The Coastal Zone 



front housing; public recreation; and nature preservation; among others, 

 have all pre-empted Coastal Zone areas without consideration either of 

 harmonious relationships between users or optimum use of a scarce resource 

 itself. 



In the early stages of a shoreline's development, single actions may have 

 relatively little impact. But in time, the resource base for certain uses is 

 dissipated. Unplanned expansion of private ownership and development 

 has reduced public access to beaches. The physical destruction of estuarine 

 habitats by dredging and filling have decreased a region's fishing potential; 

 and the pollution of estuarine and coastal waters by cities and industries has 

 begun to destroy much of their usefulness for water supply, fish and wild- 

 life, and recreation. 



What we seek are opportunities for multiple, compatible uses of the in- 

 shore waters and for maintaining options for future uses not foreclosed by 

 degradation of the resource — first, by identifying alternative uses and 

 multiple compatible uses, and then by encouraging the development of 

 efTective mechanisms for rational choices among incompatible uses. Science 

 and technology become the tools to assist in accomplishing explicit goals, 

 predicting possible inadvertent adverse effects, reducing construction costs 

 so as to add to the range of choices, and in evaluating costs and benefits to 

 facilitate choices. 



Because of the diversity of Coastal Zone activities in which the Federal 

 Government has a responsibility, almost every member and observer agency 

 of the Marine Sciences Council is directly concerned with the development 

 of the Coastal Zone. Table V.l summarizes those aspects of the Federal 

 marine science programs which have been classified in this report as ac- 

 tivities of the Coastal Zone — coastal engineering, water quality, health, 

 conservation, and recreation. Many other parts of the program discussed in 

 other chapters of the report also indirectly relate to Coastal Zone activities. 



As shown in Figure V. 1, Federal funding for these purposes amounted to 

 $21.4 million in FY 1967, and will reach $28.7 million in FY 1968. Appro- 

 priation requests for FY 1969 are $28.6 million. Conservation and Recrea- 

 tion is the major cost category and is the one in which the major part of 

 the FY 1968 increase occurred: $20.2 million in FY 1968 as compared 

 with $15.4 million in FY 1967, primarily for developing marine areas for 

 recreation and for conversation of marine locales, gamefish, and wildlife. 

 Another important increase in Federal responsibility, largely stemming from 

 new legislation of 1965-66, has been in water quality management. Some of 

 the most difficult water pollution problems are those in the Coastal Zone — 

 the Great Lakes, estuaries, and other near-shore waters. For water quality 

 management in the marine environment, expenditures in FY 1967 were $4.5 

 million; funding for FY 1968 is estimated at $7.0 million, and the appro- 

 priations requested for FY 1969 to $8.7 million. 



63 



