-------
How does the
Nt%tiont%l Estuary
Program Work?
he National Estuary Program
is designed to encourage local
communities to take responsi-
bility for managing their own estuar-
ies. An estuary must be nominated by
the Governor of each state before it
can be accepted into the National
Estuary Program. Each NEP is made
up of representatives from federal,
state, and local government agencies
responsible for managing the estuary's
resources, as well as members of the
community—citizens, business leaders,
educators, and researchers. The objec-
tive of each NEP is to create and
implement a management plan that
addresses the whole range of environ-
mental problems facing the estuary
while balancing the many needs of the
estuary and the community. Twenty-
eight estuary programs are currently
working to safeguard the health of
some of our Nation's most important
waters.
For More information
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water, Coastal Management Branch
401 M Street, SW (4504F)
Washington, DC 20460
Web site: www.epa.gov/owow/estuaries
-------
is nn estuary?
An estuary is a partially enclosed body of water formed where freshwater from rivers and streams flows into
the ocean, mixing with the seawater. Estuaries and the lands surrounding them are places of transition from
land to sea, and from fresh to saltwater. Although influenced by the tides, estuaries are protected from the full
force of ocean waves, winds, and storms by the reefs, barrier islands, or fingers of land, mud, or sand that
define an estuary's coastal boundary. Estuaries come in all shapes and sizes and are called -many different
names—bays, lagoons, harbors, inlets, or sounds.
Why nve estuaries significant?
Estuaries are important to human and marine life. The tidal, sheltered waters of estuaries support unique
communities of plants and animals that live at the margin of the sea. Examples include horseshoe crabs,
ospreys, manatees, mangroves, and seagrasses. Hundreds of marine organisms, including most commercially
valuable fish and shellfish, such as scallops, shrimp, and salmon, depend on estuaries at some point during their
development. Wetlands and aquatic vegetation in and around estuaries provide habitat for marine life and
protect water quality by filtering out dirt and pollution.
Estuaries also have economic, recreational, and .aesthetic value. Boating, fishing, swimming, and bird
watching are just a few of the numerous recreational activities people enjoy in estuaries. Estuaries are often
the cultural centers of coastal communities, serving as the focal points for local commerce, recreation,
celebrations, and traditions. Furthermore, the tangible and direct economic benefits of estuaries should not
be overlooked. Tourism, fisheries, and other commercial activities depend on the wealth provided, by
estuarine natural resources. , . ,
. Wkwt challenges do our estimriesfa,c£? '.'.-..'. , . • •...' '
Because of our love and dependence on .the water, mpre than.'half of the nation's population lives.within
100 miles of the coast^ including, on the shores of estuaries. Coastal counties are growing three times faster
than counties elsewhere in the.country. .Unfortunately, .this increasing concentration ofpeopie.is.-upsetting the
natural balance of estuaries and'threatening their health. Stresses caused by pollution,; excessive demands on
limited resources, and expansive development have resulted in unsafe drinking water, beach and shellfish bed
closings, harmful algal blooms, declines in fisheries, loss of habitat, fish kills, and a host of other human health
and natural resource .problems. ' •
How.are we protecting esinetries? • • • .,
. The National Estuary Program (NEP) was established in 1987 by. amendments to the .Clean Water Act to
identify, restore, and protect.nationally, significant estuaries of the United States. Unlike traditional regulatory
approaches to. environ^^
.to develop common solutions; Staff scientists, policy analysts, and outreach cdprcUnatorstwqrt with local com-
munities to identify-problems-.and create consensus-basedactions to address p^bi^i^facing.tliek watersheds.
' The. NEP e4cp^ge$ fetal cpn^uruti^
agjngtheir •own'estuaries.. The .-governor of a st^ernust^piriinate'an >.•>•.•.:.;
representatives from federal, state,
and local, government agencies
responsible for managing the estu-
ary's resources, as well citizens, busi-
ness leaders, educators, and
researchers. Twenty-eight estuary
programs are currently working to
safeguard the health of some of our"
nation's most important waters.
-------
Excess Nutrients:
Nutrients, such as nitrogen and phosphorus, are necessary
for plant and animal growth. In excess, however, nutrients
can increase the growth of algae in., estuaries, which blocks
sunlight and" depletes .oxygen in the;water.;This canleadtea .'
a decline.in underwater vegetation and"fish-kjUJb, Nutrients. /
come from sewage treatment plants, septic systems, fertHiz- •
ers used in agriculture and on lawns, and air pollution
sources such as power plants and automobiles. :
Pathogens: . .- '•'•. •' .' ''•.?''.,• ..-•,, •'.". .••/.
Pathogens are disease-causing organisms such as viruses, bacteria, and parasites. Pathogens can lead .
to closure of shellfishing areas and bathing beaches. Sources of pathogens .include urban and
agricultural runoff, leaky septic systems, inadequately treated sewage, boat and marina waste, and
waste from pets and wildlife.
Toxic Chemicals;
Toxic substances such as metals, polycydic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs), heavy metals, and pesticides are a concern in the estuarine environment. Many of these .
toxins accumulate in the tissues of marine organisms and grow more potent as they work their way
up the food chain. Toxic substances can lead to shellfish bed and fin-fishery closures. These sub-
stances enter the estuary through storm drains, industrial discharges, runoff from lawns and
agriculture, wastewater treatment plants, and air pollution.
Habitat Loss and Degradation:
Estuarine habitats provide essential "food, cover, migratory corridors, and breeding/nursery areas
for a broad array, of animals.. In.addition, these habitats perform other important functions, such as
water quality and flood protection, and water storage. Threats to estuarine habitats include conver-
sion of open land and forest for commercial and residential development, forestry, highway
construction, agriculture, and marinas.
Introduced. Species:: . ' ' . '
Intentional or accidental introductions of species from other environments can result in unexpected
ecological, .ecbnomic, and social impacts to estuaries. Introduced organisms can destroy native
populations; degrade estuarine habitat; interfere with boating, fishing, and other recreation; and
introduce pathogens into the environment. Examples include oyster drills, Chinese mitten crabs,
and Brazilian pepper trees. Sources of introduced species include ship ballast, aquaculture,
nurseries, and aquarium trade.
Natural Mow •Alterations:
Freshwater is an increasingly limited resource in many areas of the country. Human management
of this resource, through activities such as river damming, dredging, and pumping of drinking
water, can alter the timing and amount of freshwater entering our estuaries. Natural drought
cycles can intensify the effects of these alterations. Changes in freshwater inflows can result in
erosion and sedimentation and adversely affect fish reproduction, shellfish survival, bird nesting,
and seed distribution.
-------
of marine resotuK^pf^iSfibeauty, and economic
opportunities for its community. Lik^/ise, each of the 28 National
Slsfuary Programs (NEPs) is different, offering a variety of innovative solutions to
•ess the many sources of pollution and degradation. "Sjfc ^ >
The following descriptions highlight the key management issues^guig the 28 programs as well
as some of the major accomplishments to date.
Albemarle-Pamlico
Sounds, North Carolina
Key management issues: water quality,
habitat protection, fisheries
The Albemarle-Pamlico Sounds system
is the nation's second largest estuarine
system. Working closely with local coun-
cils, the Albemarle-Pamlico National
Estuary Program is implementing cost-
effective solutions for the top environ-
mental priorities in the river basin. The
program has spearheaded a number of
significant restoration and protection
projects, including identifying and acquir-
ing over 27,000 acres of habitat; opening
over 1,000 miles of blocked fish spawn-
ing areas; and developing more than 50
geospatial data sets as a component of
the North Carolina Corporate Geo-
graphic Database. Several commercial
and recreational fisheries also have been
improved.
Barataria- ^'i^
Terreboane Estuarine Complex,
Louisiana
Key management issues: water flow
alterations, sediment reduction, habitat
loss/alteration, nutrients, pathogens, toxic
chemicals, changes in living resources
An average: of 21 square miles of wet-
lands changes,,to open water every year in
this estuaririe^system. The confinement of
the Mississippi'fRiyer by man-made levees
along with' exterisiverchannel construction
through adjacent wetlands,has changed
die natural flow of water anilsediments,
increasing the impacts of subsidence, and
allowing the intrusion of salt water.. •
Restoration projects implemented over a
2-year span, however, have improved over
5,700 acres of wetlands at a cost of over
$58 million. Nearly 2,500 sewage treat-
ment systems also have been installed,
eliminating the discharge of almost 1 mil-
lion gallons of raw or partially treated
sewage each day. Conservation projects
on more than 4,000 acres of agricultural
lands have reduced runoff containing
nutrients, bacteria, and toxic chemicals.
Bamegat Bay, New Jersey
Key management issues: nonpoint source
pollution (pathogens, nutrients, sediments),
habitat loss/alteration
Over 450,000 people live within New
Jersey's Barnegat Bay watershed, and that
number doubles in the summer when
people flock to die shore. The estuary is
not only vital to die state's tourism indus-
try, but also supports commercial and
recreational fish populations and rare
species. To balance suburban growth with
ecosystem protection, all 33 municipali-
ties in Ocean County approved a referen-
dum in 1997 to purchase critical land
areas. This land acquisition will help pro-
tect stream corridors, water supply areas,
natural lands, agricultural uses, buffer
areas, and aquifer recharge areas. A grow-
ing network of private and public part-
ners are working together to ensure the
success of this project.
Buzzards Bay,
Massachusetts
Key management issues: nufrWnts,
pathogens, contaminated seafood, habitat
loss/alteration '!ZS&ti$z-
The diverse habitat of Buzzards Bay
includes sandy beaches, salt marshes, eel-
grass beds, and urban ports. The waters
of the Bay are relatively healthy, but some
of the smaller embayments are direatened
by increasing amounts of pollution from
residential development, industrial wastes,
and sewage contamination. To address
these issues, the Buzzards Bay Estuary
Program has assisted in die construction
of a test center to promote advanced sep-
.fieitreatment solutions and established
limits on.die amount of nitrogen that can
enter the embayments. In. addition, die
program has acquired lands for preserva-
tion and reopened more than 4,000 acres
of shellfish beds.
CaSCO Bay, CascoB^Esluaiy Project
Maine "***>******#*'*
Key management issues: habitat protec-
tion, toxic chemicals, stormwater and com-
bined sewer overflows, water quality in
shellfish and swimming areas, community
stewardship
Casco Bay is a picturesque New
England Bay covering 578 miles of shore-
line. The Bay supports recreational
activities, tourism, and industries such as
shipping, commercial fishing, and shell-
fishing. Accomplishments of the Casco
Bay Estuary Project include promoting
the adoption of Pordand's combined
sewer overflow management plan; organ-
izing efforts to eliminate pollution
sources to 360 acres of clam flats and
reopen closed clamming areas; assisting in
die relocation of 37,000 juvenile lobsters
during the dredging of Portiand Harbor;
assisting with state shellfish advisories by
conducting annual toxicity testing in the
Bay; and helping to produce an award-
winning public service announcement on
protection of the Bay.
Charlotte Harbor, " •''- ';. '
Florida ' '••-•:,;; -,.-..0'[:..'. "••••?"•'"
Key management issues: nutrients,
pathogens, habitat loss/degradation,
introduced species, water flow alterations
The Charlotte Harbor Estuary on
Florida's west coast is home to more tiian
2,300 animal species, including manatees,
sea turtles, and dolphins. Over 2,100
species of plants—from grasses to man-
groves to oaks—also are found in the
region. Rapid growth, however, is chang-
ing the character and ecology of die
watershed. To preserve the estuarine
environment, this program is sponsoring
32 varied projects, ranging from remov-
ing exotic plants that threaten native
species to erecting educational signs on
visitor trails. The program also has creat-
ed an information center, synthesized
existing scientific knowledge of the water-
shed, completed a. regional monitoring
plan, and assessed the economic value of
the area's natural resources.
-------
Coastal Bend Bays •••"""7"
and Estuaries, Texas . ' .
Key management issues: habitat ••
lass/alteration, nutrients, storm-water
runoff debris, pathogens, drinking water
quality/supply
Located in a semi-arid region, this
estuary faces pressures from agriculture,
tourism, maritime commerce, and the
large and growing city of Corpus Christi.
The Coastal Bend Bays and Estuaries
Program is working to meet the area's
water needs while protecting the estuaries'1
rich plant and animal life. The program is
focusing on three key actions: shoreline
management, nonpoint source manage-
ment, and freshwater resources. The pro-
gram's management plan was completed
in a streamlined, community-based
process with an unprecedented diversity
of stakeholder involvement. The Texas
legislature also has designated $900,000
over two years for the program.
Delaware Estuary,
Delaware, New Jersey, ' ,
Pennsylvania
Key management issues: population
growth, urban sprawl, habitat fragmenta-
tion, toxic chemicals
The Delaware Estuary watershed spans
three states. Bringing stakeholders
together in such a large and complex
watershed poses daily challenges. The
Delaware Estuary Program coordinates
resources, draws on the expertise of its
many stakeholders, and inspires large
numbers of residents in its watershed to
become involved. Through these actions,
the program works to support environ-
mentally sound land use practices,
enhance important habitats, reduce pol-
luted runoff, and reduce toxic and bacter-
ial contamination. These efforts help
ensure that contact recreation and fishing
are permitted throughout the estuary.
Delaware Inland Bays,
Delaware
Key management issues:
habitat loss ._, . ^ ff_
Development and intensive? agriculture
in a burgeoning coastal resort area threat-
en the Inland Bays' habitat and natural
resources. To help address these issues,
the Delaware Center for the Inland Bays
established the James Farm Ecological
Preserve, a 150-acre county-owned prop-
erty, which is leased as an outdoor living
and recreation area. The program also is
investigating harmful algal blooms and
recommending pollution control strate-
gies to address nutrient levels in the Bays.
In addition, the program is restoring sea-
grasses; strengthening scallop, clam, and
oyster populations; planting trees and
shrubs to buffer stream banks from pollu-
tion; and examining the amount of nutri-
ents entering the watershed through
precipitation.
Galveston Bay, Texas ;;,;•;••"' "'•*•••;:.
Key management issues: Mfiifijifioss,
nonpoint source pollution, water flow
alterations
Galveston Bay has lost 30,000 acres of
wetland habitat and 90 percent of its sea-
grasses since the 1950s. Contaminated
runoff has degraded water quality and
sediments in the Bay's tributaries and
some near-shore areas. In addition,
altered freshwater inflows have changed
the water's salinity and circulation pat-
terns, which can severely stress wetlands
and oyster reefs. In an effort to address
these problems, industry and various lev-
els of government are working together
to leverage funding, save money, and
develop creative restoration solutions.
This diversified partnership has, for exam-
ple, implemented an innovative seeding
technique and used dredged material in
wetland restoration efforts.
Indian Biver Lagoon,
Florida
. issues:
loss/alteration, increased fre$l_
nutrtents, seaimentatiion ana Wi
deposits
The location of the Indian Biver
Lagoon (IRL) on Florida's eastern
coast—between the temperate climate of
the north and the. subtropical climate of
the south—combined with its large size
make it an estuary of high biological pro-
ductivity. To ensure the health and diver-
sity of the estuary, this program is
partnering with numerous municipalities
and counties to reduce stormwater
runoff, which carries excess nutrients and
sediments into the lagoon. The IRL blue-
way/conservation and recreation lands
project has acquired approximately 8,800
acres of land in the watershed, and man-
grove replanting is helping to restore crit-
ical habitat. Sales and renewals of the IRL
license plate across Florida have raised
more than $1.6 million dollars for estuary
restoration. ._.
Long Island Sound, ->•''.•*!' !
Connecticut, New YorR""~
Key management issues: nutrients,
habitat loss/degradation, toxic chemicals,
pathogens
More than 8 million people live within
the 16,000 square-mile Long Island
Sound watershed. Boating, fishing, swim-
ming, and beachgoing generate more
than $5 billion annually for the regional
economy. The top priority of the Long
Island Sound Study is to reduce nutrients
that are impairing fish and shellfish habi-
tat by depleting oxygen levels in many
areas of the Sound. The program has set
an ambitious goal to reduce nitrogen "
loads by almost 60 percent over 15 years
and to restore 2,000 acres and 100 river
miles of habitat by 2008. To meet these
goals, the program is upgrading sewage
treatment plants to treat nitrogen; restor-
ing wetlands, beaches, dunes, coastal
grasslands, forests, and shellfish reefs; and
involving local communities in develop-
ing watershed-based approaches to con-
trol polluted runoff.
Lower Columbia I..--»-K> I .
-------
The program also helped secure a grant
to preserve nearly 10 percent of the
'Ifft'dh0A''c H-1H1C1? ]*nA
natural land.
Massachusetts Bays, ., '•
Massachusetts '•• ; • :
Key management issues: -contaminate A
shellfish, habitat loss, storm-water pollution,
municipal waste-water management, local
land use and growth
The Massachusetts Bays region encom-
passes all of the coastal waters from the
tip of Cape Cod to the New Hampshire
border. Because of the region's diversi-
ty — in terms of its land use, ecology, and
other factors — it hosts a wide range of
environmental problems. In light of these
challenges, the Massachusetts Bays
Program (MBP) has spearheaded an
interagency program to reopen contami-
nated shellfish beds by identifying sources
of pollution and implementing solutions
for remediation. To address habitat loss
and degradation, the MBP has piloted a
unique, holistic approach to assess wet-
land quality that may serve as a model in
New England. Other initiatives include
conducting a workshop series to prepare
municipal officials for upcoming
stormwater regulations and helping towns
with growth planning and open space
preservation.
Mobile Bay,
Alabama
Key management issur quality,
physical and hydrologic modifications,
habitat loss, living resources, human uses,
public involvement/education
The Mobile Bay watershed covers
more than 71,500 square miles along the
Gulf of Mexico. The program's successful
projects include shoreline erosion control,
habitat restoration, and wetland stormwa-
ter management. It has enhanced public
awareness of key management challenges
through community meetings and
encouraged volunteer monitoring by citi-
zens. Local governments and businesses
also have been active participants in sup-
porting watershed activities. The program
has completed an economic valuation of
Mobile Bay, along with preliminary char-
acterization studies for each of the key
management issues.
Morro Bay,
California
Key management issues: erosion and
sedimentation, pathogen contamination of
shellfish operations, nutrients, freshwater
flow reductions, heavy metals, habitat loss
This estuary encompasses roughly
2,300 acres of mudflats, eelgrass beds,
tidal wetlands, and open water habitat —
making it the most significant wetland
system on California's south central coast.
Threats to the estuary include erosion
and sedimentation, as well as water diver-
sion, urban and agricultural runoff, and
changing land uses that threaten water
quality and wildlife habitat. Faced with
these challenges, the program has held
workshops and established multistake-
holder issue groups to focus on priority
problems. In addition, the United States
District Court awarded the program $3.6
million to carry out its conservation and
management plan, drawing from gas and
electric utility penalty funds.
Narragansett Bay,
Rhode Island
Key management is
pollution (nutrients), pathogens, habitat
kss/degradation, monitoring, local land
use/growth
For hundreds of years, Narragansett
Bay has supported a remarkably diverse
set of resource uses. The densely populat-
ed upper Bay watershed has served as a
cradle of American industry, while the
lower Bay provides a recreational resource
of regional importance and international
renown. The Bay is home to important
fisheries and supports a wide variety of
migratory fish and wildlife. The
Narragansett Bay Estuary Program is
working collaboratively to better assess
the ecological health of the Bay, reverse
ecological degradation, and improve plan-
ning for the Bay's future. Specifically, the
Bay Program is mapping Rhode Island's
estuarine habitats and promoting habitat
restoration; monitoring water quality and
advocating nutrient controls; and helping
to develop watershed-based approaches
toward sustainable use of the Bay's natu-
ral resources.
New Hampshire
Estuaries Project
New Hampshire Estua
New Hampshire
Key management issues: pathogens,
habitat loss/alteration, nutrients, toxic
chemicals
The New Hampshire Estuaries Project
is using the health of the state's shellfish
population as an indicator of water quali-
ty and a measure of overall estuarine
health. For the first time in more than 10
years, the Hampton/Seabrook Estuary—
the most productive recreational clam flat
in coastal New Hampshire—was opened,
and more than 800 sheUfishers participat-
ed in the opening day harvest. Many
organizations within the state have
worked together to identify and eliminate
pollution sources and reopen shellfish
beds. Their work has resulted in the
opening of an additional 550 acres of
shellfish waters in the Great Bay Estuary.
New York-New Jersey Harbor, ...
New York, New Jersey '. •• •••• ' '•• '
Key management issues: toxic-chemicals;
dredged material management, pathogens,
nutrients, habitat loss/alteration
For over 300 years, the Harbor has
served as a critical port and economic
center in the midst of a densely populated
area. These factors have contributed
stresses to the estuarine system. Many
areas of the Harbor contain elevated lev-
els of toxic chemicals. Pathogenic con-
tamination results in beach and shellfish
bed closures. To address these and other
issues, the program is identifying sources
of loadings of toxics, pathogens, and
nutrients to the Harbor and is reducing
them by cleaning up sources of toxics,
controlling discharges from combined
sewer overflows, and improving nitrogen
removal at treatment plants. A protocol
now allows managers to quickly assess
potential impacts of accidental sewage
discharges and to take action to protect
the public. The program also developed a
map of priority habitat sites and helped
direct millions of dollars to their acquisi-
tion and restoration.
Peconic Bay, New York
Key management issues: .
pathogens, toxic chemicals, brown tide,
natural resource threats
One of the Nature Conservancy's
"Last Great Places in the Western
Hemisphere," the Peconic Estuary is a
high-quality resource, vital to the econo-
my of Long Island. However, brown
tides have decimated the once nationally
significant bay scallop industry, bacterial
contamination has closed many shell-
fishing areas, and nutrient inpu|s. have
depressed dissolved oxygen locafeJIn
response, the Peconic Estuary Prdgram
has integrated ecojftjmics with haBitat
and water qi
ing specific
inputs. Morf*
tion projects
agement,
and scallop,
restoration//
al resource's:
in tens of
fent, establish-
jntrol nitrogen
parly implementa-
stormwater man-
treatment upgrades,
:, and;;e'elgrass
fc support and nonfeder-
been critical, resulting
^ ins of dollars for land
preservatiiSi^pollution control, and
resourceynrffiagement.
ffis,
-------
Puget Sound,
Washington
Key management issues: habitat loss,
declining fish stocks, stormwater runoff,
onsite septic systems, introduced species,
shellfish protection
Puget Sound encompasses 2,300 miles
of shoreline and is home to more than
200 species offish and 14 species of
marine mammals. The Puget Sound
Estuary Program has helped protect this
critical resource. The program's plan led
to development of the nation's first sedi-
ment standards. More than a third of the
140 local governments in the basin have
adopted the plan's basic stormwater pro-
gram. Further, laws have been passed to
require certification of professionals who
work with onsite septic systems.
Commercial shellfish acreage has been
reopened after years of closures. And an
award-whining public education program
has involved more than 1.5 million peo-
ple. The program also works with British
Columbia on common issues including
marine protected areas, toxics, and the
introduction and spread of aquatic nui-
sance species.
SHI I'Vaiidsi"!! tisiu.'irv
San Francisco
Estuary, California
Key management issues: aquatic
resource degradation, wetlands loss, decline
of wildlife species, altered flow regimes,
introduced species, increased pollution, lack
of integrated planning and management
Facing a variety of challenges—from
the loss of wetlands to a lack of economic
incentives to promote public/private
habitat protection—the San Francisco
Estuary Project has made great strides by
strengthening and providing support for
local planning efforts. The project
worked cooperatively with local, state,
and federal agencies and private organiza-
tions to develop the Baylands Ecosystem
Habitat Goals Report—a scientific guide
for restoring and improving the baylands
and adjacent habitats of the San Francisco
Estuary. The project is now working to
implement the report by developing a
regional wetiands management plan that
will include identifying restoration proj-
ects and their costs, establishing a wet-
land monitoring framework, and reaching
agreements among funding, regulating,
and implementing parties.
San Juan Bay Estuary,
Puerto Bico
Key management issues: sewage dis-
charges, reduced water circulation, nutri-
ent-toxic contamination/sedimentation,
living resources degradation, aquatic
debris, lack of public awareness/
The San Juan Bay Estuary is one of
many tropical areas trying to harmonize
economic development with resource
protection. Urban development during
the past 40 years has led to considerable
changes in freshwater inflows and degra-
dation of many habitats and living
resources. To address these challenges,
the program focuses on improving water
and sediment quality and enhancing and
protecting habitat and living resources.
The program is restoring the Martin Pefia
Channel, promoting active participation
of all associated communities. The pro-
gram helped establish a solid waste man-
agement and recycling program and
conducted environmental education
demonstration projects directed at com-
munity-based conservation and sustain-
able development. In addition, it has
created fences to reduce illegal dumping,
cleaned up beaches, planted mangrove
seedlings, and reforested tributaries.
Santa Monica Bay,
Key management issues:
stormwater/urban runoff, haWttvestora.-
, JJ i&tonilim]
tion, toxic chemicals, pathogeri$}?s*emment
'contamination, contaminated seafood, bay
plan financing
As home to more than 5,000 species
of flora and fauna, Santa Monica Bay pro-
vides a rich natural resource immediately
adjacent to the second largest metropoli-
tan area in the nation. With more than
45 million visitors per year, the Bay faces
many challenges regarding water quality
and habitat protection. To address con-
cerns about health risks to Bay swimmers,
the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project
completed the first west coast study to
assess human health risks of swimming in
waters contaminated by urban runoff.
Other accomplishments include develop-
ing a comprehensive Bay monitoring pro-
gram; leading efforts to establish a
stormwater permit for Los Angeles
County and its 85 cities; conducting
groundbreaking research on urban runoff
sources, toxicity, and impacts; restoring
coastal wetland habitats; and funding
public outreach programs to encourage
Bay stewardship.
Sarasota Bay, Florida
Key management issues: population
growth/development, nutrients, habitat
loss/degradation, stormwater runoff/
sewage discharges
Nearly 50 years of urban growth and
development have taken a toll on Sarasota
Bay. Excess nitrogen — which enters the
Bay through waste water, stormwater,
rainfall, and the atmosphere — poses the
biggest threat to the health of the estu-
ary. Working with the community, the
Sarasota Bay NEP has helped to reduce
the amount of nitrogen entering the Bav
by 47 percent, resulting in an 18 percent
increase in seagrass acreage. The program
also has embarked on a series of projects
to enhance habitat related to seagrasses,
wetiands, and artificial reefs. As compared
with 1998, the Bay now supports an
additional 110 million fish, 71 million
crabs, and 330 million shrimp. The pro-
gram also has enhanced more than 130
acres of wetiands since 1990—about 8
percent of tho'se lost since 1950.
Tampa Bay, Florida
Key management issues: •
sediment quality, habitat loss/aJi
species loss/decline, spill prevention/response
Tampa Bay—Florida's largest open-
water estuary—stretches 398 square miles
at high tide. After decades of pollution,
the Bay is coming back to life, thanks in
part to the.Tampa Bay Estuary Program.
In particular, the program has focused on
controlling nitrogen loadings to the Bay
to restore vital underwater seagrass beds.
The Tampa Bay Nitrogen Management
Consortium, an innovative public-private
partnership, developed an action plan to
achieve nitrogen reduction goals. The
consortium is making impressive progress
toward the program's long term goal of
recovering 12,350 acres of seagrasses bay-
wide. The program also is providing
national leadership in addressing air dep-
osition of nitrogen and other pollutants
to coastal waters.
TUlamook Bay, Oregon
Key management issues: habiiai-.',. ••. .•;• .••
loss/degradation, bacterial contamination,
altered flow regimes, sedimentation, erosion
Dominated by rugged mountains with
a narrow coastal plain, Tillamook Bay
faces a challenging combination of envi-
ronmental concerns. In particular, past
land use practices and flooding have
impacted critical habitats for salmon
spawning and rearing. To address these
challenges, the Tillamook Coastal
Watershed Resource Center houses a
150-layer GIS database and posts envi-
ronmental data and watershed enhance-
ment updates online. Other projects
include streamside fencing and riparian
revegetation to keep livestock out of
streams and to restore riparian areas;
adding large rocks and woody debris to
improve in-stream habitat; and purchas-
ing ecologically valuable land to be pre-
served in land trusts. A consortium of
agencies, industries, and stakeholders is
responsible for implementing the pro-
gram's Comprehensive Conservation and
Management Plan.
-------
Albemarle-Pamlico Sounds, NC
Tear of Designation: 1987
Tear of CCMP Approval: 1994
Guy Stefanski, Director
Albemarle-Pamlico Sounds NEP
North Carolina Department of
Environment and .Natural Resources
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
Phone: 919 733-5083, Ext. 585
Fax: 919 715-5637
jB-w»«7:guy_stefanski@h2o.enr.state.nc.us
Web site: h2o.enr.state.nc.us/
nep/default.htm
Barataria-Terrebonne Estuarine
Complex, LA
Tear of Designation: 1990
Tear of CCMP. Approval: 1996
Kerry St. Pe, Director
Barataria-Terrebonne Estuary Program
Nicholls State University Campus
P.O. Box 2663
Thibodaux, LA 70310
Phone: 800 259-0869
Fax: 504 447-0870
E-mail: kerry_s@deq.state.la.us
Web site: www.btnep.org/
Bamegat Bay, NJ
Tear of Designation: 1995
Tear of CCMP Approval: 2000
Dr. Bob Scro, Director
Barnegat Bay Estuary Program
P.O. Box 2191
129 Hooper Avenue
Toms River, NJ 08753
Phone: 732 506-5313
Fax: 732 244-8396
E-mail: rscro@dep.state.nj.us
Web site: www.bbep.org
Buzzards Bay, MA
Tear of Designation: 1987
Tear of CCMP Approval: 1991
Dr. Joseph Costa, Director
Buzzards Bay Estuary Program
2870 Cranberry Highway
East Wareham, MA 02538
Phone: 508 291 -3625
Fax: 508 291-3628
E-mail: joe.costa@state.ma.us
Web site: www.buzzardsbay.org/
Casco Bay, ME
Tear of Designation: 1990
Tear of CCMP Approval: 1996
Katherine Groves, Dkector
Casco Bay Estuary Program
Room 408, Law School Building
University of Southern Maine
P.O. Box 9300
Portland, ME 04104
Phone: 207 780-4820
Fax: 207 780-4913
E-mail: kgroves@usm.maine.edu
Wed site: www.rnuslde.usm.maine.edu/
cascobay
Charlotte Harbor, HL
Tear of Designation: 1995
Tear of CCMP Approval: 2000
Tiffany Lutterman, Dkector
Charlotte Harbor Estuary Program
Southwest Florida Regional Planning
Council
4980 Bayline Drive, 4th Floor
P.O. Box 3455
North Fort Myers, FL 33917
Phone: 941 995-1777
Fax: 941 656-7724
E-mail: cnnep-lutterman@mmdspring.com
Web site: www.charlotteharbornep.com/
Coastal Bend Bays and Estuaries, TX
Tear of Designation: 1993
Tear of CCMP Approval: 1999
Jeff Foster, Program Administrator
Coastal Bend Bays and Estuaries Program
Natural Resources Building
Suite 3300
6300 Ocean Drive
Corpus Christi, TX 78412
Phone: 341 980-3425
Fax: 341 980-3437
£-w««7:jfoster@tnrcc.state.rx.us
Web site: www.sci.tamucc.edu/ccbnep
Delaware Estuary, DE/NJ/PA
Tear of Designation: 1988
Tear of CCMP Approval: 1996
Forsyth Kineon, Coordinator
Delaware Estuary Program
Delaware River Basin Commission
P.O. Box 7360
West Trenton, NJ 08628
Phone: 609 883-9500, Ext. 217
Fax: 609 883-9522
E-mail: iMneon@drbc.state.nj.us
Web site: www.delep.org/
Delaware Center for the
Inland Bays, DE
Tear of Designation: 1988
Tear of CCMP Approval: 1994
Dr. Bruce Richards, Executive Dkector
P.O. Box 297
Nassau, DE 19969
Phone: 302 645-7325
Fax: 302 645-5765
E-mail: brichard@udel.edu
Web site: www.udel.edu/CIB/
Galveston Bay, TX
Tear of Designation: 1988
Tear of CCMP Approval: 1995
Helen Drummond, Dkector
Galveston Bay Estuary Program
Bay Plaza 1
711 West Bay Area Boulevard, Number 210
Webster, TX 77598
Phone: 281 332-9937
Fax: 281 332-8590
E-mail: hctrurnmon@tnrcc.state.tx.us
Web site: gbep.tamug.tamu.edu/
Indian Biver Lagoon, EL
Tear of Designation: 1990
Tear of CCMP Approval: 1996
Martin Smithson, Dkector
Indian River Lagoon Program
1900 South Harbor City Boulevard,
Number 107
Melbourne, FL 32901
Phone: 407 984-4950
Fax: 407 984-4937
E-mail: martin_sinithson@
disrrict.sjrwmd.state.fl.us
Web site: www.epa.gov/
OWOW/oceans/lagoon/
Long Island Sound, CT/NY
Tear of Designation: 1987
Tear of CCMP Approval: 1994
Mark Tedesco, Dkector
EPA Long Island Sound Office
64 Stamford Government Center
888 Washington Boulevard
Stamford, CT 06904-2152
Phone: 203 977-1541
Fax: 203 977-1546
E-mail: tedesco.mark@epa.gov
Web site: www.epa.gov/region01/eco/lis
Lower Columbia Siver Estuary,
OB/WA
Tear of Designation: 1995
Tear of CCMP Approval: 1999 (pending)
Deborah Marriott, Program Dkector
Lower Columbia River Estuary Program
811 Southwest Sixth Avenue, 7th Floor
Portland, OR 97204
Phone: 503 229-5279
Fax: 503 229-5214
E-mail: lcrep@deq.state.or.us
Web site: www.lcrep.org/
iiii^^
-------
Maryland Coastal Bays, MD
Year of Designation: 1995
Tear of CCMP Approval: 1999
David Blazer, Dkector
Maryland Coastal Bays Program
9609 Stephen Decatur Highway
Berlin, MD 21811
Phone: 410 213-2297
Fax: 410 260-8739
E-mail: dblazer@dnr.state.md.us
Web site: www.dnr.state.md.us/mcbp/
Massachusetts Bays, MA
Tear of Designation: 1990
Tear of CCMP Approval: 1996
Jan Smith, Dkector
Massachusetts Bays Program
100 Cambridge Street, Number 2006
21st Floor
Boston, MA 02202
Phone: 617 727-9530, Ext. 419
Fax: 617 727-7235
E-mail: jan.smith@state.ma.us
Web site: www.epa.gov/
regionO 1/eco/massbay/
Mobile Bay, AL
Tear of Designation: 1995
Tear of CCMP Approval: 2000
Maty A. Knight, Director
Mobile Bay National Estuary Program
440 Fakhope Avenue
Fairhope, Alabama 36532
Phone: 334 990-3565
Fax: 334 990-3609
E-mail: mknight@faulkner.cc.al.us
Web site: www.mobilebaynep.com
Morro Bay, CA
Tear of Designation: 1995
Tear of CCMP Approval: 2000
Melissa Mooney, Director
Morro Bay Office
1400 3rd Street
Los Osos, CA 93402
Phone: 805 528-8126
Fax: 805 528-3450
E-mail: mbnep@mbnep.org
Web site: www.mbnep.org/index.html
Narragansett Bay, SI
Tear of Designation: 1987
Tear of CCMP Approval: 1993
Richard Bibb, Director
Narragansett Bay Estuary Program
Rhode Island Department of Environmental
Management
235 Promenade Street
Providence, RI 02908
Phone: 401 222-3961, Ext. 7271
Fax: 401 521-4230
E-mail: nbep@narrabay.org
E-mail: rribb@dem.state.ri.us
Web site: www.narrabay.org
New Hampshire Estuaries, NH
Tear of Designation: 1995
Tear of CCMP Approval: 2000
Chris Nash, Dkector
New Hampshke Estuaries Project
152 Court Street
Portsmouth, NH 03801
Phone: 603 433-7187
Fax: 603 431-1438
E-mail: chris.nash@rscs.net
Web site: www.state.nh.us/nhep
New York-New Jersey Harbor,
NY/NJ
Tear of Designation: 1988
Tear of CCMP Approval: 1997
Bob Nyman, Regional Coordinator
Harbor Estuary Program
U.S. EPA Region 2
290 Broadway
New York, NY 10007
Phone: 212 637-3809
Fax: 212 637-2782
E-mail: nyman.robert@epa.gov
Peconic Bay, NY"
Tear of Designation: 1993
Tear of CCMP Approval; 2000
Vito Minei, Dkector
Peconic Estuary Program
Department of Health Services
County of Suffolk
Riverhead County Center, 2nd Floor
Riverhead, NY 11901
Phone: 516 852-2077
Fax: 516 852-2743
E-mail: •wto.minei@co.suffolk.ny.us
Web site: www.co.suffolk.ny.us/
health/pep/
Puget Sound, WA.
Tear of Designation: 1988
Tear of CCMP Approval: 1991
Nancy McKay, Dkector
Puget Sound Water Quality Action Team
Puget Sound Estuary Program
P.O. Box 40900
Olympia, WA 98504-0900
Phone: 360 407-7300
Fax: 360 407-7333
E-mail: nmckay@psat.wa.gov
Web site: www.wa.gov/
puget_sound/index.html
San Francisco Estuary, CA
Tear of Designation: 1988
Tear of CCMP Approval: 1993
Marcia Brockbank, Dkector
San Francisco Estuary Project
c/o RWQCB
1515 Clay Street, Suite 1400
Oakland, CA 94612
Phone: 510 622-2465
Fax: 510 622-2501
E-mail: marciab@abag.ca.gov
Web site: www.abag.ca.gov/
bayarea/sfep/sfep .html
San Juan Bay, PR
Tear of Designation: 1993
Tear of CCMP Approval: 2000
Edna Villanueva, Dkector
San Juan Bay NEP
400 Fernandez Juncos Avenue, 2nd Floor
San Juan, PR 00901-3299
Phone: 787 725-8162
Fax: 787 725-8164
E-mail: edna.villanueva®
saj02.usace.army.mil
Santa Monica Bay, CA
Tear of Designation: 1988
Tear of CCMP Approval: 1995
Marianne Yamaguchi, Dkector
Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project
320 West Fourth Street, 2nd Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90013
Phone: 213 576-6615
Fax: 213 576-6646
E-mail: smbrp@earthUnk.net
Web site: www.smbay.org/
Sarasota Bay, EL
Tear of Designation: 1988
Tear of CCMP Approval: 1995
Mark Alderson, Dkector
Sarasota Bay Project
5333 North Tamiami Trail, Suite 104
Sarasota, PL 34234
Phone:941359-5841
Fax: 941 359-5846
E-mail: sbnep@gte.net
Web site: pelican.gmpo.gov/
gulfofmex/estuarypartner/Sarasota/
SarasotaBay.html
Tampa Bay, EL
Tear of Designation: 1990
Tear of CCMP Approval: 1996
Richard Eckenrod, Dkector
Tampa Bay Estuary Program
100 8th Avenue, SE., MS I-l/NEP
St. Petersburg, FL 33701
Phone: 727 893-2765
Fax: 727 893-2767
E-mail: saveit@tbep.org
Web site: www.tbep.org/
Tillamook Bay, OR
Tear of Designation: 1993
Tear of CCMP Approval: 1999
Richard Felley, Dkector
Tillamook Bay Estuary Program
613 Commercial Drive
P.O. Box 493
Garibaldi, OR 97118
Phone: 503 322-2222
Fax: 503 322-2261
E-mail: rfelley@co.tillamook.or.us
Web site: osu.orst.edu/dept/
tbaynep/nephome.htinl
-------
------- |