41 



Mr. Train. That is a very difficult question. I thiulc we all recognize 

 it and I don't think I can answer it. I know I cannot answer it 

 categorically. 



In some cases ; yes. In other cases, I think that the estuarine aspects, 

 the marine influences, extend sufficiently upstream that a fairly large 

 portion of a river stream could be conceivably considered as part of 

 the estuarine system in the coastal zone. 



]\ir. Harsha. Do you contemplate that all rivers that in any way are 

 influenced and affected by water from an estuaiy would be included in 

 the coastal zone ? 



Mr. Train. Well, I would like to go back first to reemphasize the 

 point that I have made, that a great deal of leeway is left by this 

 legislation to the State in the definition of the coastal zone which will 

 -come under its management plan. And I think it's quite possible that 

 •each State could answer the question you have asked, in its own way. 

 So, we may get variances in that respect. 

 Is that responsive to your question ? 



Mr. Harsha. It is probably as responsive as you can be to a difficult 

 •question — but in the gray area ? 



Mr. Train. On that t think that is a very fair and accurate com- 

 ment. We are exploring new grounds ; plowing new fields, so to speak, 

 with this legislation. 



Now, there are areas of uncertainty as to definition and scope. These 

 are left purposely. 



Now, I would think that we would all welcome a great deal of inno- 

 vation and imaginative new thinldng on the part of State and local 

 governments. 



Now, I think we would be making a mistake at this juncture in time 

 to lay down very clear categoric rules, a framework witliin which all 

 plans would have to fit. I think that it would be a mistake. 



"What we really look for here is innovation, and hopefully this bill 

 will encourage it. 



Mr. Harsha. It would be difficult to lay out categoric guidelines 

 until we have some experience. 



Mr. Train. That is very much the case, and also, as the Secretary 

 points out, in answer to an earlier question, the bill provides for— I 

 would say an miusual degree of cooperation, and consultation with 

 other agencies, and this is to be the case in the drawing up of the regu- 

 lations which would implement the legislation, and also in the review 

 by the Department of the plan of individual States. That is, it is the 

 intent of this bill and it is the expressed requirement that the Secre- 

 tary consult with all other agencies that have an interest. 

 Mr. Harsha. Thank you. 



Mr. Howard. The gentleman from California. 



Mr. Anderson. How did you arrive at the figure of $200,000 as a 

 limit for each State? 



For example, the need of one State with basically few problems with 

 a small coastline, as contrasted to another State with a large, long 

 coastline with many industrial and growth complications, and many 

 estuarine problems. How did you logically arrive at such a figure for 

 both needs? I am thinking of California, where Ave have many prob- 

 lems and would have some difficulty in trying to get along on a $200,000 

 grant, as contrasted to another State that does not have these 

 problems ? 



