99 



they serve, before they can be as effective as are those existing agencies 

 today. 



We also detect the possibility of the intrusion of the Federal Gov- 

 ernment into the independent port industry to which reference was 

 made hj the Port of New York Authority. This system of independent 

 port activities has proven its worth to our Nation. 



We have a higlily competitive actively, one which is faced today with 

 challenges due to revolution in the shipping industry. We do lack at 

 the Federal level the complete coordination of our harbor and channel 

 improvements, with those of our ship development. We would welcome 

 an improvement in this particular activity. However, with the pro- 

 gram of grants-in-aid to State agencies or other regional agencies, we 

 would anticipate Federal control through the control of the dollar. 



This would, of itself, reflect upon our port activities by determining 

 in fact that one port deserved a channel improvement at the expense of 

 another. 



We believe this is basically wrong. Thank you, gentlemen for the 

 opportunity of making this statement. 



Dr. Alexander. Thank you. 



We have time, I think, for one more question. 



Mr. Alfred A. Porro. I would like to address a question or rather 

 an inquiry as to some remarks of Mr. Clotvrorthy, with regard to the 

 proposed role of NOAA with regard to enforcement of provisions. 

 Yesterday one of the speakers spoke in terms of enforcement and teeth 

 in the law with regard to a Federal-State relationship, saying that 

 voluntary participation would be bad. Today we are talking about the 

 Federal role and I would just like to inquire as to the projection or 

 the thinking as to what the enforcement provision should be in NOAA, 

 not with regard to the States, but with regard to the various Federal 

 agencies. 



For example, should the Crops of Engineers have to have ultimate 

 approval of NOAA before issuing any given permit, or is it visualized 

 as merely being a coordinating agency ? 



Mr. Clotworthy. I was very mindful of the points made by the 

 speaker yesterday in pointing out that in at least the draft bill there 

 was a conspicious absence of teeth. Perhaps this is a failure, although 

 I think that, talking to that point, first, you can read into the language 

 the ability to do a little tail twisting if nothing else. 



Now, coming to the question of NOAA and its authority and how it 

 woidd interface with the corps, we have in existence today a volun- 

 tary mechanism between the corps and the Department of the Interior 

 in which the effects on conservation are weighed before permits are 

 granted. I see no reason why this sort of thing can't continue programs 

 formalized to some degree. 



It is quite apparent that both needs must be served. The sticky part 

 of the question that undergirds all of this discussion of the coastal zone 

 is what is your No. 1 priority in making the final decision ? Is it the 

 preservation of the status quo from an ecological point of view, from 

 an economic point of view, or from a social point of view, or is it more 

 positively the enhancement of any one of these criteria? 



I submit that, since we inhabit this planet and just about every- 

 thing that you can imagine is man centered, we have to think about 

 the coastal zone from a man-centered point of view and hence the 



