67 



strictly on a voluntary basis. I agree with Mr. Gregg that this is a 

 problem for a joint effort. That is what I propose. 



Thank you. 



(Mr. Porro's statement follows:) 



Statement of Alfred A. Poreo, Jr., Esq., Lyndhubst, N.J. 



I. A DISSENT 



The detailed study of the United States on Marine Science, Engineering and 

 Resources has recently released in its report "Our Nation and The Sea" and the 

 supplemental volumes which are to be hailed as the most comprehensive study 

 completed to date regarding the marine resources and problems connected there- 

 with challenging this country. The presentation of the facts and statistics as they 

 are in the estuarine and coastal zone is outstanding and shocking indeed. The 

 comprehensive analysis of the various threats to the estuarine and coastal areas 

 truly irrebuttably presents a case for the need for balancing of interests and 

 balancing of conflicting uses. Likewise, the general proposal of the Commission 

 respecting the management of these crucial areas must be complemented, to- 

 gether with the proposed legislation, especially its definition of the national policy, 

 objectives and guidelines and its concept of fedei-al review. However, as one of the 

 consultants that worked with the Commission, I would like, at this time to exer- 

 cise the privilege of dissent with one small concept, yet perhaps one basic aspect 

 of possible success or failure to the approach. It is respectfully submitted that 

 both the report and its supplement treat too gingerly and too optimistically the 

 subject matter of state participation and federal-state relationship. As compared 

 to the Commission's strong and creative approach throughout the report and 

 throughout its recommendations in this respect only a token attempt is taken 

 here. The proposal of creation of state coastal authorities is sound and progres- 

 sive. However, the concept of voluntary participation only is too optimistic and 

 far too weak to cope with the massive result that is desired and expressed 

 throughout the other sections of the report regarding the needs and the public 

 interest in the estuarine coastal zones of the country. 



The gravamen of the proposal before this sub-committee today is likewise per- 

 missive, following the lines of the Commission's proposal. It provides for the 

 administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency to deal with and 

 review such proposals for long range planning in the coastal and estuarine areas 

 that may come forth out of imaginary and hopefully actual coastal authorities 

 that may be formed by various states of the Union. Guide lines and objectives are 

 set forth. It provides for the old faithful federal inducement of grants and/or 

 federal guarantees ; this is a teaser but not a compeller. Hopefully, through the 

 availability of such grants federal policy can be effectuated and the national 

 interests protected. 



A state, regardless of how dramatically it may be injuring the national inter- 

 est as a result of its poor treatment of its estuarine or coastal area and regard- 

 less of how tragically a particular system of estuarines may be affected by its 

 action or lack of action, cannot in any way or manner, under this proposal, be 

 compelled to comply with the federal guide lines, planning or proposals for the 

 area. 



It is in this respect — it is with regard to this weakness — it is with regard to 

 this basic approach that a dissent is cast at this time. 



The scales of justice, the weighing of interests and the governmental process 

 has shown little bridging with the scientific world here. Nor has the marine 

 resources taken much cognizance of the artificial and vaguely defined jurisdic- 

 tional boundaries, whether they be local, state or federal. 



The crux of the development has been without proper or balanced planning, 

 without any process of sharing or conservation, and without true economic and 

 environmental consideration of values. Environmental changes, due largely to 

 technological development and advanced engineering techniques have been prin- 

 cipally without legal and administrative control. Here controlled balanced stand- 

 ards and guide lines have been neglected. On the other hand, natural changes 

 continue to effect short line erosion, loss of nutrient areas and diversions in 

 circulation — again, without respect to standard jurisdictional and governmental 

 boundaries. 



Estuarine pollution has justifiably become a matter of tremendous federal 

 government concern and study. For years light cries have increased in volume 



