VIII. PRESIDENT'S STATEMENT ON SIGNING THE 

 COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT, OCT, 27, 1972 



Managing Coastal Zones 



S. 3507, the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, is also an out- 

 growth of earlier efforts by this administration to provide for rational 

 management of a unique national resource. 



More than 75 percent of our population now lives in States border- 

 ing the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, the Gulf of Mexico, and the Great 

 Lakes. The number of people who use our coastal zones is rapidly in- 

 creasing — and so are the purposes for which these areas are utilized. 

 Commercial fisheries, ports, beaches, and other recreation areas, the 

 extraction of minerals, the siting of powerplants, the building of homes 

 and factories, the development of transportation systems — these are 

 among tho, competing functions which our coastal zones are being called 

 upon to serve. Yet these same areas, it must be remembered, are the 

 irreplaceable breeding ground for most aquatic life. 



S. 3507 recognizes the need for carefully planned, comprehensive 

 management programs to insure the most rational and beneficial use 

 of the coastal zones. This bill also recognizes that the States can usually 

 be the most effective regulators of such a planning process. I will in- 

 struct the Secretary of Commerce to carry out this statute in a w^ay 

 which focuses Federal efforts on the adequacy of State processes rather 

 than to become involved in the merits of particular land use decisions. 



But the coastal zones are not the only areas which need this sort 

 of long-range attention. This is why I proposed to the Congress in 

 February of 1971 the National Land Use Policy Act — a bill which 

 would help the States establish management programs for a wide range 

 of areas which are of critical environmental concern. It is my strong 

 hope that the next Congress will expand on the coastal zone bill which 

 was passed this fall by approving my National Land Use Policy Act. I 

 signed S. 3507, then, as an important first step toward a more compre- 

 hensive program. 



S. 3507 locates administrative responsibility for this program in the 

 Department of Commerce rather than in the Department of the Inte- 

 rior as I would have preferred — and as I called for in my proposed 

 Land Use Policy Act. This action is not sufficient reason in my judg- 

 ment for vetoing the bill, but it does underscore once again the im- 

 portance of creating a new Department of Natural Resources, as I 

 have recommended, so that we can reverse the trend toward the frag- 

 mentation and fractionalization of Federal programs and begin to 

 coordinate our environmental efforts more effectively. 



(459) 



