1102 



to be extremely watchful and diligent in our efforts at seeing that 

 the Coastal Zone Management Act is going to be carried out with the 

 intention of the Congress being of paramount interest and we are 

 going to follow up on it. 



Mr. Dti Pont. Mr, Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 

 Michigan (Mr. Ruppe). 



(Mr. Ruppe asked and was given permission to revise and extend 

 his remarks.) 



Mr. Ruppe. Mr. Speaker, congressional passageg of the Coastal 

 Zone Management Act of 1972, represented the first positive step to 

 preserve and protect our national coastline. The conference report 

 we have before us today is intended to improve and strengthen the 

 provisions of the original act, while permitting that area to be fully 

 and properly utilized. The 1972 act has been well accepted by our 

 coastal States — without exception, every one of those states has opted to 

 participate in the voluntary programs made possible through this act. 

 "WTien Congress passed the original act, we had not yet experienced 

 an energy crisis. The 1973 oil embargo forced a recognition that an 

 alteration in our national energy policy was mandatory. In an effort 

 to implement a more valid energy policy, we could not but realize 

 there would be an increased demand for the oil and gas resources which 

 are available beneath our offshore areas. Individual coastal states 

 are ill-equipped to cope with inherent impacts as we pursue offshore 

 leasing programs, deepwater ports, and additional energy facilities. 

 We cannot hope to secure a policy of energy self-sufficiency without 

 these offshore deposits, and we surely cannot expect to retain them 

 without smooth cooperation between the Federal Government, and 

 State and local governments. 



The coastal energy impact program, which may consist of loans, 

 guarantees, and grants to States and local governments for new or 

 improved facilities, contained in section 308 of the conference report 

 assures that such cooperation will be achieved in a flexible and respon- 

 sible matter. 



The conference report also addresses a problem of serious concern 

 to my State, namely that of shoreline erosion. This erosion problem is 

 not limited to the 'Great Lakes States, or even the remaining coastal 

 States, but has become national in nature. Close to one-quarter of 

 our Nation's shoreline is eroding, some of it extremely seriously. A 

 large portion of that critical erosion occurs along the Great Lakes 

 coastline. As there is more development per mile of shore along the 

 Great Lakes than exists in remaining coastal areas, the amount of 

 potential and actual damage to life, public safety, property, and wild- 

 life habitats is proportionately greater estimates of annual shoreline 

 erosion damage vary, but $300 million would be an acceptable figure. 

 To remedy this problem, the conference report requires coastal States 

 to institute a planning process to assess the effects of shoreline erosion, 

 and to evaluate methods of control, and restoration of areas stricken 

 by such erosion, whether the damage is natural, or induced by man. 

 Knowing full well the grave implications if this erosion is permitted 

 to continue unchecked, and having heard much additional testimony 

 on the subject, I was pleased to introduce this provision into the House- 

 passed bill, H.R. 3981, and am greatly satisfied that the necessity for 

 such a measure was recognized by the conferees. 



