253 



Mr. PIoLLiNGS. Could we not go on later witli that amendment, if 

 the distinguished Senator will permit it, as the Senator from Virginia 

 has concern and the Senator from Missouri also has concern about 

 active consideration at this time of this particular bill. I think per- 

 haps we should go into their concerns first, and then when we began 

 to call up amendments — we are not in a rush here this morning — we can 

 call it up. 



Mr. Stevens. I will be happy to cooperate in every way I can. I just 

 wanted to call the attention of the chairman to the fact that I hope 

 we can consider the concept which would give the local political sub- 

 division with areawide powers, the power to proceed with plans al- 

 ready made if the State has no plan. 



Mr. Spong. Mr. President, the objective of the proposed National 

 Coastal Zone Management Act is to achieve a partnership between 

 man and nature in which man's varied needs are in harmony with 

 nature's processes and resources. 



Specifically, the bill now pending would encourage the States to de- 

 velop programs to protect their coastal resources by authorizing Fed- 

 eral assistance for the preparation and implementation of manage- 

 ment programs. At the outset of my remarks, I would emphasize 

 the assertion in the committee report on this measure that — 



There is no attempt to diminish state authority through federal preemption. 

 The intent of this legislation is to enhance state authority by encouraging and 

 assisting the states to assume planning and regulatory powers over their coastal 

 zone. 



Mr. President, that is as it should be — although the success of 

 coastal zone management programs will be dependent on the coopera- 

 tion of Federal, State, regional, and local agencies. I wish to commend 

 the distinguished chairman of our Subcommittee on Oceans and 

 Atmosphere for initiating the effort to have the bill recommended. 



Keconsideration of the measure resulted in two definite improve- 

 ments. First, the inland scope of the coastal zone has been changed so 

 as to limit the legislation to the area of greatest environmental con- 

 cern. Second, the measure now requires broader participation of local 

 governments, interstate, and regional groups in the preparation and 

 operation of management programs. 



A review of the testimony clearly demonstrates the need for this 

 legislation. Much more than esthetics is involved in the protection and 

 preservation of our coastal and estuarine waters and marshlands. 

 The many varied t5^pes of natural vegetation which are found in the 

 coastal zone provide a constant food source for fish and fowl alike. 



It is estimated that three-quarters of our commercial seafoods — fish, 

 claims, oysters, shrimp, crabs, and lobsters — are nurtured in our coastal 

 areas. In addition, these waters and shorelands provide shelter and food 

 for birds and wildlife, and act as a buffer against storms and other 

 natural disasters. 



It is in our own economic interest to protect these areas from the 

 ever-increasing pressures of development and misuse. It has been esti- 

 mated that in the period 1922 through 1954 mo7'e thar one-fourth of 

 the country's salt marshes were destroyed by filling, dikin.T, or other 

 forms of development. From 1954 to 1964 an additional 10 percent 

 of the remaining salt marshes between Maine and Delaware was 

 destroyed. 



