402 



ceding discussion of State estuarine laws. In general the coastal States 

 either have confusing laws and statutes; have regulations that are in- 

 adequate, weak, or incomplete and need the passage of additional ones 

 or the strengthening of existing ones; or they do not dynamically en- 

 force, coordinate, or implement the regulations that are adequate and 

 could be effective. As evidenced by table V.2.2. included in the pre- 

 ceding section on State laws, there is a surprising lack of dredge-and- 

 fill regulations in the coastal States — a basic use/destruction control 

 technique. 



In many coastal States, zoning responsibilities have been delegated to 

 the local-level governments but are often not adequately suj^ervised/ 

 coordinated by the State level, possibly because of the general absence 

 of comprehensive management planning. 



COORDINATION 



In the realm of coordination, coastal States use the following mech- 

 anisms to coordinate their estuarine-related programs such as highway 

 construction, pollution control, and various beneficial uses : 



( 1 ) comprehensive review and/or approval of licensing or leas- 

 ing applications by multiple agencies ; 



(2) holding of public investigatory forums attended by various 

 representatives ; 



(3) conduct of a coordination arbitration reconciliation agency 

 such as a natural resources or public health agency ; 



(4) establishment of written agreements providing for coordi- 

 nation of activities — interstate, intrastate, and Federal; 



(5) membership by various agencies on a coordinating board, 

 commission, or the like ; and 



(6) development of a comprehensive management plan that 

 provides the guidelines for activities and actions by all appro- 

 priate agencies and amounts to a coordination mechanism. 



Table V.2.3 shows the distribution among selected coastal States of 

 coordination mechanisms. More often than not, coordination is not 

 adequate among intrastate agencies, nor is it adequate or truly effec- 

 tive between the Federal and State level components. 



TABLE V.2.3.— STATE LEVEL COORDINATING MECHANISMS OF SELECTED COASTAL STATES 



Licensing Investigat- Coordinat- Agree- Coordinat- Management 

 States review ing forum ing agency ments ing board plan 



Alaska X X - 



California.. _. X X -- X 



Florida.... X - - 



Georgia _ X -- 



Maryland X X 



Massachusetts X X X X X 



North Carolina.. X X 



Pennsylvania. X X 



Washington _ - X 



The problems which aboinid in almost every coastal State pertain 

 to shortcomings in ability to accomplish their programs. These short- 

 comings center around the need for a central, strong operational/ 



