136 
“Coordinating Governmental Coastal Activities.” **—The primary aim of 
this study can be described as follows: 
To recommend means of coordinating governmental agencies 
acting in the coastal zone; 
To identify gaps, overlaps, and inadequacies of coordination in 
the activities of Federal agencies in the coastal zone and to 
recommend appropriate solutions; 
To identify the need for improving Federal-State relationships 
in the coastal zone and to recommend appropriate solutions. 
The report identifies four basic uses of the coastal zone: enjoyment, 
transportation, national defense, and land use. Some of the recom- 
mendations and conclusions regarding land use and enjoyment are 
directly pertinent to this study. One such recommendation urged that 
the Department of the Interior lead a multiagency study to propose 
national objectives and goals for enjoyment of the coastal zone. This 
study would “address such matters as, (1) the relative roles and 
values of low-density enjoyment, such as preservation, conservation, 
hiking and hunting vis-a-vis high-density enjoyment, such as bathing 
beaches, marinas, athletic facilities and entertainment; (2) future 
recreational requirements, their types, quantity, and distribution; 
and, (3) rational, measurable objectives, related to economic benefits 
achieved and foregone, to help fill the partial void now facing Federal 
agencies when tradeoff decisions must be made between quantifiable 
economic effects and many as yet unquantified enjoyment values.” 
The report goes on to conclude that considerable effective Federal- 
State coordination can be obtained ‘‘through improved, tempered use 
of such means as the normal course of business: informational services, 
mutual assistance, grants, subsidies, and regulations. Where interstate 
conflicts arise that could not be handled by existing institutions (river 
basin commissions, etc.) new institutional arrangements should be 
created. 
As a result of the conclusions and recommendations set forth in 
these and other studies on coastal zone management, considerable 
attention has recently been devoted to the forming of new legislative 
proposals at the Federal level. Among them are: 
(1) A bill (S. 2802) to assist the States in establishing coastal zone manage- 
ment programs—introduced by Senator Warren Magnuson (Democrat, Washing- 
ton), August 8, 1969. 
(2) A bill (H.R. 14730) to provide for the effective management of the Nation’s 
coastal and estuarine areas—introduced by Representative Alton Lennon (Demo- 
crat, North Carolina) November 6, 1969. 
(3) A bill (S. 3183; H.R. 14845) to provide for the establishment of a national 
policy and comprehensive national program for the management, beneficial use, 
protection, and development of the land and water resources of the Nation’s 
estuarine and coastal zone. Introduced in the House of Representatives by Rep- 
resentative Fallon, November 18, 1969; introduced in the Senate by Senator 
Hale Boggs, November 25, 1969. 
It would be useful to examine the provisions included in these 
bills so that we can compare them to the emerging concepts that 
make up the new political framework for coastal zone management | 
(1) S. 2802.—This bill, recognizing the harmful side effects of un- 
planned and poorly planned development of coastal resources, de- 
&% “Coordinating Governmental Coastal Activities,” a report by the Task Group on Interagency Co- 
ordination, Federal-State Relationships and Legal Problems (COSREL), of the Committee on Multiple 
vee ofthe Coastal Zone, National Council on Marine Resources and Engineering Development, September 
