69 



the protection of the coastal and estuarine areas. Here the individual entity 

 varies in fimction and jurisdiction; great variance appears in efeectiveness. 

 Individually none constitutes a fully and independently effective system of coastal 

 zone management. Combined, without coordination, a like result has occurred. 



Although some state or local programs have reflected substantial strides to 

 more effective estuarine planning and administration, the very nature of this zone 

 disregards technical state boundaries. The jurisdiction of no governmental body 

 coincides with the boundaries of the coastal zone. The multi-state nature of the 

 estuarine is reflected by the unrestrained animal and marine resources, water- 

 ways and uses visiting from state to state. 



Yes, a great majority of the challenges presented by the coastal zone could 

 be handled on the state or regional level, providing the benefit of a close local 

 familiarity and expertise with the problem area and a more divers situation. 

 Yet, the short-comings of such a state authority are obvious; no single, con- 

 tinuous plan of development for the whole coastal zone could result ; conflicting 

 estuarine land title and use laws exist ; financial inadequacy is likely to occur in 

 many areas. 



Thus, the present federal maze, combined with the individual state approach, 

 merely compounds the complexity. Yet, it would appear that a means of coordi- 

 nating the activities of all of the existing functional agencies would be an effective 

 solution. Coordinating bodies are inherently weak. No independent strength 

 exists, but rather must be derived from support of other levels, appropriated out 

 of the budgets of other bodies and agencies. 



Other alternatives readily emerge. The creation of a new agency to handle the 

 whole zone. Oh, no. To contribute to the overwhelming maze of existing agencies 

 and bureaucracy would be a total sacrilege. Yet such an agency could have as 

 its sole mission and purpose concentration on the estuarine and coastal zone as 

 a whole — treatment of all of the related problems, planning and balanced develop- 

 ment of such areas. What about duplication or usurping of activities now carried 

 or by existing agencies and levels of government? Loss of collateral research 

 and experience of related agencies? Perhaps the responsibility should be delegated 

 to an agency, now handling a segment of the problem. Yet this would detract 

 from the overall major aspect of the program. 



Although some states have commendable programs for various aspects of the 

 estuarine and coastal zone, such as fisheries, recreation, conservation and 

 economic development, few states have truely effectuated state wide 

 comprehensive programs. Basically, it can be stated that in this regard the state 

 governments have failed. This is not to overlook the progressive steps taken in 

 such states as Massachusetts, California, Rhode Island, and some other states. 

 A study of the whole picture and the various states individually forces the con- 

 clusion that on the basis of past experience alone, a voluntary state authority 

 system would not be effective. 



Many contradictions in policies, departments, motives and approaches make 

 this obvious. The pattern in a great majority of the states is absolutely ineffectual 

 insofar as an over-all state wide program is concerned. A case at point, taking 

 the liberty of utilizing my home state, that is the State of New Jersey. New 

 .Jersey has approximately 350,000 acres of marshland and is an important coastal 

 state. It is plagued with extreme pollution in the Raritan River Basin area and 

 the Nevv^ark Bay area. Perhaps some of the most valuable estuarine areas in the 

 country could have been found in these areas and undoubtedly some of the most 

 valuable estuarine areas in the country still exist in this State. Recently, much 

 attention has been given to the estuarine areas of the State, and some extremely 

 progressive concepts put forth. However, the inability of the State Legislature to 

 enact a state-wide program and the tremendous competition between two of the 

 State Departments involved, namely, the Department of Conservation and Eco- 

 nomic Development and the Department of Community Affairs resulted in a true 

 debacle of a program. It was proposed that a state-wide commission be formed 

 to balance the planning of the 350,000 acres and to protect the same from indis- 

 criminate development. It was proposed that the continuous estuarine enjoyed 

 by the State of New Jersey, which stretches from the northerly portion of the 

 State through the estuarines of the Newark area through the marshland of 

 mid-state in the Raritan and Middlesex areas trots on through the southerly 

 portion of the State, all were basically in the same class, nature and need. State 

 politics prevented this. Instead special legislation was proposed and rushed 

 through taking a mere 18,000 acres and sacrificing the same on the basis that the 

 particular area in question, namely, the Hackensack River Basin, was in need 

 of development for purposes of housing and the creation of a new city. Basically, 



