46 



to truly comprehensive State plans, so that if some very obvious re- 

 source value inherent in the coastal zone were overlooked or io;nored 

 by a State plan, such as fisheries, for example, or water pollution, for 

 example, I would assume that that would be called to the State's at- 

 tention, and if it persisted in ignoring that particular value there 

 might be some question about the approval of the plan. 



To that extent there would be a certain trend toward uniformity 

 with respect to obvious coastal zones, but other than that very broad 

 framework, we are not looking for uniformity. 



Mr. McEwETs". "Well, I share very strongly the view expressed by 

 Secretary Hickel in his testim.ony of the need looking to the future; 

 the need of land use planning, and I am sympathetic to what the gentle- 

 man from INIinnesota said about how rapidly that need is moving in 

 on us and in this rapidly growing country in terms of people and the 

 pressures of the population and the industries that furnish those goods 

 and services. 



As has been pointed out by the Secretary in his testimony, 

 -we have had a tremendous growth of population in our coastal areas. 

 And I think we can anticipate a continuation of that pattern, except 

 as it might be affected by land use restrictions that would be placed. 



Now, it seems to me, depending upon what each State does to the 

 extent that they restrict man's changing the estuary areas and the 

 coastal areas, it will affect the future growth and development of that 

 State. 



My concern is : How do we encourage, if vou restrict the changing 

 of natural conditions, if, let's say, another State isn't going to go as 

 far in that direction and, therefore, will hold up more economic 

 growth development. I know that even zoning as to im.provements 

 that people put on their property to protect residential areas, and so 

 forth, is not without its problems. I think it is almost ironic, though, 

 that man has accepted to quite an extent — at least in this country — 

 zoning to protect the meager enhancement that he makes to what the 

 Creator gave us, but when it comes to zoning to protect an irreplace- 

 able resource — and that is what the Secretary re^'ognized in his testi- 

 mony when he said there is difficulty here — there is a reluctance to 

 restrict the individual or the community, and what it can do in the 

 future and develop^ and I use the word in italics, it may be destructive 

 to the ecology of that area. But we use the term "development." And 

 I can see that if there is not some uniformity of standard and require- 

 ment of the States, one State may lag behind another, and I think we 

 have a real problem in this area. 



For example, Mr. Train, I recently responded to a question at a 

 meeting in my district regarding a proposed multimillion-dollar proj- 

 ect that raised some possibility of a problem of thermal discharge. It 

 was just in response to a question at a meeting and it was — and very 

 little was reported in the press, but I received scores of letters endors- 

 ing what was interpreted to be my position. I received scores castigat- 

 ing me that I am against all progress. All I said was : I thought it was 

 something we should look to and look into the question of thermal 

 discharge. 



]\fy district borders Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence Eiver and 

 Lake Champlain where we have an abundance of cold water and some 

 of us can see increasing demands for both fossil fuel and thermal nu- 



