75 



Hawaii, Oregon and Wisconsin. The proposed Susquehanna and 

 Potomac River Basin compacts would come close, closer than Dela- 

 ware, to authorizing management as we speak of it here. 



The Commission on Marine Science, Engineering and Resources 

 on the other hand, proposed that the States establish coastal zone 

 authorities "to coordmate plans and uses of coastal waters and adja- 

 cent lands and to regulate and develop areas." 



The Commission and Congressman Lennon's draft bill would have 

 coastal authorities exercise "necessary enforcement powers through 

 zoning, permits, licenses, easements, acquisition or other means to 

 assure compliance with plans and resolve conflicts in uses * * *." 



The Commission proposes, and Mr. Lennon's draft bills assume, cre- 

 ation of a National Oceanic Atmospheric Agency. It would include 

 the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, the Environmental Science 

 Services Administration, the Coast Guard, the U.S. Lake Survey, 

 certain programs now administered by other agencies and certain 

 proposed new programs. 



It would function as a coordinating as well as an operating agency. 

 Both the CoiTimission and Mr. Lennon in his longer draft bill would 

 authorize NOAA to: (1) make grants to coastal authorities to defray 

 up to 50 percent of operating expenses for an initial 2-year period; 



(2) make grants to such authorities to cover up to 50 percent of their 

 long-range planning costs and implementation of such plans; and 



(3) guarantee bonds issued or loans obtained by coastal States for land 

 acquisition, water development or restoration projects to implement 

 coastal or estuarine area management plans. Such bonds would be 

 taxable obligations. 



Incidentally, interstate agencies could be designated as coastal au- 

 thorities and Mr. Lenon's bill adds river basin commissions, presum- 

 ably those set up under title II of the Water Resources Planning Act. 



I believe it fair to examine these proposals to see if they are realistic, 

 and, if found to be so, how desirable they may be. 



To take NOAA first, I suspect that strong, persuasive arguments 

 can be made for and against it. The birth of a new agency that would 

 entail removal of extant agencies from several 'Departments would not 

 be uncomplicated. Departmental and Congressional Committee juris- 

 diction is about as easy to forswear as alcohol or tobacco. 



Nevertheless, if the political judgment were made that NOAA be 

 established, I see no reason why it could not function effectively gen- 

 erally as envisaged. 



About coastal authorities, I am much more dubious. One could ex- 

 pect opposition from State and interstate agencies whose operations 

 would be "cut off at the pass," as it were. One could expect opposition 

 from local governments to which land use control, no matter how 

 well or ill performed, is a vital power. 



Even assuming that such opposition could be overcome, and I don't 

 believe it could be, I doubt the desirability of creating coastal 

 authorities. 



As I read the proposals. State conservation and recreation agencies, 

 among others, and possibly State water pollution control agencies 

 would be required to cede some or all of their powers to the coastal 

 authorities within the geographic areas over which the latter would 

 exercise jurisdiction. 



