# CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF COOS, (2014)

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/tribal%3Aconfederated_clusi%3A71ed77eb6552a6f4

## Record

- **Collection:** Tribal code
- **Document type:** Tribal code

## Text

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF COOS,
LOWER UMPQUA & SIUSLAW INDIANS
NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION
MANAGEMENT PLAN

VERSION 3.0

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE
COOS, LOWER UMPQUA, AND SIUSLAW INDIANS
1245 FULTON AVENUE
COOS BAY, OREGON 97420
(541) 888-9577

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF
COOS, LOWER UMPQUA, AND SIUSLAW INDIANS
NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION MANAGEMENT PLAN

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PLAN

1

1.1 INTRODUCTION

1

2.0 319 MANAGEMENT PLAN

2

2.1 INTRODUCTION

2

2.2 GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
TABLE 1. 319 MANAGEMENT PROGRAM MILESTONES
2.2.1 ADMINISTRATION
2.2.2 ASSESSMENT
2.2.3 RESTORATION
2.2.4 MONITORING
2.2.5 EDUCATION
2.2.6 FUNDING NEEDS

3
4
5
5
5
5
5
6

2.3 SPECIFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS FOR NONPOINT SOURCE
POLLUTION CATEGORIES
2.3.1 AGRICULTURAL MILESTONES
2.3.2 FORESTRY
2.3.3 HYDROMODIFICATION
2.3.4 MARINAS/BOATING
2.3.5 ROADS, HIGHWAYS, AND BRIDGES
2.3.6 RESIDENTIAL AND LIGHT COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT

6

3.0 EXSISTING AUTHORITIES AND PROGRAMS ADDRESSING

9

3.1 FEDERAL CLEAN WATER ACT

9

3.2 TRIBAL ORDINANCES

13

3.3 FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
3.3.1 FEDERAL
3.3.2 STATE
3.3.3 PRIVATE

13
13
15
15

7
7
8
8
8
9

3.4 ROLES OF AGENCIES/TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
3.4.1 FEDERAL
3.4.2 STATE

15
15
15

4.0 FORMULAION OF BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

15

5.0 CONCLUSION

17

1.0 NONPOINT SOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN
1.1 INTRODUCTION
The Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians seek to correct and prevent human
caused or linked nonpoint source water pollution. To pursue this objective, Section 319 of the Federal
Clean Water Act provides a method for the Confederated Tribes to follow as they work to improve water
quality. Section 319 outlines the process by requiring two documents. The first is a Nonpoint Source
Pollution Assessment of all reservation and tribal lands. The second document is a Nonpoint Source
Pollution Management Plan that identifies how the Confederated Tribes intend to address the problems
identified in the Assessment.
The Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians have completed and forwarded to
the EPA the 2014 revised Confederated Tribes’ Nonpoint Source Pollution Assessment. This assessment,
referencing data compiled by the Confederated Tribes, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality,
the US Forest Service, the South Coast Watershed Coordinating Council, among others, identifies water
quality impairments to beneficial uses of Tribal waters, including culturally significant salmonid
production, lamprey production and shellfish gathering. This assessment synthesized information from
Tribal evaluations and various watershed assessments and offered conclusions on the primary causes of
the impairments. These conclusions direct the management of nonpoint sources of pollution of Tribal
waters and the Tribal Ancestral Watersheds toward maintenance and improvements in the quality of the
relatively healthy Tribal holdings, and to continued collaboration with other stakeholders in the Ancestral
Watersheds to address nonpoint sources beyond the slivers of Tribal lands.
The goal of the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians’ Nonpoint Source
Pollution Management Program is to eliminate contributions from Tribal holdings to the impairment of
water quality in the Confederated Tribes’ Ancestral Watersheds. The further goal of the Confederated
Tribes Nonpoint Source Pollution Management Plan is to reduce contributions originating beyond Tribal
holdings but which pertain to Tribal waters. The objectives of the Plan include the implementation of
BMPs for Tribal holdings and the continued collaboration with other stakeholders in the Ancestral
Watersheds to cooperatively implement projects to reduce nonpoint source pollution inputs.
The Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians Nonpoint Source Management
Plan identifies the tribal programs to address the problems, as well as the source of authority for creating
the mechanisms to act. In addition, this Nonpoint Management Plan identifies Best Management
Practices (BMPs) under consideration and suggests new programs or activities needed to improve water
quality on tribal lands. Among the suggestions are ways to improve coordination of the efforts of various
governmental agencies, private landowners, and other stakeholders to control nonpoint pollution sources,
along with support for restoration projects and broader adoption of BMPs throughout the Confederated
Tribes’ Ancestral Watersheds. Section 319 of the Clean Water Act requires six principal categories of
information to be included in the Tribes’ Nonpoint Source Management Plan. Each of these categories is
addressed in this document, and they consist of the following.
1.

Best Management Practices which will be used to reduce pollution from each category or
subcategory of NPS pollution, taking into account the impact of the proposed practice on

1

groundwater quality. 1
2.

Nonpoint Source Programs including regulatory and non-regulatory programs for
enforcement, technical assistance, financial assistance, education, training, technology
transfer, demonstration projects, and monitoring/evaluation to assist in the
implementation of BMPs. The lead and cooperating agencies for carrying out these
programs and their specific responsibilities should be clearly identified.

3.

A schedule containing annual milestones for the four-year plan which can be used to
gauge the effectiveness of various programs. The schedule shall provide for utilization of
BMPs at the earliest practicable date.

4.

A certification of adequacy of Tribal Ordinances by the Tribal Attorney that existing laws
and Ordinances provide adequate authority to implement the proposed management
program. If additional legal authority is needed, a schedule for seeking such authority
shall be adequately expeditious to allow implementation within the four year
Management Program.

5.

Funding sources which are available to carry the Tribes program in each of the four fiscal
years, in addition to assistance, provided under section 319.

6.

Federal consistency - The Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw
Indians Management Program should identify federal financial assistance programs and
federal development projects which will be reviewed by the State for their consistency
with the proposed NPS Management Plan.

2.0 319 MANAGEMENT PLAN
2.1 INTRODUCTION
The Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians’ 319 Management Plan focuses on
mitigating and improving conditions that result in the migration of diffused pollutants into the waterways
on or near its land. Because most nonpoint source pollutants enter the waterways via runoff, the
management plan must address the effects of precipitation and runoff over the course of the year, rather
than on a specific point either in space or time.
Unfortunately, nonpoint source pollutants are much more difficult to identify, and their affects are only
felt over time, as there is almost never a single catastrophic event that triggers the problems.
Even more confounding is the fact that nonpoint pollutants often interact with one another and more than
one variable can contribute to the problem. Consequently, measures to correct problems may only be
partially effective. Another difficulty is that the impacts from BMPs take time to evaluate, just as the
impact from nonpoint source pollution is the result of long-lived and cumulative build-up over years or
decades.
The following requirements are taken from Fort Peck Reservation Nonpoint Source Management Plan,” available
at the EPA website: http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/fortpeck/fprnmp.html (.) The entire section is a direct quote
from this source.
1

2

Given the difficulties of measuring nonpoint pollution and pinpointing causes, along with the slow buildup of the problem, it is not surprising that attempts to control and remediate nonpoint source pollution
have been slow. Moreover, the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians’ treaty
was never ratified, The Tribes had no reservation from 1875 until 1984 and the Tribes federal recognition
was terminated in 1954. Restoration in 1984 included no return of land to the Tribes, and recognized the
mere 7.4 acres of land held by the Tribes as the “reservation.” Only recently have the Tribes had the
resources to develop the Tribes’ Department of Natural Resources and to begin drafting BMPs.
The Tribes have approached the need to address nonpoint source pollution by identifying the primary
categories of nonpoint pollution affecting Tribal waters. These categories are agriculture, forestry, and
hydromodificaton. The small and dispersed nature of Tribal holdings result in the conditions of the
Tribes’ holdings contributing now or in the future little if any load to impaired waterbodies, and offering
limited opportunity for watershed improvement projects. The interconnectedness of a watershed
highlight another issue facing any entity wishing to mitigate nonpoint source pollution: in any given
watershed, there are several other agencies, organizations, individual landowners, and groups that have
control over managing and protecting environmental resources.
With the above challenges identified, the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw
Indians Nonpoint Pollution Management Plan stresses prevention, restoration, and a high level of
coordination and cooperation with other land holders in the Confederated Tribes’ Ancestral Watersheds.
The development of BMPs discussed in the Assessment is also referenced in this Management Plan.
Education and enforcement capacity will contribute to prevention of contribution of pollutants by Tribal
land users and managers. In addition to BMPs, the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and
Siuslaw Indians will establish standards and regulate nonpoint source pollution through its codes and
Ordinances. Moreover, the Tribes anticipate developing educational programs to encourage voluntary
compliance and participation from members and other land users.

2.2

GENERAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

The Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians’ Department of Natural
Resources, through the direction of the Tribal Council, is responsible for the administration of the Tribes’
Environmental Ordinances. The Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians’
Nonpoint Source Management Plan is divided into two parts. The first part is the General Management
Program, while the second is the Specific Management Program. As the titles suggest, the General
Management Program focuses on the overall strategy and philosophy for managing and eliminating
nonpoint source pollution. The second part examines specific categories of nonpoint source pollution and
addresses the programs designed to ameliorate the harmful effects of agriculture, hydromodification,
forestry, etc. The Specific Management Program identifies BMPs, prioritizes impaired waterways and
proposes solutions for the existing problems. In addition, the Specific Management Program section
establishes milestones for the overall program and targets dates to help measure the Program’s
effectiveness. As part of the Water Quality Monitoring Program, the Tribes have a Water Quality
Monitoring Strategy that guides its water quality monitoring activities. Given the current fiscal
environment and availability of Tribal resources, implementation of the majority of 319 goals, milestones
and targets will depend on the availability of funding.
See Table 1.

3

TABLE 1. 319 MANAGEMENT PROGRAM MILESTONES.
ITEM

1

ACTIVITY
Complete Tribal review and submission to
Tribal Council of Surface Water Quality
Standards, Invasive Species Control,
Emergency Preparedness/hazardous waste,
Ordinances and BMPs

OUTPUT

DATE

BMPs and Ordinances

As time allows

2

Initiate and implement tribal water quality
monitoring program as per EPA approved
QAPP

3

Request 319 funding from EPA for
implementation of Management Plan

Data on temperature,
pH, conductivity,
dissolved oxygen,
turbidity, salinity,
nutrients, bacteria,
macro-invertebrates,
and habitat,
Successful application
leading to funding

4

Submit revised NPS Assessment and
Management Plan to EPA as necessary

2 Documents to the
EPA

5

6

Publish articles in Tribal Newsletter on the
Nonpoint Source Pollution Program
Implement improvements to the storm
resistance of roads and other road-related
turbidity and other nonpoint source control
projects

7

Implement riparian vegetation management
projects

8

Implement instream structure restoration
projects

9

Outreach and/or tours of nonpoint source
pollution management projects

10

Periodic Review of Watershed Assessment

11
12
13

Complete brochures on Tribal nonpoint
source pollution Ordinances and BMPs
Submit Quarterly Progress Reports to EPA
Incorporate priorities into work-plan for
Tribe's program and submit proposals to
funding sources (Tribes, EPA, BIA, Oregon
Watershed Enhancement Board, etc.)
4

Newsletter Articles
Decreased road-related
sediment and other
nonpoint source
pollution inputs
Diverse indigenous
riparian vegetation with
maximum erosion
control and shade
capability
Increase sorting and
storage of bedload to
pre-disturbance
hydrologic functions
Outreach and/or tours to
increase awareness and
understanding
Analysis of watershed
processes and
conditions

Ongoing

Ongoing
Next review
scheduled for
February 1st, 2020
At least one per
year
As funding allows
and pending on
restoration of forest
lands

Ongoing

As funding allows

Annually

At least annually

Brochures

Review annually

4/year

Quarterly

Work-plan proposals

Ongoing

2.2.1 ADMINISTRATION – Administration, including coordination of the General Management Program
and the Specific Management Programs, will be carried out by the Department of Natural Resources of
the Tribal Administration. The Director of the Department of Natural Resources is supervised directly by
the Tribal Administrator, who reports directly to and receives direction from the Tribal Council.

2.2.2 ASSESSMENT - Identifying the nonpoint source pollution problems on the holdings of the
Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians demands a comprehensive knowledge
of studies, reports, monitoring data, and professional judgment. Information and data regarding nonpoint
source pollution comes from sources including the Confederated Tribes Water Quality Program, Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, the US Forest Service,
and watershed associations.

2.2.3 RESTORATION – Based on the Assessment of Tribal holdings and the Ancestral Watersheds,
watersheds restoration projects will be implemented to address contributions of Tribal holdings to
nonpoint source pollution. Projects will prioritize pollutions which impair water quality to the extent that
the affected waterbody is on the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) 303(d) list off
water quality limited waterbodies. Projects will generally rely on time-tested methods of restorations,
such as those described in the 1997 Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board Guide to Aquatic Habitats
Restoration; projects may also employ innovative and promising new methods of watershed restoration.
Restoration projects completed on Tribal holdings include riparian invasive species removal projects. The
Tribes have also advocated for similar projects, as well as livestock exclusion projects and projects to
improve the storm resistance of roads, through the Tribes Section 319 funded participation in watershed
associations and small grant review teams. The Tribes 2003 Nonpoint Source Pollution Assessment and
Management Plan are two of the technical references used to support and review project funding requests
for the Mid-Coast Small Grant Review Team.

2.2.4

MONITORING - As the Tribes have implemented the Section 106 Clean Water Act Tribal Water

Quality Monitoring Program, more data has become available regarding Tribal waters. This data
collection has confirmed State 303d listings, while also providing a fuller dataset that is typically used to
document impairments to beneficial uses of water. Determining BMP effectiveness may prove difficult
due to the generally small size of Tribal holdings. Pending enactment of legislation which would restore a
significant acreage of forest land to the Confederated Tribes, the Tribes will implement the Tribal Water
Quality Monitoring Plan, which integrates the concepts of monitoring for nonpoint sources or pollution
such as elevated levels of temperature and turbidity, in the Tribal Forest. These efforts are intended to
improve the accuracy of the Confederated Tribes’ assessment, as well as to evaluate the effectiveness of
the BMPs to the maximum extent possible.

2.2.5

EDUCATION - In the long run, no pollution reduction and prevention program can be successful

without voluntary cooperation and compliance from Tribal Members, leaseholders, and other landowners
in the watershed. Therefore, education to explain the benefits of compliance is essential for success.
Education efforts are accordingly designed to promote understanding of the problem and BMPs and to
promote compliance with all Ordinances. The Nonpoint Source Pollution Management Program of the
Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians has developed and will continue to
develop educational materials designed for members, leaseholders and stakeholders. Outreach activities
have included and will include presentations to stakeholder groups and other affected parties and tours of
Tribal holdings to demonstrate BMPs and restoration projects. In particular, the Nonpoint Source
Pollution Management Program has utilized articles in the monthly Tribal Newsletter, and have found
these to be the most effective outreach tool to provide information to Tribal Members. Additionally, the
Confederated Tribes’ website has proven to be a useful outreach tool. The 2003 Nonpoint Source
5

Pollution Assessment and Management Plan have been posted on the website, and a neighboring Indian
tribe has used these documents as a foundation to develop and establish their own nonpoint source
pollution program. In addition to Tribal initiatives, the Confederated Tribes will work cooperatively with
other Tribal, federal, state, and local governments, and other stakeholder groups, and the Tribes will
continue to be actively involved in the watershed associations of the Ancestral Territory.

2.2.6 FUNDING NEEDS
The Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians anticipated annual funding at
$33,300 dollars. This funding currently supports the bare minimum functions of the Tribes

Nonpoint source Pollution Management Program; Nonpoint Source Pollution Assessment and
Management Plan periodic review and revision, newsletter articles, participation in watershed
association meetings to advocate for projects to address nonpoint source pollution, and outreach
activities. This funding falls far short of what is required to fully and proactively address
nonpoint source pollution affecting waters of the reservation.
2.3 SPECIFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS FOR NONPOINT POLLUTION CATEGORIES
The Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians are implementing the Tribal
Nonpoint Source Pollution Management Program, Water Quality Monitoring Program, and Tribal
Response Program and have identified a suite of BMP sources from which to select or tailor BMPs for
Tribal holdings, and have secured funding, approved work plans to adopt BMPs, and propose Ordinances
intended to prevent nonpoint source pollution from originating from Tribal holdings. The management
decisions the Tribes have and will make are based on the best science available, professional judgment,
and site-specific considerations, and cultural priorities. Among the considerations the Tribes take into
account are the following variables.
1. Severity of pollution problem and extent to which tribal and other beneficial uses are
impaired;2
2. Potential for the Tribes to effectively address the pollution problem, given technical, financial,
and geographic/hydrologic constraints (i.e. optimizing environmental and economic benefits);
3. Potential for actions to be a component of a larger reach, watershed, Gene Conservation Group,
or Evolutionarily Significant Unit scale effort.
4. Cultural considerations addressed by the action.
As the Confederated Tribes develop and implement projects, the Tribes continually review and evaluate
the programs and activities. In addition, the Confederated Tribes may participate in projects when the
Tribes are not the sole or primary sponsor: the Tribes have teamed with watershed associations, soil and
water conservation districts, and other government agencies to work toward common goals. Regardless
of the specific arrangement, the goals shall remain the systematic enforcement of Ordinances on Tribal
holdings and application of BMPs to prevent nonpoint source pollution and to restore the processes which
maintain water quality and functioning aquatic habitats. This Nonpoint Source Management Plan and the
milestones in Table 1.of pertinent nonpoint source pollution category activities and outcomes will serve as
the Tribes’ Action Plan for achieving the goal of restoring water quality in the Ancestral Watersheds.

2.3.1 AGRICULTURAL
2

Ibid

6

Agricultural practices are believed to be a significant if not the primary contributor to the impairment of
Tribal holdings in the Coos Estuary. Fecal coliform bacteria, believed to mostly originate from cattle
ranches and dairies, contribute to the impairment of the Coos Estuary and may contribute directly or
indirectly to impairment of the Siuslaw Estuary. Elevated turbidity and temperature impairs the water
quality of the North Fork Siuslaw River/Estuary and many other fish-bearing streams of the ancestral
watersheds. Depressed dissolved oxygen concentration impairs the water quality of the Sixes River,
located in a small coastal watershed with a large amount of nutrient input from livestock instream
watering. The Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians do not currently nor
will in the foreseeable future hold land in agricultural use. The Confederated Tribes will none-the-less
develop the regulatory capacity to prevent non-point source pollution from agricultural lands through the
enactment of an Agricultural Ordinance which will include components to address nonpoint source
pollution. Utilization of agricultural BMPs for nonpoint source pollution control on Confederated Tribes
of Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians land is voluntary, but compliance with Water Quality
Standards is not. These BMPs and Ordinances will rely heavily on Natural Resource Conservation
Service guidance, as well as local Agricultural Water Quality Management Plans. The Confederated
Tribes will use the Tribes traditional knowledge, political influence, and available financial resources to
assist agricultural landowners in the Ancestral Watersheds to eliminate nonpoint sources of agricultural
pollution.

2.3.2 FORESTRY
Forestry activities have a profound effect on the water quality of Tribal waters. While forestry is not the
sole contributor to the impairments, elevated turbidity and temperature levels impair the water quality of
the Tribal holding at the site of the Ancestral Siuslaw Village on the North Fork Siuslaw Estuary.
Elevated temperature impairs the water quality of the Sixes River, and when A-grade data on turbidity is
collected, evaluation indicates that the Sixes River will likely be listed for sediment as well. Much of the
Tribal land holdings are forested, however, the Tribes do not actively manage forested Tribal holdings due
to cultural, historical, environmental, or silvicultural reasons, depending on the tract. As with agricultural
practices, the forestry practices that do impact tribal water quality tend to be upstream (or tidally
downstream) operations, largely on private lands.
While the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians currently do not engage in
significant commercial forestry, the Tribes continue to pursue the legislative transfer of a significant
acreage of federal forest land to the Tribes. The opportunity and responsibility to manage the Tribal
Forest will dominate the Confederated Tribes’ Nonpoint Source Pollution Management Program. The
Tribal Forest will be managed according to the provision of the National Indian Forest Resources
Management Act, as well as the enabling legislation which currently and in all probability will continue to
direct the management of the Tribal Forest to achieve the management and restoration goals for nearby
and adjacent Federal land, currently managed under the Northwest Forest Plan. Under the legislation, the
Bureau of Indian Affairs, with the assistance of the land management agency which currently manages the
federal land, will develop a management plan for the Tribal Forest. Within this Tribal Forest
Management Plan will be incorporated the goals and objectives of the Confederated Tribes Nonpoint
Source Pollution Management Plan, including Tribal BMPs and Ordinances. While the language of the
legislation will largely determine these Tribal BMPs and Ordinances, the Confederated Tribes will
consider all sources of forestry BMPs which can contribute to the minimization of nonpoint source
pollution related to forestry activities, including the Northwest Forest Plan Record of Decision, including
the Aquatic Conservation Strategies, the (in progress) Management and Habitat Conservation Plans for
the Northwest State Forests and the Elliott State Forest, the Oregon Department of Forestry 2002 Forest
Roads Manual, and references available from the US EPA.
With or without the restoration of forest land to the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and
7

Siuslaw Indians, the Confederated Tribes will implement forest watershed restoration projects in Tribal
holdings, and the Confederated Tribes will use the Tribes’ traditional knowledge, political influence, and
available financial resources to assist forest landowners in the Ancestral Watersheds to eliminate nonpoint
sources of silvicultural pollution.

2.3.3 Hydromodification
Hydromodification is a process that can relate to several other categories of nonpoint source pollution.
For example, any activity which increases erosion can result in hydromodification. Consequently, the
best management practices for hydrologic and habitat modification often relate directly to other categories
of nonpoint source pollution. As discussed in the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and
Siuslaw Indians’ Nonpoint Source Pollution Assessment, hydromodification in the combined form of
large pulses of sediment, riparian vegetation removal, and instream structure removal, indirectly related to
forestry and agricultural practices, has resulted in water quality (elevated temperature and sediment)
impairments due to losses of stream bank stability and shade, and due to shallower base flows,
particularly in stream channels downcut to bedrock. While many activities that result in
hydromodification are regulated and permitted under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and other
regulatory pathways, many other activities are not jurisdictional to this regulation, thus BMPs and
voluntary cooperation in restoration projects are a main avenue in addressing water quality impairment
resulting from hydromodification in the Confederated Tribes’ Ancestral Watersheds. Where incidental
hydromodifications are presumed to potentially arise from nonpoint source activity categories, BMPs and
Ordinances for those activities are presumed to minimize or prevent adverse hydromodification. Where
hydromodification is the intended outcome, the Terms and Conditions attached to Section 404 Clean
Water Act permits are presumed to minimize, prevent, or mitigate adverse hydromodification. The
Confederated Tribes will use the Tribes traditional knowledge, political influence, and available financial
resources to assist landowners in the Ancestral Watersheds to eliminate nonpoint sources pollution arising
from hydromodifications.

2.3.4 Marinas/Boating
Neither marinas nor boating have been found to contribute to impairments of Tribal water quality.
Marinas and boating can contribute to water quality impairments through release of petrochemicals, other
fuel exhaust pollutants, and pathogens and nutrients from human waste or fish cleaning stations. The
Confederated Tribes currently hold a large proportion of the shoreline of Munsel Lake. The Tribes will
keep this holding in “pristine” condition and protect the area from future non-point source pollutants from
recreational boating. The Tribes recently have attained 14 acres around Ten Mile Lake within the Coos
Watershed, this property, Camp Easter Seals, is in the process of being developed into a culture and kids
camp for the Tribes. The known impacts of Non-point source pollutants from boating on the lake and its’
tributaries is limited, and will require further research by the Tribes. Any boating facilities, on all tribally
held lands will be operated consistently with the guidance provided by the ODEQ manual on marinas.
Due to the limited level of anticipated activity in this category, and due to the limited concern over the
potential level of impacts of Tribal boating, the development of BMPs and Ordinances will likely be a low
priority until such time as significant activity is expected to occur.

2.3.5 Roads, Highways, and Bridges
Roads have a major effect on watershed hydrology through their location and tendency to modify
drainage patterns. Roads associated with forest management are a significant contributor of fine
sediment, have the potential to result in hydromodification through contributions large pulses of sediment
(fill failures) or through construction in and consequent disconnection of floodplains. Impermeable road
surfaces (including bridges) and associated drainage structures tend to collect leaking vehicle fluids and
8

route these substances to waterbodies: while no Tribal waters are listed as impaired by any of these
pollutants, they of course are a concern.
Nonpoint source pollution management of forest roads is addressed in the Forestry Activity section above.
The Confederate Tribes currently hold no “roads” other than driveways and parking lots. The
Confederated Tribes will none-the-less develop the regulatory capacity to prevent non-point source
pollution from roads through the enactment of BMPs and a Roads Nonpoint Source Pollution Control
Ordinance. The BMPs and Ordinance will rely on guidance available from the US EPA, ODEQ, Oregon
Department of Transportation 1999 Routine Road Maintenance Guide, and NOAA Fisheries Biological
Opinions. The Roads Management Program milestones are summarized in Table 1.

2.3.6 Residential and Light Commercial Development
Light development can affect hydrology and contribute nonpoint source pollution including elevated
temperature, sediment, vehicle fluids, yard chemicals, refuse, pet waste, etc. While the Confederated
Tribes own several residences and other small lots, with the possible exception of pet waste, nonpoint
source light development pollution from these sources has not been found to impair Tribal waters,
although it is of concern. Development and administrative and commercial operations of the Hatch Tract
has resulted in no nonpoint source pollution being detected. An Ordinance requiring all Tribal
construction to conform to the Universal Building Code has been adopted by the Tribes. The Light
Development Management Program milestones are summarized in Table 1.

3.0 EXISTING AUTHORITIES AND PROGRAMS ADDRESSING NONPOINT SOURCE
POLLUTION
3.1

Federal Clean Water Act3

Growing public awareness and concern for controlling water pollution led to enactment of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972: this law became commonly known as the Clean Water
Act (CWA). The Act established the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters
of the United States. It gave EPA the authority to implement pollution control programs such as setting
wastewater standards for industry. The Clean Water Act also contained requirements to set water quality
standards for all contaminants in surface waters. The Act made it unlawful for any person to discharge
any pollutant from a point source into navigable waters, unless a permit was obtained under its provisions.
It also funded the construction of sewage treatment plants under the construction grants program and
recognized the need for planning to address the critical problems posed by nonpoint source pollution.
The Clean Water Act has been amended several times. Those amendments include major revisions or
changes in 1977, 1981, 1987, 1995, and 2002.
Subsequent enactments modified some of the earlier Clean Water Act provisions. Revisions in 1981
streamlined the municipal construction grants process, improving the capabilities of treatment plants built

3

Federal laws and guidelines are quoted from EPA websites, including the Fort Peck document provided as a
template at: http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/fortpeck/fprnmp.html (.) Other sections of federal law come from other
EPA sites including: http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/sec319cwa.html ;
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/sdwa/sdwa.html & http://www.epa.gov/water/laws.html and the entire text of the
Clean Water Act is available at: http://www.epa.gov/r5water/cwa.htm

9

under the program.”4 “Amendments to the CWA added in 1981 provided for reservations to receive grants
to carry out water quality management planning activities. This allowed the Tribes to receive federal
funding to help carry out basic water quality management planning activities with 208 funds.”5 To date,
the Confederated Tribes have not undertaken Section 208.

Section 303. Section 303 of the CWA requires that EPA review and approve water quality standards to
assure those standards are consistent with the requirements of the CWA. Water quality standards are
provisions of local, state, or federal law which consists of a designated use or uses for the waters of the
United States, and water quality criteria to maintain and protect such uses. Water quality standards must
protect public health or welfare, enhance the quality of water and serve the purposes of the CWA.
Accordingly, water quality standards influence and affect all water pollution control programs.
EPA guidance indicates that the relationship between nonpoint source pollution control and water quality
standards should be based upon three basic principles:
1.

Best management practices must be designed to meet water quality standards. Best management
practices are the primary mechanism to enable the achievement of water quality standards. The
Tribes expect that the proper implementation BMPs will achieve water quality standards. For
proposed nonpoint source activities, BMPs designed and implemented in accordance with a tribal
approved process will normally constitute compliance with the CWA. Once the Tribes have
approved BMPs, the BMPs become the primary mechanism for meeting water quality standards.
Proper installation, operation, and maintenance of tribal approved BMPs are presumed to meet a
landowner's or manager's obligation for compliance with applicable water quality standards.

2. The effectiveness of BMPs must be demonstrated. Once the BMPs have been installed/applied
and sufficient time has elapsed to establish the controls and monitor their effectiveness,
attainment or maintenance of water quality standards and other water quality goals should be
verified. If subsequent evaluation indicates that approved and properly implemented BMPs are
not achieving water quality standards, the Tribes should take steps to revise the BMPs, evaluate
the water quality standards for appropriateness, or both. Through the interactive process of
monitoring and adjustments of BMPs and/or water quality standards, it is anticipated and
expected that BMPs will lead to achievement of water quality standards.
3. If BMPs cannot adequately protect and maintain water quality standards, the Tribes must either
revise the BMPs to ensure protection and maintenance of water quality standards or revise the
standards or reevaluate the activity. If water quality standards are not being met, then the Tribe
may require that the NPS controls be modified or the practice causing the nonpoint source
pollution cease.
It should also be noted that EPA's regulations to implement Section 303 (40 CFR Part 131) require that
the Tribes adopt an antidegradation policy. Antidegradation policy requires that:
1. Existing instream water uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect the existing uses
shall be maintained and protected;

4

“Clean Water Act” available at: http://www.epa.gov/r5water/cwa.htm

5

Fort Peck Management Plan at: http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/fortpeck/fprnmp.html

10

2. Where the quality of the waters exceed levels necessary to support propagation of fish, shellfish,
and wildlife and recreation in and on the water, that quality shall be maintained and protected
unless the Tribes find that after full satisfaction of the intergovernmental coordination, that
allowing lower water quality is necessary to accommodate important economic or social
development in the area in which the waters are located. In allowing such degradation or lower
water quality, the Tribes shall assure water quality adequate to protect existing uses fully. Further,
the tribes shall assure that there shall be achieved the highest statutory and regulatory
requirements for all new and existing point sources and all cost effective and reasonable BMPs
for nonpoint source control;
3. Where high quality waters constitute an Outstanding National Resource, such as waters of
National and State parks, and wildlife refuges and waters of exceptional recreational or ecological
significance, that water quality shall be maintained and protected.
Nonpoint pollution activities are not exempt from the anti-degradation policy. Tribes are required to
assure that the highest statutory and regulatory requirements for all new and existing point sources and all
cost effective and reasonable BMPs for nonpoint source control shall be achieved. If a particular activity
will degrade water quality even after all these measures are applied, Tribes have to:
1. Identify proposed water quality degradation (where and to what degree water quality will be
lowered);
2. Determine that the degradation is necessary to accommodate important social or economic
development.

Section 314. Section 314 of the CWA requires the Tribes to submit a biennial report on water quality in
lakes on the reservation. These reports are to identify: eutrophic condition of tribal lakes; processes to
control sources of pollution in such lakes; procedures in conjunction with appropriate federal agencies, to
restore the quality of such lakes; methods to mitigate effects of high acidity; a list of tribal owned lakes
for which uses are impaired; and an assessment of the status and trends of water quality in lakes including
the nature and extent of pollution loading from point and nonpoint sources.
Funding is authorized to make grants to Tribes that have submitted satisfactory lake water quality reports
to control pollution and restore and protect lakes. It is not know at this time whether funding will
appropriated to address nonpoint pollution problems affecting lakes on the Confederated Tribes of Coos,
Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Reservation.

Section 319. The 1987 Water Quality Act passed by Congress on February 4, 1987 amended the CWA
to add a new Section 319, entitled "Management of Nonpoint Sources of Pollution." Section 319 requires
each Tribe to develop a comprehensive statewide nonpoint pollution assessment report, and to submit a
management program for control of nonpoint source pollution on the reservation.
The assessment report should identify reservation waters, which without additional action to control
nonpoint sources of pollution, cannot reasonably be expected to attain or maintain applicable water
quality standards or the goals or requirements of the CWA. The assessment report should also identify
categories and subcategories of nonpoint sources, as well as particular nonpoint sources that contribute
pollution to identified waters, and include descriptions of Tribal management processes and control
programs.
11

The nonpoint management programs are to include: best management practices to reduce pollutant
loadings from each category and subcategory of nonpoint source pollution identified in the Tribes'
Assessment report; specific management programs to achieve implementation of best management
practices; a schedule for program implementation; certification of necessary legal authorities; and sources
of funding to support implementation. The assessment report and the management program must be
submitted to EPA, which has 180 days to approve or disapprove the report and program.
Upon approval of the assessment report and management program, Tribes are eligible for Section 319
grants from EPA to assist in implementing the management program. The federal share of implementation
grants shall not exceed 75%. Eligible implementation cost include costs of implementing regulatory or
non-regulatory programs for enforcement, technical assistance, financial assistance, education, training,
technology transfer and demonstration projects. Monitoring which is done to support design of watershedlevel control programs or to evaluate a particular implementation project is eligible. General assessment
and planning activities as well as administrative costs are not considered implementation. Grants may also
be provided for protecting groundwater quality with the maximum federal share set at 75%.
EPA has been directed to give priority in making 319 implementation grants to nonpoint projects which
will control particularly difficult nonpoint source problems, implement innovative control methods or
practices, control interstate nonpoint source pollution, or carry out groundwater quality protection
activities.
Each tribe is required to submit an annual report to EPA and the Administrator of EPA is required to
report annually to Congress on the program.

Section 401. Section 401 of the Federal CWA requires that any applicant apply for a federal license or
permit for the conduct of any activity which results in a discharge into the navigable waters of the U.S.
The 401 certification authority is administered on the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and
Siuslaw Reservation by EPA. Section 401 provides the EPA with authority to assure that federally
permitted or licensed activities which can result in nonpoint source pollution, do not violate Tribal Water
Quality Standards (State water quality standards specify uses for the waters of the reservation, and the
water quality criteria necessary to protect those uses.
Section 401 provides the Tribe with a mechanism to modify potentially damaging federally permitted or
licensed projects. This authority is frequently applied toward dredge and fill permits issued by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers and licenses issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

Section 404. Section 404 of the Federal CWA establishes a permit program for the discharge of dredged
or fill material into the waters of the U.S. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE), Portland District,
administers this program on the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Reservation.
Discharges of dredged or fill material are frequently associated with nonpoint source pollution-causing
activities occurring in or adjacent to streams and wetlands. The 404 permit program allows a mechanism
to require implementation of appropriate BMPs for the control of nonpoint source pollution by stipulation
of BMPs as a condition of the permit. The program also allows opportunity for consultation among the
COE, EPA, USFWS, and Conservation Districts regarding appropriate BMPs.
Discharges of dredged or fill material into wetlands are regulated under the 404 program. This serves as a
significant means for protecting of wetlands, thus preserving their important function in improving water
quality through assimilation of nutrients and retention of sediments.
12

3.2 Tribal Ordinances
Previously, the EPA, through the Indian General Assistance Program and Tribal Response Program,
provided funds and approved workplans for the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and
Siuslaw Indians to develop a suite of Environmental Ordinances. The Tribes, as time allows will continue
to develop Environmental Ordinances.

3.3

Financial Assistance

3.3.1 Federal
Natural Resources Conservation Service
The Natural Resources Conservation Service administers two major programs that provide financial
assistance to projects, which may reduce pollution from nonpoint sources, which are of interest to the
Tribes. These programs are Public Law 566 and the Resource Conservation and Development Program.

Conservation Reserve Program6
The Conservation Reserve Program was authorized by the Food Security Act of 1985 and reauthorized by
the Food and Agricultural Trade Act of 1990. The Farm Service Agency administers the financial and
compliance provisions of the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) through the Commodity Credit
Corporation. Under the CRP, producers enter a contract to place highly erodible cropland into a
conservation reserve for a ten to fifteen year period. The producer seeds the land to permanent cover to
control erosion. Producers agree not to harvest, graze or crop the land for ten years. A significant change
in the CRP program as of February 1988 allows the inclusion of areas dedicated to a vegetative filter strip
along streams and permanent waterways. This strip to be planted to grass, shrubs or trees will normally be
between 66 and 99 feet in width and should substantially increase streambank stability while substantially
reducing sediments and nutrients and other chemicals from reaching water courses. Areas under CRP
contract as filter strips must have previously been cropland and do not have to meet erodibility criteria of
other CRP lands.

Water & Environmental Program
The Water and Environmental Program (WEP) is operated by the USDA’s Rural Utility Service. The
WEP provides loans, grants and loan guarantees for drinking water, sanitary sewer, solid waste and storm
drainage facilities in rural areas and cities and towns of 10,000 or less. Public bodies, nonprofit
organizations and recognized Indian tribes may qualify for assistance. WEP also makes grants to
nonprofit organizations to provide technical assistance and training to assist rural communities with their
water, wastewater, and solid waste problems.”7

Water Bank Program8
The Water Bank Program, authorized in 1970, provides that persons having eligible wetlands in important
migratory waterfowl nesting, breeding, and feeding areas could enter into ten year agreements and receive
“Fort Peck Nonpoint Source Management Plan,” http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/fortpeck/fprnmp.html (.) and
USDA Conservation Reserve Program Website: http://www.fsa.usda.gov/dafp/cepd/crp.htm
6

Rural Utility Service, USDA, “Water and Environmental Home Page: ZZZZNote on the web page, Home Page is
two wordsZZZZZ http://www.usda.gov/rus/water/index.htm
7

8

“Fort Peck Nonpoint Source Management Plan,” http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/fortpeck/fprnmp.html (.)

13

annual payments for preventing the serious loss of wetlands and for preserving, restoring, and improving
inland fresh water and designated adjacent areas.

Resource Conservation and Development (RC&D)
According to the NRCS, “the purpose of the Resource Conservation and Development (RC&D) program
is to accelerate the conservation, development and utilization of natural resources, improve the general
level of economic activity, and to enhance the environment and standard of living in designated RC&D
areas. It improves the capability of State, tribal and local units of government and local nonprofit
organizations in rural areas to plan, develop and carry out programs for resource conservation and
development. The program also establishes or improves coordination systems in rural areas. Current
program objectives focus on improvement of quality of life achieved through natural resources
conservation and community development which leads to sustainable communities, prudent use
(development), and the management and conservation of natural resources. RC&D areas are locally
sponsored areas designated by the Secretary of Agriculture for RC&D technical and financial assistance
program funds.”9

Soil and Water Conservation Assistance
“The Soil and Water Conservation Assistance (SWCA) provides cost share and incentive payments to
farmers and ranchers to voluntarily address threats to soil, water, and related natural resources, including
grazing land, wetlands, and wildlife habitat. SWCA will help landowners comply with Federal and state
environmental laws and make beneficial, cost-effective changes to cropping systems, grazing
management, nutrient management, and irrigation.”10

USDA Rural Development
The former Farmers Home Administration (FmHA) is now part of the Rural Development within the
USDA. Rural Development continues to make loans and grants in rural areas. Several of these below
market rate loans benefit water quality concerns. .

Environmental Protection Agency
The Environmental Protection Agency provides financial assistance to Tribes for activities related to
nonpoint source pollution control under several sections of the CWA. Under Section 319 of the CWA,
financial assistance can be provided to Tribes for the implementation of Tribal Nonpoint Source Pollution
Management Programs. Section 319 asks that Tribes prepare a comprehensive reservation wide nonpoint
pollution assessment report and a management program.
Upon approval of the assessment report and management program, Tribes are eligible for Section 319
grants from EPA to assist in implementing the management program. The federal share of implementation
grants shall not exceed 75 percent. Eligible implementation costs include costs of implementing
regulatory or non-regulatory programs for enforcement, technical assistance, financial assistance,
education, training, technology transfer, and demonstration projects. Monitoring which is done to support
design of watershed level control programs or to evaluate a particular implementation project is eligible.
Natural Resources Conservation Service, “Resource Conservation and Development Program,”
http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/rcd/
9

Natural Resources Conservation Service, “Soil and Water Conservation Assistance,”
http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/swca/
10

14

General assessment and planning activities as well as administrative costs are not considered
implementation. Grants may also be provided for protection ground water quality with the maximum
federal share set at 75%.
EPA has been directed to give priority in making 319 implementation grants to nonpoint projects which
will control particularly difficult nonpoint source problems, implement innovative control methods or
practices, control interstate nonpoint source pollution, or carry out groundwater quality protection
activities.

NOAA Fisheries
NOAA Fisheries provides funds for salmonid habitat restoration through its Pacific Coastal Salmon
Recovery Fund (PCSRF).

US Fish and Wildlife Service
The US Fish and Wildlife Service provides funds through the Partners for Wildlife program and through
programs dedicated to Tribal projects.

3.3.2 State
Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board
The Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board (OWEB) provides funds for watershed restoration projects.

3.3.3 Private
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation provides support for fisheries and wildlife enhancement
projects

3.4 Roles of Agencies/Technical Assistance
3.4.1 State
Oregon Departments of Fish and Wildlife, Environmental Quality, Forestry, Agriculture..
These state agencies provide information and technical assistance for their respective resources.

3.4.2 Federal
US Environmental Protection Agency; US Department of the Interior Bureau of Indian
Affairs, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management, US Geological Survey;
US Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service, US Forest Service.
These federal agencies provide information and technical assistance for their respective resources.

4.0 FORMULATION OF BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
Categories, subcategories, and sources of nonpoint pollution have been discussed in the Confederated
Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians’ Nonpoint Source Pollution Assessment and in this
15

Nonpoint Source Pollution Management Plan. The example of a Tribal nonpoint source pollution
management plan provided by the Fort Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes 1993 Fort Peck Tribes
Nonpoint Source Management Plan states that “Section 319 of the Federal Clean Water Act requires each
tribe to describe its process for identifying the measures it will use to control these categories,
subcategories, and sources.” The Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians
have developed BMPs for certain activities relevant to Tribal trust land and will continue to complete and
periodically review BMPs. EPA General Assistance Program (GAP) funds have been secured to develop
Ordinances which will provide specific guidance to minimize adverse effects on water quality by
activities including ground disturbing activities and stormwater runoff associated with site development;
riparian vegetation buffers in forested, agricultural, residential, and commercial landscapes; and road
construction and maintenance activities. A Tribal Forest Management Plan will be completed pending the
enactment of and as per the statutory provisions of legislation which proposes to restore a significant
acreage of federal forest land to the Confederated Tribes. The general process for the development of
BMPs for Tribal holdings is fairly uniform, although the details of the process will vary with the
particular holding.
In general, the Tribal Administration will draft BMPs based on research of pertinent existing local,
county, state, federal, and other Tribal BMPs and statutes. Through the Tribal newspaper and through
Tribal Council meetings, the Tribal Membership will be informed of the progress of BMP development
and will be encouraged to provide input. After this scoping and public comment period is complete, the
BMPs will be submitted in Ordinance form to the Tribal Council. The Confederated Tribes requires that
proposed Ordinances have a first reading and be subject to comment for thirty days prior to a second
reading and potential adoption at a Tribal Council meeting. Pending Tribal Council approval, the BMPs
will be adopted as Tribal Ordinances.
Silvicultural BMPs associated with the proposed Tribal Forest will be required to be consistent with the
enabling legislation which leads to the enactment of the Tribal Forest. Such BMPs will be developed in a
process similar to Tribal Ordinances and will be included in a Tribal Forest Resource Management Plan
developed under the provisions of the legislation restoration federal forest land to the Tribes, the National
Indian Forest Resources Management Act, and Bureau of Indian Affairs policies and procedures. This
Plan will be developed with input in a manner similar to the process for input on Tribal Ordinances. This
Plan will be drafted by Tribal and BIA staff with the assistance of the federal agency currently managing
the forest land, and will be subject to the provisions of NEPA.
There is a wide selection of excellent sources for BMPs for the Confederated Tribes to consider as the
Tribes’ BMPs are developed for the various types of Tribal land uses. These sources, including referrals,
include:
US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA);
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS);
US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS);
NOAA Fisheries;
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE);
US Forest Service (USFS);
Bureau of Land Management (BLM);
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ);
Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (OLCDC);
Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board (OWEB);
Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA);
Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF);
The proposed Oregon Division of State Lands (ODSL) State Programmatic General Permit
(SPGP).
16

Many of these agencies, directly or through local Watershed Associations, provide technical and financial
assistance for a variety of programs including nonpoint source pollution control. Given the (currently)
small and dispersed nature of Tribal holdings, the Confederated Tribes have identified cooperation and
coordination with these entities, especially watershed associations, in addition to the development of our
own Tribal Nonpoint Source Pollution Management Program, as the most promising path to reversing
impairments of Tribal water quality.
Categories of nonpoint sources of pollution identified by the EPA include agriculture; forestry;
hydromodification / habitat alteration; marinas / boating; roads, highways, and bridges; urban
environments, including low-impact development; and wetland / riparian management. Of these
categories, the following are the Tribal land uses which may contribute to water quality impairments:
Forestry;
Roads;
Urban/low-impact development;
Wetland/riparian management;
Boating.
As discussed above, current Tribal land uses are considered to have little or no actual or potential adverse
effect on water quality. And as discussed above, agriculture, forestry, hydromodification, roads, and lowimpact development are considered to be the primary contributors throughout the watersheds to water
quality impairment. The Tribal BMP development process will prioritize those current or likely Tribal
land uses which have the potential to contribute to water quality impairments, such as site development
and forestry. The Tribal BMP development process will then prioritize those categories which contribute
to impairment of Tribal water quality but which are not currently found on Tribal lands but which may in
the future as land is acquired, such as agriculture.

5.0 CONCLUSION
The Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians have struggled at least as hard as
any federally-recognized Tribe in Oregon to retain their identity, culture, and sovereignty. Since
restoration of federal recognition in 1984, the Confederated Tribes have expended the Tribes’ scarce
resources to meet the barest needs of the Tribal Government and the Tribal members. The Confederated
Tribes have slowly, carefully, and steadily built their administrative capacity with the goal of achieving
self-governance and economic self-sufficiency. To this end, in the late 1990’s, the Confederated Tribes
established the Tribes’ Environmental Program, which later expanded into the Department of Natural
Resources.
The Tribal holdings consist of several small and widely dispersed tracts. Limited current and potential
land use also limits the current or potential contribution to nonpoint sources of pollution. Within the
watersheds in which the Tribal holdings are located, water quality is impaired by significant, widespread,
and difficult to manage sources of nonpoint source pollution, i.e. elevated levels of temperature, sediment,
and fecal coliform bacteria, and depressed dissolved oxygen concentrations. Forest and agricultural
practices are considered to be the primary categories of land uses contributing to these impairments.
Funds have been secured and workplans have been adopted to develop new and complete periodic review
of existing BMPs addressing ground disturbing activities and stormwater runoff associated with site
development; riparian vegetation buffers in forested, agricultural, residential, and commercial landscapes;
road construction and maintenance activities; silvicultural activities, and other environmental
considerations. The Confederated Tribes have engaged with other stakeholders in the Ancestral
Watersheds, primarily through Watershed Associations, to seek solutions to impairments of water quality
arising from Tribal and non-Tribally held lands and the consequent degradation of other aquatic resources,
17

particularly the culturally significant resources of salmon, lamprey, and shellfish.
This Nonpoint Source Pollution Management Plan will be used by the Confederated Tribes of Coos,
Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians to build on the administrative capacity already established by the
Confederated Tribes and the Tribes’ Department of Natural Resources, and to build on the collaborative
relationships between the Tribes and other stakeholders in the Ancestral Watersheds, so as to integrate
Tribal technical, financial, and land resources with the technical expertise and stewardship commitment of
our partners in these watersheds and their Watershed Associations. This direction provided by this report
will continue to guide and prioritize the implementation of BMPs for controlling Tribal nonpoint sources
of pollution and to minimize and reverse impairments of water quality from conditions on Tribal holdings.
This Nonpoint Source Pollution Management Plan will also continue to be used as a tool in our
collaboration with other stakeholders to address nonpoint sources of pollution in the Ancestral
Watersheds.

18

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/tribal%3Aconfederated_clusi%3A71ed77eb6552a6f4. Public record. Not legal advice.