During the last 10 years, bond issues for park 

 and recreation area acquisition and development 

 have done much to strengthen the role of some 

 States in assuming a greater share of the leadership 

 and responsibility for recreation at the State and 

 local levels. 



The Pacific Coast States have probably acquired 

 the most pubUc areas along their coasts since 1965 

 when the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act 

 was passed by Congress. In 1965, the Oregon 

 legislature designated the entire State-owned 

 shoreline between high and low tide pubhc pro- 

 perty as a state recreation area and in 1967 the 

 State of Washington established a seashore conser- 

 vation area along its entire coastline from Canada 

 to Oregon. Cahfornia's legislature recently esta- 

 bUshed a State Advisory Commission on Marine 

 and Coastal Resources and requested it to develop 

 a master plan for the entire Cahfornia coastline 

 and prepare a report by 1969. 



Some States along the eastern coastline and 

 Great Lakes have made notable strides in providing 

 marine recreation areas within the last few years. 



—Florida established the first submarine park in 

 the country and is preparing plans for a system of 

 marine preserves. 



—Michigan made additional studies of its lakeshore 

 in 1967 and is expected to issue a report shortly. 



—Wisconsin recently established shoreline zoning. 



—The Maine legislature passed a wetland preserva- 

 tion act and a $4 million bond issue for park land 

 acquisition, with particular emphasis on a system 

 of shore parks and island reserves. 



—Massachusetts and Connecticut are both moving 

 toward greater shoreline acquisition and preserva- 

 tion with new financial and planning programs. 



A few States in the Southeast are still not 

 moving rapidly enough in acquiring shoreline. This 

 is unfortunate because some of the finest seashores 

 in the country as well as favorable climatic 

 conditions for year-round recreation use are along 

 the southeastern U.S. coasts. 



In selecting areas for acquisition the States 

 operate much hke the Federal Government in that 

 their primary targets are shoreline areas of high 



quaUty that are of interest to all the people of the 

 State. 



Most States seem to have only a limited view of 

 the recreation needs of the poor. The disadvan- 

 taged somehow do not become a part of the 

 poHtical arena in which recreation demands are 

 made. Emphasis on boating, for example, is 

 meaningless to the poor, who cannot afford boats 

 and who at best tend to be crowded into central 

 city beaches. 



Disadvantaged economic groups are often un- 

 able to use existing facilities because they do not 

 own automobiles and because pubhc transit facili- 

 ties to marine recreation areas are unavailable. 

 With the exception of in-city mass transit facihties, 

 such as the subways to Coney Island and the 

 Rockaways in New York there is inadequate 

 pubhc transportation to most State parks or 

 National seashores. 



Recommendation : 



In order that disadvantaged groups can have a 

 means of enjoying recreational opportunities, pro- 

 vision should be made for transportation of the 

 poor, through poverty funds, from metropolitan 

 areas to nearby marine recreation spots. 



C. Interstate Agencies 



With the exception of the Pahsades Interstate 

 Park Commission in New York and New Jersey, 

 whose jurisdiction is essentially the Hudson River, 

 no interstate agencies conduct significant marine 

 recreation activities. The Delaware River Basin 

 Commission will coordinate development of the 

 Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area in 

 Pennsylvania and New Jersey, near Tocks Island, 

 but this is primarily an upriver project. 



Interstate agencies could play a much larger 

 role than they do, if only because marine recrea- 

 tioners tend to be mobile and create problems 

 which often transcend State boundaries. Even in 

 the absence of interstate agencies there are oppor- 

 tunities for close cooperation between States in 

 developing recreation resources. The resources of 

 one State may only be efficiently utilized by 

 attracting users from an adjacent State. The 

 Cormnission commends joint planning by States as 

 a means for broadening the recreation opportuni- 



VII-246 



