersheds to focus attention on realistic\nprojects. The State of Washington directed new attention at sharing\nwatershed management information with local governments.\nDelaware developed an Inland Bays Recovery Initiative focused on\ncontrolling nonpoint source pollution.\nCoastal states also targeted problems created by specific land uses; for\nexample, Michigan and South Carolina adopted siting criteria and operational\nrequirements for marinas, and New Jersey mapped critical water quality areas\nthat might be affected by marina development.\nA\nS the demand for public access to the Nation's shoreline increases, SO\nPublic Access\ndo the pressures for development on the coast, leaving fewer public\naccess opportunities. State CZM programs, while lacking the financial re-\nsources to acquire large tracts of land, nevertheless have improved both the\nquality and quantity of public access. Under the CZMA, states acquired\nparcels of land for access and funded low-cost construction projects, such as\nboardwalks, piers, bike paths, and dune walkovers. Federal CZMA funds\nhave often been used to develop public access plans and guidebooks. During\nthe past two years, several activities have been undertaken, including:\nThe Maryland CZM program developed a comprehensive plan for\nestablishing a Greenway network for the Patapsco River watershed.\nThe goal was to improve water quality, expand and enhance wildlife\nhabitat, and develop and improve non-impact recreation areas.\nThe New York CZM program is currently working with nine re-\ngional advisory committees to develop a draft plan for conserving\ncritical open space. Special priority is being given to conserving open\nspace in coastal areas.\n9","The New Jersey CZM program completed a manual on Waterfront\nPublic Access: Design Guidelines. The publication details planning\nand design considerations for public access. The state also published a\nbeach access booklet, a marina siting and design handbook, and a\nsurvey of beaches accessible to the disabled, all of which are publica-\ntions designed to increase accessibility to the waterfront.\nThrough the acquisition of properties and several small-scale public\naccess projects, the Oregon CZM program maintained a strong com-\nmitment to increase public access. The state produced a field guide,\nwhich presented a photograph, map, and description for each public\naccess project. In a cooperative effort with the Parks and Recreation\nDepartment, the Oregon CZM program also developed a detailed\ninventory of over 1,000 public access sites along Oregon's coast.\nThe Rhode Island CZM program supported development of a state-\nwide Coastal Access Guide, which not only identified all access points\nto the shore, but also detailed the condition of each site and the associ-\nated facilities, such as parking and sanitary facilities.\nThe Washington CZM program contributed to public access, public\neducation, and shoreland acquisition by funding projects for floats,\ndocks, boat ramps, footbridges, boardwalk, stairways to beaches,\nwaterfront pathways, and shoreline acquisitions.\nI\nn the mid-20th century, many urban waterfronts became deteriorated\nWaterfront\nand abandoned due to polluted water and changing port and cargo\nneeds. CZM grants assist local governments in preparing waterfront land use\nRedevelopment\nplans that serve as catalysts for revitalizing waterfronts throughout the country.\nThese plans have led to billions of private investment dollars for urban water-\nfronts in cities as Philadelphia, Jersey City, Norwalk CT, Biloxi MS,\nWilmington NC, and New York.\nState CZM programs focus on directing and managing growth and\ndevelopment in areas where unwise development would have negative envi-\nronmental consequences. As the various state programs evolved, new methods\nof encouraging redevelopment of waterfront areas have been implemented.\nIn Connecticut, the concept of harbor management planning is a\nvaluable tool. The Connecticut CZM program adopted the Harbor\nManagement Act as a part of its approved program. Several communi-\nties are involved in preparing plans each year. The Rhode Island CZM\nprogram also initiated a harbor management planning program.\nIn 1990, Massachusetts adopted final regulations to implement the\nPublic Waterfront Act. These regulations address public access,\npriority for water dependent uses and setbacks.\n10","Oregon developed a waterfront development guidebook to assist\nsmall cities and towns with redevelopment and revitalization of their\nwaterfront areas.\nSouth Carolina launched a multi-year special area management\nplanning process for Charleston Harbor.\nT\nhe need to preserve estuarine areas from pollution and the pressures\nNational\nof development and to study natural and human processes within\nthese coastal ecosystems was recognized by Congress in the passage of the\nEstuarine\nCZMA. The National Estuarine Research Reserve System (System) is a\nResearch\nFederal-state partnership, administered by NOAA. The System protects\nrepresentative areas of the estuarine environment for long-term monitoring\nReserve System\nand research and provides opportunities to enhance public awareness through\neducation and interpretation of the values of these resources. Known as\nNational Estuarine Research Reserves (NERRs), these field laboratories\nprovide opportunities to study the natural and human processes that affect\nestuaries so that stresses on these highly productive areas can be minimized.\nPadilla Bay, WA\nSt. Lawrence\nRiver Basin, NY\nOld Woman\nCreek, OH\nWells, ME\nSouth Slough, OR\nGreat Bay NH\nWaquoit Bay, MA\nNarragansett Bay, RI\nHudson River, NY\nSan Francisco\nMullica River, NJ\nBay, CA\nDelaware\nChesapeake Bay, MD\nElkhorn Slough, CA\nChesapeake Bay, VA\nNorth Carolina\nTijuana River, CA\nNorth Inlet, SC\nACE Basin, SC\nSapelo Island, GA\nDesignated Sites\nEast Coast, FL\nDeveloping Sites\nWeeks Bay, AL\nI\nApalachicola Bay, FL\nWaimanu Valley, HI\nRookery Bay, FL\nJobos Bay, PR\nSince 1974, the national System has grown from one 4,400 acre site in\nOregon, an arm of the Coos Bay estuary called South Slough, to a 19-site\nSystem managing almost 300,000 acres of estuarine lands and water in 17\nstates. The newest reserve is the Chesapeake Bay NERR in Virginia which\ncomprises four sites along the York River tributary of the bay. This reserve,\nwhich encompasses nearly 3,000 acres of wetland and upland habitat includ-\ning the Goodwin Islands, Catlett Islands, Taskinas Creek and Sweethall\nMarsh, was established through the use of land acquisition, use of existing\n11","park resources and management agreements with private landowners. NOAA\nexpects to double the acreage in the System by 1995, with two new reserves in\nthe State of South Carolina and new reserves in the States of New York,\nDelaware, California and Florida.\nA reserve site must be nominated by the Governor of a state. To be\ndesignated as a national reserve, the proposed site must meet criteria estab-\nlished by OCRM. The reserves are owned and managed by the individual\nstates with OCRM providing guidelines, financial assistance, technical assis-\ntance and national program definition and support for research, monitoring\nand education activities. States receive Federal financial assistance on a 50-50\n(Federal-state) matching basis for acquiring reserve lands, and a 70-30\n(Federal-state) matching basis for managing a reserve and constructing facili-\nties, conducting educational or interpretive activities and research, and\nmonitoring. Private researchers are frequently used to conduct research and\nmonitoring at reserve sites.\nReserve areas are chosen to reflect regional differences and a variety of\necosystem types. They are primarily used for long-term scientific and educa-\ntional programs that provide information essential to coastal management\ndecisionmakers. Each site offers opportunities for monitoring changes within\nthe estuarine system and the effects of human activity on these resources,\nwhile protecting the integrity of the site for long-term research projects. The\nreserves also provide opportunities for the general public to learn about coastal\nand estuarine ecology in an outdoor setting.\nWhen complete, the System will represent all 13 of the Nation's bio-\ngeographical coastal regions. A biogeographical classification scheme ensures\nthat the System includes at least one site from each region. There are 29\nsubregions, 11 of which are not yet represented in the System. NOAA intends\nto complete the major biogeographic components of the national System by\nthe year 2000.\nSince inception, the program has emphasized research and education\nprojects in order to produce information that is useful for coastal resource\nmanagement decisionmaking. To meet this goal, NOAA established national\nguidelines in 1989 and provided funding for baseline characterizations and\nlong-term monitoring programs at reserves. The research program supports\nabout $600,000 for competitive grants annually, and an additional $380,000\nfor baseline characterization and monitoring. Among the priorities for re-\nsearch are sediment management, water management, chemical and other\ninputs, coupling of primary and secondary productivity, and fisheries habitat\nrequirements.\n12","NOAA also instituted an education grants program for the reserves.\nNOAA's guidelines set uniform standards of excellence and establish system\nidentity. The reserve sites are developing education materials and programs to\npromote an awareness of estuarine resources and to provide opportunities for\npublic understanding of the need to preserve, protect and utilize these signifi-\ncant natural resources.\nFor the first time, education grants funded completely by NOAA were\nawarded in 1991 to projects and\nprograms that benefit the entire\nNERRS. A national education\ngrant was awarded to allow 40\nelementary schools from around\nthe country to participate in the\nNational Geographic Society\n(NGS) Kids Network. The schools\ntest local water supplies and share\nthe findings via telecommunica-\ntions with over 250 schools from around the world. Each class\ntests tap water for nitrate levels and shares the results with \"research team-\nmates\" around the world. A unit scientist collates data from all the teams and\ntransmits a summary of the results to all participants. Throughout the unit,\nstudents are encouraged to think about solutions to pollution problems.\n\"What's in our Water?\" is one of the several units of study on the NGS\nKids Network - an international telecommunications-based science and\ngeography curriculum for fourth to sixth graders. This innovative use of\ntechnology allows students to experience firsthand the scientific process while\nthey broaden their knowledge of the world beyond the classroom. The re-\nserves participating in this project are the Apalachicola NERR in Florida,\nChesapeake Bay NERRs in Maryland and Virginia, Great Bay NERR in New\nHampshire, Hudson River NERR in New York, Padilla Bay NERR in Wash-\nington State, South Slough NERR in Oregon, Wells NERR in Maine and\nElkhorn Slough NERR and Tijuana River NERR in California. NOAA hopes\nto continue and expand the program this year to include more sites in the\nNERR System and to incorporate water testing at the estuarine reserves.\nThe 1990 Amendments to the CZMA made minor modifications to the\nNERRS. Among other things, the Amendments changed the name of the\nprogram from the National Estuarine Reserve Research System to the Na-\ntional Estuarine Research Reserve System. In addition, the Amendments\nrevised procedures for selecting, designating and operating estuarine reserves:\nreduced match requirements from 50 percent to 30 percent for the\nfollowing types of financial assistance awards: operations, research,\nmonitoring, facility construction and education/interpretation;\n13","increased the maximum amount of Federal financial assistance that\ncan be awarded for the acquisition of land and waters for any one\nreserve from $4 million to $5 million;\neliminated the ceiling of $1.5 million per site for development associ-\nated with facility construction; and\nestablished the authority and process for instituting sanctions includ-\ning partial or full withdrawal of financial assistance if a reserve's\nperformance is inadequate.\nNOAA is currently drafting regulations to implement the 1990 Amend-\nments to the NERRS program.\nor 19 years, the CZMA has given NOAA an opportunity to partici-\nF\nCZMA - The\npate in a valuable management program - the only national program\ncharged with comprehensively addressing all coastal issues. In this decade of\nNew Agenda\ninternational environmental awareness and cooperation, the United States is\nseen as a leader in the management of coastal resources. As a Nation, the\nUnited States can be proud of its recent achievements. In many countries and\nin America's past, vast coastal marshes and swamps were seen as wastelands.\nHowever, the United States is moving toward a deeper understanding of the\nvalue of these wetlands and other coastal resources.\nNevertheless, the Nation cannot rest on its achievements. Despite the\naccomplishments made by states to address the ties between the life within the\nsea, the lives of the people who wish to live near the sea and those who make\ntheir living from the sea, the Nation must preserve and enhance the coastal\nenvironment to assure that these resources are here and in good condition for\nfuture generations. The United States must learn more about managing human\nuse of the coastal environment. As coastal populations increase, the demand\nfor intensive development of the coastal zone will increase, creating conflict-\ning and competing demands for housing, harbors and recreational facilities on\nthese finite resources.\nThe states continue to\ndevelop and implement CZM\nprograms that fit the individual\nneeds of the states. Some\nprograms move to strengthen\nregulatory powers; other states\nmove to educate their young\nand old in the value of their\ncoastal environment. Some\nstates do both. Furthermore,\nNOAA continues to assure that\nthese programs meet national\nobjectives.","When the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) was enacted in\n1972, it was seen as a model that would test the abilities of Federal, state and\nlocal governments to work together. Now, much of this \"radical\" cooperation\nis seen as commonplace. Local governments, reacting to demands from their\ncitizens, can look to state programs for guidance and can rely on Federal\nagencies to be consistent with local plans. The partnership doesn't always\nwork perfectly, but it has resulted in positive returns for the Nation's coastal\nresources and continues to expand.\nIn 1991, Congress ambitiously renewed the CZMA for another five\nyears to propel the Federal government and the states along new paths of\ncoastal management. The tasks ahead are very ambitious.\nT\nhe 1990 Amendments to the CZMA place the problems of coastal\nCoastal\nwater quality directly into the states' path, recognizing that much of\nthe problem does not come directly from a pipe and cannot be dealt with by\nWater\nedicts from Washington, D.C. The new Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control\nQuality\nProgram is unique in a number of ways. For the first time, coastal states must\n-\nspecifically address land uses generally known to cause or contribute to\nTackling\ncoastal nonpoint pollution by prescribing management measures that are both\nNonpoint\nremedial and preventative. In addition, these management measures will be\nmade mandatory through enforceable policies and mechanisms. While afford-\nSource\ning flexibility to deal with regional differences, each state coastal nonpoint\nPollution\nprogram must, at a minimum, provide for the implementation of management\nmeasures in conformity with national guidance provided by EPA. Examples\nof management measures include buffer zones along streams and coastal\nwaters, density limits which can be applied to adjacent land development,\nimproved construction practices, erosion and sedimentation controls, and\nfarming and pesticide management practices to reduce polluted runoff.\nIn addition, the coastal nonpoint program combines the strengths of\nseveral programs at both the state and Federal levels. At the state level, the\nprogram will be crafted jointly by the CZM and nonpoint source agencies.\nThis joint effort will bring together the water quality expertise of the nonpoint\nagency and the land use expertise of the CZM agency. The result will be to\nbuild on existing programs and capabilities, to avoid duplication of effort, and\nto more effectively address the problem of runoff affecting coastal waters. At\nthe Federal level, the program is administered jointly by NOAA and the\nEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA), thus coordinating the programs and\nrequirements of the CZMA and the Clean Water Act.\nSince November 1990, NOAA and EPA worked closely to draft\nguidance for states in developing the coastal nonpoint programs. Draft Man-\nagement Measures Guidance, prepared by EPA in consultation with NOAA,\n15","specifies economically achievable measures that are the best available prac-\ntices, technologies, processes, siting criteria, operating methods, or other\nalternatives for the control of nonpoint sources of pollution from existing and\nnew categories of nonpoint sources. In addition, NOAA, with EPA's assis-\ntance, prepared proposed Program Development and Approval Guidance,\nwhich describe how states should develop the coastal nonpoint programs and\nthe criteria NOAA and EPA would use for approving the programs. NOAA is\nalso reviewing the landward boundaries of each state CZM program in order to\nrecommend changes to enable states to more effectively manage land and\nwater uses to protect coastal waters.\nhe 1990 Amendments also encouraged states to assess their pro-\nT\nFocusing on\ngrams and uncover their priority needs, as well as their achieve-\nments. A new Coastal Zone Enhancement Grants Program provides states\nPriority\nwith additional incentives to address important national coastal issues. This\nNational Issues\neffort promises to shape the future of states' coastal management efforts.\nThe new, voluntary program encourages each state with a federally\napproved CZM program to improve its program by addressing one or more of\neight national interest enhancement objectives:\n(1) coastal wetlands management and protection;\n(2) natural hazards management;\n(3) public access improvements;\n(4) reduction in marine debris;\n(5) management of cumulative and secondary impacts of coastal\ngrowth;\n(6) special area management planning;\n(7) ocean resource planning; and\n(8) facilitation of coastal energy and government facility siting.\nThis new program encourages states to achieve these objectives by\nchanging their CZM programs to increase protection for coastal resources.\nSince the new program took effect immediately, first-year grants were\nissued to the states to assist in identifying their priority needs for improvement.\nIn 1991, states put tremendous effort into identifying their priority needs.\nThey solicited the views of the public as to the most pressing coastal issues in\ntheir state and the best ways to tackle the issues. Many states moved aggres-\nsively to seek public input in this process. The Massachusetts CZM program,\nfor example, circulated a comprehensive survey to Massachusetts citizens on a\nwide variety of issues, ranging from public lateral rights of access along the\nshoreline to the adequacy of existing laws and enforcement for protecting\ncoastal resources. Other methods employed by the states to involve the public\nincluded public notices, coastal commission or citizen advisory group meet-\nings open to the public, brochures, TV interviews and information packets.\n16","The information collected by the states laid the foundation for the\ndevelopment of state Assessments, which examine how states are addresing\neach of the enhancement objectives, how significant issues are in the states,\nand what possibilities exist for improvement. The Assessments provide the\nfactual basis for NOAA, in consultation with the states, to determine the\npriority needs for improving state CZM programs. Once this process is com-\nplete, and NOAA approves a state's assessment, the state will develop a multi-\nyear Strategy, which describes how the state will deal with its priority issues.\nNOAA is now ready for full implementation of the program in FY\n1992. States will submit grant applications for activities related to these\nnational priority areas. NOAA expects to have final regulations on the en-\nhancements program in 1992. The final regulations will establish guidelines\nfor the implementation of the new program.\nN\nOAA has the opportunity to use the agency's vast resource informa-\nThe Future\ntion and management network to move all levels of government\nalong the path of better coastal management. The various offices of NOAA\nAgenda\ncan join together to focus on management issues that are crucial to the success\nof the Nation's efforts. NOAA has several opportunities, including:\nTaking the lead in managing the sources of nonpoint pollution\nthrough the implementation of the new Coastal Nonpoint Pollution\nProgram - With NOAA's vast information base, geographic areas\nwill be better defined to enable coastal states to effectively address the\nissue. Work already has begun in NOAA on this combined office\napproach to problem solving and implementation. NOAA will use the\nknowledge of the various state CZM programs to assist states in the\nestablishment of management programs that will produce results and\nyet be achievable by state and local governments that are routinely\nshort of funds.\nForging new and innovative approaches to dealing with national\npriority issues - Through the new Coastal Zone Enhancements Pro-\ngram, NOAA will assist states in focusing on critical national issues,\nsuch as coastal wetlands management and protection, management of\ncumulative and secondary impacts of growth, natural hazards manage-\nment and public access improvements.\nEncouraging research directly related to coastal management issues\nThrough the National Estuarine Research Reserves, NOAA can\nyes\nfocus research on problems occurring in similar coastal areas. Specifi-\ncally, research conducted at National Estuarine Research Reserves can\nfocus on nonpoint pollution to assist state CZM managers in address-\ning this growing problem.\n17","Encouraging new methods of integrated planning - Through the\ndevelopment of special area management plans, NOAA can focus on\nsmall, significant areas and all aspects of the problems affecting the\nquality of these coastal areas.\nProviding technical assistance to state and local government as they\nattempt to grapple with their coastal management problems - By\nusing technical and management experts, NOAA can provide a vast\nbreadth of knowledge that is unavailable on a state or local level.\nTo assure that these actions are taken in a thoughtful, integrated man-\nner, NOAA's Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management (OCRM) is\ndeveloping a long-range plan for the office and its programs. The plan is\nscheduled to be complete in Spring 1992, and stands as the first such planning\neffort undertaken by the office since its creation in the 1980s. The ongoing\neffort includes participation by state CZM managers, state NERR managers,\nand National Marine Sanctuary managers. The purpose of the long-range\nplanning effort is to:\ndevelop a mission statement for OCRM,\ndevelop a common set of goals for OCRM staff and managers,\ndefine issues and priorities on which OCRM will focus it ,resources,\nimprove the ability of OCRM's programs to work cooperatively and\nmore effectively with each other on common issues,\nintegrate OCRM's programs into NOAA-wide planning efforts such\nas the NOAA Strategic Plan,\nimprove cooperation with other NOAA programs,\nimprove the ability of OCRM's programs to work with the programs\nof other local, state and Federal agencies and private groups on\ncommon issues, and\nprovide a framework for action.\nThe need for comprehensive coastal management is more urgent than\never. Over the past 19 years, the Nation has realized a great return on the\nnational investment in state CZM programs. The next decade presents a score\nof new opportunities to improve the quality of life in the coastal zone, despite\nthe greatest population increase in U.S. history. The Federal-state partnership\nmust stand ready to meet these challenges and ensure that the Nation's coast-\nlines are healthier than ever.\n*U.S. G.P.O. : 1992-313-153:60352\n18"]}