Click here to load reader

National Coastal Zone Management Effectiveness Study ... fileii National Coastal Zone Management Effectiveness Study: Protecting Estuaries and Coastal Wetlands James W. Good John W

  • View
    214

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Text of National Coastal Zone Management Effectiveness Study ... fileii National Coastal Zone Management...

i

National Coastal Zone ManagementEffectiveness Study:

Protecting Estuaries and Coastal Wetlands

Oregon Sea Grant

andMarine Resource Management Program

College of Oceanic and Atmospheric SciencesOregon State University

December 1998

Oregon Sea Grant Special Report PI-98-001

ii

National Coastal Zone ManagementEffectiveness Study:

Protecting Estuaries and Coastal Wetlands

James W. GoodJohn W. Weber

James W. CharlandJohn V. Olson

Kelly A. Chapin

Oregon Sea Grantand

Marine Resource Management ProgramCollege of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences

Oregon State University

December 1998

Oregon Sea Grant Special Report PI-98-001

iii

Oregon State University

Mailing Address:

College of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences104 Ocean Administration Building

Oregon State UniversityCorvallis, Oregon 97331-5503

Phone: 541/737-1339FAX: 541/737-2064

E-mail: good@oce.orst.edu

Cite as: Good, J. W., J. W. Weber, J. W. Charland, J. V. Olson, and K. A. Chapin. 1998. Nationalcoastal zone management effectiveness study: protecting estuaries and coastal wetlands. FinalReport to the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resources Management, National Oceanic andAtmospheric Administration. Oregon Sea Grant Special Report PI-98-001. Corvallis, OR

Cover photo: North Carolina salt marsh (Sandra Good Alley photo)

iv

Acknowledgments

Many individuals have contributed to the completion of this project and report. We especially thank thestate coastal managers who spent many hours with us on the phone, who tracked down and compiledinformation and reports, and who provided valuable reviews of draft profiles and evaluations. Wesincerely appreciate your cooperation, interest, and generosity. Thanks also to our fellow teammembers: from the University of Washington, Marc Hershman, who addressed seaports and led theproject, and Bob Goodwin, who dealt with waterfront revitalization and provided valuable perspective;Coastal Consultant Tina Bernd-Cohen, who with Melissa Gordon evaluated beach and dune protection;Tina also provided coordination for our periodic team meetings and moral support throughout theproject; and Pam Pogue and Virginia Lee from the University of Rhode Island, who addressed thepublic access goal, and who could be counted on for treats. We also appreciated the professionalassistance of Joy Burck at OSU, who helped compile complex tables and edit copy, and Laurie Jodiceand Janet Morlan, who also assisted with editing and who were forbearing at work and supportive athome. To Tom Leschine of the University of Washington, a special thanks for his sound advice onmethodology; and thanks also to Tom, Jens Sorenson, and David Owens for their valuable guidanceduring our team work sessions. Thanks also to our state advisory committee: Eldon Hout of Oregon,Sarah Cooksey of Delaware, Jim Tabor of Pennsylvania, and Wayne Beam from South Carolina.Special thanks to OCRM project officer Mr. Bill Millhouser for his assistance and patience throughoutthe project. Reviews of the draft national report by Laurie McGilvray and several anonymous reviewerswere also helpful in preparing this final report.

This work was supported by grant no. NA36RG0451, project numbers A\ESG-3 and R\PPA-42, from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to the Oregon State University SeaGrant College Program; and by appropriations made by the Oregon State Legislature. The viewsexpressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of NOAA or any ofits subagencies.

The Oregon State University Team

v

Table of Contents

Executive Summary viii

Introduction 1

Background and Context for CZM Evaluation 2Estuaries and Coastal Wetlands: A National Resource, 3National Efforts to Protect Estuaries and Coastal Wetlands, 10Estuary and Coastal Wetland Protection in State Coastal Management Programs, 13

Evaluation Methodology 14Study Objectives and Research Questions, 15Overview of the Evaluation Process, 16The Data Collection Process, 19Steps in the State CMP Evaluation Process, 22Limitations of the Study and Evaluation Methodology, 24

Evaluation Results and Discussion 26Step 1: The Relative Importance of Estuary and Coastal Wetland Protection, 26Step 2: Potential Effectiveness of CZM Programs Based on Process Indicators, 30Step 3: On-the-ground Effectiveness Based on Outcome Indicators, 45Step 4: Estimating State CMP Performance in Context, 55The Role of Case Examples in Understanding State CMP Effectiveness, 58

Conclusions 60

Recommendations 64

References 68

Appendices

vi

List of Figures and Tables

Figures Page

Figure 1. Estuarine surface area by US coastal region (sources: NOAA 1985; stateprofiles) ........................................................................................................................................ 7

Figure 2. Coastal wetlandstidal and nontidal combinedby US coastal region(sources: NOAA 1991; individual state profiles) ............................................................................ 7

Figure 3. Coastal wetland losstidal and nontidalby US coastal region (Dahl1990; individual state profiles) ....................................................................................................... 9

Figure 4. General framework model for evaluating the effectiveness of the U.S.national coastal management program, as adapted to the estuary and wetlandprotection issue ........................................................................................................................... 17

Figure 5. State CZM profile template for estuary and coastal wetland protection......................... 21

Figure 6. Model State Coastal Management Program for Estuary and CoastalWetland Protection..................................................................................................................... 35

Tables Page

Table 1. Selected environmental-social indicators of estuary and coastal wetlandissue importance for U.S. coastal programs................................................................................ 4, 5

Table 2. Selected federal programs that have significant effects on estuaries andcoastal wetlands in the United States............................................................................................ 12

Table 3. Issue importance indicators for estuary and coastal wetland protection incoastal states, indicator significance, number of states in each rating class, and datasources for indicators .................................................................................................................. 27

Table 4. Issue importance ratings for estuary and coastal wetland protection by region.................. 29

Table 5. Process indicatorsthe processes and tools used by states to protect estuariesand coastal wetlandsand the ten most importance processes and tools (bold) basedon aggregated state rankings of importance.................................................................................. 31

vii

Tables (continued) Page

Table 6. The use of estuary and coastal wetland protection processes and tools instate coastal management programs ....................................................................................... 33, 34

Table 7. Process indicator category and overall rating criteria for state CMPs(process and tool numbers are cross-referenced to Table 6; data for ratings comefrom each states profile) ....................................................................................................... 37, 38

Table 8. Regional summary of process indicator ratings, which serve as a measureof state and regional CZM program potential for effective estuary and coastal wetland protection.139

Table 9. Potential effectiveness of state CMPs1 (based on process indicators), versusthe importance of estuary and wetland protection as a state CZM issue ........................................ 44

Table 10. On-the-ground outcome indicators, rating criteria, and processes and toolsthat serve as outcome indicator data sources................................................................................ 46

Table 11. Outcome indicator category and overall outcome indicator rating criteriafor state CMPs (indicator codese.g., RG1are defined in Table 10) ....................................... 48

Table 12. State outcome indicator ratings for estuary and coastal wetland protection............... 49, 50

Table 13. State program outcome effectiveness ratings1 for each outcome categoryand for overall tidal and nontidal water and wetland management.................................................. 51

Table 14. Performance levels of state CMPs based on a comparison of the importanceof estuary and wetland protection in a state versus outcome effectiveness ratings .......................... 57

Table 15. Performance levels of state CMPs based on a comparison of the potentialeffectiveness (based on process indicators) versus outcome effectiveness ratings .......................... 59

viii

Executive Summary

Estuaries and coastal wetlands are among the most important ecosystems in the coastal zone, providinggoods and services that are vital to human society. The need for protecting, preserving, and restoringthese valuable ecosystems was a major factor in passage of the Coastal Zone Management Act(CZMA) in 1972. Congress affirmed this in 1980 CZMA amendments, including a specific objectiveencouraging state coastal management programs to protect na

Search related