and Federal administration to resolve and guarantee environmental stability . . . 

 "Much more research specifically aimed at gathering data to make environmental 

 management determinations is needed: 



• The research should be associated with and geared to furnish data to specific 

 planning bodies or agencies. 



• Research may be carried out by Federal agencies, state agencies, and universi- 

 ties but it should be specifically oriented to produce needed answers in the 

 shortest possible time. Vague, undirected or uncontrolled research programs, 

 particularly in universities, will be inefficient and costly. . . ." 



In conclusion, NACOA was told, 

 "It should be obvious that the technical personnel of the states is more familiar 

 with and in a better position (than the Federal Government) to make local 

 judgments concerning environmental impacts. Local political pressure and public 

 demand, however, may negate efficient local management unless specific national 

 and state environmental priorities and policies are developed. 

 "Once a clear and well-defined national policy is established and accepted by 

 the public and local governing bodies, then workable guidelines and planning 

 can follow, and the states could be expected to do most of the planning and 

 decision making." * 



Regional 



There are two sorts of regional organizations, one intrastate and the 

 other interstate. Each has its problems and unique applications, the former 

 being built usually about a unique feature or situation (for example, San 

 Francisco Bay), the latter about regional needs that transcend State 

 boundaries (for example, the New England River Basins Commission). 

 In both cases, however, multiple jurisdictions must be welded into a single 

 ad hoc jurisdiction or district for some specified purpose. And in both 

 cases active citizen initiative and broad public interest are probably cru- 

 cial, since State action is required if the regional body is to have regula- 

 tory authority. 



Referring to the San Francisco Bay Project, "The experience," says a 

 recent Conservation Foundation Publication ** 

 "provided many lessons to those who seek to protect other estuaries and other 

 national resources, e\en if there is no patterened, ideal way to achieve environ- 

 mental protection that will work everywhere. 'Much more important are the 

 personalities and the quality of local politics.' ... In other areas, other political 

 arrangements may be needed. Several states might be involved in a resource. A 

 compact, or a full regional government might be desirable. But it is worth re- 

 viewing the major ingredients of the San Francisco Bay story— because each of 

 them may have been indispensible there and could be crucial elsewhere: A re- 

 source that was highly valued . . . rising environmental concern . . . factual basis 

 . . . nucleus of concerned, hard-working citizens . . . legislators to take up the 

 cause . . . campaign for legislation . . . coverage, from the press ... an agency 



* "Coastal Zone Management Problems— The State's Position," prepared for pre- 

 sentation to NACOA by Lyle S. St Amant, Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Com- 

 mission, New Orleans, La. 



**"The Saving of San Francisco Bay, ' Conservation Foundation, Washington, D.C., 



1972. 



36 



