Being more specific, the district I represent contains the Outer Banks, Cape Hatteras, et cetera.

There is a strip of approximately 82 miles of shoreline coming down the Banks, 72 miles is the property of the Department of Interior, of the shoreline.

Beach erosion in recent years and various factors of storms and tides is developing an acute situation.

There are some places along our Banks where there is less than 100 yards separating the ocean from the sound, and it has been predicted by those more knowledgeable than I, that if this barrier ever breaks, and the ocean comes into the sound, that it would affect the water table and the supply of pure water as far inland as some 50 to 75 miles.

I mention that to say that I do not think we can wait too long to correct some of the problems that now exist.

Therefore, that leads me to ask you this. What is the basic difference between H.R. 2492 and the administration's position?

Dr. WHITE. The administration's position visualizes that the coastal zone management problem is a subset, a part of the more general problem of managing the entire land area, and that the two are closely related.

The administration's position also recognizes that the coastal zone is a unique area. It is the point of juncture of land and water, and has special problems that other land areas do not have, and it calls our specifically in the bill the need to pay attention to those coastal zones. I do agree that the problem we have here is the pace of motion toward management systems.

Now, I think I would concur with you, sir, on the urgency, as I have indicated before. You only have to be associated with fishery problems as we are in NOAA to understand the great urgency of making sure that our coastal zones are properly managed so that our fisheries are protected and they are, in turn, properly managed.

You cannot be involved in the kinds of things that we are involved in without coming up with the same sense of urgency you have expressed, sir.

Mr. JONES. Thank you.

Mr. DE LA GARZA. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. JONES. Yes.

Mr. DE LA GARZA. Doctor, are you doing any research or any planning in specific items?

Is your agency doing any research or planning like on beach

erosion?

Dr. WHITE. We have groups that are working on the interaction of oceans and the land. It is not a large program.

The principal group working on beach erosion is the Corps of Engineers' Coastal Engineering Research Board.

This is a critical problem and we have been looking at it but only in a small way.

Mr. DE LA GARZA. Thank you.

Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, I believe I have one more question. Dr. White, what will be your opinion as to the feasibility of Government participation with private ownership as it relates to erosion occurring on the shorelines of the property owned by individuals? Dr. WHITE. I Would just like to clarify your question, sir.

You are suggesting the joint participation of Government and private groups in taking steps to prevent erosion?

Mr. JONES. Yes.

Dr. WHITE. Stated that way, I think it is something we are probably going to have to do.

Mr. JONES. It appears that we must if we are to protect our shores. Dr. WHITE. We have similar kinds of problems in agriculture. Mr. JONES. That is what I was going to get around to. We would not be without precedent.

Dr. WHITE. It would not be without precedent.

Mr. JONES. Thank you.

Mr. LENNON. Dr. White, have you had an opportunity to study, or has your staff studied and reported to you the three bills that are now being considered by the oceanography subcommittee?

Dr. WHITE. We have had a chance to study in some detail, sir, H.R. 2492, H.R. 2493, and H.R. 9229, which is the most recent one, includes the provisions of H.R. 2493 and includes additional provisions on marine sanctuaries and management of the contiguous zone.

I have looked at H.R. 9229, sir, but not in depth.

Mr. LENNON. Now, Doctor, how does the bill that we are considering differ from the recommendations of the Stratton Commission?

Dr. WHITE. Well, sir, I think that your bills parallel very closely the recommendations of the Stratton Commission.

Mr. LENNON. You say in your judgment the bills that are being now considered by this committee parallel in substance-at least I think you infer the recommendations of the Stratton Commission relating to the coastal zone management.

Dr. WHITE. Yes, sir.

Mr. LENNON. In what respect do they differ in any degree from the recommendations of the Stratton Commission concerning the establishment of coastal zone management?

Dr. WHITE. I cannot recall any substantial differences, but I would not want to leave the record indicating there are none since it has been some time since I looked at the details of the Commission's report. But, my recollection is that this conforms very closely.

Mr. LENNON. Now, Doctor, you were a member of the Stratton Commission?

Dr. WHITE. That is correct.

Mr. LENNON. In addition to that, Doctor, you were a member of the special panel of the Stratton Commission which was authorized to make a study of the problem relating to the management and development of coastal zones?

Dr. WHITE. That is correct.

Mr. LENNON. You joined in the recommendation of the Stratton Commission related to coastal zone management in the Stratton Commission report to the President, did you not?

Dr. WHITE. In my capacity as a commissioner, I did join in. This was within the context of the Stratton Commission's deliberations at that time.

Mr. LENNON. But, as a member of the panel, and there were four of them on that panel, you made a specific recommendation to the full committee, in turn, made the specific recommendation in the Stratton Commission report on which this legislation was drafted.

Is that a fair statement, Doctor?

Dr. WHITE. That is correct, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. LENNON. So, we have a situation-I believe I have seen it before, it is institutional restraints related to positions on legislation which is certainly not uncommon.

Now, Doctor, in the light of what you heard here in our colloquy with Dr. MacDonald, do you not believe-and I want you to speak as an individual and not as an administrative spokesman, if you can find yourself in the position to do that--do you not believe, as a member of the Stratton Commission and as a member of the special panel that made the study in depth of this question, now you state that in your judgment this legislation parallels to a very substantial degree the recommendation, do you not believe that we ought to go ahead and move forward, that we cannot wait until the time comes in the 1980's when perhaps some legislation that might be passed that involves the total land use.

Dr. WHITE. Mr. Chairman, I would say that my views have not changed since being a member of the Stratton Commission. I so stated in my testimony here that there is a great urgency to get a rational system of management of the coastal zone, and getting one as soon as possible.

I think the difference is in what context is it done.

Mr. LENNON. In addition to the recommendations of the Stratton Commission concerning the establishment of coastal zone management, which we are trying to do, did not the Stratton Commission recommend specifically and definitively that the coastal zone management should be included in the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Agency?

Dr. WHITE. That was the proposal, sir, the recommendation.

Mr. LENNON. That was the recommendation of the Commission of which you were a member.

Any other questions, gentlemen?

Mr. HEYWARD. If the Chairman will forgive me, Doctor, I will try to get you off the horns of that dilemma.

Mr. LENNON. Dr. White knows the affection and esteem and regard I have for him.

Mr. HEYWARD. Dr. White, I want to go back and I apologize that I really did not raise this with Dr. MacDonald.

He made a statement that, among other things, the Congress should develop a unified approach on land use which will avoid the confusion to State and local governments that two separate Federal programs would undoubtedly create.

I assume he meant by that that there would be a separate land use program and a separate coastal zone program.

May I ask you whether or not you conceive it possible that if this committee goes forward with a coastal zone program, that it might later be married to a total land use program if that legislation moved? Dr. WHITE. I think that Dr. MacDonald's point is well taken.

I think that there is no question that the links between the coastal zone and the rest of the land must be taken into consideration in any management of land and water areas of this country.

Now, the coastal zones are unique.

You are asking a question if you started first with the coastal zone management system, would that preclude eventually marrying that in some consistent way into a total land use policy so you have only one system.

I believe that if the Congress takes the proper action and the executive branch takes the proper action, that we can bring that about: Separate programs are not a necessary consequence.

Mr. HEYWARD. I would like to make one additional comment. In this total land use concept, you are certainly not going to have the one point of contact at the Fedearl level with all the States and all the various programs that are being managed by the Federal Government.

The States are still going to have to deal with the Corps of Engineers on their projects. They are going to have to deal with the Department of Transportation in connection with airport development. They will have to deal also with the Department of Transportation in connection with highways; with EPA in connection with facilities for abating pollution; with HUD in connection with housing and urban renewal projects; with Interior in connection with its National Parks interest, and in connection with the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. So, I do not think the argument that a different point of contact is going to be created is very legitimate.

The Congress attempted to solve that in the Intergovernmental Coordination Act of 1968.

The proposed legislation before the subcommittee envisions that the contacts between the States and the Federal Government will be in accordance with the concepts and precepts of title IV of that act.

I thought as a matter of the record we should make it crystal clear that regardless of which department administers a coastal zone program, that is the grants to assist the States in development, the two departments which have an interest beyond the land area, including the contiguous zone, the two departments that have the primary interest, as I see it, are the Department of Commerce and the Department of the Interior.

Various other departments have interests in this coastal zone area, so to object to making the first step on the grounds that you are creating another point of contact, it seems to me is a rather weak reed to rest an objection on.

Thank you.

Mr. LENNON. Doctor, one other question, if you will, please.

Do you not believe that the estuarine sanctuaries and the marine sanctuaries should be included in consideration of the legislation now before this committee? Are they not inseparable? How can you separate them?

Dr. WHITE. I would say, sir, that both the estuarine and marine sanctuaries are in a logical place, if such a bill were to be passed.

There are other logical places where such things could be considered but, certainly, if you are going to manage the coastal zone areas, and as you point out in H.R. 9229, the contiguous zone, then, clearly, an essential part of that management should be provision of areas for study and special use.

Mr. LENNON. Doctor, if you would rather not answer this question, I will strike it after you hear it, but do coastal zone management, and

you recommended that as a member of the Stratton Commission, and of the panel thereto, if it comes into being, should it be in the Department of the Interior or NOAA, or what department should it be in? If you prefer not to answer, I will strike the question.

Dr. WHITE. Well, sir, it is quite clear that my organization has extensive capabilities and interest in the coastal zone.

However, we are in the administration taking the view, which I think is the proper one, that in light of the fact that the coastal zones, the management aspects, have to be part of the general use policy aspects, the Department of the Interior also becomes a logical agency in which to lodge this.

The formation of NOAA, however, did bring into the Department of Commerce many of the oceanographic and coastal capabilities previously in the Department of the Interior.

Mr. LENNON. The Sea Grant program that came into being is now under NOAA and, through your office, the Sea Grant program being under NOAA, you are funding a number of projects which certainly are inextricably related to coastal zone management today.

Dr. WHITE. As I indicated in my testimony, 80 percent of the Sea Grant program, which totals about $15 million, is directed to coastal zone problems, and a substantial part of those are devoted to problems very closely connected to coastal zone management.

Mr. LENNON. There are a number of other projects.

Well, thank you, Doctor, for your appearance.

We look forward to your continued cooperation and help in trying to implement this program if it ever gets in your department. Thank you, sir.

Excuse me, Doctor. Just one other question, from our counsel.

Mr. HEYWARD. Dr. White, I wonder if you would be willing to address a letter to the subcommittee and specifically address your attention to those parts of H.R. 9229 which changed or added to H.R. 2493, not on the philosophical concept of whether we should or should not move forward, but if coastal legislation is enacted, specific recommendations as to language or comments on H.R. 9229, particularly sections 312 and 313, title IV.

Dr. WHITE. I am sure I will be doing that, sir, as we provide comments on the legislation.

Mr. LENNON. Thank you very much, Doctor. Thank you, gentlemen. Our next witness will be Dr. Leigh Hammond, deputy director of administration, Raleigh, N.C.

Dr. Hammond, do you have anyone with you?

STATEMENT OF DR. LEIGH HAMMOND, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION, RALEIGH, N.C., ACCOMPANIED BY JOHN PITTMAN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NORTH CAROLINA MARINE SCIENCE COUNCIL

Dr. HAMMOND. I have Mr. John Pittman with me, who is the executive director of the North Carolina Marine Science Council, which plays a key role in our coastal zones in North Carolina, as you

are aware.

Mr. LENNON. Even though I am from North Carolina, I have a request to yield to my colleague, Mr. Jones.