409 



Principally, such ca plan should provide for State control of estuarine 

 uses; that the States should control estuarine uses was definitely a 

 prevailing view. A management organization to implement the plan 

 should be placed high enough in the State-level governmental structure 

 so that its recommendations and actions to control estuarine uses can 

 be effectively heard and heeded. However, the mechanism or organiza- 

 tion may consist principally of a coordination technique, because a 

 separate estuarine organizational entity would cut across numerous 

 existing organizational responsibilities and probably needlessly dupli- 

 cate existing delegated tasks. 



Numerous States recommended that effective State management and 

 State use control could be achieved by strengthening and enforcing 

 existing use regulations and controls, such as strengthening dredging 

 and spoil controls, and enforcing water quality standards applicable 

 to tidal waters. The essential point was that the States should con- 

 trol or regulate estuarine uses or multiple uses. 



Other States took the opposite, though related, view that the State 

 needed to develop new regulations, controls, and provisions, such as 

 the development of zoning plans on a statewide basis, to govern estua- 

 rine areas. However, in general this view is essentially the same as 

 the preceding one because States that do not have adequate estuarine 

 management provisions should develop them and those States that 

 already have them should enforce/strengthen them to control the uses 

 of estuarine areas for the mutual maximum benefit for all aspects of 

 the population. 



Last, but not least, several States believed that they should conduct 

 area studies/research but restrict them to solving problems that exist 

 in the local area. Research and study needs as defined not only by the 

 States but also from numerous other sources, are elaborated separately 

 in part VI, chapter 3. 



In summary, the States believe they should manage and control the 

 use, mainly through ownership or restrictive covenants, of estuarine 

 areas. This should be done through an efficiently coordinated State- 

 level management organization, to implement a statewide compre- 

 hensive plan that is supportable or backed up by sufficiently strong 

 regulations and needed research/studies designed to solve problems 

 pertinent to the particular needs of the management organization and 

 the corresponding estuarine resources. 



Section 7. Summary and Conclusions 



An overview of the coastal States' management framework reveals 

 the following conditions in many areas. Many management organiza- 

 tions and systems are individualistic, uncoordinated, piecemeal, and 

 shortrange. Often they are burdened by noncomprehensive planning 

 and development. In turn, the planning and development is often 

 backed up by inadequate, confusing, not sufficiently enforced, or frag- 

 mented legislation and statutory regulations. 



In contrast, the coastal States have the following general views with 

 respect to their estuarine responsibilities : 



(1) The States should manage their own intrastate estuarine 

 (coastal) areas. 



