The difficulty with the phase-out approach is that 
it leaves the coastal resource problem in large meas- 
ure as it was identified in the late 1960s and early 
1970s, except that the pressures for development 
have intensified in many areas. 
One alternative of a totally differing nature would 
be to stretch out Federal support, that is, recognize 
the difficulties some States are having in developing 
comprehensive management programs and provide 
continued development support for, say, 10 years. 
This, of course, would require a continuation of the 
authorization for Section 305 support now due to 
expire at the end of fiscal year 1979. This option 
would leave open the question of how long, and on 
what basis, program operation funding (Section 306) 
might continue. 
© Continue Funding Matching Section 306 Grants 
at a Reduced Rate 
This recommendation is based on a distinction 
between State and national interests in the coastal 
area. The assumption is that the States will be will- 
ing to assume their responsibilities and fund a larger 
portion of Federally approved coastal zone manage- 
ment programs which qualify for administrative 
grants than the present 20 percent. Continued Fed- 
eral funding at a lower percentage would ensure that 
the State perform those tasks deemed in the national 
interest, which they might otherwise not undertake. 
These include facility-siting decisions, operation of 
the “Federal consistency” section of the program, 
wetland protection, and efforts to reduce disaster 
damage. : 
It is not clear how the differential between strictly 
State functions and the national interest portion 
would be determined. Nor is there at present a clear 
indication of the amount of money needed for this 
support. 
This alternative does not address the question of 
the value of the approved programs in improving 
coastal use decisions. It assumes that there will be 
a large number of effective State programs, which 
will have the ability to control use of land and 
water in the coastal region. 
With regard to such national interest questions as 
protection of wetlands or other valuable coastal 
areas, the question is whether the coastal zone man- 
agement approach is the most cost-effective means 
or whether other methods would be more efficient. 
The same holds true for other national interests such 
as port modernization, energy plant construction, 
and disaster damage reduction. 
e Replace Reliance Upon Zoning and Permit 
Issuance With Outright Acquisition 
Acquisition of critical areas of concern would be 
a costly option. But there are possible alternative 
funding measures which would preclude the need 
for massive appropriations that could be used to 
protect especially valuable coastal areas. 
For example, existing Federal land purchase as- 
sistance programs could be amended to ensure that 
a fixed percentage is used in coastal regions. The 
Land and Water Conservation Fund, administered 
by the Heritage Conservation and Recreation Serv- 
ice, which receives a portion of its funds from 
offshore oil and gas operations, could be directed 
to apply a percentage of its matching grants for 
coastal recreation. 
Some of the other programs already used to pro- 
tect coastal areas might be increased or concen- 
trated in coastal areas if it were determined to be 
in the national interest. Examples include the Water 
Bank Act and Soil Conservation and Domestic 
Allotment Act in the Agriculture Department, and 
the Federal Aid in Sport Fishing Restoration Act 
(Dingell-Johnson Program) and Federal Aid in Wild- 
life Restoration Act (Pittman-Robertson Program) 
in the Department of the Interior. Assistance from 
disparate agencies such as the Economic Develop- 
ment Administration in the Department of Com- 
merce and the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development also could contribute to the protection 
of coastal resources. 
President Carter identified coastal wetlands (as 
well as inland bodies) and coastal barrier islands as 
two resources to be protected by the Federal Gov- 
ernment in his May 23, 1977, environmental mes- 
sage. He issued an executive order barring agencies 
from’ taking actions leading to wetlands develop- 
ment and has requested recommendations on how to 
protect the remaining undeveloped barrier islands of 
the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts. 
The value of certain coastal resources is such that 
reliance on a zoning-permit program may not always 
be sufficient to withstand the tremendous pressures 
for developing coastal properties. In addition to the 
Administration’s proposed initiatives, it may be ap- 
propriate to examine the utility of a broader “coastal 
resource conservancy” program that could consoli- 
date existing and proposed coastal acquisition and 
regulatory activities and perhaps add authority where 
needed to provide sufficient coverage to protect re- 
sources having national significance. Federal action 
could come in the form of payment to property 
owners to restrict development (purchase develop- 
ment rights), as in the Water Bank Act (for wildlife 
habitat protection), and thus avoid the high cost of 
buying coastal territory outright. Such a program 
could use the information developed in the coastal 
management effort to identify and rank the most 
valuable coastal features in danger of development 
as candidates for “coastal resource conservancy” as- 
sistance. Other resources could be protected by 
regulation such as wetlands now are. The fund 
IV—40 
