Institutional mapping of Oregon coastal watershed management options

Ocean and Coastal Management

Volumn 45, Issue 6-7, 2002, Pages 357-375

  Smith, Courtland L ^a  

^a OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FORESTRY; GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS; HEALTH; MAPPING; WATER QUALITY; WATERSHEDS;

WATERSHED MANAGEMENT;

COASTAL ENGINEERING;

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT; GIS; MAPPING; WATER MANAGEMENT; WATER QUALITY;

OREGON; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0036443386     PISSN: 09645691     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0964-5691(02)00075-3     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Imperial MT, Robadue D, Hennessey T. An evolutionary perspective on the development and assessment of the National Estuary Program. Ocean & Coastal Management 1996;20:311-41.
2. Harvey N, Clarke GD, Carvalho P. The role of the Australian Coastcare program in community-based coastal management: A case study from South Australia. Ocean & Coastal Management 2001;44:161-81.
3. Cicin-Sain B, Knecht RW. Integrated Coastal Zone and Ocean Management: Concepts and Practices. Washington, DC: Island Press, 1998.
4. Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team. Forest Ecosystem Management: An Ecological, Economic and Social Assessment. Portland. OR: USDA Forest Service; USDC National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service; USDI. Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service; Environmental Protection Agency, 1993.
5. Jentoft S. Co-managing the coastal zone: Is the task roo complex? Ocean & Coastal Management 2000;43:527-35.
6. Loomis JB, White DS. Economic benefits of tare and endangered species: Summary and meta-analysis. Ecological Economics 1996;18(3):197-206.
7. Pacific Northwest Coastal Ecosystem Regional Study. Coastal Resident Survey, Basic Summary of Responses: Tillamook Bay, Tillamook County, Oregon. Seattle, WA: http://www.pncers.org/pdfs/residentsurveytillamook.pdf, June 18, 2001.
8. Smith CL, Gilden JD, Cone JS, Steel BS. Contrasting views of coastal residents and coastal coho restoration planners. Fisheries 1997;22(12):8-15.
9. Vaidya KL. 2000. Oregon Population Survey: Summary of Findings. Salem, OR: Office of Economic Analysis, Department of Administrative Services. http://www.econ.state.or.us/opb/, June 18, 2001.
10. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Opinion Survey. Olympia, WA, 1997.
11. Whitelaw WE. The Columbia River and the Economy of the Pacific Northwest. Portland, OR: Lewis & Clark Law School Water Law Project and the Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund, 1995.
12. Johnson KN, Franklin J, Thomas JW, Gordon J. Scientific panel on late-successional forest ecosystems. Alternative for Management of Late-successional Forests of the Pacific Northwest. Washington, DC: a Report to the Agricultural Committee and the Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee of the US House of Representatives, 1991.
13. Governor's Natural Resource Office. The Governor's Coastal Salmon Restoration Initiative. Salem, OR: The Governor's Natural Resource Office, 255 Capitol Street, NE; http://www.oregon-plan.org/, June 18, 2001.
14. National Marine Fisheries Service. Final 4(d) Rules for Pacific Salmon. Seattle, WA: http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/1salmon/salmesa/final4d.htm, May 5, 2001.
15. Botkin D, Cummins K, Dunne T, Regier H, Sobel M, Talbot L, Simpson L. Status and Future of Salmon of Western Oregon and Northern California: Findings and Options, Report 8. Santa Barbara, CA: The Center for the Study of the Environment, 1995.
16. National Research Council. Upstream: Salmon and Society in the Pacific Northwest. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1996.
17. Stouder D, Bisson PA, Naiman RJ. Pacific Salmon and their Ecosystems: Status and Future Options. New York, NY: Chapman & Hall, 1995.
18. Hudson WF, Heikkila PA. Integrating public and private restoration strategies: Coquille river of Oregon. In: Williams JE, Wood CA, Dombeck MP, editors. Watershed Restoration: Principles and Practices. Bethesda, MD: American Fisheries Society, 1997. p. 233-50.
19. Huntington CW, Sommarstrom S. An Evaluation of Selected Watershed Councils in the Pacific Northwest and Northern California. Eugene, OR: Pacific Rivers Council, 1999.
20. Kitzhaber JA. Healthy Streams Partnership: Principles and Agreement. Salem, OR: Governor's Office, http://www.governor.state.or.us/governor/press/p961118x.htm, August 17, 2002.
21. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. Summary: Facts Sheets and Information on the 1998 Lists of Water Quality Limited Waterbodies. Portland, OR, 1998.
22. Oregon Progress Board. The Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds: Summary Progress Report. Salem, OR: http://www.oregon-plan.org/progress/, June 18, 2001.
23. Smith CL, Steel BS. Values in valuing salmon. In: Stouder DJ, Bisson PA, Naiman RJ, editors. Pacific Salmon and their Ecosystems: Status and Future Options. New York, NY: Chapman & Hall, 1997. p. 599-616.
24. Sustainable Portland Commission. Workshop on Household Attitudes and Behavior. Portland, OR, 1999.
25. Smith CL. Salmon Symbolism, http://www.orst.edu/instruct/anth481/sal/salsym.html, November 30, 2001.
26. Tillamook Bay National Estuary Project. Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan. Garibaldi, OR, 1999.
27. Habron G. Community-based Adaptive Watershed Management. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, 1999.
28. Oregonian, November 10, 1999. p. D5.
29. Kenney DS, McAllister ST, Caile WH, Peckham JS. The New Watershed Source Book: A Directory and Review of Watershed Initiatives in the Western United States. Boulder, CO: Natural Resources Law Center University of Colorado, 2000.
30. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. Oregon's 2000 Water Quality Status Assessment Report: Section 305 (b) Report. Portland, OR, 2000. http://waterquality.deq.state.or.us/wq/305bRpt/305bReport00a.pdf, June 12, 2001.
31. Smith CL. Stuck on Planning: Institutional Mapping of Activities to Restore Oregon Coastal Ecosystems. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University, Department of Anthropology Working Paper 99-1, 1999.
32. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. Oregon TMDLs Approved by USEPA as of August 2001. http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/TMDLs/ApprovedTMDLs.htm, November 19, 2001.
33. Houck OA. TMDLs: The resurrection of water quality standards-based regulation under the Clean Water Act. ELR 1997;27:10329-44.
34. Houck OA. Are we there yet?: The long road toward water quality-based regulation under the Clean Water Act. ELR 1997;27:10391-401.
35. Houck OA. TMDLs III: A new framework for the Clean Water Act's ambient standards program. ELR 1998;28:10415-43.
36. Tillamook Bay National Estuary Project. Tillamook Bay Environmental Characterization: A Scientific and Technical Summary. Garibaldi, OR, 1998.
37. Risser PG. Oregon State of the Environment Report 2000: Statewide Summary. Salem, OR: Oregon Progress Board, 2000.
38. Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission. http://www.1cd.state.or.us/goalhtml/goals.html, November 19, 2001.
39. Tillamook County Commissioners. Tillamook County Performance Partnership. Tillamook, OR: http://www.co.tillamook.or.us/service/commissioners/Partners/ Performance.html, June 12, 2001.
40. Imperial MT, Summers K. The Tillamook Bay National Estuary Program: using a performance partnership to implement a CCMP. Washington, DC: National Academy of Public Administration, 2000.
41. Smith CL, Steel BS, List PC, Cordray S. Making forest policy: integrating GIS. Journal of Forestry 1995;93(5):31-6.
42. Pacific Fishery Management Council, Salmon Technical Team and Staff Economist. Review of 2001 Ocean Salmon Fisheries. Portland, OR: Pacific Fishery Management Council, 2002.