The Coastal Barrier Resources Act: Has It Discouraged Coastal Development?

Despite an effort by Congress to design a market-based public policy to limit development on certain coastal barriers and protect the federal treasury from paying for recovery from expensive natural disasters, growth continued on these shifting sands. In enacting the Coastal Barrier Resources Act, federal policymakers may have overlooked the key role of state and local governments, as well as the role of local developers, landowners, and realtors in shaping development on coastal barriers. By itself, the act will not prevent development. In fact, it appears that development in areas designated under the act will occur if (1) development pressure is strong enough to overcome the disincentives posed by the act, and (2) state and local governments facilitate development. For example, a local government may substitute its own subsidies for those withdrawn by the federal government. Nothing in the act prevents this from occurring. This article examines the key forces affecting development in areas designated under the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) and seeks to explain why development has occurred in some designated areas, despite the withdrawal of federal subsidies. Using case studies of selected coastal barriers designated by the act, as well as surveys of state coastal managers and key informants, the research shows that the Coastal Barrier Resources Act, by itself, will not prevent development from occurring in the designated coastal areas.     

Implementing coastal zone management: 1972–1990

Abstract

The implementation history of the Coastal Zone Management Act offers insights into the process of long‐term intergovernmental policy implementation. This five‐stage history is explained as a coproduction process, in which coastal state, environmental, and development advocacy coalitions interacted with congressional committees and the federal coastal office to shape coastal policy and manage coastal development. The coproduction approach proved invaluable during the Reagan assault on the coastal program, when the states and Congress assumed responsibility for keeping the program alive. Acknowledging underlying stakeholder dynamics as the basis for coastal program evaluation could strengthen future coastal management implementation.     

CZM in California: Successes and Challenges Ahead

California has a forty-year history of successful coastal zone management. The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, the California Coastal Commission, and the State Coastal Conservancy have protected and made accessible hundreds of miles of shoreline. While each agency has played a critical role, this article focuses on the Coastal Commission. Implementing the California Coastal Act, the Coastal Commission has partnered with local government, other agencies, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and the public to concentrate new development in already developed areas, and much of the rural coastal zone looks as it did in 1972. The Commission has protected and expanded public shoreline access through its regulatory actions. Using strong ecological science the Commission has protected a wide variety of sensitive habitats and wetlands. And under the authority of the Coastal Zone Management Act, the Commission has reviewed thousands of federal projects to assure that they are consistent with the Coastal Act. Challenges continue, though, including population growth, sea-level rise, and inadequate funding to update local coastal land use plans to address new issues, such as climate change adaptation. New investment is needed at the national, state, and local level to continue the success of the California program.     

Altruism,selfishness and coastal resources

Abstract

The basis for coastal zone management in the United States is established in legislation. In comparison, Canadian federal and provincial governments have adopted a piecemeal approach for managing a variety of concerns examined here: water quality, ecological protection, public access, aesthetics, natural hazards, and water dependency. As a result of this approach, which is characterized by a minimum of federal, provincial, and interjurisdictional coordination, the British Columbia coastal zone is showing signs of stress. For example, major shellfish harvesting areas are being lost to water pollution; ecologically sensitive habitats are being consumed by urban, commercial, and industrial expansion; recreation and tourism opportunities are being impaired by clear cutting and other inappropriate developments; and infrastructure is allowed in flood and erosion‐prone areas. Recommendations to improve the approach to coastal management in British Columbia include a variety of innovations. New federal and provincial policies, legislation, institutions, and experimentation with local and regional integrated resource planning are required to better govern the coastal zone. Increased support for existing agencies, public involvement, and access to information as well as more common use of environmental impact studies are needed to justify proposed coastal developments.     

Judicial Interpretations of Federal Consistency under the Coastal Zone Management Act

The federal consistency provision of the Coastal Zone Management Act (1972) created a new form of interaction between federal and state governments. The implementation of this provision has significant ramifications for coastal management and intergovernmental cooperation in the United States. Past studies have focused on the provision's implementation patterns among U.S. coastal states and federal-state disputes mediated by the Secretary of Commerce. This supplemental article examines judicial interpretations of the federal consistency provision over the past two decades in relation to major issues deliberated by Congress at the time of enactment. Recent changes in the provision, as well as those unresolved issues likely to resurface in future litigation, are also discussed. Seemingly, coastal land use authority and offshore energy exploration remain the most contentious issues surrounding the federal consistency provision.     

Considering “Coastal Carbon” in Existing U.S. Federal Statutes and Policies

Coastal ecosystems such as mangroves, salt marshes, and seagrasses provide important ecosystem services, including nursery habitat for fish, shoreline protection, and the recently recognized service of carbon sequestration and storage. When these wetland ecosystems are degraded or destroyed, the carbon can be released to the atmosphere, where it adds to the concentration of greenhouses gases (GHGs) that contribute to climate change. Many federal statutes and policies specifically require that impacts on ecosystem services be considered in policy implementation. Yet, no federal statute, regulation, or policy accounts directly for the carbon held in coastal habitats. There are a number of federal statutes and policies for which coastal carbon ecosystem services could reasonably be added to environmental and ecosystem considerations already implemented. We look at a subset of these statutes and policies to illustrate how coastal carbon ecosystem services and values might affect the implementation and outcomes of such statutes generally. We identify key steps for the inclusion of the ecosystem services of coastal habitats into the implementation of existing federal policies without statutory changes; doing so would increase the degree to which these policies consider the full economic and ecological impacts of policy actions.     

Federal consistency and state expectations

Abstract

The requirement in the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 that federal projects be consistent with approved state coastal zone management programs is an important incentive for states to complete their programs. As a condition of program approval, states must first consult with the federal agencies concerned and provide opportunities for comment, with the hope of avoiding conflicts. The consistency requirement is also subject to various exceptions whose scope remains to be determined. One such exception of uncertain extent is the exclusion from the coastal zone of federal lands “the use of which is subject solely to the sole discretion ... of the Federal Government....”; Despite these uncertainties, however, the consistency provision represents a major change in federal policy, which has traditionally allowed federal agencies to operate largely without concern for state land or water use requirements.     

Boundaries of the coastal zone: A survey of state laws

Abstract

A survey of coastal state legislation reveals several types of statutes affecting activities occurring in coastal regions: Coastal management statutes, wetland statutes, and shoreline statutes. Each coastal state has adopted methods to delineate coastal areas or features, whether an entire coastal zone, a limited feature such as wetlands, or shorelands. Boundary delineation is done according to linear measurements, political boundaries, roads and highways, vegetation, elevation, tidal flow, and other factors. An appendix is provided containing state statutory provisions relating to boundary‐delineation techniques.     

Providing Public Access to the Shore: The Role of Coastal Zone Management Programs

In many coastal states and territories, coastal zone management (CZM) programs have been the prime catalyst in leveraging public access initiatives among state and federal agencies, public organizations, and the private sector. A wide range of tools are used, including acquisition, regulations, technical assistance, and public education. The diversity of approaches is illustrated through a variety of case examples. Although hard numbers for measuring outcomes were not uniformly available, between 1985 and 1988, when federal and state CZM funding dedicated to public access was tracked, $141.5 million (unadjusted 1988 dollars) were spent on 455 public access-related projects. A policy shift occurred in the 1990s away from reliance on acquisition and regulation as the most effective means of providing access and toward technical assistance and public outreach-a response to the overall decrease in funds available for access. CZM programs have been able to balance the contradictory goals of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (CZMA), such as protecting coastal resources while providing for increased public access to those resources. It is recommended that CZM programs conduct assessments to determine the kind of access needed in the future and where it should be located. And, due to the creativity and innovation that states and territory coastal programs use to achieve access, it is recommended that a national clearinghouse be established for documenting and sharing information on innovative tools and programs.     

Conservation and development in Oregon's coastal zone

Abstract

Coastal zone management in Oregon is based on the state's general land‐use law. This body of law is designed to deal with population increase, urbanization, and preservation of agricultural land, as well as with other problems throughout the state. Early planning and policy recommendations for the coast were in the hands of a commission having predominantly local membership. This commission produced an extensive series of studies, policies, and recommendations which were assembled as a proposed management tool for natural resources. Staff of the commission was then absorbed into the state land‐management agency, which developed final goals and guidelines for compliance with the Coastal Zone Management Act. Adoption of the coastal goals in December 1976 has triggered deadlines for local government compliance within the coastal zone. The management program is now undergoing federal review.     

The urban coast from a national perspective

Abstract

Viewing the urban coast from the national perspective one sees not only the sheer number and complexity of the federal programs involved but the lack of adequate coordination and the different often cross‐purpose missions. It goes without saying that to date, no one federal agency or program has been specifically charged with overseeing the urban coastal resource as an entity, nor is it likely that one will. However, national concern regarding various aspects of the urban coastal issues has been expressed. A very clear‐cut national interest has been constitutionally declared in navigation, defense, and interstate commercial activities, most of which affect the water area. A more diffuse though no less important national involvement can be traced through a number of federal activities which add up to considerable federal interest and investment in our urban coastal areas. Beginning in the early 1960s with waterfront related urban renewal activity for example the activities have accelerated more recently with such things as the administration's urban initiative, the Urban Recreation Study and the Urban Waterfront Study (HCRS), the Urban Parks and Recreation Recovery Program (HCRS), the Maritime Preservation Program (HCRS and NHT), public investment in harbor cleanup (EPA), shorefront access and planning (OCZM), special waterfront demonstration projects (OCZM), and the State Coastal Zone programs coming in line to mention a few. Building on the existing framework and growing enthusiasm there is an unexcelled opportunity to make incremental progress in creating a new and better urban environment by effectively managing this unique portion of the city—the urban waterfront.     

Helping Communities Adapt and Plan for Coastal Hazards: Coastal Zone Management Program Recommendations for National Tool Developers

Adapting to changing coastlines is an unprecedented planning challenge as coastal hazards, including those associated with climate change, influence all areas of resource management. Tools have been developed to aid in understanding coastal hazards and to facilitate the planning and implementation of adaptation strategies. Through interviews with members of eight geographically distributed state Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Programs and several federal and nonprofit partners, we explored the utility of current tools for on-the-ground adaptation planning and implementation needs. State CZM Programs operate as trusted information brokers at the nexus between national resources and local needs. Here we provide seven recommendations for how to overcome the challenges identified with tool discovery, lack of trust, and the coarse spatial resolution of national tools. Our findings suggest local community needs are better addressed when end-users play a role in the tool development process. We also recommend leveraging CZM Program connections because they have the knowledge and expertise to identify solutions and disseminate information. While the recommendations presented here were taken from the perspective of state CZM Programs regarding coastal tools, the lessons learned may provide valuable insight into the tool development process for other resource management fields.     

Port administration and coastal zone management in Vancouver,British Columbia: A comparison with Seattle,Washington

Large North American ports are encountering serious management challenges. Surrounding communities, environmental interest groups, and government policy are focusing on protection and enhancement of public coastal amenities. In Vancouver, the federal port management system historically enabled national trade interests to override local and regional objectives at the discretion of port decison makers. In contrast, the Port of Seattle is administered at the local level, and legislation and policy require that local publics are involved in decision‐making. Recently, VPC established itself as the vanguard among Canada's major ports in the advancement of progressive management. Nevertheless, the adoption of new policies would ensure that Vancouver, and Canada's other ports, continue to be responsible leaders in Canadian coastal management. These policies include: federal, municipal, and provincial government representation on the local board of directors; strengthening community involvement; creation of a standing planning advisory committee; subjecting Canadian ports to the federal environmental assessment law; and adoption of explicit land and water use regulations.     

Response of coastal zone management programs to sea level rise in the United States

Abstract

State coastal zone management programs are responding to the potential impacts of accelerated sea level rise through a wide range of activities and policies. This article provides a brief overview of the Coastal Zone Management Act and other federal laws that provide the basis for coastal state regulatory activities. It surveys the level of response to sea level rise by state coastal management programs in 24 marines coastal states, from formal recognition to implementation of policies addressing the issue. Individual state CZMP responses and policies that have been implemented or proposed are categorized. The adaptation of sea level rise to ongoing institutional objectives is discussed and policy constraints and trends are summarized.     

Forty Years of the CZMA: Impacts and Innovations

This article addresses federal, state, and local regulatory regimes for controlling commercial advertising in coastal waters. It focuses on a new method of outdoor advertising that utilizes a billboard towed by a tug in coastal waters. Specifically, it explores the extent to which legal action to regulate advertising from floating billboards in U.S. waters could withstand constitutional scrutiny. The issue is examined within the contexts of commercial speech and navigational servitude. Additionally, the article discusses the preservation of viewscapes along the coast and the applicability of the public trust doctrine. Jurisdictional issues are examined along with the role of states' harbor management plans and local ordinances in regulating commerce and providing anchorage limitations. The article argues that regulation of floating billboards must not necessarily be based on aesthetics, but the public trust doctrine. The article concludes that the language of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) and interpretations of its scope, as well as Supreme Court decisions in favor of aesthetic zoning, support the inclusion of such regulations in states' coastal zone management plans.     

SiMoCo: the viability of a prototype platform for a coastal monitoring system: a case study

Coastal zones are among the most productive areas in the world, offering a wide variety of valuable habitats and ecosystems services. Despite the low population density in the Brazilian coastal zone, their distribution is quite concentrated near some coastal cities and state capitals. This concentration places enormous pressure on coastal resources. Therefore, the main objective of this paper is to present an overview on the current status of SiMoCo (Sistema de Monitoramento Costeiro, or Coastal Monitoring System in English) project as a possible early warning system that can be integrated to the Brazilian Coastal Management Information System. This prototype platform provides a real-time access to the composition, organization and simulation of planktonic communities. First, our results demonstrate such a system detecting a target dinoflagellate; second, we apply structural and functional indexes to compare and characterize the ecological networks from two different coastal areas. Conclusions are made about SiMoCo’s feasibility and its possible contribution to the decision-making process within integrated coastal zone management (ICZM) strategies.     

The demand for local access to coastal recreation in southern New England

Coastal lands provide popular outdoor recreation opportunities including beach recreation, fishing, boating, and wildlife viewing. Published studies measuring the demand for access to coastal lands generally have focused on the recreational value of intensively used beaches, which comprise only a portion of the New England coastline. This article examines the recreational demand for coastal access to a local, free‐access site in southern New England. The study uses data obtained from on‐site interviews conducted during the summer of 1995 at Gooseberry Island, Massachusetts. The estimated average value of a visitor‐day during the summer season is $3.06 for weekdays and $4.18 for weekends and holidays. While these values are at the low end of the range of values published in existing literature addressing beach recreation, the aggregate value of recreation benefits derived from public access to undeveloped coastal areas likely are significant.     

Pushing the CZMA Envelope: California: The First State to Litigate the New Federal Law

As noted often by the former California Coastal Commission Executive Director Peter Douglas, the history of how the California coast was saved is a great repository of untold stories. Although the Commission has had a dramatic and tangible impact on California's coastal geography, the public is largely unaware of many of its early accomplishments. This article begins to chronicle the rich stories of California's coastal legacy by telling the story of how the Commission utilized the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) to prevent Southern Pacific Railroad from developing a seven-mile stretch of the Monterey Bay shoreline. In so doing, the Commission helped make possible the creation of the Monterey Peninsula Recreational Trail, a public bicycle and pedestrian path that has grown to sixteen miles in length and runs through the heart of John Steinbeck's world-famous Cannery Row. The controversy also was the subject of the first judicial challenge of a state's federal authority under the CZMA and precluded private commercial and residential development that would have dramatically altered the urban form of the Monterey Peninsula. It is important to tell the story as the Coastal Commission's role in this remarkable accomplishment has been almost completely overlooked.     

The Value of a Spillover Fishery for Spiny Lobsters Around a Marine Reserve in Northern New Zealand

The contribution that Leigh Marine Reserve in northern New Zealand makes to the local spiny lobster fishery was examined by comparing the catch characteristics of Jasus edwardsii around the reserve boundary with those from Coastal Leigh, 0.3-2 km from the reserve, and Little Barrier Island, 22-30 km from the reserve. Seasonal trends were apparent in the reserve catch characteristics, consistent with lobster movements into and out of offshore fishing areas adjacent to the boundary. No significant difference was detected in catch per unit effort (kg.trap haul -1 ) among locations. However, the catch around the marine reserve consisted of fewer but larger lobsters than at Little Barrier Island, while the size and number of lobsters caught per trap haul at Coastal Leigh was intermediate between the other two locations. Catch rates around the reserve were more variable than at the other sites, but on average, the amount of money made per trap haul was similar to Little Barrier Island and Coastal Leigh.