1.
Oregon
Marine Spatial Planning
Progress Report
Paul Klarin, Marine Program Coordinator
Department of Land Conservation and Development
May 2012

2.
DREADED
DRAFT

3.
Once upon a time in the wild west…
ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST

4.
Flash Forward

5.
Back home on the range -
the last grazers of the public common?

6.
Drop some of these

7.
with cement anchors the size of a 2- car garage…

8.
in the middle of their best fishing grounds…

9.
What Me Worry?

10.
CRAB CHARTER SALMON
PORT
Ocean
Power
Technologies

11.
Policy Preferences

12.
Oregon’s Ocean Management Program
Statewide Land Use Ocean Resources
Planning Program Management Program
ORS 197 ORS 196
Ocean Policy
Goal 19 Advisory
Ocean Resources Council
State Agency Territorial
Authorities Sea Plan

13.
State Agencies: DLCD/ODFW/DSL/OPRD
Federal agencies: FERC, BOEM, NOAA, NMFS
OCZMA: local governments, ports and special districts
Community‐Based Advisory Committees
Ocean Wave Energy Trust (OWET)
Ocean Policy Advsiory Council (OPAC)
Scientific Technical Advsiory Committee (STAC)
Ecotrust
Surfrider Foundation
Conservation Community (TNC, OSCC, Our Ocean)

14.
The Moving Parts of TSP: Technological Roadmap
DLCD – 12/10 - Lanier

15.
Oregon MSP
Seafloor mapping of the
Territorial Sea:
NOAA / Contractors
coordinated by Oregon State
University
- Seafloor mapping workshop
- Priority Areas Selected
- Field work completed 2010
- < 50% of the territorial sea

16.
Oregon MSP
Map overlay of areas important to
fisheries for:
Coos Bay
Charleston
Bandon
Reedsport
Data Collection completed 2010
Surveys of commercial, charter and
recreational fishing effort

17.
Decision‐Support Tools

18.
Areas Important to Fisheries
 a) areas of high catch (e.g., high total pounds landed and high
value of landed catch); or
 b) areas where highly valued fish are caught even if in low
abundance or by few fishers; or
 c) areas that are important on a seasonal basis; or
 d) areas important to commercial or recreational fishing
activities, including those of individual ports or particular fleets;
or
 e) habitat areas that support food or prey species important to
commercially and recreationally caught fish and shellfish
species.

19.
Oregon TSP
Map overlay of areas
important to fisheries for:
Astoria
Warrenton
Survey of commercial,
charter and recreational
fishing effort

20.
Fishery Resources
High Competing Use (Level 1)
Fishery
Resources
• Areas of Greatest
Importance to Fisheries
Planning Unit Grid Used

21.
Fishery Resources
Moderate Competing Use (Level 2)
Fishery
Resources
• Areas of Great
Importance to Fisheries
Planning Unit Grid Used

22.
Statewide Planning Grid (1nm2)

23.
Beneficial Uses
Protect and encourage the beneficial uses of ocean resources
such as navigation, food production, recreation, aesthetic
enjoyment, and uses of the seafloor provided that such
activities ‐
do not adversely affect the resources protected in subsection
1., above (ecological resources and fisheries);
avoid, to the extent possible, adverse effects on or
operational conflicts with other ocean uses and activities;
and
comply with the applicable requirements of the Oregon TSP.

24.
Beneficial Uses
High Competing Use (Level 1)
Research Beneficial Uses
System Cables
• Dredge Material Disposal
• Commercial Shipping
Lanes (Deep Draft, 2 mi)
Shipping • Coastal Discharge Outfall
Lanes Marine • National Wildlife Refuges
Reserves • Nearshore Research
Inventory (OOI,
NNMREC)
• OR Islands National
Cables Wildlife Refuges
• Marine Managed Areas
• Telecommunication
Cables (1000 m)
• Marine Renewable
Energy Permits
A l f i d

25.
Beneficial Uses
Moderate Competing Use (Level 2)
Beneficial Uses
• Commercial Shipping
Lanes (Shallow Draft)
• Inactive Dredge Material
Disposal
• Navigation Aids
• Nearshore Research
Inventory
• Crabber Towboat Lanes
• Ocean Recreation
Actual footprints used

26.
Marine Ecosystem

27.
Fisheries

28.
Other Marine Users
Dredged material disposal
Cable routes
Navigation lanes

29.
Geospatial Analysis for Goal 19 Areas
Data Layers
Intersected Goal 19 Criteria
Areas of Biological Identify Areas of Existing Uses or Areas for
with the or Ecological Importance. Importance to Fisheries special management.
Planning Grid
+
+
+
B&E Exclusion Areas Fishery Exclusion Areas Current Use or Management
Exclusion Areas
Areas of Opportunity
(to be evaluated) + + +
=
????’s
Areas of Protection under Goal 19

30.
Planning Grid Overlays
Summary
Map
Started Here Layers
+
GIS
Public
Input
Data
LCDC
TSPAC OPAC Public Input
Resource Use
Public Input
Goal 19
Public Input
Draft Areas Areas
Plan

31.
Marine Marine Marine Resource
Marine Resource
Renewable Conservation Area Use Management
Development Area
Energy Exclusion Area
Area
Objective: Protect
important, unique, Objective: To maintain Objective: To
or vulnerable Goal the long term use and identify areas of
Objective: To 19 resources or health of the area by least use conflict for
protect already uses. managing for a broad the development of
permitted uses range of Goal 19 Marine Renewable
and special resources and uses. Energy Facilities.
management
areas under Goal
19 Ocean Area identified for the Maintain the status quo
Resources. protection of Goal 19 for Goal 19 uses and
Resources. Any resources. MRE Minimize impacts of
development in this development must development to existing
area must demonstrate demonstrate no users natural resources,
no reasonably significant adverse effects, this is an area that has
foreseeable adverse to the extent possible, to been identified for
effects to the identified those resources or uses.
No development of testing and
Goal 19 resources.
marine renewable development of marine
energy will be renewable energy.
permitted in these
distinct areas.
Screening Visual Resource Overlay ‐ Impact Assessment Analysis
standards apply
to all areas
Marine Recreation Overlay Area
Will not be
permitted.
Higher Permitting Difficulty Level Lower

32.
Once upon a time in the wild west…
ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST

33.
Fisheries

34.
Formula for Success
Political & Policy Framework is in place:
25 years of state ocean planning:
● Statutory direction & expectations
● Ocean management policies (in state CZMP)
● Tested process (agencies, stakeholders)
● Literacy/expectations among the public
Technical Framework is in place:
● State agency science/technical capacity
● Academic research capacity at OSU/UO, etc
● Technical expertise from NGO, university partners
● IT capacity within state CZM program
Partnerships, leveraging, and trust

35.
Benefits of Marine Spatial Planning
For industry and stakeholders:
Increases certainty for investments
Reduces costs in time and effort at project scale
Strengthens industry – industry ties
For government:
Promotes better decisions
Streamlines, clarifies decision process
Reduces the Oops! Factor
For public:
Provides transparency
Preserves wide range of public values

36.
Conclusion:
Oregon’s CMSP Process
Takes time
Takes effort
Takes funding
Never Ends
But:
It beats the alternatives (e.g. settlement agreements, lawsuits
and appeals), and it’s a cost‐effective means of doing business
because it
‐ Improves certainty for private and public investments;
‐ Reduces (but does not eliminate) political blowback.