Mal-founded!“ "will... F FISHRAPPER is a registered credoer which is the exclusive property of Paul Rouse Producdons. Publication No. USPS 350790 \ Volume 5 Number 50 FISHRAPPER December 30, 1980 Page 11 as 50mm saws Pumath August 7, 1980 *ii't‘kti'ktitifii‘kt*tt*ttti*tii‘kttttii'iittti'ki*‘kt‘kt'k‘k'kifiiit**t********t*ttit‘kt‘ttitittt “Down to Nuts & Bolts”on the Nehalem Jetty Project Hold on to your hats ladies and gentlemen and keep your fingers crossed and throw a little salt over your left shOulder. It looks like the Nehalem Bay Jetty Restoration 1 Project is on again. On July 31st, F. E. “Shang” Knight, Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners for 'I‘illamook County and Andrew Lagler, Fifesident for the Port of Nehalem in Wheeler, Oregon, set a Mailgram to U. S. Senator Mark O. Hatfield and Congress- man Les AuCoin. The text of the Mailgram and the article continues on Page 3. LCDC T rying to Shoot Down Project With Consultant’s “Best Shot” The one dark cloud on the shiny horizon is that the LCDC may be trying to block the shallow draft designation and we are publishing two letters which indicate that the spirit of Governor Atiyeh’s answer. to the letter of February 6th to the Governor asking his help :with the LCDC in regards to the classification of *the' "Nehalem River is being negated and delayed again. A new word is to be added to “Pristine”. We now have the yvord “justification” to deal \wln rwl ~ July 22, 1980’ Mr. Al Burns I Land Conservation 1175 Court. N.E. Salem, Oregon 97310 Dear hl :_ and Development Commission with. We have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that this area is not and was not pristine that it is absolutely unnecessary to prove “justification”. We are asking for maintenance of what , existed under law for the past seventy years. We do not have to justify our ‘shalldw draft classification as it exists under ‘ law now and" in the past: The six or‘ seven month prOcrasti~ nation and “stonewalling” by the LCDC is an unwarranted harassment of the citizens of the Nehalm Bay area. Ogden Boomon an Associates Calm a mo Wands M and m,“ 620 swnnn mo Pomona. Oregon97204 lot (503) 223-3254 DEPARWENT 0F uua COI‘iSERVAllOIt Nil) DEVELOPMENT [JUL 231931) . 3 SALEM Reference your letter of July to. 1980 regarding Nehalem B'ayjiavi- gation potential. Enclosed is my "best shot" at the questions in your letter. 1. Looking atmthe Tilldmook Burn hs-a whole (see map attached). i would say the following: o Logs These will move to export markets by deep draft ship. Astoria is favored due to: Proximity to the burn area. Good highway access from the burn area. — Dependable channel depths for deep draft ships. 0 Forest Products — Lumber will move from mill to rail or barge depending on location of market. Both Astoria and Tillamook are favored for barge movement because: Proximity to burn area. - Good highway access from burn area. - Dependable channel for barges. Nehalem is well situated adjacent to the burn area but lacks the excellent eastvwest, access to the area provided by highway 6 and 26 serving Tillamook and Astoria. respectively. With the recent construction of the Tillamook South jetty. the entrance channel appears to retain natural depths for barge traffic without maintenance dredging. Some maintenance dredging is performed at and upstream of the barge dock. At this time. the Tillamook channels are probably the easiest to maintain on the Oregon coast and we would expect the maintenance require- ments to be easily justified. 3. in our opinion. it would be difficult to justify dredging and maintaining a channel at Nehnlcm of sufficient width and depth “roam-q" Land Conservation and Development Commission H75 COURT STREET N.E , SALEM. OREGON 97310 a." , i» ii“ 116’ July El, 1980 nu cm 77/1 N The Honorable F. E. Knight Tillamook County Board of Comissioners Tillamook County Courthouse lillamook. OR 91141 Dear Shang: The Department has had to reschedule its review of the proposed estuary classification for Nehalem Say. 1 am sorry that this is necessary. The principal reason for this change is that we had anticipated receiving all of the materials on the proposed Nehalem classification and management plan by the end of June. Consequently, early in July we had to reassign staff desiqnated for this review to other coastal plans in our office. it is our hope to begin a review of the Nehalem classification and plan by mid September. 1 hope you will take advantage of this additional time to submit the balance of the material identified in your letter of July l7. 1980. i understand that Paul Benson and Gail McEwen have already made some changes based on the staff review of the CREST Plan. i trust their efforts will continue. Please contact your Field Representative, Bob Cortright, if you have any questions. Cordially. V: ‘\L ltd. K-varsten 5/” i V ,Directoc I“ ‘wdxzaamir cc: Port of Nehalem Paul Benson Bob Cortright. DLCD Don Oswalt, DLCD Land Conservation and Development Commission July 22. 1980 Page 2 to encourage ocean barging. We would look for a minimum rej- quirement of 300 x 15' at low water. Because of the Federal investment of over $20 Million and the existence of a shipping dock at Garibaldi less than 20 miles to the south on a principal arterial. it seems hard to justify an entirely new navigation channel requiring new work. and annual maintenance dredging. . The above comments notwithstanding. the Corps of Engineers and the Congress have in past years found justification for shallow draft channels serving small communities with a mini— mum of apparent benefits. Tillamook “Self must be considered an example of this. A. With Tillamook jetties in place and the channel established at barge depths with little or no maintenance dredging. it is hard to describe a scenario where Nehalem could be more justi- fiable through B/C analysis. Note the following: o Tillnmook is at least as accessible to the burn. if not more so. than Nehnlcm. o Tillnmook jetties and channels are in place and represent sunk costs; I o Tillamook is a low maintenance project compared together coastal projects. Maintenance costs at Nehaiem are unknown; 0 The Corps of Engineers are taking approximately 15 years to process projects from study to construction meaning that Nehalcm chnnncl would be unlikely to be available before I995. The above comments relate to commercial navigation and not fishing or recreational boating. For further opinions on this question. you may wish to contact the Portland District Corps of Engineers. Very truly yours. Ogden lineman OB:lp cc: Floyd Shelton. DED . Wouldn’t you like to know what the letter of July 10th , OCR Text: Mal-founded!“ "will... F FISHRAPPER is a registered credoer which is the exclusive property of Paul Rouse Producdons. Publication No. USPS 350790 \ Volume 5 Number 50 FISHRAPPER December 30, 1980 Page 11 as 50mm saws Pumath August 7, 1980 *ii't‘kti'ktitifii‘kt*tt*ttti*tii‘kttttii'iittti'ki*‘kt‘kt'k‘k'kifiiit**t********t*ttit‘kt‘ttitittt “Down to Nuts & Bolts”on the Nehalem Jetty Project Hold on to your hats ladies and gentlemen and keep your fingers crossed and throw a little salt over your left shOulder. It looks like the Nehalem Bay Jetty Restoration 1 Project is on again. On July 31st, F. E. “Shang” Knight, Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners for 'I‘illamook County and Andrew Lagler, Fifesident for the Port of Nehalem in Wheeler, Oregon, set a Mailgram to U. S. Senator Mark O. Hatfield and Congress- man Les AuCoin. The text of the Mailgram and the article continues on Page 3. LCDC T rying to Shoot Down Project With Consultant’s “Best Shot” The one dark cloud on the shiny horizon is that the LCDC may be trying to block the shallow draft designation and we are publishing two letters which indicate that the spirit of Governor Atiyeh’s answer. to the letter of February 6th to the Governor asking his help :with the LCDC in regards to the classification of *the' "Nehalem River is being negated and delayed again. A new word is to be added to “Pristine”. We now have the yvord “justification” to deal \wln rwl ~ July 22, 1980’ Mr. Al Burns I Land Conservation 1175 Court. N.E. Salem, Oregon 97310 Dear hl :_ and Development Commission with. We have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that this area is not and was not pristine that it is absolutely unnecessary to prove “justification”. We are asking for maintenance of what , existed under law for the past seventy years. We do not have to justify our ‘shalldw draft classification as it exists under ‘ law now and" in the past: The six or‘ seven month prOcrasti~ nation and “stonewalling” by the LCDC is an unwarranted harassment of the citizens of the Nehalm Bay area. Ogden Boomon an Associates Calm a mo Wands M and m,“ 620 swnnn mo Pomona. Oregon97204 lot (503) 223-3254 DEPARWENT 0F uua COI‘iSERVAllOIt Nil) DEVELOPMENT [JUL 231931) . 3 SALEM Reference your letter of July to. 1980 regarding Nehalem B'ayjiavi- gation potential. Enclosed is my "best shot" at the questions in your letter. 1. Looking atmthe Tilldmook Burn hs-a whole (see map attached). i would say the following: o Logs These will move to export markets by deep draft ship. Astoria is favored due to: Proximity to the burn area. Good highway access from the burn area. — Dependable channel depths for deep draft ships. 0 Forest Products — Lumber will move from mill to rail or barge depending on location of market. Both Astoria and Tillamook are favored for barge movement because: Proximity to burn area. - Good highway access from burn area. - Dependable channel for barges. Nehalem is well situated adjacent to the burn area but lacks the excellent eastvwest, access to the area provided by highway 6 and 26 serving Tillamook and Astoria. respectively. With the recent construction of the Tillamook South jetty. the entrance channel appears to retain natural depths for barge traffic without maintenance dredging. Some maintenance dredging is performed at and upstream of the barge dock. At this time. the Tillamook channels are probably the easiest to maintain on the Oregon coast and we would expect the maintenance require- ments to be easily justified. 3. in our opinion. it would be difficult to justify dredging and maintaining a channel at Nehnlcm of sufficient width and depth “roam-q" Land Conservation and Development Commission H75 COURT STREET N.E , SALEM. OREGON 97310 a." , i» ii“ 116’ July El, 1980 nu cm 77/1 N The Honorable F. E. Knight Tillamook County Board of Comissioners Tillamook County Courthouse lillamook. OR 91141 Dear Shang: The Department has had to reschedule its review of the proposed estuary classification for Nehalem Say. 1 am sorry that this is necessary. The principal reason for this change is that we had anticipated receiving all of the materials on the proposed Nehalem classification and management plan by the end of June. Consequently, early in July we had to reassign staff desiqnated for this review to other coastal plans in our office. it is our hope to begin a review of the Nehalem classification and plan by mid September. 1 hope you will take advantage of this additional time to submit the balance of the material identified in your letter of July l7. 1980. i understand that Paul Benson and Gail McEwen have already made some changes based on the staff review of the CREST Plan. i trust their efforts will continue. Please contact your Field Representative, Bob Cortright, if you have any questions. Cordially. V: ‘\L ltd. K-varsten 5/” i V ,Directoc I“ ‘wdxzaamir cc: Port of Nehalem Paul Benson Bob Cortright. DLCD Don Oswalt, DLCD Land Conservation and Development Commission July 22. 1980 Page 2 to encourage ocean barging. We would look for a minimum rej- quirement of 300 x 15' at low water. Because of the Federal investment of over $20 Million and the existence of a shipping dock at Garibaldi less than 20 miles to the south on a principal arterial. it seems hard to justify an entirely new navigation channel requiring new work. and annual maintenance dredging. . The above comments notwithstanding. the Corps of Engineers and the Congress have in past years found justification for shallow draft channels serving small communities with a mini— mum of apparent benefits. Tillamook “Self must be considered an example of this. A. With Tillamook jetties in place and the channel established at barge depths with little or no maintenance dredging. it is hard to describe a scenario where Nehalem could be more justi- fiable through B/C analysis. Note the following: o Tillnmook is at least as accessible to the burn. if not more so. than Nehnlcm. o Tillnmook jetties and channels are in place and represent sunk costs; I o Tillamook is a low maintenance project compared together coastal projects. Maintenance costs at Nehaiem are unknown; 0 The Corps of Engineers are taking approximately 15 years to process projects from study to construction meaning that Nehalcm chnnncl would be unlikely to be available before I995. The above comments relate to commercial navigation and not fishing or recreational boating. For further opinions on this question. you may wish to contact the Portland District Corps of Engineers. Very truly yours. Ogden lineman OB:lp cc: Floyd Shelton. DED . Wouldn’t you like to know what the letter of July 10th , Nehalem Valley Historical Society,Under Construction,August 2023 Shipment Scans,Fishrapper Clippings, partial sections,1980,August 7 1980,P01.tif, P01.tif