EPA 910/9-91-029
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle WA 98101
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
Water Division
Water Resources Assessment
August 1091
Umpqua, Oregon
Dredged Material Disposal
Site Designation
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
150\
LEGEND
DISPOSAL SITE
EZZ3MLW
60
1000
-------
DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
UMPQUA OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE (ODMDS)
DESIGNATION
Prepared by
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (Region 10)
With Technical Assistance From
U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers
Portland District
August 1991
-------
COVER SHEET
Draft
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
UMPQUA OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE (ODMDS)
DESIGNATION
Lead Agency: U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Responsible Official: Dana Rasmussen
Regional Administrator
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
Abstract:
This draft EIS provides information to support designation of an ocean dredged material disposal site (ODMDS) in
the Pacific Ocean off the mouth of the Umpqua River in the State of Oregon. The proposed ODMDS is an adjusted
site lying north of the present interim site. Both interim and adjusted ODMDS are located approximately one
nautical mile west of the mouth of the Umpqua River Entrance. Site designation studies were conducted by the
Portland District, Corps of Engineers, in consultation with Region 10 EPA. Realignment of the approach channel to
the estuary placed it directly over the interim site. An adjusted site was identified to avoid navigational conflicts.
Designation will allow continued deposition of sediments dredged by the Corps of Engineers to maintain the
federally-authorized navigation project at the Umpqua River, Oregon and other dredged materials authorized in
accordance with Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (MPRSA). No
significant or long-term adverse environmental effects are predicted to result from the designation. Designation of an
ODMDS does not constitute or imply approval of an actual disposal of material. Before any disposal may occur, a
specific evaluation by the Corps must be made using EPA's ocean dumping criteria. EPA makes an independent
evaluation of the proposal and has the right to disapprove the actual disposal
Public Review and Comment Process:
This EIS is offered for review and comment to members of the public, special interest groups, and government
agencies. No public hearings/meetings are scheduled. Comments received on this draft EIS will be addressed in the
final. All comments or questions may be directed to:
John Malek Telephone: (206) 553-1286
Dredging and Ocean Dumping Specialist
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Sixth Avenue, WD-128
Seattle, WA 98101
Deadline for Comments:
-------
11
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Site Designation. Section 102 (c) of the Marine Protection, Research, and
Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended, 33 U.S.C. 1401 et seq. (MPRSA), gives the
Administrator of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency the authority to designate
sites where ocean dumping may be permitted. On October 1, 1986, the Administrator
delegated the authority to designate ocean dumping sites to the Regional Administrator
of the Region in which the site is located. EPA has voluntarily committed to prepare
EISs in connection with ocean dumping site designations (39 FR 16186, May 7, 1974).
This draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was prepared by Region 10, EPA,
with the cooperation of the Portland District, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. This
draft EIS provides documentation to support final designation of an ocean dredged
material disposal site (ODMDS) for continuing use to be located off the mouth of the
Umpqua River, Oregon. This document evaluates the interim and an adjusted ODMDS
based on criteria and factors set forth in 40 CFR 228.5 and 228.6. This EIS makes full
use of existing information to discuss various criteria, supplemented by field data to
describe environmental conditions within and adjacent to the site.
As a separate but concurrent action, EPA will publish a proposed rule in the Federal
Register for formal designation of the adjusted Umpqua ODMDS.
Major Conclusions and Findings. The preferred ODMDS for final designation is
a location approximately one nautical miles west from the Umpqua River Entrance.
When designated, the ODMDS will be used for continued disposal of sediments dredged
by the Corps to maintain the federally authorized navigation project at Umpqua River,
Oregon and for disposal of other dredged materials authorized in accordance with
Section 103 of the MPRSA. The adjusted ODMDS proposed for designation is more
suitably located than the interim site in terms of navigational safety considerations.
Disposal of the dredged sediments is a necessary component of maintaining the
navigation project. An evaluation of disposal alternatives was conducted. No less
environmentally damaging, economically feasible alternative to ocean disposal for
material dredged from the entrance to the Umpqua River projects was identified. In
addition, use of ocean disposal by other dredgers may be expected to increase as other
disposal options are exhausted. Designation of an ODMDS is necessary to
accommodate this need.
Three alternatives for ocean disposal were considered for the Umpquae ODMDS:
1) Termination of ocean disposal at Umpqua;
2) Designation of the existing interim ODMDS; and
3) Designation of an adjusted ODMDS.
Based on the evaluation of need and an assessment of environmental impacts from
historic dredged material disposal, termination of ocean disposal at Umpqua was not
considered prudent or reasonable. Evaluation focussed on the existing interim ODMDS,
111
-------
an adjusted ODMDS, and consideration of an ODMDS beyond the continental shelf.
The procedures used to evaluate the ODMDS consisted of evaluating each of the five
general and eleven specific criteria in 40 CFR 228.5 and 228.6. Use of an ODMDS
beyond the continental shelf provided no environmental advantages and incurred
significant economic costs.
The interim site, or areas in the same vicinity, have been used by Portland District since
1924. To date, over 14.5 million cubic yards (cy) have been disposed at sea, over 3.5
million cy of which have been disposed in the interim ODMDS. The site received its
interim designation from EPA in 1977 (40 CFR 228.12). It was entitled "Umpqua River
Entrance" and was given the following corner coordinates (NAD 83):
43 40' 06" N 124 14' 22" W
43 ° 40' 06" N 124 13' 46" W
43 39' 52" N 124e 13' 46" W
43 ° 39' 52" N 124 14' 22" W
The approximate location of this site is one nautical mile from the Umpqua River
entrance, with dimensions of 3600 feet by 1400 feet and an average depth of 90 feet.
The site occupies approximately 116 acres.
The U.S. Coast Guard raised some concern with the location of the interim site with
respect to the marked approach channel. The approach channel was re-aligned in
response to changes made in the entrance jetties in 1982. As a result, the approach
channel became aligned directly over the interim ODMDS. Potential conflicts could
occur between the dredge or tug-and-barge activity and local ships during disposal.
Additionally, navigational problems could develop if mounding were to occur at the
interim disposal site. As a result, an adjusted location was defined and is proposed for
final designation. It has the following coordinates (NAD 83):
43 ° 40' 34" N., 124 ° 14' 26" W.,
43 40' 34" N., 124 13' 50" W.,
43 40' 20" N., 124 13' 50" W.,
and 43 40' 20" N., 124 14' 26" W.
The adjusted site is located 2,800 feet to the north of the interim site in slightly deeper
water, with an average depth of 105 feet. Its dimensions are identical to the interim
site, occupying approximately 116 acres.
After applying the five general and eleven specific criteria, designation of the interim
adjusted Umpqua ODMDS was selected as the preferred action. Continued use of the
interim ODMDS has the potential for serious conflicts with navigation although it would
not be expected to cause unacceptable environmental effects. The adjusted ODMDS
avoids the navigation conflicts and is therefore considered to be the better site.
IV
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COVER SHEET i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS v
I. INTRODUCTION 1
H. PURPOSE AND NEED . 3
General 3
Location 3
Need 3
Project History .5
Historical ODMDS Use .6
m. ALTERNATIVES 7
General 7
Definition of the Zone of Siting Feasibility 7
Resource Considerations 9
Equipment Considerations 9
Consideration of Upland Disposal Options 9
Ocean Disposal Options 10
Application of General Criteria 10
Minimal Interference with Other Activities 11
Minimizes Changes in Water Quality 13
Interim Sites Which Do Not Meet Criteria 13
Size of Sites 13
Sites Off the Continental Shelf 13
Application of Specific Criteria 14
Geographic Location 15
Distance From Important Living Resources '. 15
Distance From Beaches and Other Amenities 17
Types and Quantities of Material to be Deposited 17
Feasibility of Surveillance and Monitoring 18
Disposal, Horizontal Transport, and Vertical Mixing
Characteristics '. 18
Effects of Previous Disposal 19
Interference with Other Uses of the Ocean 19
Existing Water Quality and Ecology 21
Potential for Recruitment of Nuisance Species 23
Existence of Significant Natural or Cultural Features 23
Selection of Preferred Alternative 23
-------
Page
IV. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 27
General 27
Physical Environment 27
General 27
Geology 27
Circulation and Currents 27
Water and Sediment Quality 28
Biological Environment 28
General 28
Benthic 28
Fishes 29
Wildlife 29
Endangered Species . 29
Socioeconomic Environment , 29
General 29
Natural Resource Harvesting (Commercial) 29
Recreation 29
Cultural Resources 30
V. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 31
General 31
Physical Effects 31
Biological Effects 31
Socioeconomic Effects 32
Coastal Zone Management 32
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 33
Relationship Between Short-Term Uses of the Environment and
Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-Term Productivity 33
Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources 33
VL COORDINATION 35
Coordination by the Corps of Engineers . . 35
Coordination by EPA 35
VH. LIST OF PREPARERS 37
VIE. GENERAL BIBLIOGRAPHY 39
VI
-------
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Living Resources
Appendix B: Geological Resources, Oceanographic Processes and
Sediment Transport of the Umpqua ZSF
Appendix C: Sediment Chemistry and Water Quality
Appendix D: Recreational Use
Appendix E: Cultural Resources
Appendix F: Comment and Coordination
t
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1 General Criteria for the Selection of Ocean Disposal Sites 10
2 Eleven Specific Factors for Ocean Disposal Site Selection 15
3 Conflict Matrix .. 25
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1 General Location of Umpqua River 4
2 Overall Process for ODMDS Evaluation 8
3 Overlay Evaluation of Individual Resources in ZSF 12
4 Umpqua River ODMDS and ZSF 16
5 Umpqua River ODMDS Bathymetry 20
6 Potential Navigation Hazards ' .22
vu
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
This draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) was prepared by Region 10, U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), with the cooperation of the Portland District,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). Section 102 (c) of the Marine Protection,
Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended, 33 U.S.C. 1401 et seq. (MPRSA),
gives the Administrator of the EPA the authority to designate sites where ocean
dumping may be permitted. On October 1, 1986, the Administer delegated the authority
to designate ocean dumping sites to the Regional Administrator of the Region in which
the site is located. EPA has voluntarily committed to prepare EISs in connection with
ocean dumping site designations (39 FR 16186, May 7, 1974).
Disposal site studies were designed and conducted by the Corps, in consultation with
EPA, and the Umpqua Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site Evaluation Report (1989)
was prepared and coordinated by the Corps. The final Site Evaluation Report described
conditions in the vicinity of the interim and proposed for designation ocean dredged
material disposal site (ODMDS) at Umpqua River, Oregon. The existing interim
ODMDS at Umpqua received its interim designation from EPA in 1977 (40 CFR
228.12). The MPRSA requires that, for a site to receive a final ODMDS designation,
the site must satisfy the general and specific disposal site criteria set forth in 40 CFR
228.6 and 228.5. The Corps Report recommended that a adjusted ODMDS be
designated by EPA instead of the existing interim ODMDS due to potentially serious
conflicts with navigation. The report also documented compliance of the interim and
adjusted ODMDS with requirements of the following laws:
Endangered Species Act of 1973,
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, and the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, all as amended.
That document was submitted to EPA for review and processing for formal designation
by the Regional Administrator, Region 10. The Corps' Site Evaluation Report was used
as the basis of the draft EIS. Technical Appendices from the Corps' report are included
in this draft EIS.
- 1-
-------
-2-
-------
H. PURPOSE AND NEED
General. This draft EIS provides documentation to support final designation of an
adjusted ocean dredged material disposal site (ODMDS) for continuing use to be
located off the mouth of the Umpqua River, Oregon. The currently interim-designated
ODMDS would be dedesignated. This document evaluates the adjusted and interim
Umpqua ODMDS based on criteria and factors set forth in 40 CFR 228.5 and 228.6 as
required by the Ocean Dumping Regulations (ODR) promulgated in the Federal
Register on January 11, 1977, in accordance with provisions set forth in Sections 102 and
103 of the MPRSA. This EIS makes full use of existing information to discuss various
criteria, supplemented by field data to describe environmental conditions within and
adjacent to the site.
The preferred ODMDS for final designation is an adjusted ODMDS north of the
existing interim site. Both sites are located one nautical mile (nmi.) west of the mouth
of the Umpqua River. The adjusted site, when designated as the final ODMDS, will be
used for continuing disposal of materials dredged by the Corps of Engineers to maintain
the federally authorized navigation projects at the Umpqua River, Oregon, and for
disposal of dredged materials authorized in accordance with Section 103 of MPRSA.
The adjusted site proposed for designation is located in the area best suited for dredged
material disposal in terms of environmental and navigational safety factors.
Location. The Umpqua River enters the Pacific Ocean near the town of Reedsport,
Oregon, approximately 180 miles south of the Columbia River (Figure 1). The river
constitutes a navigable approach to Winchester Bay, Reedsport and Gardiner. The
Umpqua River has the third largest drainage basin on the Oregon coast after the Rogue
River and Columbia, and has the fourth largest estuary, covering 6,430 acres. The
estuary is fed by two rivers, the Umpqua and the smaller Smith. The watershed
encompasses part of the Coast Range, with the Umpqua River extending into the
Cascades. The estuary is fed mainly by the Umpqua River, which drains 4,560 square
miles.
Need. The Corps is responsible for the Umpqua River project which is authorized for
the following purposes:
. To decrease waiting times for vessels crossing the bar;
To provide a protected entrance for tugs, barges and commercial fishing
vessels;
To provide mooring facilities for small boats which take advantage of
project facilities;
To permit barge and small boat traffic upstream to river mile 11.7; and
To provide a harbor of refuge.
-3-
-------
Figure 1
General Location of Umpqua River
-4-
-------
Maintenance of the navigation channel to authorized depths is critical to keeping the
river and harbor open and sustaining these vital components of the local and state
economy. Portions of the authorized project considered in this report are:
An entrance channel 26 feet deep and 400 feet wide.
A river channel 22 feet deep and 200 feet wide to RM 11.0.
A turning basin 22 feet deep, 600 feet wide, and 1000 feet long at
Reedsport.
A side channel 22 feet deep and 200 feet wide from the main channel at
RM 8 to a turning basin 22 feet deep, 500 feet wide and 800 feet long at
Gardiner.
The Winchester Bay project, which includes a channel 16 feet deep, 100
feet wide and 3,100 feet long; a turning basin 12 feet deep, 175 ft wide and
300 feet long; an east boat channel, 16 feet deep, 100 feet wide, and 500
feet long, then 12 feet deep, 75 feet wide and 950 feet long; and a west
boat channel 16 feet deep, 100 feet wide by 4300 feet long.
Disposal of dredged sediments is a necessary component of maintaining the authorized
project. An evaluation of disposal alternatives was conducted and is contained in
Section HI Alternatives. No less environmentally damaging, economically feasible
alternative to ocean disposal for material dredged from the entrance to the Rogue River
was identified. In addition, use of ocean disposal by other dredgers may be expected as
other disposal options are exhausted. Designation of an ODMDS is necessary to
accommodate this need.
Project History. Navigation on the Umpqua obtained early importance because of the
gold rush in southern Oregon during the 1850's. Channel improvements began in 1871.
Due to navigational problems caused by strong rotary currents within the mouth of the
Umpqua, construction of an 8,000 foot north jetty was authorized in 1922, with
construction of a south jetty being authorized in 1930. Subsequent dredging began in
1924. In 1980, a training jetty was completed on the south side of the channel. Also, to
take advantage of the deep water off the south jetty and reduce maintenance, the
entrance to the channel was realigned to the south in 1982. Besides the jetties, the
presently authorized project includes entrance channels and turning basins.
Since 1924, over 14.5 million cubic yards (cy) have been disposed at sea with over 3.5
million cubic yards disposed in the designated offshore site. Between 1968 and 1988
annual disposal has averaged 147,349 cy, with a maximum of 313,632 cy and a
of 500 cy. Dredging that contributes to offshore disposal is done to maintain the
entrance channel 26 ft deep and 400 ft wide. Maintenance of the areas have been via
hopper dredge. Shoaling occurs between the jetties from river mile (RM) -0.5 to about
-0.8, and outside the jetties at about mile -1.2. The training jetty built on the south side
of the channel in 1980 is intended to alleviate the shoaling between the jetties.
-5-
-------
In-water disposal sites have been used within the estuary at river miles (RM) 8.9, 6.8,
5.0, 3.1, 1.6, and 0.8. For the period 1968-1988, an estimated annual average of 312,000
cy was disposed in these estuarine sites. Actually, because of potential environmental
conflicts, in-water disposal within the estuary has been limited, with an annual average
disposal of 180,000 cy in the estuary during the last 5 years.
Historical ODMDS Use. The interim site, or areas in the same vicinity, have been used
by Portland District since 1924. The interim site was designated an interim site by EPA
in 40 CFR 228.12. The site designations in 1977 were an attempt by EPA to document
and establish coordinates for historically used Corps of Engineers disposal sites. Interim
designations are to lead to final designations or termination of their use, pending
completion of required studies for final designation. This study will report on these
requirements and request final site designation for an adjusted site from EPA.
The site designated interim in 40 CFR 228.12 was entitled, "Umpqua River Entrance"
and has the following coordinates:
43 e 40' 06" N., 124 14' 22" W.,
43 40' 06" N., 124 13' 46" W.,
43 ° 40' 52" N., 124 13' 46" W., and
43 ° 40' 52" N., 124 14' 22" W.
The approximate location of this site is one mile from the Umpqua River entrance, with
dimensions of 3600 feet by 1400 feet and an average depth of 90 feet
The U.S. Coast Guard raised some concern with the location of the interim site with
respect to the marked approach channel. When the approach channel was re-aligned in
1982, in response to changes in the entrance jetties, the approach channel became
aligned directly over the interim ODMDS. Conflicts could occur between the dredge or
tug-and-barge operation and local ships during disposal activities. Additionally,
navigational safety could be impaired if mounding developed at the interim site. Based
on these concerns, data and information within the ZSF were reviewd and another
potential site located 2,800 feet to the north of the interim site. This adjusted site is
located in slightly deeper water, with an average depth of 105 feet. The coordinates of
the adjusted site are (NAD 83):
43 40' 34" N., 124 14' 26" W.,
43 40' 34" N., 124 ° 13' 50" W.,
43 40' 20" N., 124 13' 50" W., and
43 40' 20" N., 124 14' 26" W.
The dimensions of the adjusted site are the same as the original interim site, 3,600 feet
by 1,400 feet, also occupying 116 acres. This adjusted site is recommended for final
designation.
-6-
-------
ALTERNATIVES
General. Under the MPRSA, designation of ocean dumping sites follow specific
requirements. In conjunction with the MPRSA, the Ocean Dumping Regulations, as
well as related EPA and Corps of Engineers policies, must be followed. Guidance for
the evaluation process has been provided by the joint EPA/Corps workbook (1984).
This process generally involved three major phases. Phase I includes delineation of the
general area or Zone of Siting Feasibility (ZSF), i.e., disposal is economically and
technically feasible. The ZSF is determined by establishing the reasonable haul
distance, considering factors such as available dredging equipment, energy use
constraints, costs, and safety concerns. Existing information on resources, uses, and
environmental concerns are reviewed and critical resources and areas of incompatibility
identified. Phase n involves identification of candidate sites within the ZSF based on
information evaluated in Phase I. Additional studies can be conducted to further
evaluate environmental and other factors, such as disposal site management
considerations. Phase HI consists of evaluation of candidate sites and selection of
preferred site(s) for formal designation by EPA. Preparation of this EIS and the
designation rule is part of Phase HI (Figure 2).
Definition of the Zone of Siting Feasibility (ZSF). Dredging of the coastal ports is
limited to a season from April through October. That limit is imposed by the weather
and sea conditions that predominate in the Northwest. The rough seas and storms
create unsafe conditions for dredges and tug-barge combinations outside the relatively
sheltered estuaries. As previously noted, dredged material disposal at in-water estuarine
sites has occurred in the past. However, recognition of the importance of these habitats
and historic, often wholesale, alteration of estuarine habitats has severely limited such
disposal.
The size of the ZSF is controlled by the capability of available dredging equipment as
allocated among the nine Oregon, one Washington, and four California coastal projects,
and the hauling distance from the dredging site. The limited operating time available
for completing the maintenance dredging along the Oregon coast, therefore, requires a
combination of government and private dredges which operate on the Pacific coast. At
Umpqua, most of the maintenance dredging is done with government-owned dredges.
Portland District is limited by congressional action on the number of days which it can
operate the government-owned dredges. Currently, 230 days are authorized each year
and must be allocated between most of the West Coast ports. This allocation will vary
each year depending on how much shoaling is incurred by each port
An analysis was done of the availability of dredging work on the West Coast and of
contractor dredges available. Given the relatively small volumes of material to be
dredged annually at Umpqua (in comparison to other, larger jobs) it is unlikely that
more than two pieces of contractor equipment would be available in any given year for
this project. Often there may not be any contractor-owned equipment available during
the "dredge season" permitted by favorable weather and sea conditions.
-7-
-------
LITERATURE SURVEYS
INTERVIEWS
DEFINE ZSF
DEFINE TYPES OF
DREDGED MATERIAL
DEFINE PHYSICAL
PROCESSES
DELINEATE BOTTOM
AREAS
Phase I
ELIMINATE
SENSITIVE
AND
INCOMPATIBLE
AREAS
SELECT ALTERNATIVE
SITINGS
DETERMINE ADDITIONAL
DATA NEEDS
DETERMINE DISPOSAL
MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS
GATHER
ADDITIONAL
DATA AND/OR
APPLY II
SPECIFIC FACTORS
(40CFR 228.6)
Phase II
EVALUATE
CANDIDATE
SITES
USING 5 GEN.
CRITERIA
(40 CFR 228.5)
FINAL SIZING
AND
POSITIONING
DETERMINE NEED FOR
MONITORING PROGRAM
DETERMINE POTENTIAL
FOR CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
SELECTION OF MOST
ENVIRONMENTALLY
SUITABLE AREA(S)
DEVELOP SITE
MANAGEMENT
STRATEGIES
Phase III
Figure 2
Overall Process for ODMDS Evaluation
-8-
-------
Based on these factors, the Corps developed a practical ZSF for the Umpqua projects of
1.5 nmi. In a typical year, the Umpqua project requires production of about 20,000 cy
per day to complete maintenance dredging within the time allocated. The Corps'
dredge, Yaquina, can achieve this production provided the haul distance is no greater
than 1.5 nmi. Longer hauling distances of dredged material increase vessel operating
costs and reduce production, thereby increasing the time required for completion of the
work. Loss of production time due to adverse weather conditions must also be
anticipated.
Resource Considerations. The natural and cultural resources of the area within the ZSF
were identified from information obtained through review of literature, interviews with
resource agencies and local users, and through site-specific studies (appendix A).
Critical information was evaluated and mapped to identify areas of resource conflict.
The selection of resources to use for this determination was dependent on whether the
resource was considered limited. A coast-wide resource, i.e., a flatfish spawning area,
was not considered a limited resource and was not included in the overlay evaluation
technique.
Equipment Considerations. For much of the Corps maintenance work, a hopper dredge
must be used because the sea conditions encountered at the entrance are not suitable
for safe operation of a pipeline dredge. In recent years, use of mechanical dredges in
combination with ocean-going tugs and barges has increased. This has somewhat
enhanced flexibility for scheduling of dredging activities along the Pacific coast; however,
limited availability of equipment, as explained above, remains a controlling factor.
With both a hopper dredge or barge, dredged material disposal would normally occur at
an in-water site. There are sites in the estuary that have been used in the past for
disposal of dredged material (i.e., in-water sites at RM 8.9, 6.8, 5.0, 3.1, and 0.8).
Dependance on estuarine sites is discouraged by EPA and other resource agencies
because disposal inside the estuary carries greater risk of adverse environmental impacts.
Estuarine habitats are generally more productive and far less extensive than are
nearshore oceanic habitats. Disposal of the material inside the estuary would also
increase the risk of the material eroding and reshoaling in the channel, potentially
increasing dredging requirements.
Consideration of Upland Disposal Options. Upland disposal of entrance channel
material typically is not feasible for economic and environmental reasons. Upland sites
with large capacities seldom exist at such locations. More distant upland sites incur
substantially greater costs for rehandling and transportation of the material, and
alteration of the sites normally involves some environmental impacts. Pipeline dredging
of entrance reaches is usually unsafe. Because of the use of hopper dredges or
clamshell dredge and barge, it would be necessary to rehandle materials to use upland
sites. Creation of an in-water sump in the estuary would require one be dredged and
material bottom-dumped into it, then pumped ashore with a pipeline suction dredge.
Creation of a upland dewatering and rehandling area also may be necessary which could
further alter marine or estuarine habitats. This would be very costly and also would
increase adverse environmental impacts of the project. Another adverse impact of
upland disposal is that naturally occurring sediments would be removed from the littoral
system and could cause erosion of nearby shorelines over the long term.
-9-
-------
The local sponsor for the Umpqua project has not been able to identify any upland
disposal options at this time; although beneficial uses of the dredged material is
currently under investigation. The project is bordered on both sides by the Oregon
Dunes NRA and county parks.
Ocean Disposal Options. Three alternatives for ocean disposal were considered for the
Umpqua ODMDS:
(1) Termination of ocean disposal at Umpqua;
(2) Designation of the existing interim ODMDS; and
(3) Designation of an adjusted ODMDS.
Based on the evaluation of need and an assessment of environmental impacts from
historic dredged material disposal, termination of ocean disposal at Umpqua is not
considered prudent or reasonable. The need for the navigation project is not at issue
and is beyond the scope of this evaluation. Termination of ocean disposal would be
considered if the activity were causing significant unacceptable adverse effects. In
evaluation of previous disposal activities, no significant adverse effects were noted.
Accordingly, evaluation focussed on the existing interim ODMDS and an adjusted
ODMDS, and consideration of an ODMDS beyond the continental shelf. The
procedures used to evaluate these options consisted of evaluating each of the five
general and eleven specific criteria as required in 40 CFR 228.5 and 228.6.
Application of General Criteria. The proposed disposal site has been evaluated in terms
of the following general criteria (Table 1).
Table 1
General Criteria for the Selection of Ocean Disposal Sites
The dumping of material into the ocean will be permitted only at sites or in areas selected to minimise the interference of
disposal activities with other activities in the marine environment, particularly avoiding areas of existing fisheries or
shellfisheries, and regions of heavy commercial or recreational navigation.
Locations and boundaries of disposal sites will be chosen so that temporary perturbations in water quality or other
environmental conditions during initial mixing caused by disposal operations anywhere within the site can be expected to be
reduced to normal ambient seawater levels or to undetectable contaminant concentrations or effects before reaching any beach,
shoreline, marine sanctuary, or known geographically limited fishery or shellfishery.
If at any time during or after disposal site evaluation studies, it is determined that existing disposal sites presently approved on
an interim basis for ocean dumping do not meet criteria for site selection set forth in Sections 228.5 - 228.6, the use of such
rites will be terminated as soon as suitable alternative disposal sites can be designated.
The sizes of ocean disposal sites will be limited in order to localize, for identification and control, any immediate adverse
impacts and to permit the implementation of effective monitoring and surveillance programs to prevent adverse, long-range
impacts. The size, configuration, and location of any disposal site will be determined as a pan of the disposal site evaluation
or designation study.
EPA will, wherever feasible, designate ocean dumping sites beyond the edge of the continental shelf and other such sites that
have been historically used.
-10-
-------
Minimal Interference with Other Activities. The first of the five criteria requires
that a determination be made as to whether the site will minimize interference of the
proposed disposal operations with other uses of the marine environment. This
determination was made by overlaying several individual maps presented in the
Technical Appendices onto a base map, giving bathymetry and location of the interim
and adjusted disposal sites and the ZSF. The following figures were selected to be
included in the evaluation of resources of limited distribution.
Navigation Hazards Area/Other Recreation Areas
Shellfish Areas
Critical Aquatic Resources
Commercial and Sport Fishing Areas
Geological Features
Cultural and Historical Areas
Figure 3 is a composite of all of the above areas and indicates by various patterns, the
relative amount of total usage within the ZSF. As the figure shows, the interim site is
located over the approach channel where disposal activities would conflict with
navigation. The adjusted site lies within a minimal conflict area. Disposal operations
occur from May through October of each year. Ordinarily disruption of navigation
would be considered more of an inconvenience than a major conflict. Disposals from
hopper dredges or barges are not continuous operations. At Umpqua, however, the
jetties extend to within 850 feet of the interim site, severely constraining maneuvering
room. Additionally, the hazards associated with wave refraction should mounds develop
at this location are potentially extreme, especially for small craft. Bathymetric surveys in
1988 showed some mounding which may be attributable to the above average volumes
disposed that dredging year and the mild wave climate experienced during the winter of
1987-88. Past surveys had not shown any mounding. However, prudent management
argue that disposal patterns be changed or that the site be relocated. Commercial and
recreational salmon fishing occurs in the area of the interim and adjusted ODMDS.
These activities are not limited, occurring over a wide nearshore area. Disposal
operations and the salmon fishing season do overlap, however, communications with
ODFW personnel (Appendix A) indicate no observable conflicts between the two uses.
Appendix A provides a discussion of all potential conflicts within the ZSF with living
resources, and concludes that there have been no major conflicts in the past or
predictable conflicts in the future.
-11-
-------
Commercial Salmon Fishing
Comnercial Crab Fishing
Lingcod & Rockfish
Likely Shipwrecks
Best Salmon Fishing
tOOOYDS
1000YDS
Figure3
Overlay Evaluation of Individual Resources in ZSF
- 12-
-------
Minimizes Changes in Water Quality. The second of the five general criteria
requires that changes to ambient seawater quality levels occurring outside the disposal
site be within water quality standards and that no detectable contaminants reach
beaches, shorelines, sanctuaries, or geographically-limited fisheries or shellfisheries. The
nature of material has already been discussed; no contaminants or suspended solids are
expected to be released. Accordingly, there should be no water quality perturbations
that might move toward a limited resource. Bottom movement of deposited material is
discussed in Appendix B and, in general, shows a net offshore movement of the finer
fractions. The coarser material appears to remain in the general area where deposited.
Interim Sites Which Do Not Meet Criteria. Evaluation by the Corps and EPA
indicates that the adjusted site would meet the criteria and factors established in 40
CFR 228.5 and 228.6. A arguable exception is that the site is not located off of the
continental shelf. Because of the realignment of the approach channel, the interim
ODMDS is considered to not meet the criteria and factors due to potential navigation
hazard. Adjustment of the site out of the navigation lane is a prudent measure. No
reported problems or complaints have been received by the Corps or EPA on use of the
interim site. Because of their proximity, both sites are considered environmentally
acceptable for the types and quantities of dredged material that have historically been
discharged. (See evaluation of Sites off the Continental Shelf following.)
Size of Sites. The fourth general criterion requires that the size, configuration
and location of the site be evaluated as part of the study. The adjusted site, which is
proposed for designation, is 3600 feet long by 1400 feet wide, occupying an area of
approximately 116 acres. It is similar in areal size to other Oregon ODMDS sites and is
of identical size to the interim site which it would replace. Both the interim and
adjusted disposal sites are dispersive. Although volumes of material going to Oregon
ODMDS are expected to increase slightly in the future as alternative disposal options
are exhausted, this increase is not expected to seriously impact site capacity or resources
outside the ODMDS. All Oregon ODMDS are jointly managed and periodically
monitored by the Corps and EPA Public notices issued for ocean disposal operations,
as required by MPRSA, have not generated concerns about significant impacts from
their use. Also, no comments have been received about the size, shape, or location of
the interim disposal sites. The Umpqua adjusted site is located close enough to shore
and harbor facilities that monitoring and surveillance programs, as required, can easily
be accomplished.
Sites off the Continental Shelf. Potential disposal areas located off the
continental shelf in the Umpqua River area would be at least 15 nmi. offshore, in water
depths of 600 feet or greater. The haul distance to any potential site beyond the shelf is
much greater than the 1.5 nmi. limit of the Umpqua ZSF, making the project
economically infeasible. While there may be some flexibility in operations that could
increase the haul distance somewhat, the minimum 15 nmi. haul to utilize a continental
slope disposal site is economically prohibitive. Further, significant environmental
concerns about disposal in such areas make off-shelf disposal questionable.
-13-
-------
The purpose of the off-continental shelf site preference is to minimize environmental
impacts from ocean dumping. In this instance, evaluation of historic ocean dumping of
dredged material at the interim site does not reveal actual or potential resource conflicts
or unacceptable adverse environmental effects due to ocean dumping that would argue
for use of another site. Disposal into the deeper water far offshore would remove large
quantities of natural sediments from the nearshore littoral transport system, a system
that functions with largely non-renewable quantities of sand in Oregon. Disruption of
this system's mass balance could alter erosion/accretion patterns, adversely impacting
beaches, spits, wetlands, and other shoreline habitats.
Benthic and pelagic ecosystems near the shelf contain important fishery resources and
processes effecting them are not well understood. Fine grain sediment and rocky
habitats would be directly covered in disposal operations. Lower density silt/clay and
organic components of sediments could remain suspended in density layers of the
pycnocline, with potential transport inshore and to the surface in seasonal upwelling
events. Deposited sediments could be transported long distances downslope. Bottom
gradients can be 5 percent to 25 percent on the continental slope, making accumulated
unconsolidated sediments susceptible to slumping. Also, offshore transport by
nearbottom currents could occur.
Designation of a site beyond the shelf would require extensive seasonal site
characterization studies and monitoring to understand the system and evaluate disposal
impacts. Distance offshore and depth of required sampling would add further to the
time and expense of such a program.
In summary, use of an ODMDS off the continental shelf did not offer any environmental
advantages over a site located closer to the shore but did involve substantially greater
economic disadvantages.
Application of Specific Criteria. The interim and adjusted ODMDS were evaluated in
terms of the following specific criteria (Table 2). The discussions of each criterium
which follow are analytic in nature, as each is evauated in detail in the technical
appendixes.
-14-
-------
Table 2
Eleven Specific Factors for Ocean Disposal Site Selection
Geographical position, depth of water, bottom topography, and distance from coast
Location in relation to breeding, spawning, nursery, feeding or passage areas of living resources in adult or juvenile phases.
Location in relation to beaches or other amenity areas.
Types and quantities of waste proposed to be disposed and proposed methods of release, including methods of packaging the
waste, if any.
Feasibility of surveillance and monitoring.
Dispersal, horizontal transport, and vertical mixing characteristics of the area, including prevailing current velocity, if any.
Existence and effects of present or previous discharges and dumping in the area (including cumulative effects).
Interference with shipping, fishing, recreation, mineral extraction, desalination, shellfish culture, areas of special scientific
importance and other legitimate uses of the ocean.
Existing water quality and ecology of the site, as determined by available data or by trend assessment or baseline surveys.
Potential for the development or recruitment of nuisance species within the disposal site.
Existence at or in close proximity to the site of any significant natural or cultural features of historical importance.
Geographic Location. Figure 4 shows the location of Umpqua interim and adjusted
ODMDS, along with bottom contours. The interim site lies in 60 to 114 feet of water,
approximately 1.0 nautical mile offshore of the entrance to the Umpqua River. The
adjusted site lies in 66 to 130 feet of water, approximately 2,800 feet north of the
interim site. Both sites have a center line on a 270 degree azimuth. Bottom topography
within both sites is varied and is presented in detail in appendix B. Coordinates are
(NAD 83):
Umpqua interim site: 43 40' 07" N., 124 14' 18" W.,
43 40' 07" N., 124 13' 42" W.,
43 39' 53" N., 124 13' 42" W., and
43 39' 53" N., 124' 14' 18" W.
Umpqua adjusted site: 43 40' 35" N., 124 14' 22" W.,
43 ° 40' 35" N., 124" 13' 46" W.,
43 ° 40' 21" N., 124 13' 46" W., and
43' 40* 21" N., 124 14' 22" W.
Distance From Important Living Resources. Aquatic resources of the site are
described in detail in Appendix A. The existing disposal site is located in the nearshore
area, and the overlying waters contain many nearshore pelagic organisms which occur in
the water column. These include zooplankton such as copepods, euphausiids, pteropods,
chaetognaths and meroplankton (fish, crab and other invertebrate larvae). These
organisms generally display seasonal changes in abundance and, since they are present
over most of the coast, they are not critical to the overall coastal population. Based on
evidence from previous zooplankton and larval fish studies, it appears that there will be
no impact to organisms in the water column (Sullivan and Hancock, 1977).
-15-
-------
UMPQUA RIVER
Ocean Dredged Material
Disposal Site and ZSF
180'
DISPOSAL SITE
MLW
Figure 4
Umpqua River ODMDS and ZSF
-16-
-------
Sediment in the interim disposal site consists of medium to fine sands, and fine sands
outside the site (including the adjusted ODMDS). Benthic samples are discussed in
detail in Appendix A. Benthic fauna of the area are typical of nearshore, sandy,
wave-influenced regions that exist along much of the Pacific Northwest coast. These
species are adapted to high energy environments.
The infaunal community is dominated by gammarid amphipods and polychaete worms
(Emmett, et al, 1987). The species of invertebrates inhabiting the study area are the
more motile psammnetic (sand-dwelling) forms which tolerate or require high sediment
flux. Accordingly, continued use of the site for disposal is not expected to harm, but
may enhance, these organisms. They are typical of other shallow water disposal sites
such as Coos Bay sites E and F (Hancock et aL, 1981).
The dominant commercially and recreationally important macroinvertebrate species in
the inshore coastal area are shellfish and Dungeness crab.
The nearshore area off the Umpqua River supports a variety of pelagic and demersal
fish species. Pelagic species include anadromous salmon, steelhead, cutthroat trout, and
shad that migrate through the estuaries to upriver spawning areas. Other pelagic species
include the Pacific herring, anchovy, surfsmelt, and sea perch.
The disposal site is in an area where numerous species of birds and marine mammals
occur in the pelagic nearshore and shoreline habitats in and surrounding the proposed
disposal site.
Portland District requested an endangered species listing for the ODMDS from U. S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as
part of their coordination of the Site Evaluation Report. Based on previous biological
assessments conducted along the Oregon coast, it was concluded that no impacts to
threatened or endangered species are anticipated from the proposed designation and
use. A letter of concurrance from the NMFS is contained in appendix F.
In summary, the proposed ODMDS contains living resources that could be affected by
disposal activities. Evaluation of past disposal activities do not indicate that
unacceptable adverse effects to these resources have occurred. Based on resource
considerations, both the interim and adjusted ODMDS are considered acceptable for
ODMDS designation.
Distance from Beaches and Other Amenities. The interim disposal site is 850
feet from the end of the jetties and 1,900 feet from the nearest beach. The adjusted site
is 1,200 feet from the end of the jetties and 2,200 feet from the nearest beach. There
are no rocks or pinnacles in the vicinity of either site.
Types and Quantities of Material to be Deposited at the Site. The disposal site
will receive dredged materials transported by either government or private contractor
hopper dredges or ocean-going barges. The dredges typically available for use at the
Umpqua project have hopper capacities of 800 to 1,500 cy. Barges have a greater
capacity, up to 4,000 cy. Thus, no more than 4,000 cy would be disposed at any one
time. For steerage purposes, tile ships would be under power and moving while
-17-
-------
disposing. This would increase dispersion. Annual dredging volume averages just
180,000 cy. Disposal details are listed in Appendix B, Table B-l.
Material dredged for offshore disposal comes from bars forming at the mouth of the
Umpqua. They consist primarily of marine sand transported into the river's mouth. The
sand is medium to fine grained, and is slightly coarser than the native offshore
sediments. The sand has been excluded in previous disposal activities from further
biological and chemical testing as discussed in 40 CFR 227.13b. Appendix C gives the
results of sediment analysis performed on sand presently ocean disposed. Tables C-6
through C-7 deal with contaminants. Appendix C provides grainsize information for the
dredged area and the disposal sites (see figures C-5 to C-15). It also includes a
discussion of physical and chemical characteristics of fines that might be considered for
ocean disposal. Fine grain materials placed in the final site would receive chemical and
biological testing, if appropriate, as outlined in the joint EPA/Corps national testing
framework, supplemented by regional practices and best professional judgment. Periodic
re-evaluation of sediment characteristics by the Corps and EPA occur as part of our
management responsibilities.
Feasibility of Surveillance and Monitoring. The proximity of the interim disposal
site to shore facilities creates an ideal situation for shore-based monitoring of disposal
activities. Surveillance can also be accomplished by surface vessel.
Following formal designation of an ODMDS, EPA and the Corps will develop a site
management plan which will address post-disposal monitoring. All Oregon ODMDS are
periodically monitored jointly by the Corps and EPA already. Several research groups
are available in the area to perform any required work. The work could be performed
from small surface research vessels at a reasonable cost.
Disposal. Horizontal Transport, and Vertical Mixing Characteristics of the Area.
The sediments dredged from the Umpqua River entrance are predominantly marine
sands and fluvial gravels. Although the Umpqua River delivers a large sediment load,
the bottom contours suggest a rapid distribution away from the river mouth. The
beaches seem to be in equilibrium, suggesting that littoral transport is in balance. From
the bottom current records, there appears to be a slight bias in transport to the south
year-round, with some northward transport in summer only. The more probable
sediment transport system at the disposal site is a general movement southward and
deeper from the site, with a northward movement at greater depths. The constantly
varying river outflow combines with tidal flows to produce a highly variable influence on
the nearshore circulation.
Sediment movement in the littoral zone consists of two mechanisms depending upon the
size of the sediment Anything finer than sand size is carried in suspension in the water
and is relatively quickly removed far offshore. The almost total lack of silts and clays
within the Umpqua ZSF attests to the efficiency of this mechanism. Sediments sand size
or coarser may be occasionally suspended by wave action near the bottom, and are
moved by bottom currents or directly as bedload. Tidal, wind and wave forces
contribute to generating bottom currents which act in relation to the sediment grain size
and water depth to produce sediment transport.
-18-
-------
Effects of Previous Disposal. Average annual volume of dredged material
disposed offshore in the interim ODMDS from 1968 to 1988 was 147,349 cy. The
maximum and minimum quantities of sandy material were 313,632 and 500 cubic yards
respectively. Appendix B, table B-l gives the volumes of material disposed of in the last
21 years. The adjusted site has not received any dredged material.
Detailed offshore bathymetry at the mouth of the Umpqua River shows a bulge in
bottom contours between approximately -60 and -120 feet at the location of the interim
ODMDS. The bulge is probably related to the combination of river discharge and ebb
tide currents, which create an "ebb delta" of nearshore material. Ebb deltas are
common in many areas of the world. The crest of the ebb delta runs through the
interim disposal site. Historically there has not been mounding within the site, nor is
there aggradation specific to the site. Figure 5 shows survey data for the past 5 years.
A post dumping survey in August of 1988 indicates some recent mounding within the
interim site. The recent mounding may be attributed to above average disposal during
the 1988 dredge season and mild wave climate during the winter of 1987-88. A general
seaward movement of contours between 1984 and 1985, as indicated in figure 5, may be
the result of seasonal variation or the effect of changes induced by El Nino.
The interim site was surveyed in 1989 to determine the effects of the winter wave
climate on the mound.
Interference with Other Uses of the Ocean.
Commercial and Recreational Fishing: Major commercial and recreational
fisheries occur in and around the disposal site. Coho and chinook salmon are taken in a
nearshore commercial troll fishery. Annual commercial harvests of coho and chinook
salmon from 1980 to 1985 ranged from 0 (1984) to 533,563 (1982) and 43,310 (1981) to
227,780 (1985) pounds respectively (ODFW Pounds and Value of Commercially Caught
Fish and Shellfish Landed in Oregon, Annual Reports). Salmon support a good
recreational fishery centered off the Umpqua bar. Both commercial and recreational
fishing seasons generally begin in June and run through October, subject to catch quotas
set by ODFW. During this period, the potential exists for conflicts between the dredge
and fishing boats. The Coast Guard and ODFW indicated that they are unaware of any
instance where this has ever been a problem.
The recreational Dungeness crab fishery takes place mainly within Winchester Bay.
Some commercial crabbing occurs within close proximity to the two disposal sites.
Figure A-9 (appendix A) shows the general location of the commercial fishing areas.
The offshore commercial crab harvest from 1980 to 1985 ranged from 374,470 (1983) to
1,200,730 (1980) pounds landed (ODFW Annual Reports). Mussels and shrimp support
a small commercial fishery. Mussels are collected in nearshore areas, and shrimp are
taken in deep waters well away from the disposal area. Annual commercial harvests of
shrimp from 1980 to 1986 ranged from 430 (1984) to 689,707 (1980) pounds.
Offshore Mining Operations: Although deposits of heavy minerals containing
magnetite, gold, platinum, chromite, and ilmenite are present offshore along the Oregon
coast, no metallic mineral deposits in the immediate area are known. There have been
no exploratory wells drilled offshore near the mouth of the Umpqua. Exploratory wells
-19-
-------
25 JULY 1984
19 AUG 1985
112
1 OCT 1986
9 JUNE 1987
23 AUG 1988
Figure 5
Umpqua River ODMDS Bathymetry
-20-
-------
near Reedsport (on land) did not result in production. In any case it is unlikely that
production facilities would be placed near the river's mouth or the ODMDS due to the
hazard to navigation that would be created.
Navigation: No conflicts with commercial navigation traffic have been recorded
in the more than 60-year history of hopper dredging activity. Thhe potential for serious
conflict at the interim site was created when the navigation marked approach channel
was realigned directly over the site. Conflicts at the adjusted site are not expected due
to the light traffic in the Umpqua River area and the site's location away from the
marked approach channel. This situation is not expected to change substantially. The
potential navigational hazards are shown in figure 6.
Scientific: There are no known transects or other scientific study locations that
could be impacted by the disposal site.
Coastal Zone Management: Local comprehensive land use plans for the Umpqua
area have been acknowledged and approved by the State of Oregon. These plans
discuss ocean disposal and recognize the need to provide for suitable offshore sites for
disposal of dredged materials. In addition, this site evaluation document establishes that
no significant effects on ocean, esruarine, or shoreland resources are anticipated, as Goal
19 of the Oregon Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines requires.
During coordination of the Site Evaluation Report, the Corps made a determination of
consistency with Coastal Zone Management plans. EPA also concludes that designation
of the proposed site is consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the state
coastal management program. A letter of concurrance with that finding was provided by
the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development, the state coastal zone
management office. Their letter of concurrance is included in appendix F. The letter
notes that the Department may reexamine the consistency issue if new information
becomes available.
Existing Water Quality and Ecology. No pre or post-disposal water or sediment
quality monitoring have been performed at Umpqua; however, analyses conducted at
several other ODMDS are discussed in appendix C. Dredged material previously, and
currently disposed of are physically and chemically similar to the sample collected in
close proximity to the disposal site (appendices B and C). The elutriate analysis
discussed in appendix C also showed minimal contaminant releases during simulated
disposal operation with receiving water from the interim disposal site.
A general discussion of the ecology of the area based on available information is
presented in Appendix A. The ODMDS and near vicinity is typical of a Pacific
Northwest mobile sand community. Monitoring studies have not shown any significant
adverse effects from historic disposal. Studies indicate a depressed density of benthic
infauna within the interim disposal site, but no impact to densities outside of the site
relative to the reference stations. Reasons for depression in the density may be due to
the coincidence of the dredging activity and the benthic recruitment season. If disposal
at the interim site is discontinued, the benthic densities should recover to normal levels.
Shifting disposal activities to the adjusted site may result in a similar depression at the
site.
-21-
-------
m/ii,,
Figure 6
Potential Navigation Hazards
-22-
-------
Potential for Recruitment of Nuisance Species. It is highly unlikely that any
nuisance species would be transported to the disposal site. Nuisance species are
considered to be any undesirable organism not previously existing at the disposal site
and either transported or attracted there because of the disposal of dredged materials
which are capable of establishing themselves there.
In the past, all materials dredged and transported to the interim ODMDS have been
noncontaminated marine sands (appendix C) similar to sediments from the interim
disposal site. While there are no immediate plans for the disposal of fine grain
material, the possibility exists in the future. It is anticipated that the quantity of fine
grain material would be small and infrequent (less then 40,000 cy every four years). Any
fine grain material disposed in the site would be subject to specific evaluation by the
Corps and EPA as previously noted. The high energy wave and current environment
would tend to rapidly disperse fine sediments. Therefore, it is highly unlikely that any
nuisance species could be established at the disposal site since habitat or contaminant
levels are unlikely to change over the longterm.
Existence of Significant Natural or Cultural Features. The cultural resource
literature search of the Umpqua River study area is described in appendix E. Due to
the proximity of the disposal site, the resource that has the greatest potential for impact
by use of the ODMDS is shipwrecks. The most likely areas for shipwrecks in the project
area are in the shallow breaker zone and the Umpqua River mouth. Any wreck within
these areas would experience damage from the high energy wave climate. Deeper water
would buffer the high energy wave climate, thus shipwrecks in deeper water could have
less damage. The shipwrecks in deeper water tend to have more cultural value, but tend
to be fewer then shipwrecks nearshore. Included in appendix E is a table of all
recorded shipwrecks in the project area. Historical records indicates there are not any
shipwrecks within the interim or adjusted ODMDS.
Wrecks could occur in the project area that have not yet been discovered. However,
based on previous investigations in other Oregon coastal'settings (Yaquina Bay,
Coquille, Mouth of the Columbia River, etc.)j beaches, surf zones, and shallow waters
are the most likely areas for shipwreck occurrence. The Umpqua ODMDS is removed
from these areas.
A letter by the Oregon State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) concurs that no
significant cultural resources will be affected by the proposed designation and use
(appendix F) .
Selection of the Preferred Alternative. Once the general and specific site selection
criteria were applied the proposed disposal site, a conflict matrix analysis was completed.
Portland District developed the matrix format to simplify the criteria review process and
has used the matrix for several ODMDS studies. Each area of consideration on the
conflict matrix addresses at least one general and specific criteria. Table 3 contains
comments pertinent to the criteria for the proposed site. In addition to the conflict
matrix, operational constraints and cost were considered for the site.
-23-
-------
The proposed action is the designation of an ocean disposal site for the disposal of
dredged material. Designation of an ODMDS would not have any direct environmental
effects, but it would subject the site to regular use as an ocean disposal area. This
document has evaluated the past and likely future effects of disposal at the interim and
adjusted sites based upon the Corps' maintenance dredging program for the Umpqua
River navigation project and current regulatory program requirements. Separate
evaluations of the suitability of dredged material and disposal impacts will be conducted
for each proposed disposal action as required under Section 103 of the MPRSA.
Based upon the information contained in this DEIS, designation of an ODMDS off of
the mouth of the Umpqua River, Oregon is considered necessary. After applying the
five general and eleven specific criteria to the available options, designation of the
adjusted ODMDS was selected as the preferred alternative. Continued use of the
interim ODMDS was not expected to cause unacceptable adverse environmental effects,
however, the absense of navigation conflicts made designation and use of the adjusted
ODMDS the more purdent course of action.
-24-
-------
Table 3
Conflict Matrix
Ocodll Ucvd«ud Miltll-l Ultpo.ol Area CunflUl
tvilu.it In) Fni«nilul (nr Conflict wltli RuquiiKil C>mi ld>r jc luni
at tin M*rlo« rcomctlun K««**rch «nd S»actu«(l«i »tt
AREA (If
UiliSIUERATION
1. Uiiuaual Topography
2. PtiyalC4l Sudlauint C..«p«l tbll liy
1. CliKBlc^l Sudlavnl Cuapal Ibl 1 Hy
4. Influence oi faal Dlnp«aal
i. Living *»»ourc«« at LUItcd Olitrlliul Ion
b. CoaMcrclal Fl«liurl«»
I. Kecrcai lanal Fl«hi:rla«
.. .r.ed|n./lp,wnln. A,...
9. Nuracry Ar«>«
IU. F«edlii| Arcaa
II. Hlgritilon Rouian
CaJanKurwJ Spvclua
II. Spatial Ulairlbuilon o( lentboa
14. Harliw Ha*a>al«
IV Hl«.»l lta,.a»lt.
Ik. Mavlgailon llaiard
tl. Olliur Uaa» uf O4.-«au (COB|«H. plp«lln«nt
VIC.)
l». D..r.d.d A,...
20. lUcrual l*nal Us««
.'1. Cultyral/Hlaiarlc Site.
/I. OlrvilI'M ul Tcdpip.Ki/roluiil !!
l.lf Sell IVMUl
... n..,!..,.,,.
>. Slupc/Slio ul Sllu (orient*! Ion)
tti. Slii' ul (uflar Ziinv
/I. l-4.ii'i>i Ijl Inr ciMulailvu Cf facia
G
COKTL1CT 1
0
NO CONTL1CT
9
BtXEFICUL USE
COMMENTS
PB*"6tC °'«IH>***--f (r"*5
T2£iZ.to!«*in^
SM^M
^>.Klor4
Sr»owf w-oven . i-imwteG
e-«M*H soue
lt£!,^*^£:^W£D^^
^\^s*VC- 0tffM SHortEBiRDO ffeflfeGArfCR
«nvt*,Mtirip«*cKl0ijktrJrw ati, HktHT* 9fmtti 1
VM*«-«*
H^JW**fl fctf^UP. 1 llUlTk4kjJ*J 1 C.AJ ifMfrMfY
««* UICMS . WHIM* »*«MMr,<»* WOOTK
«rU£^Ba*rS HAVtf^ftM^ **oo*0
SwCMT lrlCAO«e M 1U«ftlOiT< tal STTC
DiJ^l*4^ Dld^Ol^mi*
ito^^^^K^^r?1^^ R**^
-
net cv ANT
SfECIFIC
FACTOKS
Wtom Tabla 1
4 *OC« 221. i)
1. *. . H
J. *. »
>. *. ». »
1. >, «. 10
2. 1
2. 1
», I
2. 1
2. 1
2. 1
2. 1
2. ». 10
2.
1.
1.
1
«. ». 7
*. 6. 9
2. "
ll
1. 1. ». 7
1. >. » 7
» '
1. *. '
2. 1. 4. 7. 1
*. 7
RKI.CVAHT
CCNEHAL
CKITEHIA
tarn T.bl. 2
.
c. *
b. c. d
U. d
b
. b
«. b
. b
«. b
, b
, b
a. b
*. b
-. b,
'. b. d
.. k. d
«. b. d
«. b. d
..«..=.-
b
b. d
. b d
C
4
4
:. 4
25-
-------
IV. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
General. A brief summary of existing conditions within the ZSF or specifically at the
interim and adjusted ODMDS is presented below and is the basis for evaluating the
suitability of the site for ocean disposal. More detailed information on the affected
environment is presented in the appendices which were reproduced from the Corps' Site
Evaluation Report. Information regarding the nature and frequency of the sediments
dredged from the Umpqua River navigation project is also provided.
Physical Environment.
General. The estuary of the Umpqua River opens into the Pacific Ocean about
180 miles south of the mouth of the Columbia River. It lies within the Heceta Head
littoral cell, which extends from Heceta Head south to Cape Arago. The estuary is fed
by two rivers, the Umpqua, and the smaller Smith. The watershed encompasses part of
the Coast Range, with the Umpqua River extending into the Cascades. The coastal
zone of the littoral cell consists of a one to two mile wide plain covered by active and"
stabilized sand dunes backed by the mature upland topography of the Coast Range. The
lower portion of the Umpqua River is bordered by broad alluvial flats. The continental
shelf off the mouth of the Umpqua is about 20 miles wide. Just to the north it bulges
outward, forming the Heceta Bank. Between Siuslaw and Yaquina, the shelf is at its
widest along the Oregon coast, extending over 43 miles off shore. Sand covers the shelf
at the Umpqua for about 2 miles out from the shore.
The Heceta Head littoral cell is the largest on the Oregon coast. Except for the
headlands at both ends of the cell, the entire coast line is made of beach fronting sand
dunes. Three major river systems enter the cell. From north to south these are the
Siuslaw, the Umpqua (which is the largest of the three), and the Coos River.
Geology. The Heceta Head littoral cell and the larger part of the Umpqua River
are in the southern portion of the Coast Range. The rocks of the Coast Range are
marine and deltaic sediments, and volcanic rocks, mostly from the earlier half of the
Cenozoic. During the Eocene the area was part of a large embayment of the ocean with
an volcanic island arc to the west. The sea gradually withdrew to the west and north, so
by the end of the Oligocene the southern portion was emergent. In the Miocene uplift
began that transformed the area into the mountains present today.
There are no accumulations of heavy minerals or gravel along the coast in the vicinity of
the mouth of the Umpqua River. While there have been exploratory oil and gas wells
bored both to the north and south on the continental shelf, as well as inland of the
entrance of the Umpqua, no significant quantities of oil and gas have been found.
(Gray and Kulm 1985).
Circulation and Currents. Coastal circulation near the Umpqua ZSF is directly
influenced by large-scale regional currents and weather patterns in the northwestern
Pacific Ocean. During winter strong low pressure systems with winds and waves
- 27 -
-------
predominantly from the southwest contribute to strong northward currents. During the
summer, high pressure systems dominate and waves and winds are commonly from the
north. In both seasons there are short-term fluctuations related to local wind, tidal and
bathymetric effects. Along the Oregon coast there is a southerly wind in summer which
creates a mass transport of water offshore resulting in upwelling of bottom water
nearshore. Figure B-7 (appendix B) shows the predominant Oregon coastal circulation.
The interim and adjusted Umpqua ODMDS are within 1 mile of the estuary entrance.
The Umpqua River has the second largest drainage basin on the Oregon coast after the
Rogue River and the third largest estuary. Minimum and maximum flows are highly
variable. This constantly varying river outflow combines with tidal flows to produce a
highly variable influence on the nearshore circulation. In the estuarine part of the river,
the ebbing tide adds to the normal river discharge to produce a net ebb dominance. The
Umpqua shows little or no longterm accumulation of fine sediments in the estuary and
net bypassing of sand-size sediments into the ocean.
Water and Sediment Quality. Water quality throughout the ZSF is typical of
seawater of the Pacific Northwest. There is no reason to expect significant chemical
contamination in either the water of sediments as few heavy industries are located along
the estuary. Basic water quality parameters were taken in field sampling during
collections of sediment samples from the channel. All of the values were within normal
ranges for the Oregon coast. International Paper Company (Gardiner) filed for a permit
in 1963 for an ocean outfall located approximately 4 miles north of the mouth of the
Umpqua River. The effluent from the outfall is from a log storage pond. Monthly
reports are filed with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ).
Bioassay studies are preformed semi-annually and the results submitted to ODEQ. The
presense of the outfall should not effect either the interim or the adjusted ODMDS.
Sediment from the Umpqua navigation project disposed at the ODMDS is medium to
coarse sands with occasional gravels. It is coarser than that of the ODMDS but within
acceptable limits. Bottom sediments in the Umpqua ZSF rannge from fine to medium
sand. The aone of active sediment movement in the Umpqua area extends to a depth
of about 150 feet. The thinness of the sediment layer over the basaltic bedrock
indicates that there is no long term accumulation of sediment offshore from the
Umpqua River estuary.
Biological Environment.
General. Aquatic resources of the ZSF are described in detail in Appendix A.
The ODMDS sites are located in the nearshore area and are typical of oceanic habitat
common to the nearshore north Pacific Coast.
Benthic. The benthos is typical of nearshore high energy environments. Benthic
sampling in the vicinity of the disposal site indicates the sand environments are
characterized by polychaete annelids and numerous spedes of cumaceans, gammarid
amphipods, molluscs, and snails. The species inhabiting the sandy environments are
generally more mobile types which tolerate or require high sediment flux. Juvenile
-28-
-------
crabs are also abundant in this environment. Dungeness crabs are also found in high
densities.
Fishes. The nearshore area off the Umpqua River supports a variety of pelagic
and demersal fish species. Pelagic species include salmon, steelhead, shad, Pacific
herring, anchovy, smelt, and sea perch. Demersal species include a variety of flatfish,
sculpins, and sea perch.
The predominant commercial fishery is for salmon, sole, and Dungeness crab.
Recreational fishing is primarily for salmon and bottomfish.
Wildlife. Numerous species of birds and marine mammals occur in the vicinity of
the proposed disposal site. Principal shorebird species found onshore include the
western snowy plover, black oystercatcher, killdeer, and spotted sandpiper. Recent
shorebird surveys along the Oregon Coast have shown that the northern portion of the
Oregon Dunes National Recreation Area (ODNRA) supports some of the highest
densities of wintering sanderlings in the world. Pelagic birds (e.g., shearwaters, murres)
probably use the ZSF and adjacent waters for foraging. Marbled murrelets are generally
located within 1 mile of sandy shores, typically just outside the breakers. Whales are
known to occur throughout coastal waters during migration, but population estimates
and information on areas of special use are not known.
Endangered Species. Portland District requested an endangered species listing
for the ODMDS from U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) as part of their coordination of the Site Evaluation Report.
Based on previous biological assessments conducted along the Oregon coast, it was
concluded that no impact to either species is anticipated from the proposed designation
and use. A letter of concurrance from the NMFS that no impacts to threatened or
endangered species would be anticipated is contained in appendix F.
Socioeconomic Environment.
General. The Umpqua River enters the Pacific Ocean near the City of
Reedsport, Oregon. Nigation on the river is critical to the local economy. The City of
Reedsport has a population of 4,69 (1985); Douglas County's population is 93,000
(1985).
Natural Resource Harvesting (Commercian. Forest products in the form of
lumber and raw logs have traditionally been the largest component of the local
economy. Commercial fishing is the also among the largest industries of the area. Both
depend on the Umpqua River project to some degree. Other important sources of
income are agriculture and tourism. Sand, gravel, and crushed rock make up the bulk of
commercial commerce out of Umpqua (based on short tons). No significant mineral or
petroleum deposits have been identified in the vicinity of the ODMDS.
Recreation. The Umpqua River estuary, particularly the Winchester Bay area, is
popular with recreationalists because of the coastal scenery and excellent fishing
opportunities both offshore and in the River. The area is increasing in popularity as a
- 29 -
-------
small boat harbor and has excellent facilities for the many anglers who fish here
annually. Clams are also recreationally harvested in the estuary.
Cultural Resources. Cultural resource investigations indicate that no significant
archeological or historic resources exist in the vicinity of the disposal sites. A letter of
concurrance from the SHPO is included in appendix F.
-30-
-------
V. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
General. The proposed action is the designation of a site to be available for ocean
disposal of dredged material. Designation of the site itself is an administrative action
that would not have any direct environmental effects; however, it would subject the site
to use as an ocean disposal area. Although no significant impacts are predicted by this
designation action, EPA has voluntarily committed to preparing and circulating EISs as
part of the designation process. This EIS addresses the likely effects of disposal at the
interim ODMDS based upon the Corps' current operation and maintenance dredging
program for the Umpqua navigation project and regulatory requirements. A separate
evaluation of the suitability of dredged material and disposal impacts will be conducted
for each proposed disposal action by the Corps as required under Section 103 of the
MPRSA. EPA independently reviews all proposed ocean disposals of dredged material.
Physical Effects. Continued disposal of dredged material at the proposed ODMDS
would not have a significant effect on the physical environment. The material consists
of clean sand, coarser than that present at the disposal site, but still compatible for
disposal on the sandy bottom. In the past material dredged for offshore disposal has
come from bars forming in the estuary and at the mouth of the Umpqua. Material
dredged from the bar is medium to fine grained sand, and is slightly coarser than the
native offshore sediments. The material from within the Umpqua estuary ranges in size
from silt to medium sand. Most of the anticipated future dredged material will be sand,
and would be comparable to the variation in sediment size found in or near the disposal
site. In the event of fine grain material disposal, some increase in the in situ fine fraction
may occur. The dredged material would disperse from the site in the littoral drift
system with movement expected to be to the south and offshore during the winter with
lesser movement to the south in summer and some northward transport. No mounding
is expected to occur at the ODMDS with the average disposal quantities. As indicated
by the 1988 bathymetry survey, above average disposal quantities may cause mounding.
Sediments proposed for ocean disposal require evaluation following the tiered testing
guidance described in the joint EPA/Corps national framework, Evaluation of Dredged
Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal- Testing Manual (February 1991). Sediment
characterization, including chemical and biological testing as needed, has been a
standard practice for several years in this region. The material dredged from the Rogue
navigation channel meets the exclusion criteria defined in 40 CFR 227.13(b). Sediment
characteristics are periodically reexamined by the Corps and EPA.
Biological Effects. Impacts on the biological environment would be primarily to the
benthic community. Some mortality could occur as a result of smothering. Most of
the benthic species present are motile and have adapted to a high energy environment
with shifting sands. Therefore, most would likely survive the effects of disposal. In
addition, rapid recolonization would occur from surrounding areas since the sediments
would be compatible.
.-31-
-------
Larger, more motile organisms such as fish, birds, and marine mammal species would
probably avoid the disposal activity or move out once it begins. They would likely be
exposed to short-term turbidity at most. Therefore, impacts are expected to be limited
to disturbance rather than injury or mortality.
No significant impact is anticipated from the designation or continued use of the
ODMDS to threatened/endangered species.
Socioeconomic Effects. The designation and use of an ODMDS for dredged material off
the mouth of the Umpqua River would allow the continued maintenance of the
navigation channel. This would result in waterborne commerce remaining an component
of the local economy. If a site is not designated, maintenance dredging may ultimately
cease for lack of adequate disposal sites, or other, potentially more environmentally
sensitive habitats (e.g., wetlands) would be used. If maintenance dredging of the
channel ceases, the channel would shoal in and become unsafe or unusable. Shipping
and fishing traffic would have to be directed through other ports and the local economy
would suffer.
No known minerals of economic importance would be affected by designation or use of
an ODMDS.
No impacts to recreation are expected to occur. Recreational fishery resources would
be temporarily displaced during disposal operations. Time delays for recreational
boaters caused by the passing of the dredge or an increase in navigation hazards during
congested periods could occur. Conflicts such as these can be considered an
inconvenience rather than a threat to recreational activity.
There could be a short-term reduction in aesthetics at the disposal site as a result of
turbidity following disposal. The material would settle rapidly and not affect any areas
outside of the disposal area. Minor impacts, such as changes in sand color, could occur
on the adjacent beach, but these impacts would be short-term and would not be
considered objectionable.
It is unlikely that any cultural resources are present in the proposed disposal site.
Therefore, designation or use of the site is not expected to have any impact on cultural
resources.
Coastal Zone Management. In reviewing proposed ocean disposal sites for consistency
with the Coastal Zone Management (CZM) plan, they are evaluated against Oregon's
Statewide Goal 19 (Ocean Resources). Local jurisdiction does not extend beyond the
baseline for territorial seas and, therefore, local plans do not address offshore sites.
Goal 19 requires that agencies determine the impact of proposed projects or actions.
Paragraph 2.g of Goal 19 specifically addresses dredged material disposal. It states that
agencies shall "provide for suitable sites and practices for the open sea discharge of
dredged material which do not substantially interfere with or detract from the use of the
continental shelf for fishing, navigation, or recreation, or from the long-term protection
of renewable resources." Decisions to take an action, such as designating an ocean
disposal site, are to be preceded by an inventory and based on sound information and
on an understanding of the resources and potential impacts. In addition, there should
-32-
-------
be a contingency plan and emergency procedures to be followed in the event that the
operation results in conditions which threaten to damage the environment.
Ocean disposal sites for dredged material are designated following guidelines prepared
by the EPA (Ocean Dumping Regulations). Site selection is to be based on studies and
an evaluation of the potential impacts (40 CFR Part 228.4 [e]). This meets the
requirements of State Goal 19 for decisions to be based on inventory and a sound
understanding of impacts. The five general and eleven specific criteria for the
designation of a site presented in 40 CFR 228.5 and 228.6 outline the type of studies to
be conducted and the resources to be considered. According to 40 GFR Part 228.5(a),
ocean disposal will only be allowed at sites "selected to minimize the interference of
disposal activities with other, activities in the marine environment, particularly avoiding
areas of existing fisheries or sheUfisheries, and regions of heavy commercial or
recreational navigation." Monitoring is to be conducted at ocean disposal sites. If
adverse effects are observed, use of the site may be modified or terminated. The
requirements of the ocean dumping regulations are broad enough to meet the need of
Goal 19. Therefore, the designation of this site for ocean disposal of dredged material
following the ocean dumping regulations would be consistent with Goal 19 and the State
of Oregon's Coastal Zone Management Plan.
During coordination of the Site Evaluation Report, the Corps made a determination of
consistency with Coastal Zone Management plans. A letter of concurrance was provided
by the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development, the state coastal
zone management office (appendix F). EPA also concludes that designation of the
proposed site is consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the state coastal
management program.
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. Designation of an ODMDS would allow continued
dredging and disposal of dredged material from the Umpqua navigation project with
attendant effects.
Relationship Between Short-Term Uses of the Environment and Maintenance and
Enhancement of Long-Term Productivity. Disposal of dredged material at the adjusted
ODMDS would have a unquantifiable, but apparently minor short- and long-term effect
of the productivity of the ocean environment. Use of the ODMDS would have a long-
term beneficial effect on the economy of the City of Reedsport and Douglas County.
Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources. Permanent designation of the
interim ODMDS for disposal would commit the site and its resources primarily to that
use. Other uses such as oil and gas explorations, and to varying degrees, mining, fishing,
and use by certain aquatic species, would be constrained or precluded.
-33-
-------
-34-
-------
VL COORDINATION
Coordination By the Corps of Engineers. Procedures used in this evaluation and the
proposed continued use of the interim site were discussed with the following State and
federal agencies by the Portland District, Corps of Engineers, to support their site
designation studies and preparation of their Site Evaluation Report:
- U.S. Coast Guard
- U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
- National Marine Fisheries Service
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
- Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
- Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
- Oregon State Historic Preservation Officer
- Oregon Division of State Lands
The agencies were briefed on the proposed technique from the task force workbook and
existing information was requested of them. Copies of the draft Site Evaluation Report
were provided to them by the Corps and their comments on the draft were formally
requested. Letters received are included in Appendix C.
The proposed federal action requires concurrence or consistency for three federal laws
from the responsible agencies as indicated below.
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended from U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service National Marine Fisheries Service
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, State Historic
Preservation Officer
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, Oregon Department of
Land Conservation and Development
Consistency or preliminary concurrence letters from the above agencies are included in
Appendix F. State water quality certifications, as required by Section 401 of the Clean
Water Act, will be obtained for individual dredging actions as part of the normal
permitting of federal project approval process.
Coordination By EPA. Coordination with the Portland District was maintained
throughout the site designation studies and during preparation of their Site Evaluation
Report A copy of that report was reviewed by EPA. EPA has voluntarily committed to
prepare and circulate EISs for site designation actions. The Site Evaluation Report
submitted by Region 10, EPA, by the Corps was used as the basis for preparation of this
draft EIS. A formal 45-day public review period will allow comments to be received
from all State and local agencies, and private groups and individuals on this proposed
designation by EPA. A list of those who received the draft EIS for comment may be
- 35 -
-------
requested. Many of the same agencies that reviewed the Corps' Site Evaluation Report
will receive this draft EIS.
As a separate but concurrent action, EPA will publish a proposed rule in the Federal
Register for formal designation of the adjusted Umpqua ODMDS and de-designation of
the interim site. There is a 45-day public review period for the draft rule also. It is
planned that the public review periods for the draft EIS and proposed rule be
concurrent. However, comments will be accepted on either the draft EIS or proposed
rule until the end of the latest 45-day period. Comments will be responded to in the
final EIS and rule.
-36-
-------
VH. LIST OF PREPARERS
Disposal site studies were designed and conducted by the Corps, in consultation with
EPA, and a Site Evaluation Report was prepared by the Portland District, Corps of
engineers. That document was submitted to EPA for review and processing for formal
designation by the Regional Administrator, Region 10. The Corps' Site Evaluation
Report was used by EPA as the basis of this draft EIS. The Technical Appendices from
the Site Evaluation Report are reproduced as appendices to the EIS.
Preparation of draft EIS:
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency:
John Malek Ocean Dumping Coordinator and Project Officer
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District:
Mark Siipola ' Ocean Dumping Coordinator
Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc.:
David DesVoigne, Ph.D. Environmental Scientist
Preparation of Site Evaluation Report and Technical Appendices:
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District:
Mark Siipola Ocean Dumping Coordinator
Mark W. Hanson Civil Engineer
Michael F. Kidby, P.E. Civil Engineer
A. Rudder Turner, Jr. Oceanographer
Danil R. Hancock Oceanographer
David R. Felstul Environmental Specialist
Stephan A. Chesser Oceanographer
William B. Fletcher Hydrologist
Kim William Larson Fishery Biologist
Geoffrey L. Dorsey Wildlife Biologist
Steven J. Stevens Landscape Architect
Michael A. Martin Archeologist
L. Jerome Simpson CE Technician
-37-
-------
-38-
-------
Vm. GENERAL BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anderson, G.C., 1978. Biological Oceanography of the Coastal Waters Off Washington. UW/Oceanography
Research Abstract.
Anderson, L, 1982. Near-Inertial Motions Off the Oregon Coast Masters Thesis, Oregon State University
(OSU), Corvallis, OR.
Araniegu, JJR.1., 1975. Shoreline Changes Due to Jetty Construction on the
Oregon Coast, MS, OSU, Ocean. ORESU-X2-75-007.
Baldwin, EM., 1976. Geology of Oregon. Univ. of Oregon, Kendall/Hunt Pub.
Co., 170 pp.
Earner, Debra Carol, 1982. Shell and Archaeology: An Analysis of Shellfish Procurement and Utilization on
the Central Oregon Coast. Unpublished MA Thesis, OSU, Corvallis, OR.
Barnes, James Ray, 1967. The Morphology and Ecology of Echinnrhynchus lageniformis ekbaum. 1938
(Acanthocephala). Corvallis, OR. MS Thesis. OSU. 42 pp.
Bayer, R., 1983. Ore-Aqua Company Biologist. Newport, OR. Personal Coinmunication.
Beardsley, Alan Jackson, 1969. Movement and Angler Use of Four Foodfishes in Yaquina Bay, Oregon.
Corvallis, OR. Ph.D. Thesis. OSU. 173 pp.
Becker, Clarence Dale, 1955. Larval Setting and Survival of Young Oysters. Ostrea lurida Carp., Under
Laboratory Conditions. Corvallis, OR. MS Thesis. OSU. 97 pp.
Beckham, Stephen Dow, 1977. The Indians of Western Oregon. This Land was Theirs. Coos Bay, OR.
Arago Books.
Berglund, Lisette Aline, 1972. Laboratory Studies of Successional Patterns in Assemblages of Attached
Estuarine Diatoms. Corvallis, OR. MS Thesis. OSU. 71 pp.
Bodavarsson, G.M., 1975. Ocean Wave-Generated Microseisms at the Oregon Coast. MS Thesis, OSU.
83 pp.
Boettcher, R.S., 1967. Foraminiferal Trends of the Central Oregon Shelf. MS OSU.
Bourke, R.H., 1972. A Study of the Seasonal Variation in Temperature and Salinity along the Oregon-
Northern California Coast. Ph.D. Thesis, OSU, Corvallis, OR.
Bourke, RJL, B. Glenne, and B.W. Adams, 1971. The Nearshore Physical Oceanographic Environment of
the Pacific NW Coast. OSU Ref 71-45, DepL of Oceanography, OSU, Corvallis, OR.
Bourke, Robert Hathaway, 1969. Monitoring Coastal Upwelling by Measuring its Effects within an Estuary.
Corvallis, OR. MS Thesis, OSU. 54pp.
Burt, W.V. and B. Wyatt, 1964. Drift Bottle Observations of the Davidson Current Off Oregon. DepL
Ocean. Tech. RepL 34, OSU, Corvallis, OR.
Burt, W.V, 1962-63. Oregon Oceanographic Studies. OSU/Oceanography NSF-G19783/GP-622.
Bushnell, D.C., 1964. Continental Shelf Sediments in the Vicinity of Newport, Oregon. MS Thesis, OSU,
107 pp.
-39-
-------
Butler, Jerry Allan, 1968. Effects of the Insecticide Sevin on the Cockle Clam Clinocardium nuttallii
(Conrad). Corvallis, OR. MS Thesis. OSU. 54 pp.
Byrne, J.V. and DA. Panshin, 1977. Continental Shelf Sediments Off Oregon. OSU Sea Grant Pub. 8.
Byrne, J.V. and LJX Kuhn, 1%7. Natural Indicators of Estuarine Sediment Movement. J. Waterways and
Harbors Division, 93(WW2), Proceedings Paper 5220, pp 181-194, American Society of Civil
Engineers.
Byrne, J.V., 1962. Geomorphology of the Continental Terrace Off the Central Coast of Oregon. Ore Bin
24:65-74.
Byrne, J.V., 1962. Here's a Look at Offshore Oregon. The Oil and Gas Journal. July 23,1962. pp 116-
119.
Byrne, J.V., 1963. Coastal Erosion, Northern Oregon. Jn Essays in Marine Geology, Clements, ed. pp 11-
33.
Carey, A., Pearcy, Richardson, Demory, Tyler, and Warren, 1980. Pleuronectid Production System and its
Fishery. OSU/Oceanography Sea Grant Research Abstract.
Carey, A.G., 1965. Preliminary Studies on Animal-Sediment Interrelationships Off the Central Oregon
Coast. Ocean Sci & Ocean Eng 1:100-101.
Chambers, D.M., 1969. Holocene Sedimentation and Potential Placer Deposits on the Continental Shelf Off
the Rogue River, OR. MS Thesis, OSU, 102 pp.
Choir, B., 1975. Pollution and Tidal Flushing Predictions for Oregon's Estuaries. OSU Civil .Eng. ORESU-
X2-75-010.
Chriss, T.M., 1977. Optical Evidence of Sediment Resuspension, Oregon Continental Shelf. EOS, 58(6),
410, American Geophys. Union Spring Meeting, Washington, D.C.
Coley, T.C., 1985. Preliminary Report on Bottom Trawl Catches of Four Offshore Dredge Disposal Sites:
Tillamook, Depoe Bay, Siuslaw, and Umpqua. Tec Rep. to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Portland District (DACW57-85-F-0210). 43 pp.
Collins, CA., 1964. Structure and Kinematics of the Permanent Oceanic Front
Off the Oregon Coast. Masters Thesis, OSU, Corvallis, OR.
Collins, CA., 1968. Description of Measurements of Current Velocity and
Temperature Over the Oregon Continental Shelf, July 1965-Feb 1966. Ph.D. Dissertion, OSU,
Corvallis, OR.
Collins, CA., H.C. Creech and J.G. Pattullo, 1966. A Compilation of Observations from Moored Current
Meters and Thermographs, VoL I. OSU Dept. Ocean Data Rep. 23, Ref. 66-11, OSU, Corvallis,
OR.
Collins, CA. and J.G. Pattullo, 1970. Ocean Currents Above the Continental
Shelf Off Oregon as Measured with a Single Array of Current Meters. J. Marine Research 28(1),
51-68.
Creech, H.C, 1978. An Intense October NE Pacific Storm. Jn Mariners Weather
Log 22:90-92.
Creech, C., 1981. Nearshore Wave Climatology, Yaquina Bay, Oregon (1971-1981). OSU Sea Grant
Program Rep. ORESU-T-81-002, OSU, Corvallis, OR.
-40-
-------
Crook, Gene Ray, 1970. In Situ Measurement of the Benthal Oxygen Requirements of Tidal Flat Deposits.
Corvallis, OR. MS Thesis. OSU. 113 pp.
Cutchin, DX. and R.L. Smith, 1973. Continental Shelf Waves: Low-Frequency
Variations in Sea Level and Currents Over the Oregon Continental Shelf. J. of Physical Ocean, 3(1),
73-82.
Cutchin, D i., 1972. Low Frequency Variations in the Sea Level and Currents Over the Oregon Continental
Shelf. Thesis, OSU, Corvallis, OR.
DeMort, Carole Lyk, 1970. The Culture and Biochemical Analysis of Some Estuarine Phytoplankton Species.
Corvallis, OR. Ph.D. Dissertation. OSU. 157 pp.
Denner, W., 1963. Sea Water Temperature and Salinity Characteristics Observed at Oregon Coast Stations
in 1961. MS Thesis, OSU, Corvallis, OR.
DeRycke, Richard James, 1967. An Investigation of Evaporation from the Ocean Off the Oregon Coast, and
from Yaquina Bay, Oregon. Corvallis, OR. MS Thesis. OSU.
Detweiler, J.H., 1971. A Statistical Study of Oregon Coastal Winds. MS Thesis, OSU, Corvallis, OR.
Elvin, Patricia J., 1972. An Ultrastructural Study of Early Cleavage in Mytilus. Corvallis, OR. MA Thesis.
OSU. 60pp.
Pagan, David D., 1885. History of Benton County, Oregon . . . etc. Portland: A.G. Walling Printer.
Fonseca, T., 1982. On Physical Characteristics of Upwelling Events Off Oregon and Peru. MS Thesis, OSU,
Corvallis, OR.
Fox, W.T., and RA. Davis, 1974. Beach Processes on the Oregon Coast, July, 1973. Tech Rep 12, ONR
Contract N00014-69-C-0151, Williams College, MA.
Gabriel, W.L. and Tyler, 1980. Preliminary Analysis of Pacific Coast Demersal Fish Assemblages. Mar. Fish
Review 42:83-85.
Gibbs, Jim, 1968. West Coast Windjammers in Story and Pictures. Seattle: Superior Publishing Co.
Goodwin, C.R., Emmett and Glenne, 1970. Tidal Study of Three Oregon Estuaries. OSU/CE Bull 45.
Goodwin, Carl Raymond, 1974. Estuarine Tidal Hydraulics - One Dimensional Model and Predictive
Algorithm. Corvallis, OR. PhJX Dissertation. OSU. 220 pp.
Greeney, William James, 1971. Modeling Estuary Pollution by Computer Simulation. Corvallis, OR. MS
Thesis. OSU. 77pp.
Gross, M.G., BA. Morse, and CA. Barnes, 1969.' Movement of Near-Bottom Waters on the Continental
Shelf Off the Northwestern US. JGR, 74:7044-7047.
Hallermeier, RJ., 1981. Seaward Limits of Significant Sand Transport by Waves: An Annual Zonation for
Seasonal Profiles. CETA 81-2, USACE/CERC.
Hancock, D.R., P.O. Nelson, OK. Sollitt and KJ. Williamson, 1981. Coos Bay Offshore Disposal Site
Investigation Interim Report, Phase I, February 1979-March 1980. Report to U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Portland District, Portland, OR, Under Contract No. DACW57-79-C-0040, OSU,
Corvallis, OR.
Hanson, Alfred Warren, 1970. The Symbiotic Relationships and Morphology of Paravortex sp. nov.
(Tubellaria, Rhabdocoelida) a Parasite of Macoma nasuta Conrad 1837. Corvallis, OR. MS Thesis.
OSU. 42pp.
-41-
-------
Harris, D.L., 1972. Wave Estimates for Coastal Regions. Jn Shelf Sediment Transport: Process and Pattern.
DX. Swift, D.B. Duane and O.H. Pilkey, eds., Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross, Inc.
Harriett, J.C., 1972. Sediment Transport on the Northern Oregon Continental Shelf. Ph.D. Dissertation,
OSU, 120 pp.
Hartman, Michael Colyn, 1972. A Green Algal Symbiont in Clinocardium nutrallii. Corvallis, OR. Ph.D.
Dissertation. OSU. 65 pp.
Hawkins, Dan Lee, 1971. Metabolic Responses of the Burrowing Mud Shrimp. Callianassa californiensis. to
Anoxic Conditions. Corvallis, OR. MS Thesis. OSU. 43 pp.
Hickey, B., 1980-81. Pollutant Transport and Sediment Dispersal in the Washington-Oregon Coastal Zone.
UW/Oceanography Research Abstract.
Hogue, E.W., 1982. Sediment Disturbance and the Spatial Distributions of Shallow Water Meiobenthic
Nematodes on the Open Oregon Coast. Jn Journal of Marine Research, 40(3):551-573.
Hunter, R.E., 1980. Coastal Sedimentary Processes Study. USGS, Menlo Park, Research Abstract.
Huyer, A., J. Bottero, J.G. Pattullo and R.L. Smith, 1971. A Compilation of Observations from Moored
Current Meters and Thermographs. VoL V. OSU Dept. Ocean. Data Rep. 46, Ref. 71-1, OSU,
Corvallis, OR.
Huyer, A., 1971. A Study of the Relationship Between Local Winds and Currents over the Continental Shelf
Off Oregon. MS Thesis, OSU, Corvallis, OR.
Huyer, A. and J.G. Pattullo, 1972. A Comparison Between Wind and Current Observations Over the
Continental Shelf Off Oregon, Summer 1969. J. Geophys. Res. 77(18), 3215-3220.
Huyer, A., 1973. Vertical Distributions of Temperature, Salinity, and Sigma-From Observations from R/V
Yaquina During Coastal Upwelling Experiment, 1972. Dept. Ocean. Data Rep. 73-6, OSU,
Corvallis, OR.
Huyer, A. and RX. Smith, 1974. A Subsurface Ribbon of Cool Water Over the Continental Shelf Off
Oregon. Jour. Phy. Ocean. 4381-391.
Huyer, A., 1974. Coherence at Low Frequencies in Currents Observed Over Continental Shelf Off Oregon
and Washington. EOS 55(12), p 1135, Amer. Geophysical Union.
Huyer, A., R.D. Pillsbury, and R.L. Smith, 1975. Seasonal Variation of the Alongshore Velocity Field Over
the Continental Shelf Off Oregon. Lim. and Ocean. 20(1), 90-95.
Huyer, A. and RJL Smith, 1977. Physical Characteristics of Pacific Northwestern Coastal Waters. (In) The
Marine Plant Biomass of the Pacific Northwest Coast. R.W. Krauss, ed., OSU Press, OSU,
Corvallis, OR.
Huyer, A. and R.L. Smith, 1979. Studies of the Physical Oceanography Over the Oregon Continental
Margin. OSU/Oceanography Research Abstract
Huyer, A^ EJ.C. Sobey and ILL. Smith, 1979. The Spring Transition in Currents Over the Oregon
Continental Shelf. J. Geophys. Res. 84(CU), 6995-7011.
James, W.P., 1970. Air Photo Analysis of Water Dispersion from Ocean Outfalls. PhJX Dissertation, OSU,
CE.
Karlin, R., 1980. Sediment Sources and Clay Mineral Distributions of the Oregon Coast. Jour. Sed. Pet.
50:543-560.
-42-
-------
Kitchen, J., 1977. Particle Size Distributions and the Vertical Distribution of Suspended Matter in the
Upwelling Region Off Oregon. Dept. Ocean. Contract Report, Ref. 77-10. OSU, Corvallis, OR.,
also 1978 MS Thesis, OSU.
Kitchen, J., J. Zaneveld and H. Pak, 1978. The Vertical Structure and Size Distributions of Suspended
Particles Off Oregon During the Upwelling Season. Deep Sea Res. 25, 453-468.
Kjeldsen, Chris Kelvin, 1967. Effects of Variations of Salinity and Temperature on Some Estuarine Macro-
Algae. Corvallis, OR. PhJD. Dissertation. OSU. 157 pp.
KUngemen, P.C., et al., 1969. Coastal Processes - Oregon Littoral Drift, Marine Geotechnique Preliminary
Study. OSU Dept. Civil Engr. CE572.
Komar, P.D., 1975. A Study of the Effects of a Proposed Extension of the Siuslaw River Jetties.
OSU/Oceanography Report to USAGE, Portland District.
Komar, PD., Lizarraga-Arciniegar and Terich, 1975. Oregon Coasts Shoreline Changes Due to Jetties.
OSU/Oceanography Report ORESU-R-76-002.
Komar, P.D., R.H. Neudeck, and L.D. Kulm, 1972. Observations and Significance of Deep-Water Oscillatory
Ripple Marks on the Oregon Continental Shelf. Jn Shelf Sediment Transport, Swift, et al., eds., pp
601-619.
Krygier, E.E. and W.G. Pearcy. 1986. The Role of Estuarine and Offshore Nursery Areas for Young English
Sole. Parophrys vetulus Girard, of Oregon. Fishery Bulletin 84(1):119-D2.
Kulm, L.D. and J.V. Byrne, 1966. Sedimentary Response to Hydrography hi an Oregon Estuary. Marine
Geology, v 4, pp 85-118.
Kulm, LJX and J.V. Byrne, 1967. Sediments of Yaquina Bay, Oregon. In Estuaries, Pub 83, AAAS pp 226-
238.
Kulm, LJD., Scheidegger, Byrne and Spigai, 1968. A Preliminary Investigation of the Heavy Mineral Suites of
the Coastal Rivers and Beaches of OR and N. Calif. The Ore Bin. 30:165-180.
Kulm, L.D., R.C. Roush, J.C. Hartlett, R JI. Neudeck, D.M. Chambers, and EJ. Runge, 1975. Oregon
Continental Shelf Sedimentation: Interrelationships of Fades Distribution and Sedimentary
Processes. Jn Journal of Geology, v. 83, n. 2, pp 145-175.
Kulm, LIX, 1977. Coastal Morphology and Geology of the Ocean Bottom - the Oregon Region. Jn The
Marine Plant Biomass of the Pacific NW Coast. Drauss, ed^ pp 9-36.
I
-------
Lough, R.G., 1976. Larval Dynamics of the Dungeness Crab, Cancer magister. off the Central Oregon Coast,
1970-71. Fish. Bull 74(2):353-376.
Lough, Robert Gregory, 1969. The Effects of Temperature and Salinity on the Early Development of Adula
ralifnrniffnk (Pelecypoda - Mytilidae). Corvallis, OR. MS Thesis. OSU. 92 pp.
Main, Stephen Paul, 1972. The Distribution of Epiphytic Diatoms in Yaquina Estuary, Oregon. Corvallis,
OR. PhD. Dissertation. OSU. 112 pp.
Maloney, NJ., 1965. Geology of the Continental Terrace Off the Central Coast of OR. PhD. Dissertation,
OSU, 233 pp.
Markham, John Charles, 1967. A Study of the Animals Inhabiting Laminarian Holdfasts in Yaquina Bay,
Oregon. Corvallis, OR. MA Thesis. OSU. 62 pp.
Marthaler, J.G., 1976. Comparison of Sea Level and Currents Off the Oregon Coast Using Mean Monthly
Data. Corvallis, OR. MS Thesis. OSU.
Martin, John Varick, 1970. Salinity as a Factor Controlling the Distribution of Benthic Estuarine Diatoms.
Corvallis, OR. Ph.D. Dissertation. OSU. 114 pp.
Maser, C., B.R. Mate, J.F. Franklin and C.T. Dyrness, 1981. Natural History of Oregon Coast Mammals.
USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-133, 496 pp. Pac. Northwest For. and Range Exp. Stn.,
Portland, OR.
Maughan, P.M., 1963. Observations and Analysis of Ocean Currents Above 250 m off the Oregon Coast.
Corvallis, OR. MS Thesis. OSU.
McCrow, Lynne Tucker, 1972. The Ghost Shrimp. Callianassa californiensis Dana, 1854, in Yaquina Bay,
Oregon. Corvallis, OR. MS Thesis. OSU. 56 pp.
Miller, C.B., 1980. Ecology and Reproductive Biology of Calanus marshallae in the Oregon Upwelling Zone.
OSU/OCEANOGRAPH Contract OCE76-21958 AO1.
Miller, M.C, 1978. Lab and Field Investigations on the Movement of Sand Tracer Under the Influence of
Water Waves. PhJX Dissertation, OSU.
Mills, Randall V., 1950. Railroads Down the Valley: Some Short Lines of the Oregon Country. Palo Alto,
Pacific Books.
Montagne-Bierly, 1977. Yaquina Bay Hopper Dredge Scheduling Analysis - Offshore Disposal Site
Inspection. Report to USAGE, Portland District.
Moores, CNJC, L.M. Bogert, Rl. Smith and J.G. Pattullo, 1968. A Compilation of Observations from
Moored Current Meters and Thermographs. Vol n. Dept. Ocean Data Rep. 30, Ref 68-5. Corvallis,
OR. OSU.
Moores, CJMJC and Rl. Smith, 1968. Continental Shelf Waves Off Oregon. J. Geophys. Res. 73(2), 549-
557.
Moores, CN JC, 1974. Coastal Upwelling Experiment. I. Profiling Current July-7 Aug 1972), R/V Cayuse
Cruises C7208-F1 and C7208-F2 (15-18 August and 21-24 August 1972). Dept Ocean. Data Rep.
Corvallis, OR. OSU.
Morgan, J.B. and R.L. Holton, 1977. A Compendium of Current Research and Management Programs
Concerning Oregon's Estuaries. OSU Sea Grant Pub. ORESU-L-77-004.
Murray, R J., 1978. Application of LANDSAT-2 Data for an Inventory of Eelgrass and Kelp Beds on the
Oregon Coast. OSU/ERSAL Research Abstract.
-44-
-------
National Marine Consultants, 1961. Wave Statistics for Twelve Most Severe Storms Affecting Three Selected
Stations Off the Coast of Washington and Oregon, During the Period 1950-1960. Report to Corps
of Engineers, Portland District, Portland, OR.
National Marine Consultants, 1961. Wave Statistics for Three Deep-Water Stations Along the Oregon-
Washington Coast. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, Seattle, WA.
Neal, V.T., DJ7. Keene and J.T. Detweiler, 1969. Physical Factors Affecting Oregon Coastal Pollution.
Dept. Oceanography Ref. 69-28, OSU, Corvallis, OR.
Nelson, P.O., C.K. Sollitt, KJ. Williamson and D.R. Hancock, 1983. Coos Bay Offshore Disposal Site
Investigation Interim Report, Phase n-IH, April 1980-June 1981. Report to U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Portland District, Portland, OR, Under Contract No. DACW57-C-0040, OSU, Corvallis,
OR.
Neuendorf, K.K.E., 1982. Theses and Dissertations on the Geology of Oregon, 1899-1982. ODGMI Sp
Paper 11.
Neudeck, R.H., 1971. Photographic Investigation of Sediment Transport Mechanics on the Oregon
Continental Margin. MS, OSU.
North, W.B. and Byrne, 1965. Coastal Landslides of N. OR. The Ore Bin v. 27 no. 11 pp. 217-241 also MS,
OSU 1964 85 pp.
Oceanographic Institute of Oregon, 1984. An Examination of the Feasibility of Extrapolating Infaunal Data
From Coos Bay, Oregon, to Yaquina Bay, Oregon, Final Report. Portland District Corps of
Engineers Contract DACW57-84-M-1186.
O'Flaherty, Mary Louise, 1966. Taxonomy of Some Endophytic and Epiphytic Genera of Phaeophyta on the
Oregon Coast. Corvallis, OR. MS Thesis. OSU. 65 pp.
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Pounds and Value of Commercially Caught Fish and Shellfish
Landed in Oregon, 1978-1985. Portland, OR.
Pak, H. and R.V. Zaneveld, 1977. Bottom Nepheloid Layers and Bottom Mixed Layers Observed on the
Continental Shelf Off Oregon. JGR 82:3921-3931.
Pak, H. and R.V. Zaneveld, 1981. Mesoscale Studies of Flow Regimes and Fluxes of Paniculate Matter in
Coastal Waters. Report to US Dept. Energy Under Contract 902688 TICNO; 0077240, School of
Oceanography, OSU, Corvallis, OR.
Panshin, DA., 1967. Sea Level, Winds, and Upwelling Along the Oregon Coast. MS Thesis, OSU, Corvallis,
OR.
Pattullo, J. and Denner, 1965. Processes Affecting Seawater Characteristics Along the Oregon Coast. Limn
& Ocean. 10:443-450.
Peterson, C., Scheidegger and Komar, 1982. Sand Disperal Patterns in an Active Margin Estuary of the NW
US as Indicated by Sand Composition, Texture and Bedforms. Mar. GeoL 50:77-%.
Peterson, G, Scheidegger, Nem and Komar, 1983. Sediment Composition and Hydrography in 6 High-
Gradient Estuaries of the NW US. Jour Sed Pet (in press).
Peterson, CD., 1984. Sedimentation in Small Active Margin Estuaries of the NW US, PhJX Dissertation,
OSU, Ocean. ORESU-X-84-001 R/CP-11.
Peterson, Paul Edward, 1973. Factors that Influence Sulfide Production in an Estuarine Environment.
Corvallis, OR. MS Thesis. OSU 1974. 97 pp.
-45-
-------
Peterson, WJC, 1970. Coastal and Offshore Survey, UW/Oceanography Report(s), REF-M70-2, RLO-1725,
NR-083-0.
Peterson, W.T. and CB. Miller, 1976. Zooplankton Along the Continental Shelf Off Newport, Oregon, 1969-
1972: Distribution, Abundance, Seasonal Cycle, and Year-to-Year Variations. OSU, Sea Grant
College Program Pub. No. ORESU-T-76-002. Ill pp.
Peterson, W.T., CB. Miller and A. Hutchinson, 1979. Zonation and Maintenance of Copepod Populations in
the Oregon Upwelling Zone. Deep-Sea Research 26A:467-494.
Pillsbury, R.D., 1972. A Description of Hydrography, Winds and Currents During the Upwelling Season
Near Newport, OR. PhJX Dissertation, OSU, Corvallis, OR.
Pillsbury, R.D., R.L. Smith and J.G. Pattulo, 1970. A Compilation of Observations from Moored Current
Meters and Thermographs. Vol. m, Dept. Ocean. Data Rep. 40, Ref. No. 70-3.
Plank, W.S. and H. Pak, 1973. Observations of Light Scattering and Suspended Particulate Matter Off the
Oregon Coast, June-Oct. 1972. School of Ocean. Data Rep. 55, OSU, Corvallis, OR.
Prestedge, G.K., 1977. Stabilization of Landslide along the Oregon Coast. OSU, Civil Eng. ORESU-X2-75-
003.
Quinn, WJL, and Enfield, 1971. The Development of Forecast Techniques for Wave and Surf Conditions
Over the Bars in the Columbia River Mouth and at the Entrance to Yaquina Bay. OSU Ref 71-9.
Quinn, W.H., Creech, H.C. and D.O. Zopf, 1974. Coastal Wave Observations Via Seismometer, Mariners
Weather Log 18:367-369.
Richardson, S.L. and W.G. Pearcy, 1977. Coastal and Oceanic Fish Larvae in an Area of Upwelling Off
Yaquina Bay, Oregon. Fish. Bull. 75(1):125-145.
Richardson, S.L., 1973. Abundance and Distribution of Larval Fishes in Waters off Oregon, May-October,
1969, with Special Emphasis on the Northern Anchovy. Engraulis mordax. Fish. Bull. 71(3):697-711.
Richardson, S J~, J.L. Laroche and M.D. Richardson, 1980. Larval Fish Assemblages and Associations in the
Northeast Pacific Ocean Along the Oregon Coast, Winter-Spring 1972-1975. Estuarine and Coastal
Marine Science (1980) D, 671-698.
Riznyk, Raymond Zenon, 1969. Ecology of Benthic Microalgae of Estuarine Intertidal Sediments. Corvallis,
OR. PhJX Dissertation. OSU. 196 pp.
Rosenburg, D.H., 1962. Characteristics and Distribution of Water Masses Off the Oregon Coast. MS, OSU,
Ocean.
Ross, Richard E., 1983. Archeological Sites and Surveys on the North and Central Coast of Oregon, in
Prehistoric Places on the Southern Northwest Coast, ed. Robert E. Greengo, Seattle: Thomas Burke
Memorial Washington State Museum, p. 213.
Roush, R.C, 1979. Sediment Textures and Internal Structures: A Comparison Between Central Oregon
Continental Shelf Sediments and Adjacent Ocean Sediment. MS, OSU, Ocean. ORESU-X2-79-
001.
Roush, R.C, 1970. Sediment Textures and Internal Structures: A Comparison Between Central Oregon
Continental Shelf Sediments and Adjacent Coastal Sediments. MS Thesis, OSU, 75 pp.
Runge, E J., 1966. Continental Shelf Sediments, Columbia River to Cape Blanco, Oregon. Ph.D.
Dissertation, OSU, 143 pp.
-46-
-------
Scheidegger, K.F., L.D. Kulm and EJ Runge, 1971. Sediment Sources and Dispersal Patterns of Oregon
Continental Shelf Sands. Jour Sediment Petrol, v.41, pp 1112-1120.
Seymour, RJ., 1981. Coastal Data Information Program Monthly Reports, 1981 Through Present. Calif.
Dept. Boating and Waterways, Scripps Institute of Oceanography, La Jolla, CA.
Simons, Alexy, 1983. Cultural Resources in the Paeon Graving Dock Project Area. Unpublished Report, on
file. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District, Portland, OR.
Smallbone, N., 1974. Bays and Estuaries of Oregon. OSU/Oceanography Report.
Smith, R.L., 1964. An Investigation of Upwelling Along the Oregon Coast. PLD. Dissertation, OSU
83 pp
Sobey, EJ.B., 1977. The Response of Oregon Shelf Waters to Wind Fluctuations: Differences and the
Transition Between Winter and Summer. Ph.D. Dissertation, OSU, Corvallis, OR.
Sollitt, C.K., P.O. Nelson, KJ. Williamson and D.R. Hancock, 1983. Coos Bay Offshore Disposal Site
Investigation Final Report. Report to U. S. Army, Corps of Engineers, Portland District, Portland,
OR, Under Contract No. DACW57-79-C0040, OSU, Corvallis, OR.
Spigai, JJ., 1970. Marine Geology of the Continental Margin Off Southern Oregon. PhJ5. Dissertation,
OSU, Ocean.
Slander, J.M. and R.L. Horton, 1978. Oregon and Offshore Oil. OSU Sea Grant Pub. ORESU-T-78-004.
Steiner, R.G., 1978. Food Habits and Species Composition of Neritic Reef Fishes Off Depoe Bay, Oregon.
OSU, Fish & Wild., ORESU-X2-78-002.
Stevenson, M.R., 1966. Subsurface Currents Off the Oregon Coast. Ph.D. Dissertation, OSU, Corvallis, OR.
Stevenson, M.R., J.G. Pattullo and B. Wyatt, 1969. Subsurface Currents Off the Oregon Coast as Measured
by Parachute Drogues. Deep-Sea Research, 16, 449-461.
Stevenson, M.R., R.W. Garvine and B. Wyatt, 1974. Lagrangjan Measurements in a Coastal Upwelling Zone
Off Oregon. J. Phys. Ocean. 4(3), 321-336.
Stewart, R., 1967. An Evaluation of Grain Size, Shape and Roundness Parameters in Determining
Depositional Environment in Pleistocene Sediments from Newport, OR. MS Thesis, University of
Oregon.
Sullivan B. and D. Hancock, 1977. Zooplankton and Dredging, Research Perspectives and Critical Review.
Water Resources Bulletin. American Water Resources Assc., Vol. B, No. 13.
Talbot, Theodore Webt, 1980. From the Journals of Lieut. Theodore Talbot, U. S A. on his Journey
Through Lincoln County and Along the Oregon Coast in 1849. Entries Compiled and Notes on .
Contents by Leslie L. Haslan, Newport, OR. In Lincoln County Lore: A Reprinting of Five Early
Publications of the Lincoln County Historical Society. Newport, OR.
Thompson, Rogene Kasparek, 1967. Respiratory Adaptations of Two Macrurous-Anomuran Mud Shrimps,
Callianassa califomiensis and Upogebia pupettensis (Decapoda. ThalassinideaV Corvallis, OR. MS
Thesis. OSU. 63pp.
Thurn, Alan Bradley, 1972. An Ecological Study of Diatomovora amoena. an Interstial Acoel Flatworm, in
an Estuarine Mud Flat on the Central Coast of Oregon. Corvallis, OR. Ph.D. Dissertation. OSU.
185 pp.
Toner, Richard Charles, 1961. An Exploratory Investigation of the Embryonic and Larval Stages of the Bay
Mussel Mvtilus edulis L.. as a Bioassav Organism. Corvallis, OR. MS Thesis. OSU. 51pp.
-47-
-------
Tunon, N.AA,, 1977. Beach Profile Changes and Onshore-Offshore Sand Transport on the Oregon Coast.
MS Thesis. OSU/Oceanography, 58 pp.
USAGE, 1883. Annual Report to the Chief of Engineers. Portland District Library, Portland, OR.
USAGE, 1974. Coastal Reconnaissance Study Oregon and Washington, June 1974. Portland
District, Portland, OR.
USAGE, 1980. Findings of Compliance and Non-compliance, Operations and Maintenance Dredged
Material Disposal Activities at Coastal Project. Portland District, Portland, OR.
USAGE, Unpublished data. Littoral Environmental Observation Program (LEO). U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Portland District, Portland, OR.
USEPA, 1971. Oceanography of the Nearshore Coastal Waters of the Pacific Northwest Relating to Possible
Pollution. Water Pollution Control Research Series, 2 Volumes, Environmental Protection Agency.
USEPA and USAGE, 1984. General Approach to Designation Studies for Ocean Dredged Material Disposal
Sites. Published by USAGE Water Resources Support Center, Fort Belvoir, VA.
USEPA and USAGE, 1991. Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal: Testing Manual.
EPA-503/8-91-001.
USGS. Analysis of Elutriate, Native Water, and Bottom Material in Selected Rivers and Estuaries in
Western Oregon and Washington. Open File Report 82-922.
Voth, David Richard, 1972. Life History of the Caligoid Copepod Lepeophtheiros hospitalis Frasser 1920
(Crustacea Caligoidae). Corvallis, OR. PhJX Dissertation. OSU. 114 pp.
Waldron, KD., 1955. A Survey of the Bull Kelp Resources of the Oregon Coast in 1954. Fish Comm. of
OR, Res. Brief 6(2)15.
Walker, John David, 1974. Effects of Bark Debris on Benthic Macrofauna of Yaquina Bay, Oregon.
Corvallis, OR. MS Thesis. OSU. 94 pp.
White, S.M., 1970. Mineralogy and Geochemistry of Continental Shelf Sediments off the Washington-
Oregon Coast. Jour Sediment Petrol, v.40, pp 38-54.
Willingham, William F., 1983. Army Engineers and the Development of Oregon. A History of the Portland
District. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District, Portland, OR.
Wilson, William Joseph, 1974. The Effects of Concentration and Particle Size of Suspended Materials on
Growth and Condition of the Pacific Oyster (Crassostrea gigas). Corvallis, OR. MS Thesis. OSU.
65 pp.
Wright, Tl., 1976. A Description of the Coastal Upwelling Region Off Oregon During July-August 1973..
Thesis, OSU, Corvallis, OR.
Wyatt, B., 1973. Coastal Upwelling Ecosystems Analysis: STD Measurements Off the Oregon Coast August
1973, Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission Rpt 9.
Wyatt, B., DA. Barstow, W.E. Gilbert and J.L. Washburn, 1971. Drift Bottle Recoveries and Releases Off
the Oregon Coast 1961 Through 1970. Dept. Ocean. Data Rep. 50, Ref. no. 71-36, OSU, Corvallis,
OR.
Yao, N.C.G. and S. Neshyba, 1976. Bispectrum and Cross-Bispectrum Analysis of Wind and Currents Off
the Oregon Coast: I. Development. Dept. Ocean. Research Report, Ref. No. 76-1, OSU, Corvallis,
OR.
-48-
-------
Yao, N.C.G., 1974. Bispectral and Cross-Bispectral Analysis of Wind and Currents Off Oregon Coast. PhJX
Dissertation, OSU, Corvallis, OR.
Zimmerman, Steven T., 1972. Seasonal Succession of Zooplankton Population in Two Dissimilar Marine
Embayments on the Oregon Coast. Corvallis, OR. PhJX Dissertation. OSU. 212 pp.
Zontek, Terry, 1983. Late Prehistoric Archeological Sites on the Oregon Coast. Unpublished MA Thesis,
Interdisciplinary Studies, OSU, Corvallis, OR.
Zopf, D., Creech and Quinn, 1976. The Wave Meter a Land-Based System for Measuring Nearshore
Ocean Waves. OSU/Sea Grant ORESU-R-76-013.
Zopf, D.On H.C. Creech and WJH. Quinn, 1977. Mariners Weather Log 21(5), 305-306, Washington, D.C.
-49-
-------
.APPENDKA
-------
APPENDIX A
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.1 Introduction A-l
1.2 Plankton and Fish Larvae A-l
1.11 Benthic Invertebrates A-4
1.16 Results A-5
1.21 Macroinvertebrates A-8
L23 Fisheries A-ll
126 Commercial and Recreational Fisheries A-17
L29 Wildlife A-19
Literature Cited A-21
LIST OF TABLES
Table
A-l Dominant Copepod Species by Season in Decreasing
Order of Abundance A-l
A-2 Other Taxa Collected A-2
A-3 Other Taxa Collected A-3
A-4 Dominant Fish Larval Species During the Two Peaks
of Abundance A-4
A-5 Catch Data for Fish and Crab A-13
A-6 Summary of Trawl Data A-17
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
A-l Sample Site Locations A-^
A-2 Density of Benthic Infauna A-7
A-3 Diversity, Species Richness and Equitability .-,
of Benthic Infauna A-9
A-4 Shellfish Distribution A-10
A-5 Species of Fish and Seasonal Occurrance A-12
A-6 Trawl Site Locations A-14
A-7 Density of Fish and Crab , A-15
A-8 Length-Frequency Distribution A-16
A-9 Commercial Fishing Areas A-18
A-10 Wildlife Areas A-20
-------
APPENDIX A
LIVING RESOURCES
Introduction
1.01 Information on aquatic resources was obtained from a variety of sources including a field sampling
program conducted by the National Marine Fisheries, Hammond, Oregon, Laboratory during September
1984 and January 1985. A variety of published and unpublished reports, thesis, and personal communications
with the ODFW Marine Resources Division biologists were also used. Critical living resources were
determined primarily by whether the resource was unique to the area or was in limited abundance along the
Oregon coast.
Plankton and Fish Larvae
1.02 Distribution and abundance of inshore plankton species vary depending upon nearshore oceanographic
conditions. In the summer when the wind is from the northwest, surface water is moving south and away
from the shore. Colder, more saline, nutrient rich water then moves up from depth onto the shore. This
upweUing phenomenon can extend up to 10 km offshore and last from days to weeks depending upon the
strength and duration of the wind. Species present during this time are predominantly those from subarctic
water masses.
1.03 In the winter the wind is primarily out of the west and southwest and surface waters are transported
inshore. The zooplankton community during this season consists of species from the transitional or Central
Pacific water masses.
1.04 No specific data is available for the area offshore from the Umpqua River. However, Peterson and
Miller (1976) and Peterson et aL (1979) have sampled the zooplankton community off the Yaquina River
and found copepods to be the dominant taxa. The species present varied with season, of the 58 total species
collected, 38 were collected in the summer and 51 in the winter. Eight occurred commonly in both summer
and winter while seven occurred only or predominantly in the summer and six in the winter. A list of
dominant summer and winter species is given in table A-l. In general winter species are less abundant than
summer species.
Table A-l
Dominant Copepod Species by Season in Decreasing Order of Abundance
Winter Species Summer Species
Pseudocalamus sp. Pseudocalamus sp.
Oithona similis Acartia clausili
arvus Acartia lonjremis
Acartia longir^mis Calamus marsh^ll^e
Centrophages ahdnmi^Hs Olithona similis
1.05 Other taxa collected were less abundant than the copepods except for a few organisms during certain
times of the year. A list of the other taxa collected is given in tables A-2 and A-3.
1.06 The other plankton species of importance is the megalops larval stage of the Dungeness crab (Cancer
magister). Lough (1976) has reported that megalops occur inshore from January to May and are apparently
retained there by the strong longshore and onshore components of the surface currents in the winter. After
May, the megalops metamorphoses into juvenile crabs and settle out of the plankton moving into rearing
areas near shore and in the estuary.
A-l
-------
Table A-2
Other Taxa Collected
TAXA
Calamus naupl i i
Other Copepod nauplii
Amphipods
Euphausiid nauplii
Euphausiid calyptopis
Euphausiid furcilla
Thyaanoeasa epinifera
Euadnt nordmeomi
Podon laukarti
Pteropods
Chaetognaths
Oikopleura
Ctenophores
Scypnomedusae
decapod shrimp mysis
barnacle nauplii
barnacle cypris
polychaete post-
trochophores
bivalve veligers
gastropod veligers
hydromedusae
unidentified annelid
without parapodia
pluteus
large round eggs (fish)
CalanuB eggs
euphausiid eggs, early
euphausiid eggs, late
other fish eggs
TOTAL_RELATIVE DENSITY
1969 1970 1971
FREQUENCY
69 70 71
119.5
43.1
8.5
46.3
13.3
30.2
35.4
73.7
2.8
10.2
89.4
69.2
6.0
22.9
695.5
68.1
18.5
85.9
14.5
13.6
4.0
58.9
115.3
24.6
50.3
85.7
2.5
70.9
142.7
59.3
4.4
16.2
170.5
28.9
6.1
8.2
0.0
36.8,
870.1*
55.0
70.0
19.1
52.6
168.3
64.0
20.1
258.9
79.2
3.2
23.1
16.0
25.0
168.7
686.1
57.5
35.1
.7
.3
172.7
52.3
15.7
84.0
17.2
17.
87.
9.8
S.2
60.6
30.8
66.5
34.9
22.8
45.3
231.4
8.3
21.4
68.3
42.2
10.3
35.8
117:6
17.8
226.1
449.6
39.6
34.3
21
10
5
5
4
14
2
17
2
11
25
11
7
13
40
20
15
26
17
20
7
26
12
22
33
15
5
28
28
20
14
18
11
10
11
2
1
35
34
21
19
22
16 24
8 32
2 19
5
20
16
2
3
0
11
10
11
2
12
23
40
33
2
3
5
13
28
29
16
18
22
28
10
15
27
23
11
16
11
12
25
24
14
18
a - biased by a single observation of 760 individuals/m .
The following taxa were found in less than five samples: radiolarians,
fora/ninifera, siphonophores. planula larva, trochophores. Tomopterit,
heteropods, Clione, phoronid larva, ascidian larva, salps, auricularia
larva, inn starfish, decapod protozoeas, unusual barnacle nauplii. sty-
lochairon abbroviatum, anchovy eggs, and four miscellaneous unidentified
meroplanktonic taxa.
Total relative density and frequency of occurrence of other holoplanktonic
taxa and meroplankton taken within 18 km of. the coast during 1969, 1970
and 1971 upwelling seasons. Table entries are sums of average abundances
at each of four stations?-
A-2
-------
Table A-3
Other Taxa Collected
TAXA
Calcnius naupl i i
Other Copepod nauplii
Amphipods
Euphausiid nauplH
Euphausiid calyptopis
Euphausiid furcilia
Thysanoeasa epinifera
Evadna nordmeomi
Podon laukarti
Pteropods
Chaetognaths
Oikopleura
Ctenophores
Scyphomedusae
decapod shrimp mysis
barnacle nauplii
barnacle cypris
polychaete post-
trochophores
bivalve veligers
gastropod veligers
hydromedusae
unidentified annelid
without parapodia
pluteus
large round eggs (fish)
Calanue egg's
euphausiid eggs, early
euphausiid eggs, late
other fish eggs
TOTAL RELATIVE DENSITY
1971
1969
1970
FREQUENCY
69 70 71
119.5
43.1
8.5
46.3
13.3
30.2
35.4
73.7
2.8
10.2
89.4
69.2
6.0
22.9
695.5
68.1
18.5
85.9
14.5
13.6
4.0
58.9
115.3
24.6
50.3
85. 7
2.5
70.9
142.7
59.3
4.4
16.2
170.5
28.9
6.1
8.2
0.0
36.8,
870.la
55.0
70.0
19.1
52.6
168.3
64.0
20.1
258.9
79.2
3.2
23.1
16.0
25.0
168.7
686.1
57.5
35.1
.7
.0
.2
.7
.3
172.7
52.3
15.
84.
17.
17.
87.
9.8
5.2
60.6
30.8
66.5
34.9
22.8
45.3
231.4
8.3
21.4
68.3
42.2
10.3
35.8
117:6
17.8
226.1
449.6
39.6
34.3
21
10
5
5
4
14
2
17
2
11
25
11
7
13
40
20
15
26
17
20
7
26
12
22
33
IS
5
28
28
20
14
18
11
10
11
2
1
35
34
21
19
22
16 24
8 32
2 19
S
20
16
2
3
0
11
10
11
2
12
23
40
33
2
3
5
13
28
29
16
18
22
28
10
15
27
23
11
16
11
12
25
24
14
18
a * biased by a single observation of 760 individuals/m .
The following taxa were found in less than five samples: radiolarians,
foraminifera. siphonophores, planula larva, trochophores, Tomopterie,
heteropods, Clions, phoronid larva, ascidian larva, salps, auricularia
larva, inn starfish, decapod protozoeas, unusual barnacle nauplii, Sty-
locheiron abbreviation, anchovy eggs, and four miscellaneous unidentified
meroplanktonic taxa.
Total relative density and frequency of occurrence of other holoplanktonic
taxa and meroplankton taken within 18 km of. the coast during 1969. 1970
and 1971 upwelllng seasons. Table entries are sums of average abundances
at each of four stations?-
A-3
-------
1.07 Fish larvae are a transient member of the inshore coastal plankton community. Their abundance and
distribution has been described by Richardson (1973), Richardson and Pearcy (1977), and Richardson et al.
(1980).
1.08 Three species assemblages have been described off the Oregon coast; coastal, transitional, and offshore.
In general, the species in the coastal and offshore assemblages never overlapped while the transitional species
were from both groups. The break between the coastal and transitional groups occurred at the continental
slope.
1.09 The coastal group is dominated by smelts (Osmeridae), (greater than 50 percent of the larvae collected),
and to a lesser extent the English sole (Parophrys vetulus). sanddab (Isopsetta isolepis). starry flounder
(Plfinfichthys Sordidus), and torn cod (Microgadus proxunus). Maximum abundance occurred from February
to July when greater than 90 percent of the coastal larvae were collected. Two peaks of abundance were
present during this period, one in February to March (24 percent of larvae) and one following upwelling in
May to July (68 percent of larvae). Dominant species during each peak are shown below (table A-4).
Table A-4
Dominant Fish Larval Species During the Two Peaks of Abundance
Species February to March May to July
Smelt (Osmeridae') 1.51* 4.12
English sole (Parophrvs vetulus) 4.09
Sandlance (Ammodvtes hexapterusl 1.76
Sanddab (Isopsetta isolepis) 1.73 221
Tom Cod (Microgadus proximus') 2.03
Slender sole (Lyopsetta exilis) 1.07
* Biological index - Ranking method that averages abundance and frequency of occurrence
in samples. 5 to 1 in decreasing order.
1.10 The larval species present in the inshore coastal areas were similar and had the same peaks of
abundance as those collected in the Yaquina Estuary (Pearcy & Meyers, 1974); however, the dominate
species differed. In the bay two species accounted for 90 percent of the species collected, the bay goby
fLepidogobius lepidust and the Pacific herring (Clupea harengus pallasiV Neither were present or common
in the inshore coastal area. Some of the common coastal species such as English sole and starry flounder
also use the estuary as juvenile rearing areas.
Benthic Invertebrates
1.11 Benthic invertebrates play an important role in secondary productivity of nearshore marine systems.
Not only are they a direct source of food for many demersal fishes but play an active part in the shredding
and breakdown of organic material and in sediment reworking.
1.12 Knowledge of the benthic communities off of the nearshore central Oregon coast is scant. A literature
review conducted by the Portland District indicated that only six quantitative benthic studies have been
conducted in nearshore coastal waters off Oregon.
1.13 Investigations include evaluating offshore disposal sites near the mouth of the Columbia River by
Richardson et aL (1977), a quantitative study of the meiobenthos north of Yaquina Bay entrance (Hogue
1981) and an outfall study for an International Paper Company outfall near Gardiner Or. (Unpublished,
n.d.). In addition, site specific studies of ocean disposal for the selection of the Coos bay (Hancock et aL
1981, Nelson et al. 1983, and Sollitt et aL 1984) and Yaquina Bay ODMDS have been completed (USACOE
1985 and 1986). Similar benthic studies have been conducted at seven other ocean disposal sites off of the
Oregon coast and the data is being analysed for final site designation. These studies comprise the total
A-4
-------
benthic infaunal data base available for the Oregon Coast. All but one of the benthic studies were sponsored
by the Portland District.
1.14 To provide site specific information on the infauna and epifauna to supplement the existing data and
characterize the Umpqua interim and adjusted disposal sites, Portland District contracted with the National
Marine Fisheries Service, Hammond Laboratory to collected and analyzed benthic samples as described in
Emmett et al (1987).
1.15 Stations were located on the 60, 70, 80, 90,100 and 110 foot depth contours along the center line of the
interim disposal site and also along transects to the north (adjusted site) and to the south. Figure A-l shows
the location of the sampling sites and transects. Two reference transects were also sampled north and south
of the disposal sites.
The reference transects were located far enough north and south to be out of the influence of disposal
results at the interim site. Samples were collected during two seasons, Figure A-lSeptember 1984, and
January 1985. Six replicate bottom samples were taken from each of the 24 stations using a modified Gray-
O'Hara box corer which sampled a 0.096 m area of the bottom. One sample from each station was sent to
the CoE North Pacific Division Materials Testing Laboratory for determination of sediment grain size and
organic content. The remaining five box-core samples were sieved through a 0-5 mm mesh screen; organisms
retained on the screen were preserved in 10 percent buffered formalin. Infaunal organisms were then picked
from the sediment, counted and identified to the lowest practical taxon.
Results
1.16 Sediments from all of the stations sampled in the region of the Umpqua River Interim ODMDS Site
consists of medium to fine grained sand inside the disposal site (median d=03 mm), and fine grained sand
outside of the interim site (median d=0.16 mm).
1.17 The species composition of the Umpqua interim ODMDS was found to be typical of nearshore high
energy environments (Emmett, et aL, 1987). The infaunal community is characterized predominately by
polychaete worms and gammarid amphipods. In Sept(84), polychaete worms were the dominant taxanomic
group with very large abundances at the north and south transect lines. In Jan(85), amphipods became the
dominant group with densities over 4000/sq m at some stations. Depressed densities were recorded at the
70-110 ft deep stations which lie on the transect through the center of the interim disposal site, (stations
U-2-3 to U-2-6). The species of invertebrates inhabiting the sandy portions of the study area/ Polychaete
annelids and gammarid amphipods) are the more motile psammnitic (sand-dwelling) forms which tolerate or
require high sediment flux. They are typical of other shallow water disposal sites such as Coos Bay sites "E"
and "F (Hancock et al., 1981). »
1.18 Figure A-2 compares mean infaunal densities (for five replicate box core samples) at the four stations
within the interim site, the adjusted site, the south transect and the north and south reference stations
combined.
The transects to the north (adjusted site) and south of the disposal site and the reference stations had
significantly higher densities than the interim disposal site. Depressed densities in the interim site were
observed during both the Sept(84) and the Jan(85) surveys.Further, the nearshore stations in the interim site
appear to have lower densities than the deeper stations. The survey indicates that past disposal of dredged
material may have reduced the abundance of benthic infauna within the interim site, but not outside the site
as indicated by the north and south reference stations. Dredged material disposal in 1984 occured during
23-28 August and 15-27 September; which coincided with the sampling date. Dredged material disposal in
1985 occured from 30 May to 30 September, this was three months before the sampling. These results appear
consistent with our current and past hopper dredge disposal activities since the inner portion of the interim
site receives more intense disposal activity than the deeper areas further offshore.
A-5
-------
EXAMPLE OF BENTHIC AND SEDIMENT
SAMPLING SCHEMES
LEGEND
DISPOSAL SITE
MLW
SAMPLING SITES
Figure A-l
Sample Site Locations
A-6
-------
SEPT 1984
UMPQUA OOMOS
90
100 115
JAN 1965
UMPQUA OOMOS
120
\7~7\ NORTH
OCMICR
0 1OO 115 120
SOUTH
Figure A-2
Density of Benthic Infauna
A-7
-------
1.19 Figure A-3 compares diversity (H') species richness and equitability (J') of benthic infauna by depth
for the Umpqua interim offshore disposal site, the adjusted site, the south transect and the reference stations
to the north and south. The values for each of these factors were found to be very similar for each station in
the study area. However, values for the center transects suggest a reduction in standing stock from
smothering, dilution or resulting from the observed shift to coarser grain size. Impacts outside the
interimdisposal site were not observed.
1.20 Mean densities (#/m) along the northern transect (adjusted site) increase with increasing water depth,
ranging from 3638 to 4381 organisms/m in September(84) and 2567 to 2846 organisms/m in January(85) The
middle transect, (interim site), ranged from 683 to 2044 in Sept(84) and 365 to 540 in January(85). The
southern transect ranged from 2808 to 3154 in September(84) and 3031 to 4777 in January(85).
Macroinvertebrates
1.21 The dominant commercially and recreationally important macroinvertebrate species in the inshore
coastal area are shellfish and Dungeness crabs . Shellfish distribution is shown in Figure A-4. Razor clam
beds are located north of the jetty along the beach. Recruitment to the inshore beaches comes from the
subtidal spawning areas. Gaper, softshell, butter and bentnose dams are present in large numbers near the
mouth and upriver in the estuary proper. Dungeness crab adults occur on sandflat habitat along the entire
Oregon coast. They spawn in offshore areas and the juveniles rear in the estuary.
1.22 The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has not identified a major squid spawning area
off the Umpqua estuary.
A-8
-------
DIVI
of BENTHIC INVI
UMPQUA ODMM
TO
:CK RICHNESS of BENTMC MV1
!
1771 NORTH
Figure A-3
Diversity, Species Richness and Equitability
A-9
-------
JUVENILE/ADULT DUNGENESS CRAB *
1000 YDS
1000 YDS
I
Figure A-4
Shellfish Distribution
A-10
-------
Fisheries
123 The nearshore area off the mouth of the Umpqua supports a variety of pelagic and demersal fish
species. Pelagic species include anadromous salmon, steelhead, cutthroat trout, striped bass and shad that
migrate through the estuary to upriver spawning areas (ODFW, 1979). Other pelagic species include the
Pacific herring, anchovy, surf smelt, and sea perch. Surf smelt in particular are in nearshore areas and in the
estuary in large numbers during the summer (ODFW, 1979).
124 Though migratory species are present year-round, individual species are only present during certain
times of the year. Figure A-5 shows the species of fish and their periods of occurrence off the Umpqua
River.
125 Demersal species present in the nearshore area were sampled in September, 1984 and in January, 1985
by the National Marine Fisheries Service laboratory in Hammond (Emmett et al, 1987). Samples were taken
with a 8 meter semiballon shrimp trawl with a 38.1 mm mesh main net and 12.7 mm cod end liner. One
trawl approximately 10 minutes long was taken along the 60, 70, 80, 90,100 and 115 depth contours of the
mouth of the Umpqua (Figure A-6). Fish and macro invertabrate species collected and their density are
given in table A-5. The most abundant species collected was the night smelt in Jan(85). Other dominant
species included Tom cod in both surveys, Sandlance in Jan(85), prickle breasted poacher and speckled
sanddab in Sept(84), and sandsole in Jan(85). The mean density of fish and crabs was significantly greater in
January than in September, with more individuals collected in the shallower depths (60 to 70 feet) (Figure
A-7). Diversity of species generally increased with depth though these relationships were not as consistent for
the Sep(85) data (table A-6). Length frequency data indicated that most fish collected were juveniles (Figure
A-8). Dungeness crab collected in September(84) were primarily young-of-year (< 25 mm), while in January
they were larger and probably adults (> 100 mm).
A-ll
-------
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC
I
9
BT
CO
3 e
B
s.
COHO SALMON
CHINOOK SALMON, FALL
CHINOOK SALMON, SPRING
STEELHEAD, WINTER
STEELHEAD, SUMMER
CUTTHROAT, SEA-RUN
STRIPED BASS
STURGEON
SHAD
SPAWNING
MIGRATING
HOLDING
IN STREAMS
-------
Table A-5
Catch Data for Fish and Crab
Survey
C^ePr. B
Total
Species number
captured
Spiny dogfish 0
Big skate . 5
American shad 0
Northern anchovy 2
Whitebait smelt 0
Night smelt 9
Longfin smelt 0
Unid. juvenile smelt 1
Pacific tomcod 228
Larval groundflsh 0
King-of-the-salmon 1
Bay pipefish 1
Shiner perch 4
Spotfin surfperch 0
Wolf-eel 3
Pacific sand lance 0
Lingcod 1
Pac. staghorn sculpin 3
Cabezon 0
Warty poacher 45
Tubenose poacher 21
Pricklebreast poacher 388
Pacific sanddab 0
Speckled sanddab 248
Butter sole 5
English sole 73
C-0 sole 4
Sand sole 79
Larval flatfish 1
Dungeness crab 27
Red rock crab 1
Cancer gracllis 0
Kelp crab 1
I'ugettla rlchli 1
1
"tt
Mean
number
per ha
0
3
0
1
0
6
0
1
136
0
1
1
3
0
2
0
1
2
0
28
13
241
0
154
3
47
2
49
1
17
1
0
1
1
Survey
CO*>rJ a
Total
number
captured
1
3
82
0
7
6,131
1
1
298
2
0
8
37-
35
0
250
0
56
1
2
5
65
24
71
25
61
0
307
1
17
0
2
0
0
2
6)
Mean
number
per ha
1
2
38
0
3
2.766
1
1
136
1
0
4
18
16
0
115
0
27
1
1
2
30
12
33
12
28
0
146
1
8
0
1
0
0
TOTAL
1,152
715
7,493
3,404
A-13
-------
LEGEND
DISPOSAL SITE
MLW
Figure A-6
Trawl Site Locations
A-14
-------
6 -
5 -
~ "
5* I
l«
3 -
2 -I
1 -
Density of Fwh and Crab
Umpquo ODMDS
60
80
90
100
115
\7~7\ Survey 1, S«pt 84
Survty 2. Jan 85
-------
PERCENT
so-
25-
0-
SO
SO-
0-
SO-
25
0
SO-
25
SO
25
0'
SO-
25
0
50
25
0 -
100-
75
50 -
25 -
a .
25
0-
SO-,
PACIFIC TOI1COO
"""* 25
BUTTER SOLE
M-25
Irn n II rTmlirrnn nn
NICHT SMELT
N-8I3I
^filllhi
PACIFIC TOHCOO
N-2M
jfTllhL-WTfhL
UARTT POACHER
N-4S
PRICKLEBREAST POACHER *°
N-3M
JlfflrfT^,
i
SPECKLED SANOOAB
' N-24B
25
rfU- _rf*w_i-JT_ JlTD'H.
SO
ENGLISH SOLE
II-73
25
JpHf|rf1
so
SAND SOLE
25
r^^. _J1
SO
OUNCENESS CRAB
M27
i
PRICXLEBREAST POACHER
N»*S
-iJrm fwftl n >-
SPECKLED SANDOAB
N-71
ENGLISH SOLE
N-61
JTl rfl/Tlin, . r^ _. -q
SAND SOLE
N-307
OIM6ENESS CRAB
N-17
mflLmfl
O 2S SO 75 100 125 ISO 175 20O 22S 2SO 27S 300
TOTAL LENGTH (MM)
O 25 SO 75 100 125 ISO 175 200 225 250 275 300
TOTAL LENGTH (MM)
SURVEY 1 Sept (84)
SURVEY 2 Jan (85)
Figure A-8
Length Frequency Distributions Jan(85)
A-16
-------
U-l (60)
U-2 (70)
U-3 (80)
U-4(90)
U-5(100)
U-6(115)
Mean
14
13
10
13
9
3
10
Table A-6
Summary of Trawl Data
Survey 1, September 1984
Station
and
Depth (ft)
Number
of
Species
Number
per
hectare
Density
(g/ha)
H'
J
SD
SR
911
2^35
302
704
103
13
711
24,268
49,239
17,043
28356
5310
1,248
20,911
239
225
1.67
2.53
2.44
1.50
2.13
0.63
0.61
0.50
0.68
0.77
0.95
0.73 236
0.70 1.88
0.47 1.94
0.71 232
0.72 2.49
0.63 1.44
0.69 0.66
2.07
Survey 2 , January 1985
Station
and
Depth (ft)
Number
of
Species
Number
per
hectare
Density
(g/ha)
H'
J
SD
SR
U-l (60)
U-2 (70)
U-3 (80)
U-4(90)
U-5 (100)
U-6(115)
Mean
14
12
17
20
17
12
15
6,201
6,634
2,900
2,853
1,472
345
3,401
21,102
18,868
22571
29,681
27,982
12393
22,100
0.58
0.44
1.52
1.65
2.85
251
0.15
0.12
037
038
0.70
0.70
0.14
0.10
0.42
0.44
0.81
0.72
0.40 0.44
1.69
1.40
230
2.76
254
236
2.18
Commercial and Recreational Fisheries
L26 Major commercial fishing areas are shown in figure A-9. The predominant commercial fishery is for
salmon, Dungeness crab and bottom fish. Salmon trolling and crab fishing done over most of the ZSF.
L27 Commercial landings for the Winchester Bay in 1986, as compiled by ODFW (1988) were:
Bottom Fish 758,984 Ibs
Salmon 309,737 Ibs
Dungeness Crab 465.544 Ibs
Total
1534,265 Ibs
1.28 The principal recreational fishing that occurs off the Umpqua River is for salmon. Salmon fishing is
done by charter and private boat and occurs in the same areas as the commercial fishery, but generally closer
to shore.
A-17
-------
SALMON FISHING AREA
CRAB FISHING AREA
1000 YDS
1000 YDS
Figure A-9
Commercial Fishing Areas
A-18
-------
Wildlife
1.29 Numerous species of birds and marine mammals occur in the pelagic, near shore, and shoreline habitats
in and surrounding the proposed disposal site. Information on distribution and abundance of bird species is
from the Seabird Colony Catalog (Varoujean 1979) and Pacific Coast Ecological Inventory (USFWS 1981),
except as indicated. Shorebirds occur along much of the coast primarily as migrants and/or winter residents.
A few species of shorebirds including western snowy plover, black oystercatcher, killdeer, and spotted
sandpiper nest along the coast. Recent shorebird surveys along the Oregon Coast have shown that the
northern portion of the Oregon Dunes National Recreation Area (ODNRA) supports some of the highest
densities of wintering sanderlings in the world. Information on most species of shorebirds is lacking,
therefore their abundance and distribution can only be addressed in general terms. Several species of special
concern, bald eagle, peregrine falcon, marbled murrelet and brown pelican occur along the coast and may
use the ZSF or the surrounding areas. Pelicans and peregrine falcons are often associated with spits, ocean
beaches and offshore rocks. Pelagic birds (e.g. shearwaters, murres) probably use the ZSF and adjacent
waters for foraging. Marbled murrelets are generally located within 15 km of sandy shores, typically just
outside the breakers.
133 Data on marine animals is from the Natural History of Oregon Coast Mammals Maser et al. (1981),
Pearson and Verts (1970), and the Pacific Coast Ecological Inventory (USFWS 1981), except as indicated.
Except for seals and sea lions, information on marine mammals is extremely limited. Harbor seals and
sealions are primarily transient in the project area. Hauling out occurs within the estuary and on the jetties.
Whales are known to occur throughout coastal waters primarily during migrations, but population estimates
and information on areas of special use generally are not available (reference biological assessment for
whales).
134 Habitats and species within the ZSF (Figure A-10) may be affected, and include the area north of the
Umpqua River which is used as a nesting and wintering area by the western snowy plover. Western snowy
plovers are listed by the State of Oregon as threatened. Brown pelicans, a federally listed endangered species,
use the north spit area at the mouth of the Umpqua River and forage in the estuary and nearshore areas.
Murres, with young, dispersing from nesting colonies will occur in the ZSF; conflict with the disposal
operations should be minimal due to the limited presence of the dredge.
135 Several important wildlife areas outside the ZSF potentially could be affected by disposal of dredged
material. Western snowy plovers congregate and nest in the area around the mouth of the Tahkenitch River
and the area from the Umpqua River south to Tenmile Creek. Beaches within the northern portion of the
Oregon Dunes NRA which support high densities on sanderlings could possibly be impacted.
A-19
-------
Figure A-10
Wildlife Areas
A-20
-------
Literature Cited
Peterson, W.T. and CB. Miller, 1976. Zooplankton Along the Continental Shelf off Newport, Oregon,
1969-1972: distribution, abundance, seasonal cycle, and year-to-year variations. Oregon State University, Sea
Grant College Program Pub. No. ORESU-T-76-002. Ill pg.
Peterson, W.T., CB. Miller and A. Hutchinson, 1979. Zonation and Maintenance of Copepod Populations b
the Oregon Upwelling Zone. Deep-Sea Research 26A.-467-494.
Lough, R.G., 1976. Larval Dynamics of the Dungeness Crab, Cancer magister. off the Central Oregon Coast,
1970-71. Fish. Bull. 74(2)353-376.
Richardson, SI., 1973. Abundance and Distribution of Larval Fishes in Waters off Oregon, May-October,
1969, with Special Emphasis on the Northern Anchovy, Engraulis mordax. Fish. Bull. 71(3):697-711.
Richardson, S.L. and W.G. Pearcy, 1977. Coastal and Oceanic Fish Larvae in an Area of Upwelling off
Yaquina Bay, Oregon. Fish. Bull. 75(1):125-145.
Richardson, S.L., J.L. Laroche and MX). Richardson, 1980. Larval Fish Assemblages and Associations in the
Northeast Pacific Ocean Along the Oregon Coast, Winter-Spring 1972-1975. Estuarine and Coastal Marine
Science (1980) II, 671-698.
Pearcy, W.G. and S.S. Myers, 1974. Larval Fishes of Yaquina Bay, Oregon: A Nursery Ground for Marine
Fishes? Fish. BulL 72(1):201-213.
Richardson, M.D., A.G. Carey, and W.A. Colgate. 1977. An Investigation of the Effects of Dredged
Material Disposal on Neritic Benthic Assemblages off the Mouth of the Columbia River. Phase II.
DACW57-76-R-0025.
Hogue, Wayne E, 1982. Seasonal Changes in the Abundance and Spatial Distribution of a Meiobenthic
Assemblage on the Open Oregon Coast and its Relationship to the Diet of 0-age Flatfishes. Ph.D. thesis,
OSU, Corvallis, OR 125 pp.
Hancock, D.R., P.O. Nelson, OK. Sollitt and KJ. Williamson, 1981. Coos Bay Offshore Disposal Site
Investigation Interim Report, Phase I, February 1979-March 1980. Report to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Portland District, Portland, OR, under contract no. DACW57-79-C-0040, Oregon State University, Corvallis,
OR.
Nelson, P.O., C.K. Sollitt, KJ. Williamson, DJR.. Hancock, 1983. Coos Bay Offshore Disposal Site
Investigation Interim Report Phase JJ, ffi, April 1980-June 1981. Report submitted to the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, Portland District for Contract No. DACW57-79-0040. Oregon State University, Corvallis,
Oregon.
Sollitt, CJC, D.R. Hancock, P.O. Nelson, 1984. Coos Bay Offshore Disposal Site Investigation Final Report
Phases IV, V, July 1981-September 1983. UJS. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District, Portland,
Oregon, for Contract No. DACW57-79-C-0040, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon.
Emmett, RI~, T.C. Coley, G.T. McCabeJr. and RJ. Mcconnell, 1987. Demersal Fishes and Benthic
invertebrates at Four Interum Dredge Disposal Sites off the Oregon Coast. National Marine Fisheries
Service, 2725 Montilake Boulevard East, Seattle, Wash. 98112, 69pg.
Maser, G, B.R. Mate, J.F. Franklin and C.T. Dyrness, 1981. Natural History of Oregon Coast Mammals.
USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-133, 496 p. Pac. Northwest For. and Range Exp. Stn., Portland,
OR.
Montagne-Bierly Associates, Intx, 1977. Yaquina Bay Hopper Dredge Scheduling Analysis. Prepared for:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District, Navigation Division, P.O. Box 2946, Portland, OR 97208.
A-21
-------
Varoujean, D.H., 1979. Seabird colony catalog: Washington, Oregon, and California. U.S. Dep. Interior Fish
and Wildl. Serv., Region L, Portland, OR. 456 pp.
U.S. Dep. of Interior Fish and Wildlife Serv., 1981. Pacific coast ecological inventory.
Pearson, J.P. and B J. Verts, 1970. Abundance and distribution of harbor seals and northern sea lions in
Oregon. Murrelet. 51:1-5.
US Army Corps of Engineers, 1985. Yaquina Bay ODMDS. April 1985. Portland District, Portland, OR.
A-22
-------
, APPENDIX B
-------
APPENDIX B
TABLE OF CONTENTS
GEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ............................................. B-l
1.1 Regional Setting [[[ B-l
13 Regional Geology [[[ B-l
1.6 Economic Geology [[[ B-4
1.7 Sediments ................ ............................................. B-4
1.14 Conditions in the ZSF [[[ B-8
OCEANOGRAPfflC PROCESSES ......................................... B-ll
2.1 Coastal Circulation . ............................................. ; ....... B-ll
22 Ocean Waves and Tide ......... ...................... .................... B-ll
25 Local Processes [[[ B-14
2.7 Site Monitoring at Umpqua ......... ...................................... B-14
SEDIMENT TRANSPORT ............................................... B-19
3.1 The Littoral System .................................... ................. B-19
33 Umpqua Littoral Cell ............ ........................................ B-19
3.4 Umpqua Sediment Transport .............................................. B-21
BIBLIOGRAPHY [[[ B-23
LIST OF TABLES
Table
B-l Dredge Quantities at Umpqua .................... . ......................... B-5
B-2 Umpqua River Entrance Sample Data ........................................ B-5
B-3 Umpqua Offshore Sediment Sample Data ...................................... B-7
B-4 Physical Characteristics of the Umpqua River .................................. B-14
B-5 Sources and Losses in the Littoral Cell ....................................... B-19
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
B-l Umpqua Littoral Cell Location Map .......................................... B-2
B-2 Coastal Geology Near Umpqua ...................... . ...................... B-3
B-3 Umpqua ZSF and Sample Locations . . . ....................................... B-6
B-4 Umpqua ZSF Bottom Profiles .............................................. B-9
B-5 Sidescan Map [[[ B-10
B-6 Seismic Profiles [[[ B-12
B-7 Oregon Coastal Circulation . . ............................................. B-13
-------
APPENDIX B
GEOLOGIC RESOURCES, OCEANOGRAPHIC PROCESSES
AND SEDIMENT TRANSPORT OF THE UMPQUA ZSF
GEOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Regional Setting
1.1 The esturary of the Umpqua River opens into the Pacific Ocean about 180 miles south of the mouth of
the Columbia River. It lies within the Heceta Head littoral cell, which extends for 90 km from Heceta Head
south to Cape Arago. Figure B-l shows the location of the Umpqua littoral cell. The estuary is fed by two
rivers, the Umpqua, and the smaller Smith. The watershed encompasses part of the Coast Range, with the
Umpqua River extending into the Cascades. The coastal zone of the littoral cell consists of a one to two
mile wide plain covered by active and stabilized sand dunes backed by the mature upland topography of the
Coast Range. The lower portion of the Umpqua River is bordered by broad alluvial flats. The continental
shelf off the mouth of the Umpqua is abut 30 km wide. Just to the north it bulges outward, forming the
Heceta Bank. Between Siuslaw and Yaquina the shelf is at its widest along the Oregon coast, extending over
70 km offshore. Sand covers the shelf at the Umpqua for about 3 km out from the shore. From there a
thin layer of mud (1 to 3 cm thick) mantle the surface (Kulm 1977).
1.2 The Heceta Head littoral cell is the largest on the Oregon coast. Except for the headlands at both ends
of the cell, the entire coast line is made of beach fronting sand dunes. Three major river systems enter the
cell. From north to south these are the Siuslaw, the Umpqua, which is the largest of the three, and Coos
River.
Regional Geology
13 The Heceta Head littoral cell and the larger part of the Umpqua River are in the southern portion of
the Coast Range. The rocks of the Coast Range are marine and deltaic sediments, and volcanic rocks,
mostly from the earlier half of the Cenozoic. During the Eocene the area was part of a large embayment of
the ocean with an volcanic island arc to the west. The sea gradually withdrew to the west and north, so by
the end of the Oligocene the southern portion was emergent, hi the Miocene uplift began that transformed
the area into the mountains present today. Figure B-2 shows the coastal geology near Umpqua.
1.4 During the Pliocene and Pleistocene periodic ice ages and warmer intergladal periods caused major
fluctuations in the sea level Terraces were cut that, in conjunction with tectonic uplift, are now raised above
sea level. Low stand of sea level allowed streams to cut below today's sea level With the sea level rise that
came with the end of the last glaciation these valleys were drowned, forming large estuaries, including the
Umpqua's. Along the coast of the Heceta Head littoral cell the Flournoy Formation was eroded into a low
coastal plain. The combination of favorable terrain and ample sediment supply allowed extensive dune fields,
the Coos Bay dune sheet, to form. The sheet had its origin at the end of the last ice age. Its advance and
growth is associated with the subsequent period of submergence. (Lund 1973, Cooper 1958).
1.5 The Umpqua River rises in the Cascade Range, and the upper reaches pass through Mesozoic rocks of
the northwest corner of the Klamath Mountains. For the most part, though, it flows through Eocene
formations of the Coast Range. The most inportant of these are the Roseburg formation to the east, the
Flournoy Formation, the Tyee Formation, and the Elkton Formation. The Roseburg Formation was
deposited in the early Eocene, and folded and thrust by subduction at the end of the Eocene. It consists of
volcanics and interbedded sediments. The Flournoy Formation is probably middle Eocene in age, and is
primarily composed of rhythmically bedded sandstone with thin layers of siltstone. The Tyee Formation, of
late middle Eocene age, unconformably overlies the Flournoy. It is made of rhythmic graded bedding, with
micaceous sand grading upward into siltstone. The Elkton Formation is also from the late middle Eocene,
though younger than the Tyee. It consists of siltstone with minor amounts of sandstone. (Baldwin 1981,
Baldwin and Beaulieu 1973).
B-l
-------
TUIamook H**d
Cap* Falcon
Cap* M*ar*a
Cap* Lookout
Cascade H*ad
Government PI.
Yaqukia H«ad
Cap* P*rp*tua
H*c*ta H*ad
Cap* Blanco
Port Orlord
Humbug Mt.
Cap* Sebastian
Crook Point
Brooking*
Pt. St Q*org*
Midway Point
126
124
122
120
Figure B-l
Umpqua Littoral Cell Location
B-2
-------
Figure B-2
Coastal Geology near Umpqua
B-3
-------
Economic Geology
1.6 There are no accumulations of heavy minerals or gravel along the coast in the vicinity of the mouth of
the Umpqua River. While there have been exploratory oil and gas wells bored both to the north and south
on the continental shelf, as well as inland of the entrance of the Umpqua, no significant quantities of oil and
gas has been found. (Gray and Kulm 1985).
Sediments
1.7 The Umpqua River is the major source for sediment in the littoral cell. It is fed by the Umpqua and
Smith Rivers, with a combined drainage basin of 5,042 sq. miles. Mean monthly discharge is highest in
January at about 18,000 cfs, and lowest in September at about 1,200 cfs. Mean annual discharge is about
8200 cfs, which gives a six hour mean discharge of l.TTxlO^S cf. The estuary of the Umpqua River covers
6,430 acres. The diurnal tidal prism is 16x10*8 cf, which divided by the six-hour discharge gives a
hydrographic ratio of 9. This means that the estuary is fluvially dominated, and therefore that a large portion
of the fluvial sediments will be transported out the mouth and into the sea. The Siuslaw River estuary has a
hydrographic ratio of 6, so it too is fluvially dominated and should be a contributor of sediment to the cell.
Coos Bay has a hydrographic ratio of 20, making it tidally dominated and a net sediment trap. (Peterson pers
com)
1.8 Coastal erosion does not seem to be a significant source of sediment for the Heceta Head littoral cell.
The coastline of the cell is generally stable. Only at Cape Arago and Heceta Head are there slowly retreating
cliffs (USAGE 1971, Stembridge 1976). The extensive sand dune fields along the coast constitute a large
sediment sink. Sand is transported off the beach by wind and deposited on the dunes. Ironically, however,
the stabilization of sand dunes by vegetation may leave them vulnerable to undercutting by waves (USDA
1975, SSWCC 1978). Still, the coast of the Heceta Head cell must be considered a net sediment sink. Rates
and quantities of the material involved in either erosion or migration onto the land are not available.
1.9 Within the Heceta Head littoral cell there are three offshore dredge disposal projects. These are Coos
Bay, which involves the largest quantities, Umpqua, and Siuslaw. The type of material contributed by
dredging depends on both the location and hydrologic conditions. Dredging during or just after high flows is
more likely to pick up fluvial sediments than dredging done during periods of low flow, when marine
sediments have intruded into the mouth. By the same token the further upstream dredging is done the more
likely it is that fluvial sediments will be encountered. Judging by the size of the material dredged from the
Umpqua River, it seems that it is primarily fluvial in origin. Because the Umpqua is fluvially dominated
most of the Umpqua's sediment load should eventually be carried out into the ocean. This means that the
net contribution of dredging to the sediment budget is much smaller than the amount naturally carried
offshore.
1.10 Offshore disposal of dredge material at Umpqua began in 1924. Since then, morje than 142 million cy
have been dumped at sea. Between 1968 and 1988 annual disposal has averaged 147349 cy, with a maximum
of 313,632 cy and a minimum of 500 cy (Table B-l). The dredging that contributes to offshore disposal is
done to maintain the entrance channel 26 ft deep and 400 ft wide. Shoaling occurs between the jetties from
river mile -0.5 to about -0.8, and outside the jetties at about mile -LI The training jetty built on the south
side of the channel in 1980 is intended to alleviate the shoaling between the jetties.
1.11 In determining the importance of the various potential sources the mineral assemblages of the
sediments and the sources can be useful The Heceta Head littoral cell is differentiated from the neighboring
cells by its orthopyroxene to clinopyroxene ratio of about 1:1. Of the rivers entering the cell, only the
Umpqua has a similar ratio, indicating that it is the major source of sediment for the cell A slight increase
in the ratio around the mouth of the Siuslaw River shows that it contributes minor amounts of material
Coos Bay, in contrast, seems to be a sediment sink, trapping marine sands as well as fluvial sediments.
(Peterson pers. com., Chesser and Peterson 1987)
1.12 The surface sediments of the Umpqua ZSF are dearly differentiated between the native sediments and
the disposed dredge material The native sediments are moderately to well sorted fine sand (0.19 to 0.125
mm). Within the disposal site the sediment is medium sand, with an average mean grain size of 033 mm,
B-4
-------
Table B-l
Umpqua River Dredging History
Quantities Dredged
Year Total Entrance Bar Year
Quantities Dredged
Total Entrance Bar
1968
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
103,400
305,000
80,200
178,400
122,950
124,950
161^71
470,005
450,700
275,750
539,200
35,600
97,000
13,000
18,100
500
62300
175,851
244,795
220,970
92,800
180,000
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
486,272
587,050
262323
494321
216,705
399,150
290,451
334,230
407,184
266,188
313,632
217,850
209,891
264,410
135,950
161,441
139,813
94,946
152^69
263,118
Total 6,556,000
21 year average 312,190
3,094336
147349
and a range of variation from 0.26mm and 0.40 mm. The transition between the native and dredge sediments
appears to be abrupt. For native sediments, there may be a slight tendency for fining with increased depth.
1.13 Two sediment sampling surveys using the same stations were conducted in September 1984 and
January 1985. Figure B-3 shows the location of the sampling sites in relation to the Umpqua ZSF (zone of
siting feasability). Change in the grab size was not consistent within the ZSF. Thirteen of the 18 stations
outside of the disposal site showed a decrease in grain size, while 4 of the 6 disposal site stations increased in
grain size. For the most part the change in grain size was inconsequential, with 11 of the external stations
showing a change less than or equal to 0.1 phi. Only two changed more than 03 phi. Within the disposal
site the change was usually greater. Two stations increased by more that 035 phi Increase in grain size
outside the disposal site was located in the deeper half of the ZSF adjacent to the site. In no case did a
change in grain size bring the sediment outside the disposal site as close as 0.6 phi to the dredge material.
From this information it is not possible to infer movement of dredge material from the disposal site.
Conversely, blanketting of the disposal site by native sediments does not seen to have occurred. The material
dumped at the offshore disposal site is dredged from the outer channel bar and the entrance of the Umpqua
River. Samples taken from these areas in January, 1979, had median grain sizes of 030 mm and 0225 mm.
This is coarser than the native offshore sediment, a difference that is, as noted above, also seen in the
offshore disposal area.
TABLE B-2
Umpqua River Entrance Samples
Sample Date D50 D90 %Fines
A
B
2/81
4/85
030
0225
Note: Grain size given in millimeters.
B-5
-------
EXAMPLE OF BENTHIC AND SEDIMENT
SAMPLING SCHEMES
LEGEND
DISPOSAL SITE
MLW
SAMPLING SITES
Figure B-3
Umpqua ZSF and Sample Locations
B-6
-------
TABLE B-3
Umpqua Offshore Sediment Samples
Site Mz DSO D90 % fines Date
ur-1
ur-1
ur-3
ur-4
ur-5
ur-6
ul-1
ul-2
ul-3
ul-4
ul-5
ul-6
u2-l
u2-2
u2-3
u2-4
u2-5
u2-6
u3-l
u3-2
u3-3
u3-4
u3-5
u3-6
ur-1
ur-2
ur-3
ur-4
ur-5
ur-6
ul-1
ul-2
ul-3
ul-4
ul-5
ul-6
u2-l
u2-2
u2-3
u2-4
u2-5
u2-6
u3-l
u3-2
u3-3
u3-4
u3-5
u3-6
0.16
0.16
0.16
021
0.17
0.16
0.19
0.19
0.17
0.14
0.18
0.17
033
028
034
035
031
028
0.18
0.18
0.17
0.125
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.15
0.15
0.18
0.16
0.17
0.18
0.16
0.16
0.15
0.15
0.17
03
028
030
034
035
034
0.18
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
020
0.16
0.15
0.19
0.19
0.18
0.13
0.18
0.18
034
026
035
038
031
025
0.18
0.18
0.16
0.13
0.16
0.15
0.16
0.15
0.16
0.18
0.17
0.18
0.17
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.17
031
028
031
034
034
035
0.18
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
022
022
021
032
0.23
0205
025
0245
024
0.17
024
023
050
0.41
052
055
0.48
036
025
025
024
0.16
022
022
0225
025
022
026
028
022
025
0205
021
0225
022
026
0.44
038
0.40
057
054
0.49
023
0225
0205
020
020
020
1 3 Sept 1984
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
1
6
1
4
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
9
1
1
2 - 27 Jan 1985
3
3
2
1
2
1
3
1
4
7
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
2
2
2
2
Note: Mean grain size (Mz) calculated using Folk and Ward's (1954) parameters. Grain
size given in millimeters.
B-7
-------
Conditions in the ZSF
1.14 Bedrock is not exposed within the Umpqua River study area. However, the geologic map of the
Reedsport Quadrangle (Beaulieu and Hughes, 1975) indicates that the study area is underlain by the
Flournoy Formation of middle Eocene age, which consists of rhythmically bedded hard sandstone and
siltstone. The sub-bottom profiles indicate these layers dip to the west beneath the study area. No faults
have been mapped or projected into the study area from onshore mapping. Clarke and others (1981)
recognized three acoustic units separated by unconformities in seismic reflection profiles across the
continental shelf of Oregon. They are, in order of increasing age, Pleistocene deposits (Unit 1), late Miocene
to late Pliocene Unit 2), and Eocene to middle Miocene (Unit 3). The offshore mapping of Clarke and
others (1981) extends to within three miles of the ZSF. By extrapolation, it appears that Unit 1 overlies Unit
3 in the study area. A breached anticline trending N12W can be projected into the western edge of the study
area. No faults identified in either onshore or offshore mapping are projected into the ZSF. (From USACE
1986)
1.15 The ocean bed in the vicinity of the Umpqua ZSF is characterized by a bulging outward of the
bathymetric contours in front of the mouth of the Umpqua River, and an otherwise featureless slope that
increases from the north to the south. A mile and a half north of the Umpqua's mouth the average slope is
about 75 ft/mile between the 24 ft and 156 ft contours. Two miles south of the entrance the slope has
increased to about 90 ft/mile. The slope also shows a general increase with distance offshore. The bulge in
front of the mouth is evident to a depth of 130 ft, after which the contours are straight. The disposal site is
centered on the crest of the bulge.
1.16 Six bathymetric surveys were made between 1979 and 1985. Based on these surveys 4 profiles were
constructed for each of the dates and compared to observe changes through time. Three of the profiles were
oriented downslope, one over the bulge and one each to the north and south. The forth profile crossed the
bulge at right angles to the other profiles. Figure B-4 shows the location of the profiles. Most of the changes
noted occurred after 1982. There was little net change along the north profile between 1979 and 1985. The
south profile, however, showed net aggradation over its entire length of 1 to 4 feet. The bulge showed the
greatest change, showing a maximum aggradation of 6 feet. The aggradation was evident from a depth of 66
ft down to the end of the profile. The cross sectional p'rofile showed the greatest increase at the highest part
of the profile. The correspondence between the depth of the aggradation of the bulge and the nearshore
edge of the disposal site, plus the centering of the accumulation points towards disposal as being the cause of
the aggradation of the bulge. The bulge itself is probably the ebb delta of the Umpqua River. The cause of
the aggradation south of the mouth is uncertain. The absence of aggradation prior to 1982 has not been
explained. In all probability it is the result of a combination of factors, including the amount of material
disposed, the discharge from the Umpqua, and the wave climate between 1979 and 1982.
1.17 Figure B-5 shows the results of the 1984 sidescan sonar survey of the Umpqua ZSF. The area
surveyed by sidescan sonar is primarily fine sand. Sand waves were observed extending from a couple of
thousand feet north of the Umpqua's mouth to about a mile south, and to a depth of about 48 feet. A thin
band of what is interpreted as "coarse sand/or gravel" is found both north and south of the mouth. No
samples have been taken from these bands to confirm the interpretation, and the band may instead be sand
dollar beds.
B-8
-------
I
A
S
I
WAVE HEIGHT (M.)
2 9 486
00 1984
1977
LEGEND *°
1ZZ2 DISPOSAL SITE
E3S3MLW
-------
WJ
a
APPROACHES TO THE
UMPOUA RIVER
-------
1.18 Figure B-6 shows two seismic profiles which cross the study area from ENE to WSW, essentially
parallel with the slope. The layer of unconsolidated sediment is quite thick, varying between 120 to over ISO
feet thick. About halfway down to bedrock there is an intermediate reflector. This layer may represent a
temporary change in the depositional environment, a thin layer of denser material such as ash, or
overconsolidation of sediments by dessication during a low stand of sea level The bedrock surface is fairly
irregular.
OCEANOGRAPHIC PROCESSES
Coastal Circulation
2.1 Coastal circulation near the Umpqua ZSF is directly influenced by large-scale regional currents and
weather patterns in the northwestern Pacific Ocean. During winter strong low pressure systems with winds
and waves predominantly from the southwest contribute to strong northward currents. During the summer,
high pressure systems dominate and waves and winds are commonly from the north. In both seasons there
are short-term fluctuations related to local wind, tidal and bathymetric effects. Along the Oregon coast there
is a southerly wind in summer which creates a mass transport of water offshore resulting in upwelling of
bottom water nearshore. Figure B-7 shows the predominant Oregon coastal circulation.
Ocean Waves and Tide
22 Ocean waves arriving at Umpqua are generated by distant storms and by local winds. Distant storms
produce waves that arrive at the coast as swell which are fairly uniform in height, period and direction. The
longer period swells generated by more distant storms approach generally from the NW-W or W-SW sectors.
Longest period swell generally occurs during autumn while shortest sea and swell periods occur during the
summer. Local winds produce seas which contain a mixture of wave heights, periods and directions.
Generally, local seas have higher waves and shorter periods than incoming swell. Local seas generally
approach the coastline from the SW-S sectors during autumn and winter but from the N-NW sectors in
spring and summer.
23 Wave hindcast predictions from meteorological records from 1956-1975 near Umpqua are presented as
a wave rose Diagram in Figure B-4. Sixty-six percent of waves are from within 22 1/2 degrees of due west
with 41 percent of the waves over 3 meters high. Only 7 percent of waves are from the southwest but all are
over 3 meters high. Waves from the northwest occur 26 percent of the time with only 5 percent over 3
meters high. The larger waves are usually from the west-southwest and occur during winter months.
2.4 Superimposed upon the slowing-varying regional or seasonal circulation are periodic currents due to the
tides which are very important nearshore. Tidal currents are rotary currents that change direction following
the period of the tide. Thus the tidal currents generally flood and ebb twice daily. Direction and speed of
nearshore tidal currents is highly variable. Tidal current speeds have been measured at lightships along the
Pacific coast and reported by NOAA (1986). Hancock, et al (1984), Nelson, et al (1984) and Sollitt, et al
(1984) summarize current meter data offshore of Coos Bay between May 1979 and March 1983. These
reports substantiate the influence of tides on nearshore bottom currents. Bottom current records were found
to be dominated by tidal influence with the maximum velocities associated with tides, including spring tide
effects. These tidal influences were additive to currents produced by surface waves and winds. One station
closest to the estuary was noticeably affected by the ebb current
B-ll
-------
LEGEND
UMPQUA RIVER PROFILE NUMBER 1
ELEVATION DATUM IS MLLW
FROM FATHOMETER RECORDINGS
LOCATION BY PORTLAND DISTRICT.
COE
NOTES ON BEDROCK QEOLOOY:
Bedrock protMbty consist! of the Noumoy
Formation - rhythmically bedded hard sandstone
and slltstone (middle Eocene).
INSTANCE M FEET
Figure B-6
Seismic Profiles
LEGEND
UMPOUA RIVER PROFILE NUMBER 2
ELEVATION DATUM IS MLLW
FROM FATHOMETER RECORDINGS
LOCATION BY PORTLAND DISTRICT,
COE
NOTES ON BEDROCK GEOLOGY:
Bedrock probably consists of UM Floumoy
Formation - rhythmically bedded hard sanditont
and tinstone (middle Eocana).
B-12
-------
SUMMER CIRCULATION
NORTH
WINTER CIRCULATION
Figure B-7
Oregon Coastal Circulation
B-13
-------
Local Processes
25 The Umpqua ocean disposal site is within 1 mile of the estuary entrance. The Umpqua River has the
second largest drainage basin on the Oregon coast after the Rogue River and the third largest estuary. The
Minimum and maximum flows presented in table B-4 indicate the highly variable in river flow. This
constantly varying river outflow combines with tidal flows to produce a highly variable influence on the
nearshore circulation. In the estuarine part of the river, the ebbing tide adds to the normal river discharge to
produce a net ebb dominance. The Umpqua shows little or no longterm accumulation of fine sediments in
the estuary and net bypassing of sand-size sediments into the ocean. Table B-4 lists important characteristics
of the study area.
TABLE B-4
Physical Characteristics of the Umpqua River
Drainage Basin Area (sq. mi.) 5042
Estuary Surface Area (fT2) 2.9 x KT8
Mean Tide Range (ft.) 5.1
Diurnal Tide Range (ft.) 6.9
Mean Tidal Prism (ft"3) 12 x 10*8
Diurnal Tidal Prism (fT3) 16 x 1(T8
Minimum Annual Flow (cfs) 1200 (September)
Maximum Annual Flow (cfs) 18300 (January)
Mean Annual Flow (cfs) 8£00
Extreme Discharge (cfs) 265,000 (1964)
Mean Hydrgraphic Ratio (HR) 9
Maximum Hydrographic Ratio (HR) 46
2.6 The numbers in table B-4 are from Percy, et al (1974), OSU (1971) and Johnson (1972). The
Hydrographic Ratio is the tidal prism volume divided by the mean river discharge for a six hour period.
Peterson, et al (1984) use the Hydrographic Ratio to compare the tidal prism with .the river discharge for the
same six hour period. The tidal prism is estimated as the volume of water brought into the estuary by each
flood tide. The six hour river discharge is estimated from the annual average discharge. The higher the HR
the more tidally dominated the estuary. For comparison Table B-4 lists two values for HR. The maximum
HR only occurs during extreme low summer riverflows. The variation in HR shows that the Umpqua
probably discharges sediment on an Annual basis, but may trap marine sands during the summer months.
Site Monitoring at Umpqua
2.7 Current meters were deployed near the Umpqua ocean disposal site in 1985 and 1986. The meters
were attached to moorings at depths from 78 to 95 feet. Bottom current records were obtained from April
12-May 9 and from July 11-August 14 in 1985 and March 27-May 5 in 1986. These periods were picked to
represent typical winter and summer conditions, however, the transition to summer conditions can begin as
early as April Figures B-8 and B-9 shows the daily average bottom current speed and direction for summer
and winter records.
B-14
-------
Figure B-8
Current Velocity for 1985
B-15
-------
Figure B-9
Current Velocity for 1986
B-16
-------
In the current rose, each bar represents the direction the current is moving toward. The length of the bar
represents the percent of occurrence of the current in that direction, ie., the longer the bar, the more
prelevant the current in that direction. The width of the bar represents the range of velocity, ie., the thicker
the bar, the faster the current
2.8 Summer currents in 1985 were more frequently to the north, but the strongest currents were to the
south. There were minimal onshore-offshore currents. Bottom currents in winter 1985 had a strong offshore
component and were frequently southward. During winter 1986 there were two meters at different depths.
The shallow site had currents that were predominantly southward and offshore. The deeper site had currents
that were predominantly southward and onshore. None of the winter records in 1985 or 1986 had a
significant northward component
2.9 There are several sources of wave data for Umpqua. Wave records near the ocean disposal site were
obtained by OSU from March 17-30 and from July 12-24 in 1985 and from March 28-April 3 in 1986. Wave
records were obtained by Scripps from May 1984 to June 1985 near the site at a depth of -130 feet. Wave
data from Coquille for 1985 and wavemeter data from Newport from 1971-81 are also available for
comparison. Figure B-10 shows the 10-year average monthly significant wave height from Newport
. compared with monthly averages for both Umpqua and Coquille. The monthly average at Umpqua is pretty
consistently above Coquille and the 20-year Yaquina averages. The Umpqua and Coquille monthly averages
show the same low in January and high in March of 1985. The daily histogram shows how variable wave
height can be with peaks occasionally exceeding the monthly average.
2.10 Detailed current measurements have been obtained from another study conducted at Coos Bay,
Oregon. Seasonal measurements made over two-week periods showed currents at the 25-m-deep disposal site
averaged between 20 and130 cm/s at one-third the water depth during the summer and between 30 and 60
cm/s during the winter and spring. Near-bottom currents were generally between 10 and 20 cm/s with
downslope flow components predominating over upslope components. Near-bottom waters exhibited
downslope movement to depths in excess of 40 m during the summer and deeper than 70 m during the
winter. Similar conditions are expected to exist at the interim Umpqua disposal site since both sites are in
similar depth regimes. *
B-17
-------
SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT
MEAN MONTHLY
i
a UMPQUA SBI
« VAOUINA rasi
aa.o
SIQ. WAVE HEIGHT 4 MRS
AT UMPQUA JUL.V 1
ia.o
1O.O
.o
a.o
e.e
m i n i mmnmmiiiir
ai aa
aa a*
DAW OP1 JUUV
i« ar
o.o
Figure B-10
Seasonal Waves for Coquille, Yaquina, Umpqua
B-18
-------
SEDIMENT TRANSPORT
The Littoral System
3.1 At the Umpqua dredging project there is a need to locate an offshore disposal site to prevent the
dredged material from returning to the entrance channel. This requires knowledge about the direction and
rate of longshore transport as well as onshore/offshore transport. Sediment movement in the littoral zone
consists of two mechanisms depending upon the size of the sediment. Anything finer than sand size is
carried in suspension in the water and is relatively quickly removed far offshore. The almost total lack of
silts and clays within the Umpqua ZSF attests to the efficiency of this mechanism. Sediments sand size or
coarser may be occasionally suspended by wave action near the bottom, and are moved by bottom currents
or directly as bedload. Tidal, wind and wave forces contribute to generating bottom currents which act in
relation to the sediment grain size and water depth to produce sediment transport.
32 Hallermeier (1981) defined two zones of sand transport based on wave conditions. The inner littoral
zone is the area of significant year-round alongshore and onshore-offshore transport by breaking waves. The
outer shoal zone is affected by wave conditions regularly enough to cause significant onshore-offshore
transport. Using Hallermeier (1981) and longterm wave data from Newport (Creech, 1981) the limit for
strong longshore transport varies from -28 feet in summer to -51 feet in winter. Significant onshore-offshore
transport occurs to depths of -83 feet in summer and to -268 feet in winter. Hancock, et al (1984) calculated
the probability for wave-induced current velocities at various depths off Coos Bay. From other studies, a
critical velocity of 20 cm/sec has been shown necessary to erode sediment in the 0.2 mm sand size, common
off the Oregon Coast. Using the Coos Bay data the probability of wave-induced sand movement is very
small beyond a depth of about 150 feet. Various sedimentologic studies have suggested an offshore limit of
modern sand movement at the 60 foot depth, while others push this limit out to over 100 feet.
Umpqua Littoral Cell
33 Figure B-2 shows the Umpqua Littoral Cell which extends approximately 90 km north from Cape
Arago to Heceta Head. The Umpqua is the dominant river entering this littoral cell, with an estimated
400,000 cubic yards of sand contributed annually (Karlin, 1980). Mineral assemblages of the Umpqua River
correlates with the littoral sand mineralogies as well as terrace deposits within the littoral cell (Peterson,
personal communication). This indicates that the primary source of sand within the cell has historically been
from the Umpqua. Figure B-ll represents the type of litteral sediment transport system present at Umpqua.
3.4 The beach and dune area was described by Dicken (1961) as "in a state of near stability", whereas
Cooper (1958) describes the dune complex around the mouth of the Umpqua as undergoing very slow
erosion. Using erosion rates for similar shorelines in Lincoln County (Smith, 1978) would result in less than
a foot of erosion per year but almost 400,000 cubic yards per year along the entire littoral cell. This is
comparable to the potential sediment supplied by the Umpqua, not to mention any Siuslaw sedimentation.
Table B-5 identifies the possible sources and losses of littoral sediments in the littoral cell:
TABLE B-5
Sources and Losses in the Littoral Cell
Sources Losses
1. Rivers 1. Coos Bay
Umpqua 2, Dune Growth
Siuslaw 3. Headland Bypassing
2. Erosion 4. Offshore Transport
Dunes 5. Ocean Disposal
Terraces
Seacliffs
3. Headland Bypassing
4. Onshore Transport
B-19
-------
OFFSHORE^
OCEAN
DISPOSAL
STREAMBANK
EROSIO
RIVER
DISCHARGE
ESTUARY
SEDIMENTATION
RIP
CURRENTS
WAVES
LITTORAL
SEDIMENT TRANSPORT
HEADLAND
Figure B-ll
Littoral System
B-20
-------
Umpqua Sediment Transport
3.5 Although the Umpqua River delivers a large sediment load, the bottom contours suggest a rapid
distribution away from the river mouth. The beaches seem to be in equilibrium suggesting that littoral
transport is in balance. From the bottom current records, there appears to be a slight bias in transport to
the south year-round, with some northward transport in summer only. This is also mentioned by Cooper
(1958) as a factor causing the more massive sand dunes to occur south of the Umpqua. Peterson (personal
communication) describes Umpqua sediment as dominant throughout the offshore indicating transport in
both directions.
3.6 The OSU wave records were analysis for direction as well as period and significant height. The wave
data and current data together with grain size and depth were used to compute a predicted sediment
transport amount and direction. These were summed over the period of record and are shown on figure
B-12. From 18-30 March, 1985, the predicted transport was 22 cubic meters to the north-northwest and 12
cubic meters to the south-southwest. From 28 March to 3 April, 1986, the predicted transport was 10 cubic
meters to the southwest. Very little transport (0.5 cubic meters) occurred from 7-11 July, 1985 to the
northwest. The length of vector, on figure B-12, is proportional to the quantity of transport.
3.7 Figure B-12 illustrates the probable sediment transport in the Umpqua ZSF. There is probably a net
southward transport north of the jetties out over 30 foot depth which causes the entrance shoal at the north
jetty. This southward transport shifts farther offshore south of the jetties, being influenced by the tidal
discharges of the Umpqua River. Nearshore transport to the south is toward the south jetty. The interim
disposal site is influenced by the tidal/river current, being inline with teh channel The adjusted site, to the
north, should be away from these southern trending currents. Consequently, any sediment transport from the
adjusted site should be to the north or offshore.
B-21
-------
SUMMER
WINTER
180'
LEGEND
DISPOSAL SITE
MLW
Figure B-12
Sediment Transport at Umpqua
B-22
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Baldwin, E. M., 1981. Geology of Oregon. Kendall/Hunt, Debuque, Iowa. 170 p.
Baldwin, E. M., and Beaulieu, J. D. 1973. Geology and Mineral Resources of Coos County, Oregon: Oregon
Dept. GeoL Min. Ind. Bull 80. 82 p.
Beaulieu J. D. and Hughes, 1976. Land Use Geology of Western Coos County, Oregon: Oregon Dept. GeoL
Min. Ind. Bull 90.148 p.
Beaulieu, J. D., Hughes, P. W., and Mathiot, R. K., 1974. Geologic Hazards Inventory of the Oregon Coastal
Zone. Oregon Dept. GeoL Min. Ind. Misc. Paper 17. 94 p.
Boggs, S. and Jones, C. A-, 1976. Seasonal Reversal of Flood-tide Dominant sediment Transport in a Small
Oregon Estuary. GeoL Soc. Am. BulL v. 87, pp 419-426.
Byrne, J. V. 1963, Geomorphology of the Oregon Continental Terrace south of Coos Bay: Ore Bin v 25 pp
149-157.
Chesser, S. A., and Peterson, C. D., 1987, Littoral cells of the Pacific Northwest coast (in) Kraus, N. C. (ed)
Coastal Zone '87 Proceedings. ASCE. New York, pp 1346-1360.
Cooper, W.S, 1958, Coastal Sand Dunes of Oregon and Washington. GSA Mem. 72, 169p.
Creech, C, 1981. Nearshore wave climatology, Yaquina Bay, Oregon (1971-1981). OSU Sea Grant
Program Rep. ORESU-T-81-002; NOAA- 82060305 submitted to National Oceanic and Atmospherics
Admin., Rockville, Md. Oregon State Univ., Corvallis, Or.
Dicken, S.N., 1961. Some Recent Physical Changes of the Oregon Coast.
Dott, R. H. Jr., 1971. Geology of the Southwest Oregon Coast West of the 124th Meridian: Oregon Dept.
GeoL Mini Ind. BulL 69, 63 p.
Grey, J. J., and Kulm, L. D. 1985. Mineral Resources Map; Offshore Oregon: Oregon Dept. Geol Min. Ind.
Geol Map Series 37.
Hallermeier, R. J., 1981. Seaward Limit of Significant Sand Transport by Waves. CETA 81-2,
USACE/CERC, 23 p.
Hancock, D.R., Nelson, P.O., Soffit, CJC and Williamson, KJ., 1981. Coos Bay Offshore Disposal Site
Investigation Interim Report, Phase 1, February 1979-March 1980. Report to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Portland District, Portland, Ore., under contract not DACW57-79-C0040, Oregon State University, Corvallis,
Or.
Johnson, J.W., 1972. Tidal Inlets on the California, Oregon and Washington Coasts. Hyd. Eng. Lab. Pub.
HEL 24-12, UC Berkely, Ca.
Karlin, R., 1980. Sediment sources and clay mineral distributions off the Oregon coast, Jour. Sed. Pet, v50, n
2, pp543-560.
Kulm, LD., 1977. Coastal morphology and geology of the ocean bottom-the Oregon region, (in) Draus,
(ed.) Marine Plant Biomass of the Pacific Northwest Coast, pp 9-36.
Kulm, LD., Scheidegger, KJ% Byrne, J.V. and Spigai, J J, 1968. A preliminary investigation of the heavy
mineral suites of the coastal rivers and beaches of Oregon and Northern California. Ore Bin v. 30, p
165-184.
Nelson, P.O., Sollit, CJC, Williamson, KJ. and Hancock D.R., 1983. Coos Bay Offshore Disposal Site
Investigation interim Report, Phase n-HI, April 1980-June 1981. Report to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
B-23
-------
Portland District, Portland, Ore., under contract not DACW57-79-C0040, Oregon State University, Corvallis,
Or.
Oregon State University, 1971, Oceanography of the Nearshore Coastal Waters of the Pacific Northwest
Relating to Possible Pollution, Vol. 1, Chapter 4, Glenne and Adams, p 24.
Percy, K.L, Sutterlin, C., Bella, DA^ KUngeman P.C., 1974. Description and Information Sources for
Oregon Estuaries. Sea Grant/ Oregon State University, Corvallis, 294 p.
Peterson, C.D., Scheidegger, W., Nem, W, and Komar, PJX, 1984. Sediemnt compostion and hydrography in
6 high gradient estuaries of the Northwest United States. Jour. Sed. Pet. v. 56 pp 86-97.
Ramp, L., 1973. Metalic mineral resources, (in) Baldwin, E.M., and Beaulieu, J.D. (eds.) Geology and
Mineral Resources of Coos County, Oregon: Oregon Dept. Geol. Min. Ind. Bull. 80, pp 41-62.
Runge, E J., 1966. Continental Shelf Sediments, Columbia River to Cape Blanco, Oregon. Unpub. PhD
thesis, Oregon State Univ. 143 p.
Smith, E.C., 1978, Determination of coastal changes in Lincoln County, Oregon, using aerial photographic
interpretation. MS Thesis, OSU Dept of Geography, Corvallis, Oregon, 29p.
Sollit, CJC, Nelson, P.O., Williamson, KJ. and Hancock, D.R., 1984. Coos Bay Offshore Disposal Site
Investigation Final Report,Report to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District, Portland, Ore., under
contract no. DACW57-79-C0040, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Or.
Stembridge, J.E., 1976. Recent Shoreline Changes of the Oregon Coast: National Technical Information
Service (AD AO4 8436), Springfield, Va., 46 pp.
Strub, P.T. Allen, J.S., Huyer, A-, Smith, Rl., and Beardsley, R.C., 1987. Seasonal cycles of currents,
temperatures, winds and sea level over die Northeast Pacific continental shelf; 3SN to 48N: Journal of
Geophysical Research, v. 92, n. c2, pp 1507-1526.
U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, North Pacific Division, 1971. National Shoreline Study, Inventory Report
Columbia North Pacific Region, Washington and Oregon, 80 p.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District 1975. Chetco, Coquille and Rogue Estuaries, Final
Environmental Impact Statement Portland Oregon.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District, 1978. Chetco River Hopper Dredge Scheduling Analysis.
Portland Oregon
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District, 1986. Geologic and Seismic Investigations of Oregon
Offshore Disposal Sites. Prtland Oregon.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service and Oregon Coastal Conservation and
Development Commision, 1975. Beaches and Dunes of the Oregon Coast. 141 p.
B-24
-------
, APPENDIX C
-------
APPENDIX C
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Paragraph Page
1.1 General C-l
2.1 Sediment and Water Quality of Umpqua Sands C-6
3.1 Quality of Fine Sediments C-18
32 Bioassays C-18
3.1 Physical/Chemical Testing C-20
Bibliography C-24
LIST OF TABLES
Table
C-l Location of Sampling Sites C-6
C-2 Water Quality Data, Umpqua River C-7
C-3 Volatile Solids in Dredged Material C-7
C-4 Volatile Solids in Disposal Site C-7
C-5 Volatile Solids in Reference Transects C-8
C-6 Dissolved Chemicals in Native Water & Elutriates C-9
C-7 Dissolved Insecticides and Herbicides C-9
C-8 Total Recoverable Chemicals in
Bottom Material C-10
C-9 Total Recoverable Insecticides and Herbicides C-10
C-10 Physical Characteristics of Sediments
In Winchester Bay C-22
C-ll Concentrations of Metals and Elutriates
from Winchester Bay C-23
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
C-l Columbia River Entrance Channel and ODMDS C-2
C-2 Coos Bay Sample Station Locations C-4
C-3 Coos Bay ODMDS: Disposal Site
Sediment Characteristics C-5
C-4 Sediment Sampling Stations Umpqua ODMDS C-ll
C-5 Gradation Curves, Winchester Bay 1980 C-12
C-6 Gradation Curves, Umpqua River 1980 C-12
C-7 Gradation Curves, Umpqua River 1980 C-13
C-8-
C-15 Gradation Curves, Umpqua ODMDS C-14/18
C-16 Location of Sampling Sites C-19
C-17 Sediment Quality Stations ; C-21
-------
APPENDIX C
SEDIMENT AND WATER QUALITY
General
1.1 General criterion (b) and specific factors 4, 9, and 10 of 40 CFR 228.5 and 228.6 require sediment and
water quality analyses indicative of both the dredging areas and disposal sites. Dredged materials placed in
interim-designated ODMDS along the Oregon coast usually consist of medium to fine sands taken from
entrance bar shoals and deposited on slightly finer continental shelf sands. Disposed sediments at Umpqua
are similar in grain size to those at the disposal site. Because of their coarse nature, similarity to ODMDS
sediments, isolation from known existing or historical contaminant sources, and the presence of strong
hydraulic regimes, dredged sands from entrance bar shoals meet criteria for exemption from further testing
according to provisions of 40 CFR 227.13(b). Some data are available from navigation channel sands and
fines in the Umpqua estuary, however, and are presented in this appendix. Also, some chemical tests have
been run in the past and are compared with water and sediment quality impacts associated with disposal of
sands and silts at ODMDS for the two largest Oregon coastal navigation projects, the Mouth of the
Columbia River (MCR) and Coos Bay. If fine sediments are ocean disposed at Umpqua, available data will
need to be reviewed and possibly supplemented with additional chemical or biological testing to evaluate such
an action.
12 The MCR project was one of the Aquatic Disposal Field Investigations conducted as part of the
Dredged Material Research Program (DMRP) in the mid-1970's (Boone et al. 1978, Holton et al. 1978).
The DMRP was a nationwide program conducted by the Corps of Engineers to evaluate environmental
impacts of dredging and dredged material disposal. The MCR studies included work at an experimental
ODMDS, site G, located south of the MCR channel at an average depth of 85 feet. Figure C-l shows the
Columbia River Entrance and the disposal sites. Following baseline physical, chemical, and biological
characterizations of the site, a test dumping operation disposed of 600,000 cubic yards of medium to fine
sands (median grain diameter = 0.18 mm) during July - August 1975. Sediments at the disposal site were a
fine to very fine sand (median gram diameter = 0.11-0.15 mm).
13 Monitoring results indicated a mound of slightly coarser sediment within the site that gradually mixed
with ambient sediments and dissipated over several months. Water quality monitoring during disposal
showed no elevation of toxic heavy metals, including Cu, Zn, Cd, and Pb, with some nontoric elevation of Fe
and Mn. Nutrient fluctuations were associated primarily with tidal variations, as were chlorophyll and
paniculate organic carbon. Dissolved oxygen remained high throughout disposal operations. Sediment quality
remained high, with slight but nontoxic increases in Pb (from 2 to 4 mg/kg) and Hg (from 0.008 to 0.05
rag/kg) recorded before and after disposal at area G. Oil & grease values in the sediments decreased
slightly after disposal, while there were no elevations in ammonia. The authors concluded that there were no
adverse impacts in terms of water/sediment quality or toxicity from disposal of MCR sands at area G. They
attributed fluctuations in tested variables primarily to sediment and suspended paniculate input from the
Columbia River, biological activity and processes, and laboratory difficulties associated with repeated
measurements close to analytical detection limits.
1.4 An evaluation of areas offshore of Coos Bay was conducted under Corps contract by Oregon State '
University researchers persuant to designation of a new ODMDS for fine grain sediments from upper Coos
Bay and Isthmus Slough (Hancock et aL 1984, Nelson et at 1984, Sollitt et aL 1984, U.SA.C.E. Portland
District 1984). The program, conducted in five phases during 1980-1984, included baseline physical,
biological, and chemical surveys of offshore areas followed by selection of candidate sites and a test
dump/monitoring study at proposed site H. Figure C-2 shows the location of the Coos Bay sample stations.
This site was subsequently designated by EPA as the final site for fine Coos Bay sediments (51 FR 29927 -
29931, dated 21 August 1986).
C-l
-------
so-
«6«IO
123*40'
Columbia Rivtr tntrane* ehonntl and OOMOS, including experimental
disposal site G (From Boone et al. 1978).
Figure C-l
Columbia River Channel Entrance and ODMDS
C-2
-------
1.5 The dump/monitoring program at site H consisted of disposal of 60,000 cubic yards of fine sediments
from Isthmus Slough, accompanied by water quality and benthic monitoring during disposal operations and
followed by post-disposal monitoring of the site and adjacent areas over the next 18 months. Elevations in
ammonia, Cu, and Mn were observed during disposal that in some cases were at the threshold of acute
toritity. However, these elevations were of short duration. No substantial elevations of other contaminants
or changes in dissolved oxygen, oxy-redox potential, turbidity, or pH were observed. Sediments at the site
showed elevated levels of volatile solids, fines, and heavy metals that gradually decreased over the next 18
months. Figure C-3 shows the results of the chemical test results. Total volatile solids was found to be the
most sensitive and reproducible indicator of levels of contaminants and its use was suggested as a mentoring
tool to utilize during further disposal operations at site H.
C-3
-------
OFFSHORE
AREA G
Gl
Coos Bay sample station locations for chemical.
biological, and physical studies at interimdesignated and
candidate ODMDS (From U.S.A.C.E. Portland District 1984).
Figure C-2
Coos Bay Sample Site Locations
C-4
-------
i1
en
I
1
8
B'
2
s
v%
n
B*
A
ff
-a
c
o
cr>
JC
o
a
_Q
o
CO
o
a.
09
a
o
a.
ce
tu
CJ
2
O
<_)
UJ
LJ
Qi
6 -
5 -
4 -
3 -
2 -
0.0
TIME (Years)
1.5
Coos Boy OOMOS: Recovery of selected sediment chemical parameters
at disposal site-samples containing dredged materials (From Sollitt et al. 1984).
-------
Sediment and Water Quality of Umpqua Sands
2.1 Sediment samples from the main channel of the Umpqua Federal navigation project were collected by
the Portland District, Corps of Engineers in October of 1980 as part of a coastal evaluation of authorized
federal navigation channels. The offshore disposal site at Umpqua was sampled in January, 1985. Locations
of these sampling stations are given in figure C-4 and table C-l.
Table C-l
Location of Sampling Sites at Umpqua
Site Site Collection Site Location
No. Designation Date Latitude Longitude Remarks
1 Umpqua RM 0.0 10-29-80 4y40'09" * 124°12'ir
2 Winchester Bay 10-28-80 43P40'58" 124°11'02" mouth/boat
basin.
3 Umpqua RM 2.4 10-28-80 4? 4131" 124>10'15"
4 Umpqua RM 2.6 10-28-80 43'41'38" 124>10'00"
5 Umpqua RM 2.8 10-28-80 4?41'45" Wf09'49"
2.2 Physical sediment, bulk sediment, and elutriate analyses were performed on the samples for several
organic and inorganic parameters. Details of the sampling, lab analysis and procedures can be found in U.S.
Geological Survey open file report 82-922. A summary of results of tests from that publication appears in the
following sections.
23 Basic water quality parameters were taken in the field during collections of sediment samples. Results
of the field measurements, collected with an automated multi-parameter water quality analyzer, are given in
table C-2. Measurements reported in the table were taken at Umpqua River mile (RM) 0.0, which is
immediately inshore of the disposal site. The water quality parameters fall within the normal ranges
expected for near shore ocean waters off the Oregon Coast.
2.4 Dredged materials deposited at the ODMDS come from the entrance bar, entrance to the Winchester
boat basin, and in the main river channel up to RM 3. The grain size distribution curves for Umpqua River
sediments from these areas show well-sorted fine sands with median grain sizes between 0.2 and 03 mm
(figures C-5 - C-7). Disposal site sediments are also well-sorted fine sands with median grain size
approximately 03 mm (figures C-8 and C-9). Thus, Umpqua dredged sediments are very similar to
sediments at the ODMDS.
25 The percentage of volatile solids in the Umpqua River channel (table C-3) are within the range
exhibited by offshore sediments. The percentages of volatile solids in the disposal site sediment samples,
however, are all less than 0.8 (table C-4), which are less than those in reference transects (table C-5). The
difference in volatile solids is probably related to the coarser gram size of the sediments at the disposal site
and those dredged from the channel
C-6
-------
Table C-2
Water Quality Data, Umpqua River
River Mile 0.0 0.0
Parameter
Depth S B
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/1) 1032 *
Conductivity (mmho/cm) 533 53.6
Salinity (g/1) 35.2 35.4
ORP 207 207
Temperature (*C) 12.7 12.7
pH 8.01 8.02
Turbidity (ntu) 0.7 0.4
Time 1022 1027
Fathometer reading 45
2.6 Sediments from both the channel and the disposal site are similar to those from reference areas (figures
C-10 - C-15). Sediment and elutriate analyses showed sediments dredged from the channel to be clean sand,
well within the background range expected at Umpqua (tables C-4 - C-7). Therefore, there should be no
problem with designation of the offshore site for continued disposal of these sediments.
Table C-3
Volatile Solids in Dredged Material
Sample # Date Location % Volatile Solids
2
3
5
Octl980
Octl980
Octl980
mouth of boat basin
R.M. 2.4
RM.2&
1.44
137
1.73
Table C-4
Volatile Solids in Disposal Site
Sample # Date % Volatile Solids
U-2-1 Jan 1985 0.6
U-2-2 Jan 1985 0.7
U-2-3 Jan 1985 0.4
U-2-4 Jan 1985 0.7
U-2-5 Jan 1985 0.8
U-2-6 Jan 1985 0.7
C-7
-------
Table C-5
Volatile Solids in Reference Transects
Sample # Date % Volatile Solids
UR-1 Jan 1985 1.1
UR-2 Jan 1985 1.4
UR-3 Jan 1985 15
UR-4 Jan 1985 1.0
UR-5 Jan 1985 13
UR-6 Jan 1985 13
U-l-1 Jan 1985 1.5
U-l-2 Jan 1985 1.4
U-l-3 Jan 1985 L2
U-l-4 Jan 1985 13
U-l-5 Jan 1985 2.2
U-l-6 Jan 1985 1.2
U-3-1 Jan 1985 1.1
U-3-2 Jan 1985 1.0
U-3-3 Jan 1985 13
U-3-4 Jan 1985 12
U-3-5 Jan 1985 13
U-3-6 Jan 1985 13
C-8
-------
Table C-6
Dissolved Chemicals in Native Water and Elutriates
!> Tire n r mime, irrti »<, coccst ICBITIVE tsTunlit »«rt>. ki-iiTKt IUIIHIUIE «ITEI. ir-iirnt ri»« »it£k. tk-c:uT>l«tt
VIVH t:.:im*is₯. rfitrfc. Kb- i:uiTkUTF *IT« KUMTNILINH HATEI. EP'KLiiTkiiTE dim rni:sH inck, IN-IOTTW.I Aittkin. viu iiuNbi:* FJLLUV
Titi n.i LICIT VJDL iipicifr:::: ran UTTfE *i?Kk 3ANPLI:::. TIK suNaci or JIHPLES uiLizKii HE PUI ELUVMIITES. Tut: ktuptCTivi: HIIIYI.
»1TEI. IILUE3 -' IIBIC1TE TNIT 1 CHtKIOL ulLiac; 112 Uu? Htl HUE.)
I
t
t SITU
0. DE3CI1PTIOI
CIPIIDI
(UC/l
19 CO)
CIIOIIUI COPPII
(UC/L (UC/L
19 ci) i: CB)
iioi ma
(UC/L l
PO.U1
uupgui
ro«i
pgit
pg«i
UHP3II1
pgBt
HllPlfll
UHPgUt
yp.i- jHi
IP
I
ITII
!
H
I
l>
in
IB
m
in
|H
kn
!
H
0.
7.
1
2.
2.
2.
t.
t.
t .
t.
t.
7.
7.
4
a
».
*
10
1 1
1 1.
0
ft
t
4
t
a
2
1
4
)
5
a
(
i
7
I
t
»
4
4
El
'"
III
HI
III
HI
HI
HI
112
III
HI
III
HI
«r.2
HI
«2
112
««»
IC2
III
IO/29/aO
io/io/ao
10/H/aO
10/28/10
io/2a/ao
lo/ia/to
IO/2B/M C
io/ia/to
10/21/10
10/19/00
io/2»/ao
to/it/ao
io/11/ae
10/JO/tO
10/JO/tO
IO/J9/00
14/JO/M
lo/w/ao
10/JO/M
lo/jo/ao
110
50
110
I TO
I TO
ITO
00
100
to
0
110
100
210
to
to <
to
TO
to
SO
no
<
>0
JO
220
to
>0
10
1*0
140
110
TO
I JO
470
10
l>0
40
I too
ISO
JO
20
40
10
JO
JO
40
to
to
10
JO
10
10
JO
JO
JO
10
N
20
10
0.0*
O.lt
O.I
0.0*
0.04
0.11
O.OT
1.4
O.J7
0.0>
Table C-7
Dissolved Insecticides and Herbicides in Native Water and Elutriates
(POI Tin OP I1HPII. IIPII TO COilli IfllTMl UTI1IIII I4TII, Ifltf nitl4LIII >TII. IP-IITIII Hill I1TII. ll-ll»TII«tl
IT! IITI1IIII H4TII. II- IHTII4TI HIT! IIIII4LIII »tll. It-ILITIUTI Kltl PUSH »(!. M-MTTOI UlTIIItk. ?» HHIII POtlOlllO
TII no naiT con iniciTiii roi I«THI HITII IXPLII. tn iiini or inpiu 41111111 n» POI IIITIIITH, TIS IMUCTIII IIIIIQ
1TII. ItUlI '--' III1C1TI TUT * CIU1C1L tlltlHS 141 lOt (HI lull.)
I
T
I
10.
IT!
I3CIIPTIOI
(M/l)
MI-
Tltll
(10/1)
Itll-
TOII
ITI1-
Illl
(ll/l)
CIMI-
III
(I/I)
(/t)
eini-
liii
»»k III lit
i-
ILPIII
IIDO-
aBLPK
(gc/i)
OQV1 III
NUt
0.0
7.1
fDIICIMTII III
pgui in 5.1
t »p«»l I.I
BOgBl ! t.l
a Hpg»i t.t
7.a
T.a
II 10/lf/OO
12 lo/jo/ao
HI lo/ta/ao
HI io/ii/ao c.oi
HI io/ia/ao c.oi
in io/ii/ao c.oi
in 10/M/ao c.oi
112
III
IO/1T/00
IO/2T/00
4.1
4.1
c.oi c.oi c.ot
c.oi c.oi c.oi
C.OI C.OI C.OI
C.OI C.OI C.OI
(.01
4.OI
9ITI
ICSCIIPTIOI
»IM»1
pgui
>p
IICII9TII
pgn
IP«B1
pgBi
MP4BI
upgui
pg«i
m
m
o.o
T.a
in
f.i
i.i
t.t
f.i
T.a
T.a
i
Kl
'"
HI
112
HI
112
III
HI
III
null
(K/L)
i.Ot
C.OI
..
C.OI
C.OI
C .01
C.OI
C.OI
i.'fll
urn-
CILOI
(0/1)
C.OI
C.OI
C.OI
i.OI
c .01
C.OI
C.OI
C.OI
IPT1-
CILOI
1 POI III
(IC/l)
i.OI
C.OI
..
C.OI
C.OI
C.OI
C.OI
C.OI
until
C.OI
C.OI
..
C.OI
C.OI
C.OI
C.OI
C.OI
ITI-
011-
CILOI
(I/I)
C.OI
4.01
4.01
C.OI
4.01
C.OI
C.OI
LIIC9.
1111 PCI POLI- PII-
CILOI. Illll
c
c
c
c
c
c
4
.Ol i.l i .1 i .1
.01 C.I C.I C.I
*. -
.01 C.I C.I C.I
.01 C.I C.I C.I
.01 dl C.I C.I
.01 C.I C.I C.I
.01 C.I C.I C.I
noil- PIOII-
TOBE TI1II
(UO/L) (US/I)
C.I i.l
C.I C.I
.1 C.I
.1 C.I
.1 C.I
.1 c.t
C.I C.I
C.I C.I
PIO-
HIIIl
(KC/l)
C.I
C.I
C. I
C.I
C.I
C.I
C.I
C-9
-------
Table C-8
Total Recoverable Chemicals in Bottom Material
'roi TTPI or stiPLE itrci TO CODISI »>I*TI«I ismiiiii »«TEI, I»*IITI«E imrmuiE »>TII, IF-IITKI run «»ni. EE-EIUTIIATE
ITU CSTU1I1IC «iT«i. C«- ELUTIIITC HIT! EtlllltLIlE ltd. U'ELUTIIITE Vim Ml!M iTEI. II-IOTTOI 4i»IUL. TIC IU.ICI rOllO.HS
Tit T»0 DIGIT CODE UDlCATta, rOI IITIII Kttll 91IPLES. Til IUIIII Or 3HPLE9 lIUlSEt »l» » IUTIUTE3. Till ICSPSCIIKl I1IIIC
«ITEI. »LOE3 - '-- IIQIC1TE TUT I CIEIIC1L ilUISES Hi IOT llt« kkOE.J
It
0.
SITI
DISC 11 PT 101
fltEIlC
(oe/c)
HUM
(08/8)
IIIIl-
UM
(a/a)
citiini
(a/a)
ciio- corrii
!«
(uc/o) («o/a)
CItlllE
(a/a)
1101 Lilt
(00/8) (io/a>
tat
(iic/a)
5.2 H IO/H/M
a uipggi 11 «.t u 10/29/10
9 uirgui ii 7.1 H io/19/ao
II IIPO» II 1.7 II 10/JO/BO
12 oipgat u 9.1 io/29/ao
it iipgii u 11.4 H lo/jo/ao
5
10
10
10
I)
l»
I]
7
10
It
I) 10
7700 10 lib
9100 10 99
7500 IO tl
DOOO 10 110
9200 10 200
7>00
< 0.0 .
II 0.0
21 0.0
i
1
10
4
19
I to
117
100
1)0
JIO
no
JTO
410
J40
410
410
Table C-9
Total Recoverable Insecticides and Herbicides in Bottom Material
[PHI TIPE or lurii. Km TO eo»iii IITIII H»»'III »ITU. »! Kitiiiui MTU. ir-iiTiii PIEI» «»TII. »>IL»IUTI
IT. C1T«II» «>T». (I- CLITIIITI KIT! CVIIII1III KITH. IP-IUTIKTI KITI Mill «. ILIOTTOI UlTKItL. TIE »« rOLLO»IU
Tit T«0 II8IT COM IIMC1TE3I POI IITItl «! IHPLtl. Til IMIII OP IKPKI IIKIKI Hi rul SlBT«l«TtS. THE ItSrECTlII HI1IIC
«TEI. KLUII . -- IIIIC4TC TUT t CIEIIC1L tlltllM US IOT IIBI I1IK.)
a
I
T
c
9.
J1TI
DE9CIIPTIOI
CIIOI- H. EIK>- IIPT4- KPti-
ILHII HIE HI HE III IUIII lULril IIU1I CllOl CILOI LlltAlt
(N/BO) (/(«> (N/IO) («/!) (>e/i8) (ii/io) (e/ie) («o/ie) (oo/ta) luc/ic)
* mrgai n t.t
I OMPOBJ II 4.5
9 ipgill II 7.9
11 upgvi u 0.7
II 9.1
It »Peil II 11.4
M 10/II/M
III IO/29/4M)
U IO/29/*0
IS IO/1O/4W
H 10/29/M
U IO/JO/00
O.I
O.I
O.I
I
I
f
I
0.
lITt
ISICIIPTIOI
m. ton-
OEI- IIIIE KI NI rn. linn run
CILOI Till!
(/HM/II) (/!) (II/IO (II/II) IM/II) («8/H) IIO/II) III/II) (/«)
1,4-1 2.4.5-T 2.4-IP
4
o ir«it ii «
1 iir«» u i
u iiro.it. ii o
u iron ii 9
it iipgii u 11.4 u
41
41
Cl
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
C-10
-------
a
y S3
" £2
o
0
CO
60
90
30
180
UMPQUA RIVER ZSF
SEDIMENT SAMPLING SITES
-------
104
U.S. StMAAJB MVt OMMHC M MOW U.I fTAWMD MVtI MUM
1 »h I « HH 4 « ILOUI»»»0«01070»OOI40MO
to
0
70
*°
5-0
ao
10
M
o_
MO
100 10
£S_
HfOtOM
1
Mouth of I
9>t B««in
SAND 1ST]
nivea/coASTM. smniBiT ANALYSIS
6
A
Ch«nn«l V
of Boat >
it in«id«
in
Si. SAND
-------
O
0,3
Bff
KlVtK/COA3TAL SEDDtOTT ANALYSIS
U.S.C.S.
»> U»pqu« Riv.r
-------
foorlv Cradad SAMP (»P>
GRADATION CURVES
Figure C-8
Gradation Curves
lit RM
tat *
8"
8
c
§M
i.
r
g
-
-
-
--
-
«« Vim*
» 1* t
-
-
-
-
*
-
f
/
.....
Kt
» 4 < tit 1
'
...
-
-
*
BSMWH
4U
MB M M
.
U-2-4
O
O
MWII
« M » M m i
* "nl 1
v !J I
i
Ni
nl
«
\
1
1
\\
\
\
\
I
\
\\
\\\
1 ^
* *
<
-------
Ul-l
riam SAHD (8P)
UI-2
a
o
Fin* SAND (SP)
Vol«
.1
1.4
TT
CBIEUC OCBM DISKMAL SITES
»7 J«o 85
GRADATION CURVES
MM)
» MAT 8 BBS (85-8H-7M)
Figure C-10
Gradation Curves
CKMIWIC OCCAM OlirOUL.SIT||
Figure C-ll
Gradation Curves
C-15
-------
Figure C-12
Gradation Curves
lit n
4T
HIM
M U>
t
n
IMCUI
..It-US _
rim SARD
-------
M » OUfHO MM WMUI
4 1 IK MM » » «0 » H »
Pin* SAND
VoL tiU 8 >11
-------
Quality of Fine Sediments
3.1 Fine sediments from the Federal portion of the Winchester Bay boat basin navigation channel have
undergone both biological (Ecological Analysts, Inc. 1981) and chemical (USAGE Portland District,
unpublished data 1987) testing to evaluate potential for toxicity effects at the ODMDS. Test results are
described below.
Bioassays
32 liquid, suspended particulate, and solid phase bioassays and bioaccumulation tests were conducted under
contract to USAGE Portland District by Ecological Analysts, Inc., during April - August 1981. Surface
sediments were collected by Ponar grab from five locations in the Salmon Harbor and Winchester Bay boat
basins (Figure C-16). A single composite of the 5 stations was used as the test sediment, as agreed to
between CoE Portland District and EPA Region 10. Reference sediments were collected from 3 stations
immediately inshore of the interim-designated ODMDS. Test species included:
Liquid and suspended particulate phases:
Calanus pacifica -- copepod
Crangon franciscorum -- bay shrimp
Parophrys vetulus juvenile English sole
Solid phase:
Rhepaxynius abronius burrowing amphipod
Macoma inequinata filter-feeding infaunal bivalve
Abarenicola pacifica deposit-feeding polychaete
Bioaccumulation: A. pacifica
33 The liquid and suspended particulate tests were conducted for % hours under static, aerated conditions.
Significant mortality occurred for C. franciscorum exposed to 100% liquid phase test sediments. Survival
percentages were: reference control, 85%; liquid phase test, 45%; and suspended particulate phase test, 82%
survival The report authors attributed this mortality to lack of food for test animals in the liquid phase,
which is filtered, rather than contaminant effects. It was estimated that "the limiting permissible
concentration (LPC) of the liquid phase after initial mixing at the disposal site would not be exceeded." No
other mortality was observed in these two phases.
3.4 Significant mortality was observed in flow-through 10-day solid phase tests for R. abronius. Reference
survival was 91% while test sediment survival was 69%, averaged over the 20 replicates run for each
condition. Net decrease in survival was, therefore, 22%. The report authors attributed the mortality to a
combination of contaminants and physical incompatibility of the fine grained test sediments, since R.
abronius prefers sandy substrates. No other significant solid phase mortality occurred. In the A. pacifica
bioaccumulation tests, tissue accumulation showed no significant elevations of any contaminants tested when
compared between dredging site and reference sediments.
C-18
-------
Umpqu* Blv«r
Figure C-16
Locations of the Dredge Material sampling sites at Winchester Bay, Oregon.
C-19
-------
Physical/Chemical Testing
3.5 Sediment physical and chemical analyses were completed in July 1987 for samples from 12 stations in the
two Winchester Bay boat basins (Figure C-17). Results showed a mixture of sediment types with coarser
sediments located near the basin entrances and fine sediments inside (Table C-10). Some of the fine
sediments have high organic and clay content, with several stations showing ranges of 7 -15% organics and 8
- 24% days. Coarse sediment areas are presently dredged annually with disposal in a nearby dispersive
estuarine in-water site.
3.6 Bulk and elutriate chemical analysis results showed that sediments do not have high contaminant levels
(Table C-ll). The mercury value for WB-12, in the west basin, was somewhat elevated at 0.134 ug/g.
However, toxicity effects for mercury at this level would not be expected at the recommended ODMDS.
Chromium values for all samples were high, with a range of 36.5 - 752 ug/g, but showed no relationship with
sediment type or proximity to moorage areas. Some Oregon estuaries have high background chromium levels
and these data indicate a similar phenomenon at Umpqua. The same samples and composites were analyzed
for organic contaminants, including pesticides, PCBs, and PAHs. None were detected in any samples.
3.7 While bioassay results indicated some potential for Winchester Bay sediments to cause mortality at the
ODMDS, later testing results showed a lack of high contaminant levels in the Federal channel. Some of the
original bioassays had to be rerun because of excessive reference and control mortality (Ecological Analysts,
Inc. 1981). Therefore, mortality could have been caused by several factors related to test conditions as well
as contaminants. Considering the dispersive nature of any location within the Umpqua ZSF for fine
sediments, toxicity effects would not be expected from ocean disposal of Winchester Bay sediments.
C-20
-------
Figure C-17
Station Locations for 1987 Sediment Quality survey at Winchester Bay, Oregon
C-21
-------
Table C-10
Physical Characteristics of Sediments Collected
July 1987 at Winchester Bay, Umpqua Estuary
Sample Sofl % % %(1) D50 Organic %(2)
No. Class. Gravel Sand Fines (mm) Content Clay
1 Sand 3.5 95.5 1.1 027 1.9 -(3)
2 Sand 0 953 4.7 0.17 4.5
3 Sandy Silt 0 30.0 70.0 0.031 13.4 15.1
4 Sandy Silt 0 17.5 815 0.050 6.9 7.7
5 Sand 0 95.7 43 025 1.6
6 Silt 0 8.6 91.4 0.013 11.7 23.9
7 Sand 0 99.7 03 020 1.4
8 Sand 0 95.7 43 0.16 42
9 Sandy Silt 0 32.5 67.5 0.032 15.0 122
10 SUt 0 133 86.7 0.015 9.9 20.5
11 SiltySand 0 60.7 293 0.14 42 123
12 SiltySand 0 62.7 373 0.12 5.5 11.0
Notes: (1) Silt/Clay <62u grain diameter
(2) Clays <4.5u grain diameter, day content based on material suspended at end of hydrometer
analysis.
(3) Clay not estimated due to insufficeint quantity of fines for a hydrometer analysis
C-22
-------
Table C-ll
Concentrations of Metals and Elutriates in Sediments
from Winchester Bay, Umpqua Estuary
Concentrations of Metals in Sediments Digested by EPA Method 3050
for Umpqua ug/g Dry Weight (Fe in %)
Supl*
Hg A» Cd
Cr
Cu
f« Ha
HI
Zn
UB-34A coop 0.079 8.6 0.23 61.4 35.3 2.90 222 70.4 7.65 70
WB-5 0.064 5.6 0.17 47.9 27.4 2.48 187 57.6 6.25 62
WB-6r.pl 0.062 8.6 0.19 66.1 39.2 3.36 267 ; 75.4 9.13 84
VB-4 r«p 2 0.079 6.6 0.20 63.6 39.2 3.26 252 60.5 7.76 66
VB-9610 camp 0.074 7.4 0.22 59.3 37.2 3.08 227 70.4 7.42 74
VB-11 0.044 5.1 0.14 34.5 23.5 2.02 135 40.2. 4.55 52
VB-12 0.134 7.6 0.14 75.2 47.1 3.50 232 U.O 8.64 90
pH and Concentrations of Metals and Aononia in Recieving Waters
Seavater and Sediment Elutriates
for Umpqua ug/1 (except NH(3) in ag/1)
Supl*
Hg A*
Cd
Cr
Cu
HI
Pb
Zn Nll(3) pM
Ufi Receiving W«t«r 0.0006 1.5 O.OS7 0.17 0.70 12.0 4.31 1.77 0.43 5.89 0.13 7.45
UB-4 eiiiirUt* r«|»l O.0011 14.5 0.006 0.31 0.31 164.0 1640.0 S.I* O.22 1.19 i.SJ 7.SI
UB-6 EluirUtu r«ji2 0.0012 IS.9 0.001 0.2J 0.2} SI9.0 2040.0 4.72 0.01 O.il 6.52 7.52
Ui-11 ElucrlaM 0.0011 5.9 0.007 0.38 0.38 104.0 305.0 1.85 0.19 1.32 1.70 7.78
C-23
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ecological Analysts, Inc. 1981. A technical evaluation of potential environmental impacts of proposed ocean
disposal of dredged material at Winchester Bay, Oregon. USAGE Portland District contract report,
Ecological Analysts, Inc., Concord, CA.
Fuhrer, GJ. and FA. Rinella. 1982. Analysis of elutriates, native water, and bottom material in selected
rivers and estuaries in western Oregon and Washington. U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 82-922.
Hancock, D.R., P.O. Nelson, C.K. Sollitt, and KJ. Williamson. 1984. Coos Bay offshore disposal site
investigation, interim report, Phase I. Oregon State University contract report. U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Portland District, Portland, OR.
Holton, R.L., NJH. Cutshall, L.I. Gordon, and L.F. Small 1978. Aquatic disposal field investigations,
Columbia River disposal site, Oregon: Appendix B: Water column, primary productivity and sediment
studies. DMRP Technical Report D-77-30. Environmental Laboratory, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways
Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. S3 pp. + appendices.
Nelson, P.O., CJC Sollitt, KJ. Williamson, and D.R. Hancock. 1984. Coos Bay offshore disposal site
investigation, interim report, Phases II, ID. Oregon State University contract report. U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Portland District, Portland, OR.
Sollitt, C.K., D.R. Hancock, and P.O. Nelson. 1984. Coos Bay offshore disposal site investigation, final
report, Phases IV, V. Oregon State University contract report. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland
District, Portland, OR. 355 pp. + appendices.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District. 1984. Coos Bay offshore disposal site investigation,
summary. U.S.A.C.O.E^ Portland District, Portland, OR. 31 pp.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District. 1980. Findings of Compliance and Non-compliance,
Operations and Maintenance, Dredged Material Disposal Activities at Coastal Projects. U.S A.C.O.E.,
Portland District, Portland, OR.
C-24
-------
, APPENDIX D
-------
APPENDIX D
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Paragraph Page
1.0 General D-l
2.0 Recreational Use Areas D-l
3.0 Impacts of Disposal Operations D-3
4.0 Conclusion D-3
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
D-l Recreational Use Areas D-2
-------
APPENDIX D
RECREATIONAL RESOURCES
General
1.1 This section identifies the major recreational use areas within the zone of Siting Feasability (ZSF) at the
mouth of the Umpqua River. Figure D-l shows the ZSF in relation to the Umpqua River. The information
was compiled to determine the potential impacts of disposal operations on recreation.
Recreational Use Areas
2.1 All ocean frontage within the ZSF is publicly owned, making this area popular with recreationists.
Figure D-l shows the major recreational use areas located within the ZSF. The Umpqua River and its
associated offshore waters are known as one of the best salmon fishing areas along the Pacific Coast
Although the area receives recreational use year-round, the most popular months are from May through
September. Preliminary activities include fishing, camping, beachcombing, off reading and sightseeing.
22 The coastal land north of the Umpqua River is part of the Oregon Dunes National Recreational Area.
This portion of the Oregon Dunes has limited access and has no developed recreational facilities. The beach
is open year round to motorized vehicles and off reading is a popular activity. The dune area behind the
beach is popular among hikers who enjoy a more primitive hiking experience.
23 Directly south of the Umpqua River is public land administered by Douglas County. Camping and
Picnic facilities are provided for public use. In addition, the county maintains a road which parallels the
beach and provides access to the Umpqua Lighthouse State Park and sand dunes within the ODNRA (
Oregon Dunes National Recreation Area ). All of the recreation facilities at the state park are located
inland away from the ZSF beach front.
2.4 Oregon Dunes NRA borders the state land and continues south along the coast to Coos bay. There are
no developed recreational facilities in the ODNRA within the ZSF boundary. Unlike the beach area in the
nothern half of the ZSF, the entire length of the beach in the southern half of the ZSF is dosed to motorized
vehicles. The most common activities occuring in this portion of the ZSF are fishing, beachcombing,
sightseeing and hiking. The southern portion of the Oregon Dunes NRA has developed access, thus receives
much higher public use than the area north of the river.
25 The Umpqua River jetty fishery is well known and accounts for a high number of angler use days. The
south jetty is the principle fishing area because of the easy access. A popular place for fishing and crabing
the entrance channel is off the old U.S. Coast Guard pier on the south side of the channel Peak months of
activity on the jetties are June, July and August Most crabs are taken from the main channel by individuals
in boats, although some are taken directly off the U.S.C.G. pier. The most popular months for crabing are
June through September.
2.6 Salmon fishing is the most popular type of offshore recreation. Both private and charter boats fish the
waters throughout the western third of the ZSF. A well known area lies just beyond the mouth of the river,
where salmon fishing is productive. Bottom fishing is also popular but is limited to areas outside the ZSF.
Sport angling occurs primarily during summer months when salmon are feeding nearshore before begining
the fall spawning migrations.
D-l
-------
Oregon Dunes NRA
Primatlve Recreation
Jetty Fishing
as County
Park
Lighthouse
State Park
Major Salmon F1sh1
Limited Shore
Oregon Dunes
NRA
Figure D-l
Recreational Use Areas
D-2
-------
Impacts of Disposal Operation
3.1 The disposal site identified on the map is located within a major salmon fishing area and is directly
adjacent to one of the most popular and productive salmon fishing sites offshore of the Umpqua River.
However, few conflicts are expected to occur between fisherman and disposal operations as long as the
dumping of dredged material is restricted to the northeast corner of the dump site. Any conflicts between
disposal operations and recreationists would occur as the vessel was in route to the disposal site. These
conflicts could include time delays for recreational boaters caused by the passing of the dredge, an increase
in navigation hazards during congested periods and disruption of fishing activity as the dredge passed through
popular fishing areas. Most of these conflicts could be considered an inconvenience rather than a threat to
the recreational activity. The only serious threat is the potential for collision between recreational boaters
and dredge traffic. Confrontations of this type are rare because the dredge moves at a slow speed. Unless
there is significant change in equipment or operational proceedures, the potential for collisions will remain
low.
32 ' When the dredged material is deposited at the disposal site the surrounding turbidity will increase. This
would result in reduced visual quality of the area and could possibly disrupt the feeding patterns of sport fish.
Both of these situations would be temporary and normal conditions would return as soon as the disposed
material settles.
33 Sediment deposition along the beach is another possible consequence of disposal operations that could
affect recreational activity. The accumulation of dredged material on the beaches could potentially interfere
with the free movement of sand which may affect the vegetative cover or modify the local topography. If the
slope of the beach is altered significantly, it could interfere with the accumulation of driftwood and other
items of interest to beachcombers. Another potential problem with beach nourishment is the accumulation
of foreign material on the beach. If the dredge material had a different color or texture than the existing
material, the results could be a reduction in the visual quality of the area.
Conclusion
4.1 Continued use of the current disposal site should have little impact on existing recreation. During
disposal operations, water turbidity will increase. Any impact this may have on recreational fishing or visual
quality of the area will only be temporary. Some inconveniences will be experianced by recreational boaters
and fishermen, but overall disposal operations appear to cause no serious threat to recreation.
42 If future studies indicate the disposal operations are either detrimental to ocean fauna or disrupt
sediment deposition along the coast line, further information should be collected to determine more
specifically what extent the impacts have on recreation. However, until any of these impacts are observed,
future disposal of dredged material at the present site is not expected to have any substantial effects on
recreation.
D-3
-------
, APPENDIX E
-------
APPENDIX E
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Paragraph Page
1.1 Introduction E-l
1.2 Study Area E-l
2.1 Prehistoric Sites E-l
3.0 Historical Cultural Resources E-4
3.2 Maritime Fur Trade E-4
3.10 Settlement Period E-5
3.14 Cultural Resources E-6
4.0 Shipwrecks of the Umpqua River E-6
4.1 Test of Shipwreck Locational Model E-6
4.8 Shipwreck Locational Model E-9
4.13 Uses of the Model E-10
4.16 Project Site Evaluation E-ll
References ( E-13
LIST OF TABLES
Table
E-l Shipwrecks of the Umpqua River E-7
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
E-l Umpqua River Entrance in 1887 E-12
E-2 Shipwreck Frequencies E-4
-------
APPENDIX E
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Introduction
1.1 The cultural resource statement for the Umpqua ODMDS is organized in the following manner.
Prehistoric cultural resource potential is reviewed and evaluated first. Then follows a brief discussion of the
areas historic settlement and development highlighting the major themes. This description is sketched with
an emphasis on ocean going vessels and their use in exploration, trade with the Indians, settlement and
development of the region. Following this section is a statement on shipwrecks as cultural resources, a Table
listing the shipwrecks of the Umpqua vicinity and project area with a comment on the wrecks. A Shipwreck
Locational Model is discussed next and used to evaluate the site for unreported wrecks. The report
concludes with the results of the evaluation and a side scan sonar study (field investigation) of the proposed
Umpqua Disposal Site.
Study Area
1.2 The Umpqua Study area incompasses an area of 1.5 nautical miles in radius with its center point at the
entrance of the Umpqua River. This area is considered the zone of siting feasibility (ZSF), and is
determined by the economic haul distance of the current dredges. Within this area is located the interim
disposal site, and the adjusted disposal site. The interim disposal site is 1500 yards (east-west) x 500 yards
(north-south); its SW corner is located approximately 2000 yards west of the end of the North Jetty.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Prehistoric Sites
2.1 Analysis of the prehistoric cultural resource potential suggests two possibilities: (1) Sites from the early
colonization of the "new world" by the antecedents of the American Indians and (2); sites or artifacts
reflecting the procurement of food resources by more recent Indians in the shallow near-shore environments.
22 The initial colonization of the North American continent is thought to have occurred during the last
phases of the Pleistocene. During the terminal phases of the Pleistocene, approximately 12,000 to 60,000
years ago, sea levels ranged from 60 meters to 300 meters lower than there present position, a consequence
of the glacial phases of the Pleistocene. Lowering of the sea level left a broad exposed coastal plain which in
many places extended miles beyond the present coastline. Archeologists concerned with the problem of the
arrival of humans in the North American continent point to a coastal route as a likely path for these early
migrants. (Fladmark, 1983:12-41) It is possible that some of the earliest prehistoric sites maybe present on
the seabed within the nearshore environment of the Oregon coastline.
23 In order to initiate an offshore survey for early prehistoric sites, the following criteria should be met:
(1) early prehistoric sites should be present within a reasonable distance of the project area.
Presence of early sites on land would at least give some basis for suspecting their presence in an
offshore area.
(2) The study area should contain or be likely contain undisturbed sediments from this time period.
Though some reviewers consider the possibility of site survival low as the sea advanced to its present
elevation and shoreline (Aikens, 1984:70) there are scattered examples of inundated sites that have
with stood the high energy of heavy surf and waves. (Cressman,1977:%20:48;179).
(3) the survey area should be within an area that would have been exposed during the expected time
frame of the initial colonization of the North American continent
2.4 (1) Review of site information for the Umpqua area does not include sites older than 4000 years,
although a site estimated at 7000 years or more is located on the Rogue River, on the southern Oregon
E-l
-------
Coast line. (Ross, 1986). These sites though of considerable antiquity still post date the end of the
Pleistocene rise in sea-leveL (2) Historic information indicates that the project area (the disposal site) is
within a high energy, erosional area. An 1887 chart of the area shows depths averaging between 50 and 60
feet (y.S.C.G.S.,1887), while more recent surveys indicate depths of 90 to 120 feet (figure E-l). The
disparity in depths suggests that substantial erosion of the area has occurred since the jetty's stabilized the
channel and the Umpqua River outlet. And (3) though the seafloor within the project site would have been
exposed 18,000 years ago (U.SA.C.E., 1987:E-3), its likely that (given (2)) these depths are recent, and are
not relic surfaces from 18,000 years ago. Consequently, the conditions for early sites are not present within
the study area.
2^ The probability is also remote that there are more recent prehistoric sites in the study area. Evidence
gathered from archaeological sites located on coastal shorelines indicates that prehistoric Native Americans
occupying the Oregon Coast line concentrated their subsistence activities within the estuaries and the near
shore ocean environments. There is little evidence that these Indians engaged in an offshore fishery. Within
the Umpqua estuary a prehistoric archeological site, the Umpqua-Eden, provides evidence of this use. Bone
fishhooks, harpoons, and barbs from fishing spears, and a netweight were recovered during testing. Faunal
remains from the site included "whale, stellar sea lion, harbor seal, and sea otter, while fishes included
salmon and starry flounder...SheUfish...made up a large percentage of the midden deposit itself." (Aikens,
1984:74, citing Ross and Snyder 1979). Unlike the Indians of the northwest Washington and some further
north, the Indians of the Oregon coastline did not hunt whales. The presence of whale remains in
archeological sites are likely from scavenged beached whales. (Lewis and Clark,
1969:(3):309)
2.6 A number of places occupied by the historic lower Umpqua Indians are present within the estuary.
Closest to the project area are two sites in the Winchester Bay vicinity. One of the sites is reported in
Winchester Bay and the other near the outlet in the vicinity of the lighthouse. (Dorsey, 1890:231)
E-2
-------
w
I
1
- ;*" ..--.;
--- -"-
UMPQUAH RIVER ENTRANCE
-------
2.7 The lower Umpqua Indians participated in a resource procurement strategy which emphasized the same
resources as those recovered in the Umpqua-Eden Site. These included clams, flounder, mussels, chitons,
barnacles, crabs, and salmon caught in fixed fish traps, weirs, where the fish were speared, clubbed or netted
(Beckham, 1986:28); whales were also scavenged when they drifted onto the beaches (Beckham,1986:28 citing
Frachtenberg, 1914)
2.8 It is very unlikely that prehistoric sites of more recent periods, (4000BP) or from the
ethnographic/historic period are present within the project area. Subsistence activities within the study area
were limited to procurement, and would not produce archeological deposits. It is possible that fishhooks,
stone weights, and other non perishable elements of a near-shore procurement technology are present.
HISTORICAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
3.1 Two recent histories of the southern Oregon Coast have provided background for this report. Beckham
(1986) has provided the definitive history of Douglas County and the Umpqua River drainage and Douthit
(1986) has written a general narrative history of south coastal Oregon. Pertinent
background for this report are those aspects of the areas history that involve the movement of people and
goods by ocean going vessels.
Maritime fur trade
3.2 Following the exploring expeditions of Captain James A. Cook in the 1770's and the official report
published in 1784 a maritime fur trade of relatively unknown dimensions developed along the northwest coast
of North America. (Johannsen and Gates, 1957:31-3437). By the mid 1780's the coast of Oregon was visited
frequently by maritime fur traders in pursuit of sea otter and other furs. The trade for fur otter, was carried
on by sailing vessels vessels whose masters and merchants bartered European manufactured trade goods with
various coastal Indian groups. Successful traders became familiar with the coast, passages over bars into the
bays and estuaries of coastal rivers, the types of goods the Indians preferred, how to conduct the barter, and
transport of the furs to markets along the coast of mainland China.
33 The historic literature of this period, provides only a glimpse of the fur trade. The actual extent and
details of the trade are relatively obscure. The maritime fur trade was characterized by an aggressive
entrepreneurial spirit driven by potentially great profits. Each national group evolved its own separate
manner of conducting the trade though they all operated under conditions of secrecy in order to protect their
places of trade and methods from the competition. (Howay and Elliott, 1929:202)
3.4 Other factors also influenced the inherent secrecy of the trade.
Vessels under the British flag were forced by terms of government granted monopolies to the South Seas and
East Indian Trading Companies to purchase licenses and to pay royalties to the companies when they traded
for furs on the northwest coast and when they sold/bartered their furs to the
Chinese.(Johannsen and Gates, 1957:40) In order to avoid royalty payments to the Trading Companies, some
British trading vessels sailed under the flags of other nations without the benifit of trading licenses.
3.5 Absence of records was part of the operating procedures of the trade. Where documentation exists, it is
rarely detailed. The purpose of the fur trade was profit, not knowledge. The primary sources of this period,
the logs and journals of ship Captains and merchants, are the terse description of the trade with the Indians
which do not provide the comprehensive statements found in later journals of expeditions such as, Lewis and
Clark's, or others with a broader interest in the area.
3.6 Based on the above information, it is likely that wrecks of the maritime fur trade are present along the
Oregon Coast The number of vessels that participated in the fur trade is unknown. Johansen and Gates,
state that "between 1785 and 1789 sixteen British vessels" operated along the coast (Johansen and Gates,
1957:41); between, 1784-1309, at least 70 American vessels participated in the trade. (Johansen and Gates,
1957:58) They also infer the presence of unregistered vessels participating in the trade. Lewis and Clark,
discussed the trade with the Indians at the mouth of the Columbia River. The Indians provided them with
some information on twelve vessels and traders who used Baker Bay as an anchorage.(Lewis and Clark,
1969: (3)306-307) This count does not distinguish between American or British vessels, nor how long these
vessels engaged in the trade but it does indicate an active trade continuing into 1806. More detailed study of
E-4
-------
the historic record and field investigations to locate shipwrecks of the era will be necessary before an
accurate estimate of the wrecks of the fur trade can be made.
3.7 By the late 1820*8 the target animal of the fur trade in the Pacific Northwest shifted to beaver. In order
to maximize the return overland trapping brigades made up of fur hunters in the employ of fur trading
companies carried out the hunt. Between 1820's and 1850*5 the Hudson Bay Company established and
operated a major fur trading base, Fort Vancouver on the middle Columbia River. The operation also
included smaller posts. One post, Fort Umpqua, was located at the confluence of Elk Creek and the
Umpqua River. The labor of the trapping brigades was supplemented by a minor trade with the Indians.
3.8 The fur trading post, the trapping brigades, and the trade with the Indians was partially supported by
supply vessels from Company headquarters in Great Britain and by overland freight canoes from fur trade
depots in the Great Lakes region. As the trade grew the Hudson Bay Company, developed a policy requiring
the major company bases to developed their own local agricultural farms to reduced dependence on supply
vessels and expensive imported goods. An extensive fanning network was developed and operated from Fort
Vancouver. Local produce and cattle supplied the trapping brigades. Shipping was reduced mostly to
transporting furs to various markets and importing of items that could not be grown or produced at the
Forts.
3.9 American interests in the Oregon Territory continued to grow despite the presence of the Hudson Bay
Company. In 1828, the American trapper and explorer, Jedidah Smith crossed the lower Umpqua River and
camped near present day Scottsburg. The party incited the Indians over attempts to recover an ax stolen by
an Indian from one of Smith's men. The lower Umpqua's attacked the party of 22 men leaving only Smith
and two partners as survivors. The attack by the Indians initiated a period of increasing hostilities and
conflicts aggravated by growing numbers of white settlers and miners that ended in the late 1850's with the
establishment of the U.S. Army's, Fort Umpqua near the mouth of the River.(Beckham,1969) Indians from
Umpqua River, Coos Bay and the Siuslaw were kept on a reserve in the vicinity of the Fort. (Douthit,
1986:119). Sailing vessels and steamers carried supplies and personnel to man the post. One of the vessels,
the FAWN carrying supplies for the post wrecked off the Siuslaw River.(Beckham,1969) The Army's Fort
Umpqua was abandoned in the early 1860's. The Indians were moved to reservations up the coast.
Settlement Period
3.10 Settlement began along then shorelines of the Umpqua estuary during the late 1840's and 1850's. The
Klamath Exploring expedition entered the Umpqua estuary aboard the chartered schooner SAMUEL
ROBERTS. (Schofield,1916:355-357) Members of the expedition platted the settlements of Winchester,
Umpqua City, Scottsburg, and Elkton. The Expedition "explored" the Umpqua River and some of its
tributaries noting the presence of small pioneering settlements and homesteads along Elk Creek (Beckham,
1986:73).
3.11 With the platting .of the towns, settlement slowly emerged. One of the first commercial structures, The
Gardiner Mill Company, a saw mill at Gardiner, was built in 1863 from timbers salvaged from the army's
abandoned blockhouse at Fort Umpqua (Douthit, 1986:110). The local economy developed and expanded
primarily around the timber resources of the region. In addition, mining, the commercial salmon canning
industry and agricultural products provided some diversity within the regional economy. (Beckham,
1986:191-234). These products were transported to their various markets by vessels of the coastal trade. .
Numerous wrecks from this period are distributed along the Oregon Coast line.
3.12 The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers entered the history of the coast with its historic mission to promote
regional development by providing and improving the commercial navigational system. In the 1870's the
Corps of Engineers, at the urging of local concerns, attempted to improve the
navigability of the Umpqua River by removing rock obstructions from the streambed. The work was
undertaken to make it possible to operate steamboats from Scottsburg (head of tide water) to Roseburg.
However, even with these improvements the river was to swift and shallow for commercial shipping. The
next set of improvements involved the construction of the North Jetty (1930) and the South Jetty (1930) and
a 22 foot deep ship channel to Reedsport (1933). The ship channel supported the shipping of lumber from
the mills in Gardiner and Reedsport. (WiUingham, 1983:141).
E-5
-------
3.13 From the early maritime fur trade, the exploration period, the establishment of Fort Umpqua, the early
settlement period, and the period of regional development, the principal means of moving people and
commodities was by ocean going vessels. Ships, schooners and vessels of the coastal trade, carried explorers,
traders, and supplies for the settlements, the pioneer communities, the loggers and the miners of the
Umpqua region. In turn these vessels carried out the furs that were taken in trade with the Indians,
information on the areas settlement potential from the exploring expeditions, and later the goods produced in
the region: the sawn lumber, canned salmon, gold and agricultural produce of the settlement to the outside
markets.
Cultural Resources
3.14 The majority of our background research has been directed at documenting the presence of historic
cultural resources, specifically shipwrecks within the ODMDS study areas. This documentary effort forms
the essential background for evaluating potential project effects on cultural resources by defining the most
likely cultural resource(s) within the project area. Based on investigations of Ports along the Oregon Coast
including studies at the mouth of the Columbia River U.S A.C.E., 1987Oct), Yaquina Bay (U.S A.C.E.,1987
Oct), Coquille River (U.SA.C.E., 1985 April) and the Chetco River (U.SA.C.E.,1988 July) historic
shipwrecks are the most likely cultural resources present in the project area's offshore location.
3.15 A shipwreck data base has been developed from the information complied during background research.
This data base contains records of shipwrecks from each coastal project area. The data base includes
information on, vessel type, size, and cargoes. This information can be used as supporting evidence to
confirm whether a wreck site is the vessel identified as wrecked in that location.
SHIPWRECKS OF THE UMPQUA RIVER
A Test of the Shipwreck Locational Model
4.1 Shipwrecks, the tangible remains of the trade, settlement and development periods are present within
the study area. Location and study of these wrecks can provide insights into the periods of this regions
history. For some aspects of the areas history, wreck sites maybe the only form of documentation, adding
new and critical data. For others, wrecks will fill out our knowledge of the historic period informing us of
the lifeways of the recent past.
42 The Umpqua River Shipwreck Data Base covers an area extending 2 miles south, 9 miles north, and 20
miles west of the Umpqua River mouth; in addition some wrecksites in the ulterior estuary of the Umpqua
River are also included in the Data Base. Fify-one documented wrecks have occurred within this area. These
wrecks are shown on Table L
43 These wrecks have the following distribution: 28 wrecks (55 percent) have been deposited on the
beaches; 2 wrecks (3 percent) in the surf zones; 8 wrecks (16 percent) on the bar at the mouth of the
Umpqua River; 5 (10 percent) offshore; 6 (12 percent) in the Umpqua River esturary, 1 on the jetty; and 1
wreck (the OREGON, 1854) has an unknown wreck province.
E-6
-------
Table E-l
Shipwrecks of the Umpqua River
Vessels
ADMIRAL NICHOLSON
CABEB CURTIS
COLUMBIA
GLEANER
HUNTER
RALPH
SAN GABRIEL
ADEL
ALMIRA
BOBOLINK
ENTERFRICE
EVA
FEARLESS
G.C. LINDAUER
GAZELLE
LILY
LOO CHOO
LOUISE
Wreck
Dates
05/16/1924
02/20/1851
11/08/1858
12/30/1917
11/07/1902
10/05/1899
01/01/1913
02/19/1949
01/09/1852
10/77/1873
05/23/1873
11/07/1915
11/20/1889
05/16/1924
07/03/1922
10/21/1909
07/15/1855
04/14/1903
Wreck
Sites
bar
bar
bar
bar
bar
bar
bar?
bar7777
beach
beach
beach
beach .
beach
beach
beach
beach
beach
beach
Salvaged
salvaged
abandoned
salvaged
refloated
salvaged
salvaged
refloated-
refloated
abandoned
salvaged
salvaged
refloated
abandoned
abandoned
salvaged
salvaged
abandoned
refloated
TJJCY
MARY AND IDA
4/14/1903 beach
5/11/1893 beach
Refloated
refloated
Oregon!an
5/17/1924
Gibbs 1957:272,
West Vol.1
n.d.:23
West, Vol.1,
n.d.:13
West Vol.3,
n.d.:53
West Vol. 2
n.d.:13
Coos Bay Tines
02/12/1907
West Vol 1
n.d.:85
West Vol.3
n.d.:16
Port Unpqua
Courier
Marshall 1982:72
Wright 1967:42
West vol.1
n.d.:24. Wright
1967:211
West Vol.1
n.d.:23
West Vol. 3
n.d.:38
West Vol.
1,n.d.-.55-55
, Wright
1967:371
Oregonian
5/17/1924
Port Umpqua
Courier
7/7/1922,
7/28/1922
Vest Vol 2
n.d.:63
Gibbs,1957:273
Wright 1967:68
Vest Vol.2,
n.d.:15
Coos Bay Tines
2/12/1907
West Vol. 2
n.d.:15
Coos Bay Tines
2/12/1907
Vest Vol 1
n.d.:26
E-7
-------
Table E-l (cont)
Shipwrecks of the Umpqua River
Vessels
NASSAU
PEERLESS
ROANOKE
SADIE
SEA OTTER
SPARROW
TACOMA
TRUCKEE
UNA
UNA
UASHOUGAL
VASHTUCNA
UILHEMINA
ZAMPA
ALPHA
MELDON
ADEL
JUNO
MARIE JOAN
ORK
VASHTUNCA
BOSTONIAN
Wreck
Dates
Wreck
Sices
07/22/1852 beach
02/12/1882 beach
02/02/1853 beach
02/18/1906 beach
08/22/1808 beach
12/04/1875 beach
01/29/1883 beach
11/18/1897 beach
03/27/1892 beach
01/21/1893 beach
08/77/1936 beach
07/04/1922 beach
01/22/1911 beach
11/11/1891 beach
02/03/1907 beach
03/16/1873 beach/b*?
02/10/1920 interior
10/31/1906 interior
8/18/1936 Interior
interior
08/18/1922 interior
10/01/1850 interior?7
E-8
Salvaged Sources
abandoned West Vol 1
n.d.:5
Wright 1967:43
salvaged West Vol 1
n.d.:41
abandoned Wright 1967:49
West Vol 1
n.d.:6
salvaged West Vol 2
n.d.:35-36
abandoned Gibbs 1957:71,
139-140
alvaged Wright 1967:230
West Vol. 1
n.d.:31
abandoned Wright 1967:313
West vol 1
n.d. :42-43
abandoned Oregonian
11/19/1897
refloated'Coos Bay Times
2/12/1907
West Vol.1
n.d.:62
refloated West vol.1
n.d.:65
abandoned West Vol.4
n.d.:53
refloated Port Unpqua
Courier
7/7/1922,
8/18/1922
alvaged West Vol. 3
n.d.:13
Marshall 1982:75
refloated Coos Bay Tines
2/12/1907
West Vol. 1
n.d.:60
refloated Marshall.1982:73
abandoned Wright
1967:211:Marshal
1 1982:74
abandoned West Vol. 3
n.d.:61
refloated West Vol.2
n.d.:37
salvaged Port Umpqua
Courier
8/21/1936
abandoned Cibbs 1957:275
Marshall
1982:75
abandoned Port Unpqua
Courier
8/18/1922
abandoned West, n.d.:3-4
Marshall,
1982:73
-------
4.4 Forty-seven of these wrecks have occurred within the ZSF study area. (An area of 1.5 nautical miles in
radius centering on the mouth of the Umpqua River; not including the 6 interior wrecks in this sample,
limiting further statements to only those wreck sites that might be affected by the projects. Of the 41 wrecks
in the study area; 26 wrecks (55 percent) have occurred on die beaches; 2 wrecks (4 percent) in the surf
zone; 8 wrecks (17 percent) on the bar; and 3 wrecks (6 percent) offshore; and 1 of unknown province.
4.5 Further analysis of the wrecks indicates that at least 21 of these wreck have been salvaged or refloated,
leaving 23 for further study. Of these one vessel the CABEB CURTIS was reported wrecked and abandoned
on the bar. Given that the bar has been the site of jetty construction maintance dredging and increased
scouring through channelization of the current, this vessel is unlikely to have survived within the vicinity of
the bar. In addition two of
the offshore wrecks are located a substantial distance from the project area. The PHIL SHERIDAN is
reported sunk 15 miles off the mouth of the Umpqua and the FLORANCE, 20 miles off the mouth. Neither
of these wrecks is within the project area. The other three offshore wrecks are too recent to be important
cultural resources.
4.6 There are 18 potentially significant wrecks or remnants of wrecks within the Umpqua study area,
however, none of these wrecks are within the area that will be directly affected by disposal of material
dredged from the ship channel or the bar. These wrecks have the following distribution:
Beach 11 Surf Zone 2
Interior 4 Unknown 1
4.7 These wrecks range in age from the wreck of the SEA OTTER in 1808, through a group of vessels
wrecked in the 1850s, to vessels wrecked in the 1980s. Wreck sites include good preservation contexts, the
beach and surf zone. Wrecks in similar settings have include major structural elements, such as keels, frames,
cargo hold(s), and associated cargo. Discovery of these features and artifacts will provide significant
information on the fur trade, and the historic development of the Umpqua River region.
Shipwreck Locational Model
4.8 Data collected on known wrecks has been compiled and used to develop a general model predicting the
likely location of wrecks along the Oregon Coast line (Figure 1). Analyzing this information has produced
the following wreck site distributions: (1) The areas with the highest likelihood of historic wrecks are the
beaches and past surf zones. (In some cases historic surf zones can be surprisingly distant from their current
positions. In the Astoria area, the wreck sites of two vessels are considerably inland from the present surf
zone.) (2) The next most likely areas are located in the shallow near shore environments, for example the
present surf zones and in the vicinity of navigation hazards, such as reefs and areas of shoalling. (3) The
least likely areas are those beyond the nearshore environment in places of increasing water depth. The
wrecks of the Unpqua River Data Base support this distribution.
4.9 The majority of shipwrecks occur during particular seasons of the years suggesting that wreck sites are a
product of natural forces which operate on a vessel after it has been damaged, looses power and/or steerage.
The majority of shipwreck occur during the late fall-winter-early spring storm season. Research suggests that
vessels are typically damaged while approaching the entrances of river Ports and landings along beaches.
When vessels are damaged or loose power near the shoreline they are trapped by nearshore ocean currents
and pushed by the predominantly onshore winds of the late fall-winter-early spring storm period into the
coast and toward the beaches.
4.10 These causal factors also operate on that small set of special cases, the derelict vessels that drift from
their point of damage whether its along the coastal waters of Japan or along the ocean trade routes miles off
the coast. Though, the absolute number of derelict vessels cannot be determined, when these vessels appear
along the Oregon coast during the storm season, they too drift towards the shore carried by coastal ocean
currents and 'are brought into the beaches and surf zones by the on shore winds of the storm season. It is
my guess that the majority of derelicts are beached during the late-fall winter early spring storm season,
rather than being randomly distributed throughout the year. .
E-9
-------
4.11 An important element of this study is determining the probable location of undocumented wrecks.
Modeling shipwreck distributions and defining the causes is important for identifying the probable sites of
undocumented wrecks. Though it is likely that the majority of wrecks sites are reported in the historic
literature, it is certain that unidentified wreck sites are also present. The history of early exploration, fur
trade and the colonization period indicates that many vessels operated in a manner that did not always leave
documentation of there presence in a specific area. As examples: (1) Early exploring/fur trading expeditions
operated along an unknown coast line. There may have been instances where these vessels, reconnoitering
and trading on an unknown coast line, were wrecked and lost without witnesses or records. (2) In some cases
fur traders pursuing profits operated illegally in other countries territorial waters or without proper
authorization from their own countries. Little if any documentation would be available to demonstrate the
presence or loss of these vessels except the location of wrecks of this period. (3) Though infrequent, there is
some evidence of Spanish Galleons lost while on transoceanic routes from the far east to destinations along
the southern California Coast line. These where secret crossing. It is possible that wrecks of Spanish
Galleons and/or merchant ships are present along the Oregon Coast. (Beals and Steele,1981:24-26). (4)
And in some cases vessels are lost along shorelines of their own coastal areas, become delict hulks and drift
on ocean currents to foreign coastlines and beaches. For example, numberous Japanese cargo and fishing
vessels (Junks) have drifted onto the shore of the northwest coast after being damaged along the islands of
Japan. (Brooks, 1875).
4.12 Based on the locations of known wreck sites, the shipwreck model predicts a similar wreck pattern for
undocumented wreck sites. In the case of undocumented shipwrecks the model assumes that the basic
natural forces of ocean currents and winds as determined by the season are the primary causes of wreck
distributions along the Oregon Coast. This pattern is probably a constant throughout the maritime history of
the Northwest Coast.
Uses of the Model
4.13 The shipwreck model has two purposes: As a planning tool for the ODMDS projects or similar civil
works the model can be used to guide the evaluations of work areas by excluding the high probability
locations from planning studies. Used in this manner, the model can help reduce project costs by orienting
work toward low probability areas and preserve cultural resources by avoiding them. (2) In addition the
model can be used as a locational device to focus historical archeological investigations in areas where wrecks
are likely to occur, or if a researcher desires to locate wrecks with the densest level of information to areas
further offshore from the typical wreck site.
4.14 The model, however, cannot be used to avoid cultural resource investigations. Basically, the model
predicts a general shipwreck distribution within each project area, however, each place has its own unique
historic potential despite the fact that wrecks cluster on beaches and within shallow nearshore environments.
Historic Preservation Legislation acknowledges the uniqueness of historic events by requiring evaluation of all
project areas, not just the most likely areas. This requirement is important for the preservation of historical
archeological resources. For example, shipwreck events are not as frequent as many popular accounts lead
one to believe, especially when compared to the number of successful voyages.
Commercial snipping was a very successful operation with thousands of tons of goods reaching their
destinations, the benefits clearly offset the small number of vessels that were lost. For preservation values,
the absolute number of potentially significant shipwrecks is probably small
4.15 In addition, the likelihood that wrecks will be preserved and will be available for future study is not
necessarily assured. Wrecks are not only preyed upon by professional salvors, treasure hunters and pioneers
who saw wrecks as a source of "raw" materials, but are also lost to marine organisms and broken apart by the
mechanical forces of wave energy and ocean currents. Most shipwrecks on beaches and in near shore
environments are probably reduced to remnants of major structural elements (keels, frames), although it is
possible that artifacts are present, distributed around the wreck buried under beach sands (Delgado, nd.). At
a minimum these wreck sites are significant as part of a comparative study collection with each wreck
providing data on a particular aspect of shipping. This information may range from data on ship construction
to places of trade or origin based on artifacts as simple as ballast material. The offshore wrecks, however,
maybe in a class by themselves. These wrecks, relatively fewer in number are generally beyond easy
accessibility and maybe in a preservation environment superior to those wrecks in more exposed locations.
Archeological data at these sites will probably be richer, including a higher density of artifacts and, possibly,
substantial remnants of a vessels wooden structure.
E-10
-------
Project Site Evaluation
4.16 The proposed disposal site is unlikely to contain shipwrecks. The model indicates that shipwrecks are
clustered on the beaches and in the surf zones. Figure E-2 shows the shipwreck frequencies for the Umpqua
ZSF. This distribution is consistent with the known wrecks of the Umpqua River Region. In 1887 this area
was beyond the beach, surf zone and bar of the Umpqua River.(U.S.G.C.S, 1887) Ships wrecked or damaged
in the vicinity of the disposal area would more likely have been driven into the surf zone or onto the north or
south beaches then to have sunk. The possibility that wrecks sunk in the vicinity or on the disposal site is
also low. This location of the disposal site has under gone substantial erosion since the depth sounding of
1887. In 1887 depths in this area averaged, 50 to 60 feet (U.S.G.C.S., 1887), recent soundings indicate
depths of 80 to 90 feet (Earth Science Assoc. and GeoRecon International, 1985); it is likely that this
increase in depth is a consequence of the scouring of the area by the confinment of the Umpqua River
between the south and north jetties. In my opinion, any wrecks in the area would have been (1) eroded out
and moved by the current or (2) their visibility increased as the sediments where flushed away and the
remnants of the wreck settled onto a new surface.
4.17 Side scan sonar evaluation of the disposal sites supports the
assumptions stated above. Though the side scan sonar work was carried out primarily for environmental
reason, any sonar images that indicated the presence of shipwrecks would have been noted. This evidence
may include the presence of structural remains of ships, sediment mounding indicating the burial of vessels,
and/or ballast or cargo remnants marking the site of a decayed vessel No shipwreck signature or other
evidence of a shipwreck was recorded by the sonar investigation. (Earth Science Assoc. and GeoRecon
International, 1985)
4.18 Though the presence of a shipwreck in the disposal area is unlikely, there is a strong likelihood that
remnants of wrecks maybe present north of the north jetty. This area, formerly a surf zone and beach is the
location of numerous wrecks. In addition, the preservation context of this area has been enhanced by the
construction of the north jetty, a substantial amount of sand has accretted in this area as a consequence of
the constuction of the jetty. The area that is now beach includes both former beachlines and surf zones.
Evaluation of this area by proton magnetometer may result in the location of known as well as
undocumented shipwrecks.
E-ll
-------
m
*::*:*::*:::
KX»YD5 0
iii ill i i i i I
1000YDS
Figure E-l
Shipwreck Frequencies
E-12
-------
REFERENCES
Aikens, C. Melvin. 1984. Archeolgogy of Oregon. U.S. Department of the Interior. Bureau of Land
Mangement. Oregon State Office.
Beckham, Stephen Dow, 1986. Land of the Umpqua: A History of Douglas County. Oregon. Roseburg,
Douglas County Commissioners.
Beckham, Stephen Dow, 1969. Lonely Outpost: Army's Fort Umpqua. Reprint from the Oregon Historical
Quarterly.
Brooks, Charles Wolcott, 1964, Japanese Wrecks Stranded and Picked Up Adrift in the North Pacific Ocean.
(reprinted from California Academy of Sciences, 1876) Fairfield, Ye Galleon Press.
Coos Bay Times, 2/12/1907
Cressman, Luther S., 1977. Prehistory of the Far West. Homes of Vanished Peoples. Salt Lake City,
Umiversity of Utah Press.
Delgado, James P., nd. Documentation and Identification of the Remains of the 1882 Schooner NEPTUNE
at Fort Funston, Ocean Beach Golden Gate National Recreation Area, San Francisco. Report prepared by
Golden Gate National Recreation Area, San Francisco, California.
Dorsey, J. Owen, 1890. The Gentile System of the Siletz Tribes. Journal of American Folk-Lore, v3,
pp.227-237.
Douthit, Nathan, 1986. A Guide to Oregon South Coast History, Including An Account of the Jedediah
Smith Exploring Expedition of 1828 and ITs Relations with the Indians. Coos Bay, River West.
Fladmark, Knut, 1983. Times and Places: Enviromental Correlates of Mid-to-Late Wisconsinan Human
Population Expansion in North America,pp.l2-41. in Early Man in the New World, ed. R. Shutler, Beverly
Hills, Sage Press.
Fractenberg, Leo J., 1914. Lower Umpqua Texts and Notes on the Kusan Dialects. Columbia University
Contributions to Anthropology, 4. New York, Columbia University Press, (cited by Beckham,1986)
Gibbs, James A., 1957. Shipwrecks of the Pacific Coast Portland, Binfords and Mort.
Howay, F.W. and T.C. Elliott, 1929(Sept). Voyages of the Jenny to Oregon, 1792-94. The Oregon Historical
Quarterly, voL30, 197-206.
Johansen, Dorthy O. and Charles M. Gates, 1957. Empire of the Columbia A History of the Pacific
Northwest. New York, Harper and Row.
Lewis, Meriwether and William Clark, 1969 (reprint). Original Journals of the Lewis and Clark Expedition,
1804-1806, in six volumes, ed. Ruben Gold Thwaites (ed) New York, Arno Press.
Marshall, Don, 1982, Oregon Shipwrecks. Portland, Binfords and Mort. Schofield, Socrates, 1916(Dec) The
Klamath Exploring Expedition, 1850, Settlement of the Umpqua Valley, Its Outcome. The Quarterly of the
Oregon Historic Society, Vol 17(4)341-357.
Oregonian, 11/23/1895; 11/19/1897; 10/3/1915; 5/17/1924
Port of Umpqua Courier 7/7/1922; 7/28/1922; 8/21/1936; 10/22/1937; 9/29/1955
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1985 (April). Yaquina Bay Interim Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site
Evaluation Study. Appendix E. Cultural Resources. Portland District.
E-13
-------
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1987 (October). Coquille Ocean Dredged Marerial Disposal Site
Evaluation. Appendix E. Cultural Resources. Portland District.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1988 (October). Rogue Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site Evaluation.
Final report. Appendix E. Cultural Resources. Portland District.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1988 (July). Chetcb Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site Evaluation. Final
Report. Appendix E. Cultural Resources. Portland District.
United States Coastal and Geodetic Survey, 1887. Umpqua Entrance 1887. U.S.Coastal and Geodetic
Survey Issued November 1887.
West, 'Victor, n.d. Shipwrecks of the Southern Oregon Coast, 8 volumes, typescript on file Southern Oregon
Community College, Coos Bay.
West, Victor and R.E. Wells, 1984. A Guide to Shipwreck Sites Along the Oregon Coast Via Oregon U.S.
101. North Bend, R.E. Wells and Victor West.
Willingham, William F., 1983. Army Engineers and the Development of Oregon. A History of the Portland
District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Wright, E.W., 1967. Lewis and Dryden's Marine History of the Pacific.
E-14
-------
, APPENDIX F,
-------
APPENDIX F
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Paragraph Page
1.1 Comments F-l
13 Coordination F-l
LETTERS
Concurrence Letter from Oregon Department of
Land Conservation and Development
Concurrence Letters from United States Department of Commerce
Concurrence Letter from United States Department of the Interior
Concurrence Letter from Oregon State Department of Transportation
State Historic Preservation Office
-------
APPENDIX F
COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
Comments
1.1 The Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (MPRSA) requires that, for a site to
receive a final ODMDS designation, the site must satisfy the general and specific disposal site criteria set
forth in 40 CFR 228.5 and 228.6, respectively. The final designation procedures also require documentation
of recommended disposal site compliance with MPRSA and with the following laws:
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,
Endangered Species Act of 1973,
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, and
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, (all as amended).
1.2 The data provided in this document was compiled to satisfy these laws and has been coordinated with
appropriate and necessary State and Federal agencies.
Coordination
13 The procedures used in this ODMDS final designation study have been discussed with the following
agencies:
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Oregon Division of State Lands
U.S. Coast Guard
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
National Marine Fisheries Service, and
U.S. Environmental Protectione Agency.
1.4 Following completion of the preliminary draft, statements of consistency or concurrence were sought
regarding three State or Federal laws. The statutes and responsible agencies are:
Coastal Zone Management Act of Oregon Department of Land
1972, as amended Conservation and Development
National Historic Preservation Oregon State Historic Preservation
Act of 1966, as amended Officer
Endangered Species Act of 1973, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
as amended National Marine Fisheries Service
1.5 Consistency or concurrence letters from these agencies are included in this appendix. State water
quality certifications, as required by Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, will be obtained for individual
dredging actions.
1.6 A formal public involvement program designed to receive comments from all State and local agencies,
private groups and individuals will be coordinated by EPA upon submittal of this document containing the
request for final site designation.
F-l
-------
mio*1
.»*'-<°>>
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administi
NATIONAL MARINE FISIIhRIFS SERVICE
Northwest Region
7600 Sand Point Way N. E.
BIN C15700, Bldg. 1
Seattle, WA 98115
F/NWR3: 1514-04 JB
OCT 251988
Mr. Richard N. Duncan
Chief, Fish and Wildlife Branch
Department of the Army
Portland District Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 2946
Portland, OR 97208
Dear Mr. Duncan:
This is in response to your September 29, 1988, letter regarding
endangered and/or threatened species that may be present in the
vicinity of the Umpqua River Offshore Dredged Material Disposal
Site.
Enclosed is a list of endangered and/or threatened species under
the jurisdiction of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMPS)
that may occur offshore of the Umpqua River. Also, enclosed for
your information is a special edition of Marine Fisheries Review
entitled "The Status of Endangered Whales". There are no
candidate species in this area under review by NMFS for proposed
listing under the Endangered Species Act. Please contact
Joe Scordino at (206) 526-6140 if you need any additional
information.
Sincerely,
Roll and A. Schriitten
Regional Director
Enclosures
75 Years Stimulating America's Progress * 1913-1988
-------
»«*''<
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Ocaanle and Atmotpharic Admlniatratlon
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
ENDANGERED AND/OR THREATENED SPECIES
OFF WASHINGTON AND OREGON
under the jurisdiction of
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
MARINE MAMMALS
Gray Whale
Humpback Whale
Blue Whale
Fin Whale
Sei Whale
Right Whale
Sperm Whale
Eachrichtiua robuatua
Meyaptera novaeangli aa
Balaenootera muaeuluB
Balaenoptara phvaalua
Balaanoptera borealia
Balaena glaeialia
PhvBeter macroeenhalua
MARINE TURTLES
Leatherback Sea Turtle Dermochelve eoriaeea
75 Years Siimulalinj> America's Progress * 1913-1988
-------
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National OcMnle and Atmoapharie Administration
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
Northwest Region
7600 Sand Point Way N. E.
BIN C15700, Building 1
Seattle, HA 98115
FEB \ 3 19B9 P/NWR3: 1514-04 js
Mr. Lauren J. Aimonetto
Chief, Planning Diviaion
Department of the Army
Portland Diatrict Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 2946
Portland, OR 97208
Dear Mr. Aimonetto:
This is in response to your December 8, 1988, letter regarding
an Endangered Speciea Act (BSA) biological assessment aa
supplemented on February 6, 1989, for the Umpqua River Offshore
Disposal project. We concur with your determination that
populations of endangered/threatened apeoiea under our purview
are not likely to be adversely affected by the propoaed action.
This concludes consultation responsibilities under Section 7 of
the ESA. However, consultation should be- reinitiated if new
information reveal a impacts of the identified aotivitiea that
may adveraely affect listed species or their critical habitat,
the identified activity ia aubaequently modified, or a new
apeciea ia liated or critical habitat is determined that may be
affected by the identified activity. Zf you have any new
information or questions concerning this consultation, please
contact Joe Soordino at (206) 526-6140.
Sincerely,
Holland A. Schmitten
Regional Director
cc: F/PR - Nancy Foster
75 Years Stimulating America's Progress * 1913-1981
-------
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Portland Field Office
727 NE 24th Avenue
Portland, OR 97232
" w ».
May 1. 1987 -.x/. ^" fc
1-7-87-SP-92
Richard N. Duncan
Portland District Corps of Engineers
P. 0. Box 2946
Portland. OR 97208-2946
Dear Mr. Duncan:
As requested by your letter, dated April 10, 1987, and received by us on April
16, 1987. we have attached a list of endangered and threatened species that
may be present in the area of the proposed dredged material disposal sites
located offshore of the Umpqua, Chetco, Coqullle. and Rogue River
entrances. From phone conversations with Geoff Dorsey of your staff, we
understand these areas are located approximately one mile straight but from
the river entrances in 60 to 90 feet of water and are about 1 square mile
in size. The list fulfills the requirement of the Fish and Wildlife
Service under Section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended. The Corps of Engineers requirements under the Act are outlined in
Attachment B.
Should your biological assessment determine that a listed species is likely to
be adversely affected by the project. The Corps of Engineers should request
formal Section 7 consultation through this office. Even if your biological
assessment shows a "no effect" or "beneficial effect" situation, We would
appreciate receiving a copy for our information.
Your interest in endangered species is appreciated. If you have any
additional questions regarding your responsibilities under the Act. please
call David M. Sill at our office, phone (503) 231-6179 or PTS 429-6179. All
correspondence should Include the above referenced case number.
Sincerely, *
Russell D. Peterson
Field Supervisor
Attachments
cc: Rl FWE-SE
PPO-ES
ODFW (Nongame)
ONHP
5SP-92:05/01/87
RU Ci2 I VED
REGULATORY BR.
-------
Attachment A
LISTED AND PROPOSED ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES AND
CANDIDATE SPECIES THAT MAY OCCUR IN THE AREA OF THE PROPOSED
DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITES LOCATED OFFSHORE OF THE
UMPQUA. CHETCO. COQUILLE. AND ROGUE RIVER ESTUARIES
STATE OF OREGON
1-7-87-SP-92
LISTED SPECIES-7
Brown Pelican Pelecanus occidentalls (E)
PROPOSED SPECIES
None
CANDIDATE
None
(E) - Endangered (T) - Threatened (CH) - Critical Habitat
-^ U. S. Department of Interior. Fiah and Wildlife Service. Jan 1986. Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife and Plants. SO CFR 17.11 and 17.12.
-------
o
> .; *.
Nil. UX.PSOIUDI
Department of Transportation
STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE
Parks and Recreation Division
525 TRADE STREET S.E., SALEM. OREGON 97310
April 13, 1989
Lauren J. Aimonetto
Planning Division
Portland District of Engineers
PO BOX 2946
Portland, OR 97208-2946
RE: Umpqua River Channel and Bar
Off-shore Disposal Site
Douglas County
Our office has reviewed the cultural resource report by
Michael Martin for the Umpqua River off-shore disposal site
which was surveyed using side scan sonar by Earth Sciences
out of Palo Alto, California and GeoRecon International of
Seattle, Washington. Since no shipwrecks or features were
noticed that might indicate the presence of wrecks or wreck
sites, we concur that the proposed project would have "No
Effect11 on sites on, or eligible for inclusion on, the
National Register of Historic Places. If you have any
questions-you can contact Dr. Leland Gilsen at 378-5023.
Sincerely,
J i LJ*
D. W. Powers, III
Deputy ISHPO
DWP:LG:jn
BAR.LTR
-------
NH.QOUISCMMDT
Department of Land Conservation and Development
1175 COURT STREET NE, SALEM. OREGON 97310-0590 PHONE (503) 373-0050
March 16, 1989
Lauren J. Aimonetto
Chief, Planning Division
Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 2946
Portland, Oregon 97208-2946
RE: Umpqua Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site Evaluation
Dear Mr. Aimonetto:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the draft Ocean Disposal
Site Evaluation for the Umpqua River Navigation Project. You
have requested that the Department concur with the Corps1
determination that the project is consistent with the Oregon
Coastal Management Program (OCMP).
The site evaluation report includes findings against Statewide
Planning Goal 19, Ocean Resources, which is the most applicable
policy of the OCMP. The report does a commendable job of
assessing the compatibility of continued dredged material
disposal at the interim site with Goal 19 requirements and the
criteria of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act.
The Department concurs that final designation of the interim
disposal site is consistent with the OCMP.
Tha Department understands that EPA will carry out a formal
public involvement program during the final site designation
process. The Department may reexamine the consistency of the
project with the OCMP during the EPA process if new information
is available at that time.
Thank you for the opportunity to review the document for
consistency with the OCMP. Please contact Nancy Hittpenn of my
staff if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Actin
CG:NW
cc: Steve Stevens, COE
Glen Hale, DLCD
-------
JUL I 8 199!
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
Northwest Region
7600 Sand Point Way N. E.
BIN C15700, Building 1
Seattle, Washington 98115
F/NWR3: 1514-04-020
Robert E. Willis, Chief
Resource Protection and
Fish and Wildlife Section
Department of the Army
Portland District, Corps of Engineers
P. O. Box 2946
Portland, Oregon 97208
Dear Mr. Willis:
This is in response to your June 7, 1991 letter regarding a
revised Endangered Species Act (ESA) Biological Assessment for
the designation of an Offshore Dredge Material Disposal Site off
the Umpqua River entrance. The revised assessment addresses
potential affects on northern sea lions and Sacramento River
winter-run chinook salmon, which have been listed since the time
of the February 13, 1989 informal consultation on this project,
and updates your December 8, 1988 assessment on gray whales. We
have reviewed the revised Biological Assessment and concur with
your determination that populations of threatened/endangered
species under our purview are not likely to be adversely affected
by the proposed actions.
Consultation should be reinitiated if the identified activity is
modified or new information reveals impacts of the activities
that may adversely affect listed species, or if a new species is
listed or critical habitat determined that may be affected by the
identified activity.
Also, please be aware that the proposed listing of Snake River
fall chinook, spring/summer chinook and sockeye salmon under the
ESA imposes new requirements on federal agencies to evaluate the
potential effects of any federal action on.these proposed species
and to confer with NMFS if the action is likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of any of the proposed species.
K C C I- I V li D
JUL 2 2 1991
REG-& ENV RES BR
-------
This concludes consultation responsibilities under Section 7 of
the ESA. If you have any questions concerning this consultation,
please contact Joe Scordino at (206) 526-6140.
Sincerely,
I
A. Schmitten
Regional Director
cc: F/PR2 - Pat Montanio
F/NWR5 - Merritt Tuttle
-------
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
PORTLAND DISTRICT. CORPS OK ENGINEERS
( O BOX J»46
Reply to
Attention ol:
June 1, 1991
Planning and Engineering Division
RP
RR
Orig.
Mr. Rolland Schmitten
Regional Director
National Marine Fisheries Service
7600 Sand Point Way, NE.
BIN C15700
Seattle, Washington 98115
Dear Mr. Schmitten:
Pursuant to the requirements of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, we are forwarding an addendum to our biological assessment
for species under your jurisdiction that could be impacted by the
designation of an Offshore Dredge Material Disposal Site (ODMDS)
off the Umpqua River entrance, Douglas County, Oregon.
We received a letter from you on February 13, 1989, which
stated you concurred with our December 8, 1988, biological
assessment which concluded "no affect" on listed species for this
project, however, that biological assessment did not address
impacts to northern sea lions or Sacramento River winter run
chinook salmon.
Enclosed is our biological assessment for newly listed
species as well as an updated assessment for gray whales. We
have concluded that this project will have "no affect" on listed
species.
Should you require any additional information, please contact
Geoff Dorsey or Chris Moehl of my staff at (503) 326-6482.
Sincerely,
C5
w
*
I
Robert E. Willis
Chief, Resource Protection and
Fish and Wildlife Section
Enclosure
-------
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
FOR
GRAY WHALES, NORTHERN SEA LIONS,
AND
SACRAMENTO RIVER WINTER-RUN CHINOOK SALMON
AT
UMPQUA RIVER ODMDS
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project involves the designation of a new
offshore dredge material disposal site (OOMDS) at a location
approximately 1 mile offshore of the mouth of the Umpqua River
near Reedsport, Oregon. The site would be located approximately
2800 feet north of an existing interim site (Figure 1), at an
average water depth of 150 feet. The dimensions of the proposed
site are 3600 feet by 1400 feet with geographic coordinates at
43°-40/-35"N/ 124°-14/-22/'W; 43°-40'-35"N, 124°-13 '-46' 'W; 43°-
40'-21"N, 124Q-13'-46"W and 43°-40'-21"N, 124°-14'-22"W.
Approximately 180,000 cubic yards of dredged material,
derived from the maintenance of the Umpqua River Federal project
channel, would be placed at the site annually. Chemical and
physical analyses of the channel sediments were conducted in 1987
and 1989. These sediments consisted primarily of clean sand with
some fine grained and detrital fractions. All concentrations of
organic compounds including pesticides, PCB's and PAH's were
below method detection limits. The concentrations of metals, oil
and grease and ammonia were also typical of clean Oregon
estuarine sediments with a moderate level of organic matter.
Dredging may occur from April through October although
dredging actions primarily occur in May and June with followup
work occurring later in the season. The limited timeframe for
dredging is imposed by storms and rough sea conditions from
November to April. Both hopper and clamshell dredges may be
employed.
GRAY WHALES
Coastal waters of Oregon serve as a migrational corridor for
gray whales moving to and from their breeding, calving, and
assembly areas along Baja California, Mexico and their primary
foraging areas in the northern Bering and southern Chukchi Seas
(Darling 1984).
Southward migration occurs off Oregon between early December
and mid-February, with pregnant females being the first to pass
southward. (Herzing and Mate 1984). Southbound whales typically
-------
reposed site
II
Kij'.IMf I
ii'iu:r«;!( i nil nf lliii|i(|iia l(ivi:i'
.iiiJ <««.in IM.-i<'«:utoiit Silt::;
-------
occur off Oregon in water less than 90 meters deep, with the
majority of migrants occurring in water 40-60 m deep, located
between 1.6 and 3.2 km offshore (Herzing and Mate 1984).
The northbound migration is comprised of two groups of whales
migrating in two phases. The first phase begins migration
between mid-February and April and consists of whales without
calves. The second group consists largely of whales with calves,
with migration beginning between late April and May (Herzing and
Mate 1984). Generally, whales comprising the first phase tend
to migrate further offshore, with imruatures showing a preference
for migration closer to shore (Herzing and Mate 1984). Northward
cow/calf migration typically occurs close to shore. Herzing and
Mate (1984) observed that 90% of the whales migrating during the
later phase, traveled within 800 m of the shore; during the
final three weeks of migration, 90% traveled within 100 m of
shore.
A portion of the eastern Pacific population of gray whales
does not migrate to the northern seas; these whales spend summer
offshore of California, Oregon, Washington and British Columbia.
Mate estimated a summering population of 75 whales off the coast
of Oregon in 1979 (Darling 1984). Current population estimates
by Mate indicate an increase to 100-200 summering whales (B.
Mate, pers. convers., 1990). Information regarding summering
gray whale distribution off Oregon is patchy. It appear^ that
most summering gray whales occur between Winchester Bay (Umpqua
River) and Cascade Head, near Lincoln City (B. Mate, pers. comm.,
1990). These summering gray whales occur in scattered, small
groups or as individuals. There was reportedly a cow/calf pair
summering off Coos Bay in 1990 (Jan Hodder, OIMB, pers. comm. 7-
90). Three small groups have been reported elsewhere in Oregon
during 1990 (Beverly Lund, pers. comm. 7-90); these include
approximately 6 individuals between Boiler Bay and Yaquina Head,
a group between the south Jetty of Yaquina Bay and Seal Rock, and
a group at Gold Haven near Sea Lion Caves.
There are occasional reports of gray whales occurring in
coastal estuaries including the Columbia River, Tillamook Bay,
Yaquina Bay, Siuslaw River, and Coos Bay (B. Mate, pers. comm.,
1990) . Apparently it is not uncommon for gray whales to occur
between the Highway 101 bridge and the jetties at Yaquina Bay;
these observations include north and south bound migrants and
summering gray whales. Summering gray whales have been observed
in the mouth of the Siuslaw River between the jetties by Corps
personnel and other observers have recorded them as far upriver
as Mapleton on the Siuslaw. Operators of the charter boat
Siggi-G out of Garibaldi reported a gray whale near buoy six,
Tillamook Bay entrance channel, in late spring 1990; it is not
known whether this represented a migrant or summering gray whale.
A whale, species unknown, was observed just north of Tillamook
Bay in June 1989 less than one-half mile offshore.
The most recent study of summering whales off Oregon was
conducted by Sumich (1984). Summer sightings were defined as
those which occurred between 1 June and 15 September. Sumich
reported over 1200 gray whale sightings during a 1977-1980 study
off coastal Oregon. A 100 km section of coastline from the
-------
Siuslaw River to Government Point just north of Depoe Bay,
appeared to be relatively important to gray whales. In 1977, 6O%
of the 460 observations occurred within this 100 km section.
Sumich reported a maximum observed occurrence of 0.2-0.3
whales/km over the 100 km study area during the 1977 and 1978
studies. It was not determined whether whales were more numerous
along this section, or simply easier to detect. Whale
distribution within the 100 km section varied between 1977 and
1978; in 1977 whales were most commonly observed in the southern
half of the study area, in contrast to 1978 when whales were more
frequently observed in the northern half of the study area.
Sumich noted that site specific use also varied daily; thus, a
period of maximum occurrence was undetectable. Additionally,
weather, sea state, observer effort, the presence or absence of
strategic observation points, and the unreliability of aerial
counts due to the predominant occurrence of gray whales in surf
and foam lines (which makes them difficult to detect) also
contribute to the large variation in observed abundance. Because
of these factors, Sumich considered his abundance estimate of
0.2-0.3 whales/km to be conservative.
Sumich (1984) noted that the primary activity of summer gray
whales off the Oregon coast appears to be feeding. Benthic
infauna, primarily gammarid amphipods and polychaete worms are
the principal food items of gray whales (Rice et al 1984).
Migrating whales feed, to some extent, on benthic organisms at
the mouths of rivers and estuaries (Nerini 1984). Pelagic
foraging by gray whales is thought to be rare (Nerini 1984),
though Sumich (1984), suggests that offshore sightings may be an
indication of pelagic feeding.
Sumich noted that nearshore locations with silty sediments
appear to be foraging areas for gray whales; presumably because
of high amphipod populations in silty sediments (D. Hancock,
USAGE pers. comm., 1985). Gray whales also frequented surf or
foam lines. A pod of whales summering near Boiler Bay, OR
(1990), was reported to have been feeding in kelp beds (Beverly
Lund, pers. comm. 1990).
Sumich (1984) postulates that whales which summer off Oregon
may gain energetic benefit by shortening their migration. He
further noted that the whales off Oregon consisted predominantly
of immature or small mature individuals. Mate has also indicated
that the majority of whales summering off Oregon appear to be
immature (Beverly Lund pers. comm. 1990). Gray whales that
summer off British Columbia have been documented to return to
within 150 km of an established location, with some individuals
reportedly having returned for up to 8 consecutive years (Darling
1984). As such, Darling argues that these whales are not cutting
their migration short, but that they are intentionally seeking
out and utilizing available "pockets" of habitat. Although a
through investigation of the age structure of these whales has
not been made, Darling (1984) believes that these populations may
also be composed primarily of young individuals.
-------
DISCUSSION
Disposal operations at the ODMDS will typically occur during
the latter part, or after conclusion of, the second phase of the
northward migration of gray whales. Dredging and disposal would
not occur during the southward migration. Should disposal
operations occur when whales are present, it is unlikely that
gray whales would be impacted as disposal operations are
intermittent in nature and confined to a limited area. Summering
whales have been sighted near the mouth of the Umpgua River. We
would anticipate some potential for avoidance of the immediate
disposal area, but the proposed site is offshore of where
summering gray whales would typically forage. As material to be
disposed is not contaminated, we anticipate no impacts from
contaminants on migrant or summering gray whales.
CONCLUSION
We conclude that designation and subsequent use of the Umpgua
River ODMDS would have "no affect" on gray whales.
LITERATURE CITED
Darling, J. D. 1984. Gray whales off Vancouver Island, British
Columbia. Pages 267-287 in M. L. Jones, S.L. Swartz, & S.
Leather wood, eds. The gray whale, "Eschrichtius robustus."
Academic Press, Inc., Orlando, FL. 600pp.
Herzing D. L., & B. R. Hate. 1984. Gray whale migrations along
the Oregon Coast, 1978-81. Pages 289-307 in M.L. Jones, S.L.
Swartz, & S. Leatherwood, eds. The gray whale, "Eschrichtius
robustus." Academic Press, Inc., Orlando, FL. 600pp.
Nerini, M. 1981. A review of gray whale feeding ecology. Pages
423-450 in M. L. Jones, S. L. Swartz, & S. Leatherwood, eds.
The gray whale, *Eschrichtius robustus'. Academic Press,
Inc., Orlando, FL 600pp.
Rice, D. W., A. A. Wolman, & H. W. Braham. 1984. The gray
whale, %Eschrichtius robustus'. Mar. Fish Rev. 46(4):7-14.
Sumich, J. L. 1984. Gray whales along the Oregon Coast in
summer, 1977-1980. The Murrelet. 65:33-40.
NORTHERN (STELLER) SEA LION
Northern sea lions breed along the west coast of north
America from Ano Nuevo Island off central California, to the
U.S.S.R.'s Kurile Islands and the Okshotsk Sea in the western
north Pacific Ocean. There is no evidence to indicate that there
are separate populations throughout this range (NMFS 1990). The
northern sea lion subpopulation which occurs off California has
been declining since the 1920's, with a more rapid rate of
decline since I960 (Gentry and Withrow 1986). The Alaskan
population has undergone an 60% decline since 1985 (ODFW 1990),
prompting the emergency listing of the species throughout it's
range.
-------
Northern sea lions are year-round residents along the Oregon
coast. The subpopulation off Oregon is second in size to the
Alaskan subpopulation (Brown 1988). Northern sea lions are known
to haul out at a minimum of ten sites off Oregon; two of these
sites,- Rogue and Orford Reefs, are rookeries. Other important
haulout sites include Ecola State Park, Sea Lion Caves, Columbia
River South Jetty, Three Arch Rock, Cape Arago, and Seal Rock.
Weekly surveys of the Columbia River South Jetty between March 9,
1991 and June 4, 1991 have consistently revealed approximately
100 Northern sea lions of mixed age class and sex to be hauled
out at this location (Brian Herceg, Pacific States Marine
Fisheries Commission, pers. comm. 1991).
In contrast to the Alaska and California subpopulations,
statewide population counts for Oregon have remained fairly
stable. In 1984 and 1985, year-round counts ranged.from 769 to
2352. During this survey, peak counts (2352) were made on May 21
& 23, 1984 with haulout attendance greatest at Ecola State Park,
Sea Lion Caves, Orford Reef and Rogue Reef (Brown 1988) . Peak
attendance at the two Oregon rookeries occurs during May, June
and July. Sea lions begin to leave the rookeries in August.
Males are the first to leave, followed by females within a few
months (Gentry and Hithrow 1978). The number of sea lions using
.Orford Reef has declined since 1986. It is not certain, but the
decline may be related to a rapidly growing sea urchin fishery in
the area (ODFW 1990). Seasonal shifts in the use of haul out
sites is common among northern sea lions. Northern sea lion
numbers appear to be lower off Oregon in the winter than summer,
though it is not known where these animals may be migrating to or
wintering. Northern sea lions forage at river mouths and near-
shore areas along the coast. Roffe and Mate (1984) studied the
feeding habits of pinnipeds, including northern sea lions in the
Rogue River estuary, Oregon in 1984. It was determined that the
sea lions fed most heavily on Pacific lamprey. A variety of
environmental correlations were studied with respect to feeding,
and it was determined that the factor which most affected feeding
habits was proximity to the mouth of the river. Although sea
lions have been accused of damaging the commercial salmon fishery
in several locations along the West Coast, studies have shown
that sea lions generally consume less of these fish than thought,
and in fact, that salmon comprise a relatively small proportion
of their diet (Gentry and Withrow 1978). Roffe and Mate (1984)
determined that, of observed surface feeding, only 2% was on
salmon. The main food items for northern sea lions in the Rogue
River estuary appeared to be lamprey (26.8%) and non-salmon id
fishes (32.4%) (Roffe and Mate 1984).
DISCUSSION
The proposed disposal site is situated approximately 30 miles
from and between two northern sea lion haul out sites; Sea Lion
Caves to the north and Cape Arago to the south. Abundance of
northern sea lions at Sea Lion Caves is highest during summer and
winter; and highest at Cape Arago during summer months (Brown
1988).
Some foraging by transient northern sea lions may occur in
-------
the project vicinity to a limited extent. The relatively distant
proximity to the nearest haul out site, suggests that the Umpqua
River mouth is not widely used by this species as a foraging
area. It is unlikely that northern sea lions would be impacted
by disposal operations though we would anticipate some potential
for avoidance of the immediate disposal area. Material to be
disposed of is not contaminated, as such, we anticipate no
impacts from contaminants on northern sea lions.
CONCLUSION:
The project may result in some localized avoidance of the
immediate dredging and disposal area by northern sea lions.
However, the project should have "no affect11 on the status of the
population nor should the survival of individuals be affected by
the proposed action.
LITERATURE CITED
Brown, R.F., 1988. Assessment of Pinniped Populations in Oregon.
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife report to National
Marine Fisheries Service, Seattle, WA. 44 pp.
NMFS. 1990. Listing of Steller Sea Lions as Threatened and
Endangered Species With Protective Regulations. Federal
Register 50 CFR Part 227. pp 12645-12661.
Gentry and Withrow, 1986. "Steller Sea Lion" in Marine Mammals
Delphine Haley, ed. Pacific Search Press; Seattle, WA.pp.
186-194.
Roffe, T.J. and B.R. Mate, 1984. Abundances and Feeding Habits
of Pinnipeds in the Rogue River, Oregon. J. Wildl. Manage.
48(4):1262-1274.
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW), 1990. Northern
(Steller) Sea Lion Garners Concern. Wild Flyer, vol. 1, no.
2, June 1990.
SACRAMENTO RIVER WINTER RUN CHINOOK SALMON
The Sacramento River winter-run chinook salmon is not
expected to occur in significant numbers in the vicinity of the
project. This species is thought to primarily occur offshore in
deep water from Fort Bragg to Monterey, California (ECOS INC.
1990). Coded wire tag recovery information compiled by the
Alaska Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries
Service, indicates that tagged Chinook salmon released in the
Sacramento River drainage have been recovered from foreign' and
joint venture trawl fisheries off Oregon. These tagging programs
involve fall chinook salmon, however they do serve as an
indication that Sacramento River winter run chinook salmon may
occur off the Oregon coast.
The limited extent of habitat affected by disposal
operations, intermittent nature of disposal events, and lack of
-------
contaminants associated with the channel sediments indicate that
the project will have "no affect" on Sacramento River winter run
chinook salmon.
In addition to Sacramento River winter run chinook salmon,
five salmonid species are listed as candidates for Federal
classification as threatened and/or endangered species. Species
proposed for listing are Salmon River sockeye salmon, Snake River
fall, summer, and spring chinook salmon, and lower Columbia River
coho salmon.
Miller et al. (1983) noted that the largest: catches of adult
coho salmon of Columbia River origin in the ocean fishery have
been off northern California to southern Oregon. They also
indicated that spring chinook salmon of Columbia River origin
apparently migrate north for rearing. Discussions with John
Williams of NMFS, Seattle, indicate that available information
indicates that Snake river chinook and sockeye stocks migrate
north for rearing. Information is preliminary and not complete,
however.
CONCLUSION
The limited extent of habitat affected by disposal
operations, intermittent nature of disposal events, and lack of
contaminants associated with disposal materials indicate that the
project will have "no affect" on Sacramento River winter run
chinook salmon or on the candidate stocks. Most fish from runs
of concern, except lower Columbia River coho stocks, are probably
absent from the area.
Literature Cited
Ecos Inc. 1990. Draft biological data report. Winter run
chinook salmon for the Sacramento River Bank Protection
Project. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento Dist.
38 pp.
Miller, D. R., J. G. Williams, and C. W. Sims. 1983.
Distribution, abundance and growth of juvenile salmonids off
the coast of Oregon and Washington. Fisheries Research
2(1983):l-7.
------- |