geographical entities that do not conform neatly to 
the definition of “coastal.” 
The definition of coastal itself is ambiguous with 
regard to the identification of population patterns. 
To designate a State, county, or SMSA as a “‘coastal” 
unit suggests a degree of involvement with coastal or 
Great Lakes waters. Traditionally the “coastal re- 
gion” has been considered to extend inland as far 
as the effects of the ocean tide can be detected. This 
makes Washington, D.C., a “coastal city” because 
the tide affects the Potomac River as far as the old 
port city of Georgetown, a section of Washington. 
But to residents of the Washington area, the city is 
hardly coastal; the coast in any real sense is a 3-hour 
drive to Rehoboth, Del., or Ocean City, Md. There 
is a similar situation involving Houston, Tex. About 
40 miles inland, the city is classified as coastal be- 
cause c! its connection to Galveston Bay by the 
Houston Ship Channel. But Galveston, a city on a 
coastal island, is more clearly the “coastal” city than 
its larger neighbor Houston. 
it is often stated that “more than one-half the 
people in the country live within 50 miles of the 
coast.” The statement is misleading because it is 
based upon census figures which indicated that in 
1970 “about 53 percent of all . . . people now live 
in counties which lie at least partly within 50 miles 
of the Nation’s coastlines,” [Emphasis added.] ** 
Therefore, people residing more than 50 miles from 
the coast are included in the county statistics making 
up the census totals. Six hundred counties have a 
portion, within 50 miles of the coast; only 400 
actually touch the coast. On the other hand, there 
are counties which touc® the coast and are in- 
cluded in ‘“‘coastal” population statistics, hut extend 
far inland. Jefferson County in the Florida pan- 
handle is one such case. 
The 400 counties included in table 4-2 (at end 
of chapter) are considered to be coastal by NOAA’s 
Office of Coastal Zone Management, drawn from 
program submissions by the States. The final list will 
probably be smaller, because States have initially 
selected larger coastal planning areas than will be 
included in their final definition of the coastal zone 
under their coastal management program. Thus, 
Washington State listed 17 counties in the initial list 
compiled by its coastal zone office and 15 in the final 
definition of its coastal territory. 
The population in the 400 counties designated by 
the State’s coastal programs was 85,489,421 in 
1970, or 42 percent of the Nation’s population of 
203.3 million. By contrast, 107 million persons lived 
in the Census Bureau’s list of 600 “coastal” counties. 
Coastal Zone Management 
Background 
The concept of coastal zone management devel- 
oped in the late 1960s in response to the accelerating 
use of coastal resources. Pressures from industrial, 
commercial, and residential users were growing. The 
judgment was that the existing governmental appara- 
tus to deal with such pressures—Federal, State, 
and local—was inadequate. “Something must be 
done,” concluded the Stratton Commission in its 
chapter on Management of the Coastal Zone.”* 
Our Nation and The Sea, released at the time the 
Nixon Administration took office in 1969, was one 
of at least five sources that identified the need for 
a revised system of decision-making about future 
uses of the coastal region. Similar recommendations 
came from the Marine Sciences Council, a Cabinet- 
level council headed by the Vice President; from 
the estuary studies prepared by the Department of 
the Interior in 1969 and 1970—the National Estuary 
Study and the National Estuarine Pollution Study; 
and from the recommendations of the American 
22U.S. Depariment of Commerce, Census Bureau, Press Re- 
lease, Glenn M. Hearin, 29 November 1970. 
23 Our Nation and The Sea, op. cit. note 1 p. 49. 
Law Institute (ALI) for a Model Land Development 
Code.** 
The concept of coastal zone management, and 
other forms of land-use planning and resource regu- 
lation that have been proposed, is predicated on 
the police powers that reside in the sovereignty of the 
States. In the past most States have delegated this 
inherent power to municipal and county govern- 
ments. While some State constitutions transferred 
these policy powers to the local governments, most 
States enacted enabling statutes to execute the trans- 
fer of zoning power. Piecemeal planning and the 
failure of local zoning and regulatory authorities to 
exercise coordinated control over the coastal region 
contributed to the stated need for comprehensive 
planning and regulation in the coastal region. The 
basis of coastal zone management was to be the re- 
coupment of the State powers to control some uses 
of Jand and waters in the coastal margin, based on 
an areawide perspective that would transcend the 
fragmented boundaries of local government. A re- 
gional or interstate approach also was contemplated. 
24The American Law Institute. A Medel Land Development 
Code. Philadelphia, American Law Institute, 1971. 
IV-7 
