Inasmuch as the coastal zone encompasses those areas of the oceans and 

 the margins of the land which relate most directly to the current big-E 

 issues — Environment, Energy, and Economics — this lack of aggressive action 

 on an approved national program which bears so strongly on all three 

 could have serious economic, social, political, and environmental reper- 

 cussions. 



Because of the sensitivity of this critical geographic area and of our 

 concern for the future of the coastal zone — a concern shared by many 

 groups and individuals — NACOA has had all aspects of coastal zone ac- 

 tivity (Federal, state, local and industrial) under relatively constant review 

 for over 15 iTionths. This review only confirms and reinforces prior con- 

 victions. We see no reason to moderate the stance or alter in any way the 

 recommendations made in the 1972 Report. 



Why Delay? 



NACOA understands that several concerns (perhaps among other less 

 obvious factors) were involved in establishing the current holding pattern 

 on the Coastal Zone Act. Among them are concerns over: (a) com- 

 patibility of the provisions of the Coastal Zone Act with total land-use 

 management on a national scale, (b) departmental assignment, and (c) 

 budget limitations. 



Since the Coastal Zone Management Act was made compatible with 

 the several land-use proposals even before it was enacted, this concern 

 seems unnecessary. It is understood that the congressional proponents of 

 each have agreed on details for coordination. 



Assignment of the program to the Department of Commerce in the 

 1972 Act was justified, NACOA believed, because "the Committee feels 

 very strongly that there should be strong coupling between the informa- 

 tion-gathering and the management functions." * NACOA went on to 

 say ". . . the fact that the Department of Commerce, with NOAA, would 

 have the primary Federal responsibility for implementation of this pro- 

 gram . . . assures the opportunity of this coupling." ** We still believe 

 the assignment was justified! In the light of possible reorganization of 

 environmental and resource management and technical agencies now 

 being widely discussed, the concern regarding the assignment to Com- 

 merce is further weakened. Regardless of the outcome of the proposed 

 reorganization of environmental and resource management agencies within 

 the Federal Government, development of an effective national coastal zone 

 management program is so important that continued delay on this ground 

 seems unwise. 



* "First Annual Report by NACOA," op. cit., p. 39. 

 ** Ibid., p. 39. 



25 



