owned by State or local governments, and 11 percent (4,000 miles) by the 

 Federal Government. The ownership of nearly 3,000 miles or 7 percent 

 is uncertain. Seaward below mean high water, the State generally has 

 jurisdiction, in most cases out 3 miles. 



Although Alaska's coastal zone has important management problems, 

 those with difficult jurisdictional properties lie elsewhere, and this dis- 

 cussion will focus on these. The greatly complicating factor in the non- 

 Alaskan coastal zone is of course the problem of how to deal both 

 equitably and wisely with the private interests involved when they begin 

 to conflict with each other or the public interest. One illustrative statistic 

 — two-thirds of the 2,700 miles of critically eroding shoreline is privately 

 owned, virtually all of it under extensive development. And "significant" 

 erosion afTects over 40 percent of the shoreline, again much of it trace- 

 able to man-made developments.* 



Accordingly, when NACOA undertook to review the present status of 

 the coastal zone management problem, it arranged for briefings from rep- 

 resentatives of local governments. State governments, intrastate and inter- 

 state regional commissions, as well as from the major Federal agencies in- 

 volved, the Department of Interior, the Department of Commerce, EPA, 

 the Department of Defense (including both the Corps of Engineers and 

 the Navy) and the Department of Transportation (the USCG) . In addi- 

 tion, points of view representative of other Federal agencies, industry, and 

 of the conservation community were also sought. Using the judgment 

 of knowledgeable Committee members to supplement these briefings, we 

 feel the following factors are of special significance. 



• Though what is done on land does affect the coastal zone, the major 

 indicators of impact are marine. Hence, the coastal zone poses unique 

 problems for management, many differing in kind as well as degree 

 from those facing inland land-use management. 



• The coastal zone — and its problems — differs from one place to another 

 in fragility and the need for protection, as well as in biological pro- 

 ductivity, and the presence of mineral resources. Management ap- 

 proaches and priorities for early attention should differ for estuaries, 

 wetlands, exposed beaches, and unique areas such as the Everglades 

 from those applied to more stable systems such as the coast of 

 Maine, areas already heavily developed such as New York Harbor, 

 or where extensive oil or mineral deposits underlie the region such 

 as along the Gulf Coast of Louisiana. 



• Priority attention and management decisions should also be deter- 

 mined by the relative severity of the environmental impact of the 

 various types of activity proposed. Activities producing permanent or 



* "Critical" erosion is that where action to stop it is felt justified in the light of 

 economic, safety, demographic, or ecological factors. "Significant" erosion is un- 

 desirable but efforts to arrest it may not be justified in these terms. Ibid. 



33 



