Proceedings of Alabama public meeting series on coastal zone boundaries / sponsored for Alabama Development Office, Alabama Coastal Area Board ; by Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Consortium

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

Coastal Zone
Information
Center Procee "ings of
ALABAMA PUBLIC MEETING SERIES
ON COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARIES

"Y
IF ItI 1@-
1ril

Sponsored for
ALABAMA DEVELOPMENT OFFICE
ALABAMA COASTAL AREA BOARD 0 A
HT
%A 393 by
A2
P76
d

1976
c.2 Mississippi - Alabama Sea Grant Consortium
MASGP - 76 = Oil

PUBLIC MEETING SERIES ON ALABAMA COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARIES

Mobile and Baldwin Counties, Alabama
November - December, 1975

Alabama Development Office
Montgomery, Alabama
March, 1976

ALABAMA PUBLIC MEETING SERIES ON COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARIES

November - December, 1975

INTERPRETATIONS

LUTHER W. HYDE

The preparation of this document was partially financed through a federal grant
from the Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
as authorized by Section 305 of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972. The
program was administered by the State Planning Division, Alabama Development
Office, Office of the Governor.

r
US Department of Commerce
r4OAA Concta:1 Center Library
U
22341, So t:i ".31as3n Avenue
Charleston, SC 29405-2413

Sponsored for the
Alabama Development Office
and the
Alabama Coastal Area Board

by the
Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Consortium

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Conclusions 1

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Summary of Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Transcripts of Meetings and Meeting Participants: 9

Mobile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Foley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Citronelle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

Bayou La Batre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

Bay Minette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

CONCLUSIONS

Coastal Zone Boundary

There was a wide divergence in opinion as to what should be included

within the Alabama coastal zone. Proposals and suggestions ranged from

including all of the State within the coastal zone to defining a minimal

zone that would include only the offshore waters.

A proposal by the Citizen's Coastal Zone Alliance (CCZA), an alliance

of several conservation-oriented groups representing a large number of people

encouraged the adoption of a broad coastal area (two counties and portions

of four others) based on ecological considerations. Several speakers

supported the CCZA proposal. The Mobile Area Chamber of Commerce, represent-

ing a large part of the Mobile area business community, proposed that the

coastal zone include only the offshore waters and a small area of the Mobile

delta. Comments from citizens throughout the meetings generally supported

an area between these limits.

Based upon statements, comments and questions by participants in the

five public meetings, it is concluded that there is a predominant desire

for a minimal coastal area.

2. other

Though it was not the purpose of these meetings to go beyond a discus-

sion of the coastal zone boundary, several other impressions occurred over

and over. As voiced by those in@attendance, the public is tired of too much

government regulation, both Federal and State, and they view the coastal

zone program, and specifically the permitting activities of the Sta-te Act,

as added infringement on their private rights. There were many comments

regarding the composition of the Coastal Area Board along with suggestions

that there should be more local Baldwin and Mobile County representation on

the Board and more local involvement in the program.

There is a great deal of misunderstanding and lack of knowledge about

the purposes of coastal zone management in Alabama. This lack of knowledge

has led to a negative attitude by the public toward the coastal zone program.

This can only be overcome by a positively oriented publicinformation and

public participation program that involves local citizens in the planning

effort.

INTRODUCTION

Five meetings were held in Mobile and Baldwin Counties in November and

December, 1975, for the purpose of soliciting public input into the definition

of the Alabama coastal zone boundary. These meetings were attended by 409

registered participants.

Each meeting was chaired by a member of the Coastal Area Board and the

staff presented three possible coastal zone boundaries for consideration of and

comment by the public. Several well thought-out alternative boundary proposals

were presented by citizen groups. There was a great deal of active partici-

pation by citizens at each meeting. "In addition to serving as a forum for

developing ideas on the boundary definition, the meetings served as an oppor-

tunity to create public awareness of the coastal zone program and as a medium of

interchange of ideas on a wide range of coastal zone related topics.

This report sinn arizes the meetings and attempts to draw general conclu-

sions from the public!gcommentsregarding the coastal zone boundary and related

items. Transcripts of meetings are included with only a minor amount of editing.

The Coastal Area Board appreciates the participation of the public in these

meetings. Other meetings will be held on other coastal zone topics as the
'A
program develops.

SUMMARY OF MEETINGS

Mobile

The Mobile meeting was attended by 117 registered participants. Ten citi-

zens presented prepared statements and 25 citizens made statements or asked

questions from the audience.

The Citizen's Coastal Zone Alliance (CCZA) proposed a boundary that would

include all of Mobile and Baldwin Counties and parts of Washington, Choctaw,

Clarke, and Monroe Counties. The inland boundary would extend to the Jackson

Lock and Dam on the Tombigbee River and the Claiborne Lock and Dam on the

Alabama River. Six speakers and one letter supported the CCZA proposal. One

speaker addressed the need for rapid but reasonable industrial expansion with

a balanced program to assure environmental protection. Another speaker spoke

in favor of a clean environment but felt the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972

placed too much power at the Federal level and therefore recommended the adoption

of a minimal coastal zone boundary. Another speaker stressed the growth of

unnecessary Federal regulation an'd urged the adoption of the smallest possible

coastal zone boundary.

Questions and comments from the audience were strongly against government

regulation and the continued infringement upon private property. Several citizens

emphasized the desire of a minimal coastal area and some suggested the possible

repeal of the Federal and State Coastal Zone Management Acts.

Foley

The Foley meeting was attended by 90 registered participants. Thirty-five

citizens participated by giving prepared statements, by asking questions or

by making comments.

The CCZA boundary, first proposed at Mobile, was introduced and supported

by two speakers. Two other speakers recommended a broad area to assure that

all coastal drainage was included within the defined boundary. Several speakers

questioned the need for additional regulations and objected to creeping Federal

take-over and expressed firm opinions that the boundary should be as small as

possible. A contour line boundary was suggested as possibly being the most

suitable, and another speaker suggested that the coastal zone boundary should be

made compatible with the U.S. Corps of Engineerst area of authority.

Prepared statements were primarily in support of a broad coastal zone,

whereas audience comments and questions were principally negative in tone. Many

of those in attendance were exposed to the coastal zone management concept for

the first time. Many questions were directed toward learning the requirements

for a boundary as set out in the State and Federal laws. The general feeling

against further regulation - Federal, State, or local - was very strong and

generally was the' overriding issue in the meeting.

Citronelle

The Citronelle meeting was attended by 18 registered participants. Two citi-

zens addressed the meeting and one question was asked from the audience.

The CCZA boundary proposal was presented. Another speaker pointed out that

Citronelle was the highest point in the coastal area from Texas to North Carolina

and was the highest townon the Gulf, Mobile and Ohio Railroad between Mobile

and St. Louis, Hissouri. He felt that Citronelle, or other similar areas,

should not be included within the coastal zone.

There was insufficient participation at the Citronelle meeting to draw

any conclusion as to the feeling of local citizens.

Bayou La Batre

The Bayou La Batre meeting was attended by 66 registered participants.

Only two prepared statements were presented. The meeting centered around an

exchange of information in reoponse to questions and comments from the audience.

The CCZA boundary proposal was presented and supported by one spokesman.

Other comments were primarily negative in that they attacked the Federal Government

for trying to force land use through the back door, to take away private property

rights, and continuing to interfere in local affairs. State government was also

condemned for encroachment on private rights. Two speakers advocated taking

all of the State into the coastal zone so that all would "suffer equally". The

power and makeup of the Coastal Area Board was questioned with the recommendation

that it be restructured to have more local representation.

Statements, questions and comments at Bayou La Batre covered a wide range

of possible boundaries and strayed far afield from the topic discussion. The

citizens were generally negative toward government in general and Federal

regulation in particular.

Bay Minette

The Bay Minette meetf-ng was attended by 118 registered participants.

Thirteen citizens presented prepared statements and 10 citizens asked questions

from the audience.

The Mobile Area Chamber of Commerce submitted a proposed boundary that

followed the shoreline along the coast and in Mobile Bay and included a small

marshland area of the delta. The Chamber of Commerce also recommended repeal

of the State Coastal Zone Act. The CCZA boundary proposal was supported by

two speakers with justifications for various areas included within the boundary.

The Baldwin County Board of Realtors recommended a coastal zone extending inland

200 feet from mean high water and suggested that the Coastal Area Board

become a "clearinghouse" type operation for coordination of permitting and

coastal zone coordination. Two speakers urged the adoption of a minimum coastal

zone and generally supported the Chamber of Commerce proposal. One speaker

suggested the boundary coincide with the "saltwater line" and another proposed

the 11.8 feet above mean sea level (100-year flood line) altitude as the inland

boundary. Three other speakers presented comments regarding the coastal zone

program without making a specific boundary recommendation. Several questions

from the audience inquired about various aspects of the program and generally

expressed concern over too much permitting and increasing government control.

I
I
I -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I TRANSCRIPTS OF MEETINGS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

0-, ,

Mobile Bay Hilton Inn
Mobile, Alabama
November 18, 1975

AGENDA

Opening Remarks: The Honorable Gary Greenough
Commissioner, City of Mobile
Member, Alabama Coastal Area Board

Introduction: Willis Hyde
State Planning Division
Alabama Development Office

Review of Proposed Boundaries: Gene Cody
State Planning Division
Alabama Development Office

Prepared Statements and Comments by the Public

Questions and Comments from the Audience

Meeting Participants

OPENING REMARKS

Gary A. Greenough
Commissioner, City of Mobile
Member, Alabama Coastal Area Board

There are a few people I would like to introduce: Commissioner Archie
M. McMillan of the Baldwin County Commission, a member of the Alabama Coastal
Area Board; Hugh Swingle of the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural
Resources, representing Claude Kelley of the Alabama Coastal Area Board; Bill
Starnes, State Planning Director, representing Red Bamberg, Director of the
Alabama Development Office and Chairman of the Alabama Coastal Area Board;
and Tom Joiner, Assistant Oil and Gas Supervisor, representing Dr. Philip
LaMoreaux, a member of the Alabama Coastal Area Board. Also here is Reo
Kirkland, representing the Lieutenant Governor, Jere Beasley.
In the beginning I would like to make one important point. This is not a
formal public hearing. Rather, it is a meeting to discuss some tentatively
proposed boundary configurations.
We will outline the general background leading into tonight's meeting.
Then we will have a period for comments. We ask that you come to the podium
and speak into the microphone so that all may hear. We also ask that you state
your name and the organization that you represent. Please try to limit your
comments to three minutes.
Having said this, let me add that it is a pleasure to welcome you to Mobile.
This is the first in a series of such discussion meetings. Others will be
held in Foley, Citronelle, Bayou La Batre, and Bay Minette.

INTRODUCTION

L. Willis Hyde
State Planning Division
Alabama Development Office

Many of you are familiar with the coastal zone management program as it
is presently conceived in the State of Alabama while others may not be fami-
liar with it. I will briefly bring you up to date on how we got into coastal
zone management, what it is, and what it means to the State of Alabama.
The coastal zone management concept in the United States began in the late
1960's during a period when there was much emphasis on environmental consider-
ations. In that period there were several federally funded comprehensive
studies to document the problems of the coastal zone, problems evolving from
the tremendous conflicts in uses, tremendous demands for population growth,
recreation, industrial development, and many other uses that were competing for
that thin zone that we call the coastal zone. Much of the population of the
United States, in fact most of the major cities of the United States and in
the world, are in the coastal zone. As a result of these federal studies and
the recognition of the increasing coastal zone problems, several bills were
introduced into the Congress.
The National Coastal Zone Management Act was passed in 1972. This Act has
two sections that are of primary interest to us in Alabama and in the coastal
states around the country. Section 305 established a three year planning
period during which federal funds are available to assist states in develop-
ing a comprehensive coastal zone management plan. The coastal states, as
defined in this Act, include those bordering on the Atlantic, the Gulf, the
Pacific, and the Great Lakes, Hawaii, Alaska, and four U. S. possessions--Puerto
Rico, Guam, the Virgin Islands, and American Samoa. There are thirty states and
four possessions involved in this program. Section 306 grants are available
for implementation of plans that are approved by the Secretary of Commerce.
The State of Alabama became involved in coastal zone management with the
passage of Act 1274 in the Regular Session of the 1973 Legislature. This Act
established the Alabama Coastal Area Board and assigned the task of developing
a Coastal Zone Management Program to the State Planning Division of the Alabama
Development Office. As a result of the passage of Act 1274, the State of
Alabama initiated a coastal zone management program in early 1974. The State
received it's first federal funds in June 1974. We are now nearing the half
way point in the three year planning process.
Various program elements specified in the State coastal zone management
act must be completed before i. plan can be approved for receiving implementation
funds. One of those elements is the coastal zone boundary. We are here tonight
in the first of a series of five meetings to solicit your comments regarding
the coastal zone boundary.
The 'Staff of the coastal zone program developed seven bo'undary proposals
which were presented to the Coastal Area Board. The Coastal Area Board has

chosen the three boundaries which we will be discussing tonight as represen-
tative of possible areas to be included. There are maps and narratives
describing these three boundaries in the packet of information that you
received when you registered. The boundary determination is important as it
defines the area in which the Coastal Area Board will implement the plan when
it is developed. We must determine what the boundary will be and we wish to
have your input into that determination. In other words, we are really here
tonight to give each of you an opportunity to say what you would like about
these three proposals or any other proposals that you may wish to discuss.
The Coastal Area Board will consider the reactions from the public, and this
will enter into the final formulation of the Alabama coastal zone boundary.
I would like to make one correction to the article which appeared in the
Mobile Press Register this past Sunday. The article stated that once a boundary
is established, the Board will hold the permitting authority on virtually any
type of construction undertaken. This is true in one sense, but is not
technically correct. Once we have an approved coastal zone management plan, the
Coastal Area Board will become a permitting agency. The boundary definition,
however, is only the first in a number of steps before a comprehensive coastal
zone plan is developed. Once'we have a defined boundary, we will not immediately
become a permitting agency.
At this time, I would like Mr. Gene Cody to review the information on
the boundary proposals. After that time, we will turn the program back over
to Commissioner Greenough for questions or comments from the audience.

REVIEW OF PROPOSED BOUNDARIES

Gene Cody
State Planning Division
Alabama Development Office

Please find in your information packet a memorandum to participants in
public meetings on the Alabama coastal zone boundary. Turn over to about midway
to the first map, and you can follow along on this presentation. We will not
get into complete detail, but we will be sure that everyone understands these
proposals.
The first map represents a two county area, Alabama's coastal counties,
which are Mobile and Baldwin. One proposal is to incorporate the two counties
into the coastal zone of Alabama. On the next page you will see some posi-
tive and some negative comments on this particular proposal. Certainly, there
are others, but these will help to guide your thinking. Of course, we welcome
any other comments on these proposals. Some ideas under the positive side
are: (1) Utilizes existing governmental boundaries and thereby simplifies
administration. (2) Easily determinable boundary eliminates the need for
costly on-the-ground surveys. You would encounter frequent surveyings in a
boundary proposal based on contours. (3) Incorporates greater number of critical
areas and areas of particular concern than other proposals. (4) Previous
technical and socio-economic studies have been compiled on county unit basis
and therefore data would be directly useable for planning purposes. In this
we have reference to census data, in particular. County census data is pre-
pared based on definitive geographic Census Enumeration Divisions, which are
further divided into smaller areas referred to as Census Enumeration Districts.
In the case of metropolitan cities, such as Mobile, the city is divided into
Census Tracts. There are some 400 bits of information obtainable from the
1970 census data. If we could use this readily available data, we would not
have to expend additional planning funds to obtain the same data. (5) Includes
areas that will be affected by oil and gas development onshore and offshore and
areas to be impacted by the outercontinental shelf oil exploration, pipeline
corridors, Ameraport development, and related activities.
Two proposed corridors are now under study, one in south Baldwin County and
one in south Mobile County, for bringing pipelines ashore. The impact on these
areas must certainly be considered. (6) Eliminates possible controversy of
some county property owners being included and others excluded from the coastal
zone area. (7) Meets requirements on Federal and State coastal zone laws.
In fact, it could possibly take in more land than is needed, as you will see
from the negative comments.
Some of the negative comments on using the whole two coastal counties as the
official coastal zone are: (1) May encompass an area larger than needed to meet
requirements of the Federal and State Acts. (2) May cause controversy with upper
county property owners who question placing their property in the coastal zone.

The second boundary proposal is a single boundary line, and it is consider-
ably smaller than the two counties. We call this the Physical Features and
Census Enumeration District proposal (Mr. Cody described the boundary using large
maps of the counties). This boundary encompasses an area that includes 41
census enumeration districts and 36 census tracts in Mobile.
Now we consider the positive and negative aspects of this proposal. Some
of the positive aspects are: (1) Boundary line drawn on manmade or natural
features that can be easily identified and locatedon the ground. (2) Reduces
the need for field surveys to determine position of boundary. (3) Keeps
management area to minimal size, and thereby allows a smaller administrative
staff to oversee the program. This is referring to possible on-site inspections
in case of receiving a permit application. (4) Census and socio-economic data
tabulated by census enumeration districts would allow direct application of
data for planning purposes. (5) Includes land well above 100 year flood line,
areas of offshore and delta oil and gas exploration, areas to be impacted by
possible outer continental shelf oil and gas exploration, pipeline corridors,
Ameraport development, and related activities. (6) Includes wetlands, beaches,
and other critical areas and areas of particular concern. In the recent past
we have sent a letter to various State and one Federal agency and the regional
planning agency in the Mobile area requesting them to help identify these areas
of particular concern. We have had good input on this, but further work must
be done. (7) Meets the requirements of the Federal and State Acts. On the
negative side: (1) Best available physical feature or census enumeration
district line does not always coincide with the most desirable coastal zone
boundary. It may be too broad or may be too narrow. (2) Does not conform to
existing governmental jurisdictions. (3) May not include all areas that will
eventually be identified as critical to coastal zone management. (4) May cause
some controversy when property on one side of a road or stream is in the coastal
zone, while that immediately across the road or stream is not included.
The third boundary proposal that I would like to discuss is a multiple
zone type, that is physical features for the primary zone and socio-economic
units for the secondary zone. This boundary is outlined in the information
packet (Mr. Cody described the boundary using a large map of the:counties).
Some positive comments on this boundary proposal are: (1) The multiple
boundary provides a means of implementing coastal zone authority over the
immediate coastal area, while at the same time, providing an overview and
coordination role over a larger area of influence. (2) The primary zone includes
land well above the 100 year flood line, areas offshore and delta oil and
gas exploration--areas likely to be impacted by possible outer continental
shelf oil and gas exploration, pipeline corridors, Ameraport development, and
related activities. (3) Includes wetlands and beaches and other critical areas
and areas of particular concern. (4) Primary zone is drawn on manmade
features that can be easily identified and located on the ground, thereby reducing
the need for field surveys. (5) Secondary zone incorporates whole census
enumeration districts in which the primary zone falls, thereby allowing the
use of data tabulated by census enumeration districts. (6) Secondary zone along
census enumeratio.n district boundaries generally coincides with political,
cultural, and physical boundaries. (7) Keeps area of management relatively
small and thereby allows a small administrative staff to regulate activities.

Two CoLi t Area
ALABAMA'S CO"A@TAL COUNTIES

Ha"@flivrro Carlton-
;
e@ 11, .1
, @' Hog
WOO

p s Chape'l
3 01
CP
Sam

r1saw

rnan

tin V
p
9

W tmore

21,
clvu

CL Ra
2 Ba
C- e a u -Pl- t I, et
CL

r
C,
e @Z7' V

Ion

16n
kn ? I Ste Iw Gat oo

on
even is I's
0 111@
luf

aoh e
self q%t

ntf a

The d e R I L Roben ale
Fairlho z X.4j-'
ington I I S er le
t 0 ellefont ne aftkt" art
14 Great no Clear
Fa@l R* or PE Point e4r Clay Cot

190M Mon uts
(",a Y
Magna Et
Biy 0 hamps nt M"11.t Pt Weo%$ In -2 4
j0parn
abams n 7 Pei
Ws Av, wbos 194@ ron Boy pe4 4: Ba
Rvroo@ v Pt Ron ecour 3 ph, Big L
Y
MIS OSIP I
@'Itl Pmm Co.
Vauphin stand iv
I @W

P.4 FO G ilue
phif% (and pe/ Pt M r n off Shot
Ica
.,On 1,14

10 0 10 20 30

Physical Ffea@+"r i (Primary) anj Socioeconomic uncretaecor."
ALABAMA'S COASTAL COUNTIES

_Z, re
unflower
u

Crt
caritol;
.41,x
od,
ea4oard
h far @47
4
Uriah
McIntosh

q
eg .. 14.
Z,
S+'s @hal"R`i 3
C@
am
C- alcOl
Q@
c, Mcitlou
-4,

Tensaw

J,
V@

M
ore
Le
toe Oil

Is
Primary

A%
G M SeconJar

eii Minet
0.
I r

0
-N
'qiglbree@, -Grand

Gites, 0

7
on

f6
mcoufI
Vol Pt
LOKI Y
pt phn
pt 5
#Aontr

S it 'Robertsdale
heod OB LE Fai
rvihgt 71
a
13ei(e ntaine, Battl 5 W
L a Point Cl Su@rdaf
p If r1l fay City -
Gra 8 F I R-r low
In [I n n Louis
C n r
BA Y
n
YqjLa stre Delcha s mull. W As
11 'ch
d a
Gr Alaba a Port Pet
eron ey
We Hii@bes &I eri;.d@o Ba@
JoSeph
SOU Cd@ t B n Svc it -Or n Big
a pt Bav on Seco Wolf
I S I S pp, - - I -A I le, ay
Z",- P-t 1@. 9
Dau in Islan -112 -
Islan p Firgan Gasque Gulf ore -s
Peican
Pei.- J-d "Y
to SAnd krd 40
0 to 20 30
I FA @ Y -7 - - - - - - - - --
- - . --- - -- I . @ - .--- 7-
10 20 3u 40 bo Kilometers
II - - -- 1 - - - - ---L -4 7, - - =- -;-q

I'hysic-al I-eatures and Gensas tn"fneviii-riort visitrrocTs
ALABAMA'S COASTAL COUNTIES

unflowey

He
M

ea, Z
7,i ib" "
It I e r
4
Fiat)

MC
Intosh,

ff Pittil
C'
S S Chapetl
3
4
a, C@" C' Aalcol
vi
.;' 1'7
V n
R7 Te
4,g

t am.,
M)un
Vern

Ve r,
attor. 01

I ve, 2
=re
@N toc: on

Ax
ow

a_
G
i'E --
2
Oak enter
a at. urri i M i In e tl
1W
H U
'A %P-
arn Ij
C,
011

A
-S
stv
U, e
I 4ig I
t
'g
@j - , I .. Y
I IR
h' 11"Wri
L
it Ateelwoo. I

Spent 4

WIN
seven.1 tills 70
1. Mal s
WID.1,
Hall, Villas
C Loxl"

Pt
Dog RPt hne

god Pt
M ntfe
Jac S 10-
Ajj@ Theod M 0L E 4 obensdale
@a- ope .. z -:! " 4@p .- - -: .
r i gton C
a isfontain Be as Whar
0
h, Fowl R., Pt mat Point Isar ntC'lea lay City - Q Surnmerdele
rano a , I - blis Oro
a low

R on Mon L is
c ner Y

-ta
J3 DVh rnp @.- I
E
11.1 Pt ceAs
Bay IF 011
ryafld al Is
labanna rt
Pei
Wilt A, Horb.. 19.1 eron Say 2
[email protected] 8c; Ba>
BOn josep
Barro P% Cod. Pt ecour Sig L
L) N ay Son _our Wo B
Or n-
16, ter ay
Daup in Island Lit Point CIO
P-1 Fu
"Que
oaulph, IslAn pt'll )It N1 Ban if Shores
Al

I'm Fit
5-1 I-rd

10 0 10 @0 30 40 Miles

10 -0- 10 20 30-- 40 w Kilometers
H ZCH In=[ T.-
- - --1.7--= --Eg

(8) By adopting a secondary zone, it allows for possible expansion of the
primary zone into areas where coordination already exists. (9) Meets the
requirements of the Federal and State coastal zone acts.
Some of the negative aspects of this boundary proposal are: (1) Manmade
features upon which primary zone is based are not always best coastal zone boundary
and may result in too broad or too narrow zones. (2) Neither primary or secondary
zone s conform to existing governmental jurisdictions. (3) May not include
all areas that will eventually be defined as critical to coastal zone
management. (4) May cause some contrbversy when property on one side of road
is in the coastal zone, while that immediately across the road is not in the
coastal zone.
This completes my presentation of the three boundary proposals selected
by the Alabama Coastal Area Board for your consideration at this public
meeting.
Maps showing these three Coastal Area Board proposals have been included
on the three preceeding pages (pages 16a, 16b, and 16c).

PREPARED STATEMENTS AND COMMENTS BY THE PUBLIC

Alicia V. Linzey
Citizen's Coastal Zone Alliance

My name is Alicia Linzey. I am here this evening as a spokesperson for a
coalition of conservation groups known as the Citizen's Coastal Zone Alliance.'
This alliance was conceived during a workshop sponsored by the Sierra Club that
was held on Dauphin Island during the last weekend in September. At this
moment, we represent almost 65,000 people who reside not only in south Alabama,
but throughout the State as well as in neighboring states. We fully expect
our roster of member organizations to grow still larger in the coming weeks.
The Alliance currently consists of the following organizations: The Alabama
Conservancy, The Alabama Wildlife Federation, The Mobile County Wildlife and
Conservation Association, The Mobile Bay Audubon Society, The Birmingham
Audubon Society, The Save Our Bay Club, the Chattahoochee Chapter of the
Sierra Club (representing Georgia and Alabama), and the Gulf Coast Regional
Conservation Committee of the Sierra Club (representing Florida, Georgia,
Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana). Our views are also concurred with either
fully or in part by a number of other groups, and these groups will independently
transmit their thoughts to the Coastal Area Board. This Alliance was put
together in order to allow citizens' groups to take full advantage of our
rights to participate in all phases of Alabama's coastal zone management
program. At one of the early meetings of the Coastal Area Board, oreof the
Board members, I believe Dr. Upham, suggested that the potential for public
involvement here would be so great that the citizens could write their own
coastal zone management program if they so desired. We have fully accepted
the challenge of that suggestion and we would like to acquaint you with our
boundary proposal.
In my efforts to provide the background of our proposal, please bear with
me if I cover some of the same points that the Coastal Area Board staff has
already addressed. The Coastal Zone Management Act, passed by Congress in 1972,
was designed "to establish a national policy and develop a national program
for the management, beneficial use, protection, and development of the
land and water resources of the Nation's coastal zones..." This law provides
funding to assist coastal states in the development of management programs for
their shorelands and waters. This federal funding may be received for three
years, by which time a state must have its management plan drawn up and approved
in order to retain eligibility for federal funding for the next step--implementing
the management plan.
The most basic, but perhaps the most difficult element of a state's manage-
ment plan is the identification of the boundaries of the coastal zone of that
particular state. The federal law gives little guidance on boundary setting
except to state that "coastal zone means the coastal waters ... and the adjacent
shorelands ... and includes transitional and intertidal areas, salt marshes,

wetlands, and beaches... The zone extends inland from the shorelines only to
the extent necessary to control shorelands, the uses of which have a direct
and significant impact on the coastal waters..." and "seaward to the outer
limit of the United States territorial sea." The question of what uses of
shorelands have both a direct and significant impact on coastal waters has
generated considerable discussion, and the way in which a given state answers
this question determines to a large extent the definition of the inland
boundaries of its coastal zone.
It bears repeating that it is not our purpose just to set a line on a map.
That line must minimally take in those shorelands being used in ways that have
an effect on coastal waters. For example, industries discharging to coastal
waters; forestry and land development practices that result in erosion and
siltation; draining, filling, or destruction of swamplands and marshes; oil
and gas production inoffshore and inshore areas and so on. It must also include
areas of particular natural value such as, for example, the Mobile-Tensaw
Bottomlands, which has been listed in the National Registry of Natural Land-
marks by the U.S. Department of the Interior.
A state, however, may set wider boundaries than those meeting the minimal
requirements of the federal law. Within these boundaries, the state must even-
tually designate uses to which specific areas may be devoted--as for example,
which areas are suitable for preservation and which for development.
The federal legislation is implicit in its requirement that the states pro-
vide full opportunity for public participation in the establishment of a manage-
ment plan. It admonishes the states to make a careful and deliberate effort to
consult with interested citizens, not only through mandatory public meetings
such as this, but also through the mechanism of advisory and review groups.
Alabama's Coastal Zone Management Law was passed 1973, and its stated pur-
poses are closely aligned with those of the federal statute. It established a
Coastal Area Board under the aegis of the Alabama Development Office. A note-
worthy feature of the Alabama law is that it exempts from regulation any acti-
vities relating to the exploration, production, or transportation of oil or
gas. Legislation introduced during the current legislative session that would
have eliminated this exemption and eventually make the Coastal Area Board inde-
pendent of the Alabama Development Office failed to pass.
The Alabama Coastal Area Board received federal funding for its first year
of operation on 30 June 1974, and thus must have its management plan approved
by NOAA (Office of Coastal Zone Management) by 30 June 1977. Among early
actions by the Board was the adoption of a preliminary boundary definition for
use in applying for federal funding. This preliminary boundary consisted of
three "tiers" of elevation, each with a differing degree of management or control.
Although boundaries based on contour lines are now thought to be impractical,
the "tiered" approach, or settLng of different boundaries for differing levels
of control, remains valid.
Until very recently, little progress had been made in reaching a definitive
boundary line. At the 29 September meeting of the Coastal Area Board, the three
proposals that you have already seen were adopted for further consideration.
We have studied these tentative proposals to determine their adequacy with the
intention of either supporting one of these or drafting a counter proposal.
We have chosen the second path, and our proposal is contained in the map and
boundary definition that has been distributed. Please bear in mind that the map
that you see is the result of the input of all of the member organizations of our
Alliance and that it has been fully approved by each of them individually.

In developing our boundary definition several guidelines were used. Because
we are a group of citizens for whom environmental concerns are paramount, our
most important premise was that the boundary be valid in an ecological sense.
Of equal concern was that the boundary be defensible in terms of the federal
law and its attendant rules and regulations. Neither have we been unaware
of the political and social pressures that hover in the background.
In setting the specific boundary, it soon became apparent that, having
considered the above premises, the most workable line would be one that could
easily be identified on the ground. A line on a map that cannot be translated
into reality without expensive.and time consuming surveys will only cause
delays in implementing the management plan. For this reason, we have followed
the lead of the Coastal Area Board and chosen readily identifiable, man-made and
physical features as a means for enclosing natural systems insofar as has been
possible. In trying to determine the proper placement of the line, we were
guided primarily by natural drainage patterns, considering that rivers, streams
and wetlands draining into coastal waters should be a part of the coastal zone.
We also took into consideration coastal zone definitions of neighboring states,
run-off patterns from agricultural lands, areas serviced by sewage systems that
outfall in coastal waterways, and the necessity for including areas of unique
natural, cultural, historical and recreational significance.
We are adamant in our feeling that the Coastal Area Board proposals fall
short of taking in enough of the coastal watersheds to really control the majority
of uses impacting coastal waters. Also, the use of census enumeration districts
as boundary lines, although useful and convenient from several viewpoints, is
meaningless unless these districts can be aligned with natural systems.
Specifically, these boundaries do not take in areas from which there are or
shortly will be direct sewage outfall to coastal waters. Neither would they
control uses affecting two of south Alabama's most valuable recreational
streams, the Escatawpa River in Mobile County and the Styx River in Baldwin
County. Legislation that would bring the Escatawpa into the National Wild and
Scenic Rivers System is currently pending in Congress, and both the Escatawpa
and the Styx have been designated by the State of Alabama as candidates for
wild, scenic, and recreational rivers status in a potential state program.
Also, rules and regulations (15 CPR 923.13) attendant to the federal legislation
outline eight areas of "particular concern", with the requirement that a state
include these areas within its coastal zone even though their uses may not
directly affect coastal waters. Among these eight areas of particular concern
are at least two that speak to this particular situation: Number 1 which
cites areas of unique natural habitat or scenic importance and Number 3, areas
of substantial recreational value and/or opportunity. We suspect that many
interests would like to adopt a boundary that includes even less of Alabama's
coastal area than any of the Board proposals. It should be clear to you, however,
that the adoption of a narrower zone would defeat the purposes of the federal
and state legislation and, therefore, be unapprovable.
We find partial concurrence with the Coastal Area Board proposal that takes
in the entire two county area, but only if this area is to be designated as
having the highest or primary level of control under the Board's current defi-
nitions. However, we part company with the Board when we reach the Mobile-Baldwin
County line, and our boundary extends northward along the Alabama and Tombigbee
Rivers to the extent minimally necessary to control impacts on coastal waters.
Saying that our coastal zone is restricted to the two coastal counties may
be a convenient political decision, but this stance makes little sense from a

natural viewpoint because the Alabama River forms the northern boundary of
Baldwin County. In essence, the Coastal Area Board is saying that they
claim control over lands and waters south of the river, but are not interested
in what happens on the north bank of the river. Since uses on both sides
impact the same water, this position is untenable. When you consider such
things as the locations of present and planned industries, impacts directly
and indirectly resulting from the proposed Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway,
proposed oil and gas activities, and so on, it becomes obvious that we must go
farther north in order to exercise some control over the future of our coastal
area. The locks and dams on the Tombigbee and Alabama Rivers provide the ideal
northern terminus of our coastal zone, not only because the tidal influence
terminates here, but also because these sites provide a convenient, identifiable
boundary. You might also be interested to know that the area between the rivers
is replete with archeological remains of early Alabamians, which gives it
significance as "an area of particular concern" under the federal regulations,
specifically as an area of historical significance and cultural value. I will
not go over with you every inch of our map, because you and the Board members
have been given a detailed boundary description. I would reiterate, however,
that we are proposing our entire area as a primary control area and that we have
selected those identifiable man-made and physical features which conform to
natural systems and patterns of shoreland use that impact coastal waters, as well
as taking into consideration areas of particular concern as outlined in
federal regulations.
Let me comment on the matter of tiered, or differing levels of control.
Although we have designated our entire area as having a primary level of control,
we are not opposed to the concept of differing levels of control for different
areas of the coastal zone. However, the current Board stance is to define a
secondary zone as an area of no control and subject only to coordination with
other state agencies. This is in contrast to their original definition of
secondary, which called for control over uses that affect the primary area.
We recognize that some areas within our boundary could reasonably be subject to
a level of control less than a primary level, but not under current definitions
being used by the Board.
I hope that all of the Board members and all of you here tonight will
recognize the effort expended by the individuals involved in the Citizen's
Coastal Zone Alliance. We have volunteered our time in a serious and sincere
attempt to help ensure the wise use of our state's coastal area and we are
willing to work with the Coastal Area Board in the coming months as they
progress toward a final boundary definition and management program.

Alabama's Coastal Zone - A Boundary Definition Proposal

All of Mobile and Baldwin Counties including waters in Mobile Bay and the
Gulf of Mexico out to the State's three mile limit; then commencing on the west
at the Mobile-Washington County line; east to the western edge of the floodplain
of the Escatawpa River; north along the edge of the floodplain to county road 8;
east on county road 8 (southside of highway) to Deer Park; northwest on U.S. 45
(eastside of highway) to U.S. 84 at Bolinger; east on U.S. 84 (southside of
highway) to the town of Service; north to the south bank of the Tombigbee
River; northeast to the Jackson Lock and Dam; east and southeast along the north
bank of the Tombigbee River to U.S. 84; southeast on U.S. 84 (southside of
highway) to the western edge of the floodplain to a point due west of the

Claiborne Lock and Dam; due east to county road 17; southeast on county road 17
(southside of road) to L&N Railroad; south on L&N Railroad (westside of R.R.)
to state road 59; west on state road 59 (northside of road) to county road 1;
south on county road 1 (westside of road) to the Baldwin-Escambia County line.

C IQ, r V,-4t-

LOLK

o n ro e-

00f

W%, r%

Dr. E. Bruce Trickey
Chairman, Economic Development Committee
Mobile United

My name is Dr. E. Bruce Trickey, and I am Chairman of the Economic Deve-
lopment Committee of Mobile United. I'm just a little bit surprised to be up
here tonight, because I thought I was going to have an easy time and listen to
the proposals of the Coastal Area Board. The work our committee is doing is
connected so closely, I think, with what the Coastal Area Board is doing, that
I couldn't refrain from sharing where we are with this group here tonight.
In the Economic Development Committee of Mobile United, over a year ago
we started work on the consideration of where Mobile should be in the future,
in ten years, and where we are now. We recognize there isn't too much we can
do about that. In order to get a handle an the problem we have to think in
terms of the immediacy, and look ahead. When we looked ahead, we could see,
as so many of us know, there is an expectation of a very rapid industrial
expansion. This very rapid industrial expansion led to concern on our parts
for protection of wildlife in the area for the future. These two things some-
times are not mutually compatible and have to be adjusted to get a reasonable
balance between the two. So the question we pose for ourselves is, how do we
protect the wildlife values for the people of coastal Alabama, and at the same
time, how do we allow for reasonable industrial development compatible with
this wildlife?
our position is that we want both. We want the wildlife, and we also
want to see industry developed for all the good things that come from that.
One year of study in this committee has resulted in a concensus of opinion
which we expressed in terms of a description of boundaries in a map, rather
similar to these discussed tonight, but with a different viewpoint. There is,
of course, no perfect answer. Everything that we propose has to be compromised.
What we did was to take maps similar to these and decide where the industry
expansion would very likely happen. As far as we can see, industry will try to
expand between Jackson and Mobile on this side of the river and on the other
side of the river on the high ground. We set aside on our map an area which
would be open to industry to expand. On the other hand, we also drew boundaries
which would outline wildlife areas, which would extend from Jackson to Mobile,
essentially the floodplain areas. These would be set aside for the protection
of wildlife. We also drew areas which would outline where future commercial
developments and residential and recreational areas would be located.
I am sorry that I did not bring that chart with me tonight. If I had known
that I would be up here, I would have brought it. However, I could not refrain
from this opportunity to share with you where we are. I will provide the Coastal
Area Board with a copy of our ideas as to what these boundaries should be. We
think that any plan that is agreed upon should accomplish the objectives that
I have outlined. That is, we should allow for reasonable, rapid expansion of
industry, but it should be done in a way which is balanced tc protect the wild-
life values in which Mobile places so much store.

Marisa Gardner

Ladies and gentlemen, my name is Marisa Gardner. I live at 111 Idlewood
Drive in Chickasaw. I am a contented housewife and mother, and also a dedicated
church worker. My life has been changed drastically by the announcement of a
planned petroleum refinery in the floodplain of Mobile, upwind from my home .
This change, this announcement, has been very meaningful for me. It has afforded
me the opportunity to learn how governments work, or rather it has opened my
eyes to the bureaucratic form of government which we live under.
I have been disturbed by the large number of local, state and federal
regulatory agencies who do not act in concert to implement a national program
of environmental preservation and land use. I am concerned about the degradation
of the environment in industrial areas, such as Chickasaw, where by necessity,
by economics, and by priority large segments of our population reside and work
at established firms.
I have followed the Coastal Area Board from meeting to meeting. Now the
time, I feel, has come to carry on the intent of the law. Wise planning must
be the key work. However, planning without action is down-right irresponsible.
It is important that we realize that we have the responsibility individually
and collectively to preserve our natural resources for future generations. Our
soil is eroding at the rate of four billion tons per year. The displaced soi 1, I
or sediment, is the largest water pollutant we have by volume. The Mississippi
River alone deposits more than 500 million tons of soil and rock fragments into
the Gulf of Mexico each year.
Let us be ready for the Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway. Let us be awarq@_ that
the planned channelization will increase flooding in the delta. If promoted
developments occur adjacent to the waterway, greater losses will result with
future floods. I support the plan which was presented by Mrs. Alicia Linzey
and the Citizens' Coastal Zone Alliance. Thank you very much.

Claude W. Arnold.

My name is Claude Arnold, and I live in Fairhope. I am not speaking for a
large organization. I am speaking for myself. The first thing I would like to
say is that I would like to seethe, red line (smallest area on map) become the
coastal zone boundary, if we can't make it any smaller. I would like to remark
that you can always expand it. Let's expand it when we can't put it off any
longer.
In 1953 1 graduated from the University of Alabama, after having specialized
in sanitary engineering in city planning. All of the city planning textbooks
originate in New York City. In 1943 1 visited New York City as part of the United
States Navy. I was riding a PT boat, and I am one of the few people here, I
imagine, who had a personal aquaintance with Jack Kennedy, one of the things
I am very proud of. I went back to New York in 1969 anticipating seeing marvelous
improvements as a result of the dedicated work of the planners who had been
working there through these last twenty years. Would you believe that I saw
houses that had been declared for human habitation in 1905, and that is a long
time ago, still standing and s'till being inhabited by human beings? This kind
of thing, ladies and gRntlemen, represents another effort of our planners, and
planner is another word for regulator, and regulator is another word for governor.

Governors do not contribute to production, they tend to limit it. We need
more producers. We need a lot of producers. This is another effort of government
to implement the national land use planning that so far Congress has succeeded
in not passing. Who is going to pay for it? I submit that this kind of a plan
is unconstitutional. It seizes private property. We tell people they can
keep their land just so long as they do with it what the government wants them to.
Thank you. I'll be back for another meeting.

Nancy Garret
Environmental Quality Committee
The League of Women Voters of Mobile

The League of Women Voters of Mobile endorses the concept of delineating
the boundaries to enclose, when feasible, natural watersheds of our coastal
area. We feel it is important to draw the northern boundary of the official
coastal zone at the Jackson Lock and Dam on the Tombigbee River and the
Claiborne Lock and Dam on the Alabama River, since county lines are arbitrary
and do not consider natural systems. In general, we support the proposal of
the Citizen's Coastal Zone Alliance and respectfully urge your study and
consideration of this proposal.

Myrt Jones
President, The Mobile Bay Audubon Society

I am Myrt Jones, President of the Mobile Bay Audubon Society. Mrs. Alicia
Linzey of the Citizen's Coastal Zone Alliance presented her alternative proposal
for the designation of the coastal zone of Alabama before the Board members of
the Mobile Bay Audubon Society, and the plan was unanimously accepted.
It is imperative that industry, municipalities, promoters of industry and
citizens support this proposal of the Citizen's Alliance in order to properly
maintain a balanced ecosystem. If too narrow or inadequate a coastal zone
boundary is accepted, then the coastal area will not be an all around environ-
ment, but could become degraded and be just one big cesspool, not f4-t for
humans or marine organisms.
Our coastal zone is too valuable for us to continue to deal with it in a
haphazard and uncoordinated fashion. Anyone on the Corps of Engineers public
m
'ling lists realize that there is inadequate land use planning along our
al
waterways, especially in conjunction with the proposed increase in the traffic
projected with the Tenn-Tom Waterway and the industrialization that is accom-
panying it. There has been a "dragging of feet" from this Board, and little or
no support has been given it by local or state officials in trying to better
the situation.
Mr. Sage Lyons of the Chamber of Commerce commented that all interested in
this coastal area should work together. I make this suggestion to him, when

is he going to get started on this idea? We have been stating for several years
that in order to accomplish a balance, the Chamber of Commerce, Alabama Deve-
lopment Office, and the local and state organizations pushing for industry
should let us, the citizens, know what they are up to? These groups seem to
believe secrecy is the best policy, and we do not realize what is happening
until an industry has been placed in our floodplains, such as a refinery,
submerged leases are given in our Bay, and a few other airprises, such as
inddstries that aren't wanted in other states get the "open door" policy
here in Mobile.
Little consideration is given for the impact these dirty industries will
have on our already stressed air and water environment. Many of these industries
should be settled out of the coastal zone and dispersed to other less crowded
areas with less of an impact.
Lay people need to be involved. They don't have to have technical compe-
tence, just a little common sense that is shown lacking in many proposals
and decisions in this area, and they also need a great deal of interest and
should be able to comment on what they think is important. If we are on top of
things from the beginning and given an opportunity to help in policy and deci-
sion making, there would be less confusion, maybe less distrust of government,
less opposition and more of a constructive relationship in this coastal area.
The concern for the future of our coast should reach and include a broad
cross section of our society. It is only through the understanding, full cooper-
ation and participation of all of the affected groups that we will be successful
in developing a rational and effective approach for coastal zone management
in Alabama. Adopting this broad Citizen's Alliance proposed boundary is
the first step.
As our Congress stated in the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, "The
coastal zone is rich in a variety of natural, commercial, recreational, indus-
trial and esthetic resources of immediate and potential value to the present
and future well-being of the nation." Considerably more than one-half of the
U. S. population lives within fifty miles of the coast. By the year 2000, this
will rise to more than eighty percent. It will be a challenge of major propor-
tions to conserve and enhance our vital resources with the many forces
competing for them, such as conservation, recreation, residential needs and
food production, as well as private and public industrial development.
Rene Dubos remarked that man must find at the coast some awareness of nature
and there experience its divine mysteries. Man ceases to be a man when the sea
and the sky are no longer a part of his spirit. Without them, man becomes a
cosmic outlaw, having neither the completeness and integrity of the animal nor
the birthright of true humanity. Thank you.,

Verda Horne
Chairman for Environmental Quality, Alabama League of Women Voters
Board Member, Alabama Conservancy

Members of the Coastal Area Boardandfriends, I am Verda Horne, a resident
of Baldwin County, and I live within a mile and one half of the shoreline. I
have lived in the coastal area withLn a few miles of that coast for the pa,,3t

38 years, and have made biological observations in several of the areas. I
speak as a resident and as Chairman for Environmental Quality for the Alabama
League of Women Voters, and as a member of the Board of the Alabama
Conservancy. In all these capacities, I concur completely with the Citizen's
Coastal Zone Alliance, which indeed is an outgrowth of the symposium of citizen
and coastal agency representatives which met to study coastal problems and
opportunities in April of this year at Dauphin Island and again in September.
Our first such studies, that is speaking for the League of Women Voters,
preceded the National Coastal Zone Management Act by several years, when the
National Water Pollution Control Administration awarded the National League a
grant to convene a four-state symposium on coastal zone problems early in 1970.
Our studies have continued as have our legislative support for both the national
law and the state law under which we are operating. We have attended all ses-
sions of the Alabama Coastal Area Board, except those held in Montgomery, in an
effort to continue to observe the accomplishments and problems of the Board.
Our recent citizen symposiums were made more valuable by the participation of
many Legislators from the Atlantic coastal zone states, as well as regional
administrators of the Department of Commerce.
The objectives of the comprehensive laws are not to prohibit development
as you will note if you read those laws. They are rather to provide a mechanism
by which the competing interests and users and uses can be considered by citi-
zens who are directly involved, that is, by those who live on or near the
coast, and by those who live a distance frcm the coast, fishermen, shippers,
farmers and businessmen. As we considerthe.concern for these many people, we
realize that boundaries are indeed necessary. As some people have suggested,
we will find that the true coastal boundaries are the continental divide, which
might make it a little difficult.
Let me speak then of only one aspect at this particular time that I came
across as I was asked to serve on a review board, a citizen's review board for
NOAA, which was preparing the National Seafood Fisheries Plan. Two of the
statements they made are these: Multiple uses of the cQastal..areas._can_
balance socio-economic needs including those for food and for recreation. As
examples, prudent site selection and design of industrial plants can greatly
reduce their impact on living marine resources. Proper treatment of municipal
and industrial wastes can improve degraded habitats. Restricting the use of
wetlands to activities which are water dependent can minimize use conflicts.
Legislation already exists to accomplish many of these management actions.
However, one of the goals of pollution control amendments of 1972 is restoration
of water quality, which provides for the protection and propagation of fish,
shellfish, wildlife and provides for recreation in and on and near the water.
The removal of some development can insure that these fisheries habitats will
be restored and renewed. I won't go any further, but I will speak at greater
length, I hope, at the next meeting. Thank you.

Helen Stafford
Environmental Quality Chairman
League of Women Voters of Baldwin County

I am Helen Stafford, a resident of the Eastern Shore of Mobile Bay, and I
live at Battles Wharf, Fairhope post office. Along with my neighbors, I am
vitally interested in the quality of the water in the Bay and the Gulf of Mexico.

We are gratified that the Federal and State Governments are making the
regulation of our coastline activity possible through the Coastal Zone Manage-
ment Acts, and we are concerned that this planning include enough land area
to control runoff into the waters of the Bay and Gulf.
Baldwin County has three dominant industries, seafood, agriculture, and
tourism, all of which can be drastically affected by the work of the Coastal
Area Board. Seafood depends on the preservation of our estuaries which act
as the spawning grounds for much of our, sea life and on the restriction of the
pollutants in the water; agriculture depends on the preservation of our good
soil and the control of runoff and erosion; tourism depends on the preservation
of our dwindling beaches and clean salt and fresh water. I therefore urge
that planning for coastal zone management include enough of the water entering
our coastal areas that they be protected from erosion and pollution.
As the Environmental Quality Chairman of the League of Women Voters of
Baldwin County, I wish to state that our League, as part of the state organi-
zation, is in agreement with the policy stated by Mrs. Horne, representing the
League of Women Voters of Alabama. We urge the inclusion of an expanded area
in your planning.
I should like to read a letter from Mrs. Jason Kutack, President of the
League of Women Voters of Baldwin County,to the Coastal Area Board regarding
our position on the boundaries for coastal management:

The Board and members of the Baldwin County League of Women
Voters in setting the proposed boundaries of the coastal zone
believe that the counties of Monroe, Clarke, and Washington
should be extended an invitation to work with the Alabama
Coastal Area Board in developing the boundaries for coastal
zone planning. We feel that these counties, which have a
sizeable area along the Tombigbee and Alabama Rivers, could
well be included in the planning phase of a coastal zone
boundary definition. It does not seem logical to have the
boundary stop at the south shore of the Alabama River and ignore
the north shore of this river.

Mrs. Albert Nonkes.

I am Mrs. Nonkes. My husband and I have lived in Fairhope for four years.
We like Fairhope very much because it is a very beautiful coastal area. It
breaks our hearts that this area is not going to be developed properly, and
if our air and water become polluted. This brings me to a point made by this
gentleman from Fairhope, who is opposed to the Coastal Zone Management Act
because of private property rights. Does this gentleman, who lives in the
United States, realize he lives in a democratic country? I don't mean a
communistic or socialistic country, but a democratic country, where we all are
supposed to have the good of many other people at heart. The good of other
people would indicate that we protect the many lands that these private property
owners own, especially those which are situated:Ln-the wetlands. If they would

like to get money out of this land, why not go on through Section 312 of
Estuaries? They could work together with the Federal Covernment and see
what could be done so that the estuaries become sanctuaries. They could sell
to the Government or to the state.
We could then go further and use these wetlands for creating natural
field laboratories to gather data for natural and human processes. I think
that would be a very bright and beautiful idea, instead of you saying, "Well,
I want an oil well out there. I want my money out of there, and I don't give
a damn about anybody else." I think that is all I have to say for now.
Thank you.

David Roberts

My name is David Roberts. I am speaking as an individual. I have been
sitting back there listening with interest to the observations of the ecologist
and the environmentalist, and I can't say that I disagree with any of their
objectives. However, I think that as a result of the exposure that I have
had to land use controls and the dangers of land use controls at the national
level, that I would be remiss were I not to express an opinion, even though
it is not prepared.
I'm afraid that we overlook the basic danger in land use controls when it
is administered from the federal level. The problem is the same old problem of
the camel getting his nose under the tent, and I fear that the federal statutes
that provide funding for the coastal zone management committees merely provide
an entree of more complete land use control to the area. For that reason,
I favor the position of my friend, the gentleman on my left, who expressed
his position in that perhaps we should take this thing by degrees. I also
favor the position that was expressed by Dr. Trickey, that we should try to work
out some kind of a program where the environmental protection of the area can
be made compatible with the planned economic growth of the area.
The big problem that occurs in the implementation of federal statutes is
that the agencies that are given the authority to promulgate the regulations
usually overstep the intent of Congress. I think we found this to be the case
in so many instances.
In reading this law, there is no way that you can expect your local
government, you as a voter or a citizen, your city, your county, or the state
even to have ultimate control over what is done with the land in south Alabama.
This law, if you will read it, is replete with comments such as: Such a
plan must be approved by the Secretary of Commerce. This plan cannot be imple-
mented until all of its ramifications have been thoroughly examined. No funding
will be made available to the agency involved unless the plan is approved. The
plan cannot be modified unless the modifications are approved. If you think for
a moment that such approval is going to be forthwith merely upon application
by local government, you don't know too much about the operation of the federal
bureaucracies.
I am in favor of clean air. I am in favor of clean water. And I am in
favor of the preservation of the environment. But in my opinion, this kind of
legislation and its implementation should be taken in small degrees and one
step at a time. Thank you.

QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE

Barbara Klass: Which zone or boundary best regulates offshore drilling,
referring particularly to Dauphin Island?
Gary Greenough: I would presume that the correct answer to that would be all
of them. They will all regulate the same.

Larry Merrihew: Why is is that all proposals meet state and federal coastal
zone acts' requirements and each proposal has a negative side in that they may
not meet existing governmental jurisdictions?
Greenough: The*simple answer to that is that the boundaries of, for
instance the City of Mobile, do not always conform with the boundaries drawn
here. That is the point, I think.

Martha Broadus: Has any decision been made with reference to upstate areas and
other states' contribution to pollution of area waters?
Greenough: Technically, no, not yet. That will come later in the manage-
ment program.

0. L. Adams: What is the estimated cost of administering the program?
Greenough: A simple answer is that it is obviously impossible to estimate
that at this date. Until we have set a boundary and moved further into the
program, we cannot tell. I am sure, however, like other governmental costs it
will be astronomical.

Julius E. Marx: Is erosion control contemplated?
Greenough: Certainly.

Name not known: When approval is received and the Board becomes a permit-
ting agency, does this eliminate agencies such as the Alabama Water Improvement
Commission, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the Environmental Protection
Agency?
Greenough: The answer is no. It will be a parallel permitting procedure. We
have already had some Board discussions about how to avoid making this thing
worse than it already is. I don't know if any of you are familiar with the
permitting nightmare that we have now.

Name not known: Why would anyone oppose being in a coastal area?
Greenough: Well, that is as old as the question of zoning. Some folks just
don't like it. I think we have one speaker who sort of enunciated that point.

Judy McConnell: I am Mrs. Judy McConnell from Irvington. I read in the
newspaper Sunday about the meeting tonight. I am not aware of the Acts, but,-,.I
just know thatthey were passed in 1972 by Congress and in 1973 by the State

Legislature. As I read the article in Sunday's newspaper, I was greatly dis-
turbed. We have a small farm in Irvington. When I saw that it might be bounded
and that the coastal zone might take in all of Mobile and Baldwin Counties,
I was concerned. I am afraid if a line was drawn, we might be put out of
business. I'm serious about this. When the government extends funds to any
board or any organization and takes away the rights of private individuals,
then I will not be able to control my farm. I think that we should repeal
the acts.
Now I know a little knowledge is dangerous, and I guess I've lost my mind
over this one thing. What little bit I have heard tonight, like areas being
set aside for wildlife or recreation or industry, is a wonderful idea. I am
all for the good things, but I am also for my own individual rights. If
they are going to be taken away, if I am not going to be able to control my
own home, or if it is going to be controlled by somebody else, then pretty
soon everybody that knows more than I do will say I'm not going to do a good
job in raising my children, so they will do that job for me. Do you see my
point? I do not see where our rights can be put aside as private property
owners for a land use act. You will take all that away from us. If I am
wrong, I would like you to comment on that. I don't understand.
Greenough: Your position is very well articulated as the answer to the
question.- why would anyone want to oppose zoning?
Judy McConnell: It is not zoning. I don't feel it is zoning. I think it is,
like the man said, land use, It is taking my land from me, and that is my
right. The lady was wrong in saying we are a democracy, rather we are a
republic. I am saying that when control of what we own is taken by the state,
that is, I believe, socialism. Now when the state owns and when the state
controls, that is communism. I own mine, and I will control mine.
Greenough: Thank you.

Name not known: I notice that the permit activities are going to require double
and triple paperwork. In the State Act, I can't find out what the permit acti-
vities are. I would suspect that the landowner for whom that good lady just
stood up for, myself, and a lot of others here in this room would like to know.
If I was to put a half acre fish pond on a twenty acre plot, would this be a
permit activity? Would we be subjected to put in this tremendous amount of
whatever you call it on page 8 (of the State Act)78 This would then be sent out
to all of these various people on page 10 (of the State Act). I (the paper-
work) multiplies. I don't see in this big Act what the permit activity is.
Greenough: For those of you who couldn't hear, he is commenting about what
a permitting activity would be or what activities would have to be permitted
generally. That, I think, is what we will have to decide and define in our
management plan. I really can't give you a more specific answer on that. We
recognize exactly the problem that you are talking about. As we have mentioned
earlier, we have had some discussions about it at several Board meetings.
I, personally, am extremely concerned that a citizen who would want to
make some small improvement on his property would have to be subjected to
expensive and time consuming procedures. Just as a private citizen (perhaps, I
shouldn't say this from the chair), we are about "governmented" to death, in
my opinion. The only thing that is saving us is that we aren't getting all
we are paying for. Seriously, if you look at the statistics, it is rapidly
becoming a very serious problem in this country. We recognize that. On the
other hand, we must somehow try to balance the preservation of the environment.

Name not known: Do you know of any zoning in the United States that is done on
a voting basis? Is this the first example of where land use control is made?
Greenough: For those of you who are not aware, the man who is asking me that
question is the Senior Assistant City Attorney of the City of Mobile. He has
set me up as a strawman again. He knows good and well that I don't know of any
such zoning. The question was, do I know of any land use planning, in a sense,
zoning (zoning is really the implementing tool, or the zoning ordinance is the
implementing tool, of the land use plan) where there is not voting. I would
have to say, and I cannot say this authoritatively, but I would presume that
the answer would be no. I know that there is none in Alabama. This is a
departure from the practice of the past. That is correct. It is a very good
point, and I think it gives rise to the statement of the lady back there and
other statements that have been made.
Name not known: But this plan is not mandatory. We do not have to join in.
Greenough: As I understand it, if we don't do our own plan, it is going to
be done for us.
Name not known: The Act doesn't say that. It says that if you don't do it, you
don't get the funds.
Greenough: Ok, now, we are not going to get out of control here, folks.

Name not known: Without knowing what a permitted activity would be, how can
you describe what boundaries you should have? It seems like one is relevant
to the other.
Greenough: You are right, it is a chicken and egg situation. That is why this
is perhaps the most important, and still. the most difficult, procedure to go
through, that of defining the boundaries. There are some obvious permitting
procedures that we could all think of. There are some subtleties, I am sure,
that we will encounter later. The basic answer though has to be both the
letter and the speak of the law, whatever those things mean. That is the only
answer that I can give you. That is the case.

M. L. Hall: My name is M. L. Hall. I would like to observe that 1, as a citizen
of Baldwin County and the United States, personally am sick and tired of being
governed not by law, but by regulations and by unelected officials. This,
precisely, is what we have here.
You made a comment that if we didn't do it, then the Federal Government
would. The National Act says in Section 303 that its purpose is to preserve,
protect, develop and, where possible, restore and enhance the resources of the
nation's coastal zone for this and proceeding generations. I fully agree
with that policy. It says that it is to encourage and assist the states. In
other words, it is to make possible grants.
I would like to direct a question now. Is it not true, and you ladies
who are in favor of this should pay attention, that the purpose of this agency
is to allow the development of an offshore oil loading facility? Was that not
the stated purpose that Senator Owen directed or introduced to the State bill?
Greenough: To my knowledge that is not true. When the Congress of the United
States, in its deliberations, passes and promulgates a law, it's the law of
the land. It may not be popular, but that's not the question. The Congress of
the United States enacted this law, and I'll guarantee you that if we don't do
something about it, they're going to come right down here and do it for us.
You can bet on that.

W. R. McElroy: My.name is W.R. McElroy, and I'm Vice President of the Mobile
Area Chamber of Commerce, in charge of the Transportation Council. I am not here
tonight to deliver any opinion nor statement on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce.
But the Chamber of Commerce will, at the proper time before you complete this
series of hearings , present a statement in full of its position on this entire
affair. Forget about the Chamber of Commerce, because they would probably kick
me off the Board if they heard what I was going to say now. I am going to speak
now as plain, old W. R. McElroy, a private citizen.
For the first time, I believe, I have a feeling for what the poor people
are going through. Sometimes you see in the paper where they've been put out
of their home and their furniture has been stacked on the cement out front.
I understand how they feel tonight, because I feel I have been dispossessed
by these wonderful women who want to protect this environment. And I fully
agree with them that this environment should be protected.
I happen to own property in Baldwin County, Mobile County, and Washington
County, but it looks like it is all going down the drain to me if we follow
what is being suggested by these good ladies here tonight. It seems to me
that we're completely oblivious to the old American principle of private
property. If we're going to have to submit on a piecemeal basis, maybe we
ought to just turn over our property to the Federal Government or the state
government or the county government and just let them handle it the best way
they see fit. Because as I see it now, there's not much future hope for private
property in this country if we don't watch this thing and take it in very small
degrees and see where we go from here. Let's don't jump in here and try to
take in the whole Baldwin, Washington, and Mobile Counties. Let's take in
the minimum possible to meet the federal standards and try to work and see
where this thing goes. A lot of you ladies may find out that this thing is not
what you thought it was in the beginning. Thank you.
Greenough: Thank you: Now, I'll tell you the purpose of our being here this
evening was for you to address the Board and present your positions. We're not
going to go any further in the debate. I hope I don't offend anybody, but
that's just the way it's going to be. Does anyone else want to ask a question
or make a statement?

Name not known: I'd like to ask a question. Will the Board be receiving written
statements on positions, and if so, what will be the cutoff date for receiving
them?
Greenough: We will be receiving them. As of now, there is no cutoff date. I
presume that in the not too distant future, once we start the official public
hearings, then we will have a cutoff date. That will be made available to
you, but until you are notified of a cutoff date, there is none.

Alicia Linzey: I'd just like to clarify something for you. I think that some
of you think that our proposed boundary lines represent a preservation line.
This is a line by which zoning for various purposes will be accomplished, not
just to protect the wildlife, but also zoning for industry, zoning for develop-
ment, etc. This is not a preservation line.
Greenough: Thank you. It is a point well taken.

Carol Walding: I'm Carol Walding from Mobile and I have a question that I think
might -c-l-earup some of this confusion. I am under the impression that, basically,
the Coastal Area Board is a coordinator of all types of activities, and they
don't really have a lot of controls. Is this true?

Greenough: I think that is a reasonably correct premise. I would tend to
agree7WM you. At least, that is my perception of it.

Name not known: It's my impression that most of you on the Board are elected,
are you?
Greenough: No, malm, that's not correct. There are actually three elected
members of the Board: Commissioner Haas of the Mobile County Commission,
Commissioner McMillan of the Baldwin County Commission, and myself.
Name not known: Then the others are appointed?
Greenough: That is true by virtue of the office they hold. They are the
heads of major state departments.

Name not known: You don't have any particular intention of taking private
property?
Greenough: No. to be perfectly candid with you, I have an overriding concern
from my responsibility in the City of Mobile. We have a large planning staff,
all sorts of zoning and subdivisions, etc., that we are working on. Frankly
any sort of boundaries we have that can potentially foul us up, waste our ti;e,
confuse us, and so forth, I want to avoid. I think I have a responsibility to
try to avoid that. Any other questions?

Name not known: I'd like to know, and I think we'd all like to know, how much
control and what the limit of control would be? Is there some way you can tell
use the limit of control?
Greenough: Does anybody have a definite answer for that? I don't think we can
really tell at this point. Let me try to outline the sequence of events in
lay language.as best I can. We must first adopt a set of boundaries and then
develop a management plan. In the development of that plan, many policy options
will be considered and eventually decided. These policy options will probably
set up categories, like the City of Mobile zoning orders, where certain uses
are permitted in a particular zone. Then there would certainly be appealate
procedures. But the basic point that I want to make is that we are, in
essence, talking about some form of review and either direct or indirect
control through a permitting procedure. It seems reasonably clear that that is
the intent of the law. Whether desirable or not, in your point of view, that
does appear to be the intent of the law.

Name not known: Gary, I seem to presume that the State of Washington did not
include anything in their official zone that did not have to be included. They
have put in that which meets the standards, and that is two hundred feet from
the shoreline. Have you all considered such a standard here in the primary zone?
Greenough: Yes.
Name not known: And you have discarded it?
Greenough: No, we have not discarded any particular boundary configuration. We
narrowed it down to these three out of seven, because they roughly illustrate the
type of configuration that we wanted the public's response to. This, I think,
is where we are right now.
Name not known: How can the public possibly give an intelligent response if they
don't know what the permit activities are? If you can't dig a garden (if that's
a permit activity), then two hundred feet from the shoreline would be very
reasonable. The public has no idea of what the permit activities are. The State

Act makes it clear you can't do anything that is a permit activity unless you have
an extensive application and it is approved after a public hearing, newspaper
publication, etc. You and I are familiar with what all of that means. Without
knowing what the permit activities are, how in the world can you intelligently
determine where the lines should be?
Greenough: I don't know, I'm no historian, but it sounds to me like we're going
to drift back to the Hamilton Debate. That's the question that's as old as
American Government. I have a note here from Bill Moore that he'd like to
make a statement.

William F. Moore: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. I'm Bill Moore and I'm
a good guy and a bad guy. I'm here representing myself. I was one of the
co-authors of the Coastal Area Act of Alabama in 1973 and also a co-author of
the amendment introduced by Senators L.W. "Red" Noonan and Dick Owen and the
amendment introduced by Representative Douglas Johnstone in 1975. In consider-
ing definitions and what the coastal area might entail, I'd like to call your
attention to Public Law 92-583 on page two.
We have discussed some of the boundaries and possibilities, but let's take
a look at what the Federal Act contemplates as far as the coastal zone. It
says the coastal zone means the coastal waters, including the lands therein and
thereunder, and the adjacent shorelands, including the waters therein and
thereunder, strongly influenced by each other and in proximity to the shore-
lines of the several coastal states. It includes transitional and intertidal
areas, salt marshes, wetlands and beaches. The zone extends in the Great Lakes
to the international boundary between the United States and Canada and in
other areas, seaward to the outer limits of the United States territorial sea.
The zone extends inland from the shorelines only to the extent necessary to
control shorelands, the use of which have a direct and significant impact on
coastal waters. Boundary considerations must consider this definition.
I have no comment on these boundary proposals put forth here tonight.
However, I think we might all stop and realize that if we attempt to do through
the Coastal Area Board what we have not been able to accomplish through existing
Boards and with existing laws, we're probably out in left field in the tall
grass. In Section 303 of the Act, it charges us to give full consideration to
ecological, cultural, historic and aesthetic values, as well as the need for
economic development. I don't think we can overlook any one of these things
just because it suits our purpose. Thank you sir.
Greenough: Thank you. I appreciate your pointing that out, in particular,
because we were just talking about that.
Are there any other questions? It's certainly been a pleasure, and we
surely appreciate the cooperation of all of you interested citizens.

MEETING PARTICIPANTS

Mobile, Alabama

N. A. Adams Jeffrey H. Blood
First National Bank.of Mobile South Alabama Regional Planning
Post Office Box 1467 Commission
Mobile, Alabama 36621 Post Office Box 1665
Mobile, Alabama 36601
0. L. Adams
OKC Dredging, Inc. W. H. Brigham
55 Oakland Avenue 361 Gaines Avenue
Mobile, Alabama 36608 Mobile, Alabama 36609

R. F. Adams Martha Broadus
Post Office Box 1988 Eastern Shore Junior Women's Club
Mobile, Alabama 36601 612 Southern Way
Spanish Fort, Alabama 36527
Lowell Addy
City of Mobile Jack W. Campbell
Post Office Box 1827 American Waterway Operators
Mobile, Alabama 36601 Post Office Box 2188
G. Millard Amerine Mobile, Alabama 36601
Mobile Area Chamber of Commerce Thomas B. Campbell
32 East Chadwick Drive City of Mobile Planning Commission
Mobile, Alabama 36606 Post Office Box 1827
Mobile, Alabama 36601
Claude W. Arnold
Fairhope Title & Survey Company May Gill Carlin
100 North Bancroft Street Joint Legislative Council
Fairhope, Alabama 36532 258 Woodlands Avenue
Mobile, Alabama 36607
M. L. Aust, Jr.
Aust-Pomder Engineering Hattie S. Caulton
Post Office Box 236 S. D. Bishop State Junior College
Daphne, Alabama 36526 1559 Van Dorn Street
Dorothy S. Bivens Mobile, Alabama 36605
Public Relations Department Freddy Cockrell
S.D. Bishop State Junior USDA - Soil Conservation Service
College 3038 Springhill Avenue
351 North Broad Street Mobile, Alabama 36607
Mobile, Alabama 36603
Gene Cody
Alabama Development Office
State Capitol
Montgomery, Alabama 36130

Kendall Dexter Charlie Gay
International Paper Company Eastern Shore Chamber of Commerce
Post Office Box 2328 307 Fairhope Avenue *
Mobile, Alabama 36601 Fairhope, Alabama 36532

DeDe Duncan Kathy Gill
DeDe's Home Rentals Eastern Shore Courier
702 Government Street Fairhope Avenue
Mobile, Alabama 36602 Fairhope, Alabama 36532

Tom R. Eubanks William J. Godard
International Paper Company Fairhope Yacht Club
211 Tensa4 Avenue Post Office Box 333
Fairhope, Alabama 36532 Fairhope, Alabama 36532

Gregory R. Evans Gary Greenough
Councilman, Town of Wilmer Commissioner, City of Mobile
Post Office Box 70 Post Office Box 1827
Wilmer, Alabama 36587 Mobile, Alabama 36601

Perry W. Evans Mary Y. Grice
Mayor, Town of Wilmer Historic Blakeley Foundation
Post Office Box 70 North Shore Property Owners Association
Wilmer, Alabama 36587 Route 1, Box 333 A
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507
Jim Fibbe
Mobile County Board of Health Ted Hackney
Post Office Box 4533 Mobile Area Chamber of Commerce
Mobile, Alabama 36604 Post Office Box 2187
Jo Ann Flior Mobile, Alabama 36601
Public Relations Counsel, Inc. James R. Hancock
108 South Claiborne Street Post Office Box 365
Mobile, Alabama 36602 Spanish Fort, Alabama 36527

John B. Foley Mrs. James R. Hancock
Magnolia Land Company Post Office Box 345
413 South McKenzie Street Spanish Fort, Alabama 36527
Foley, Alabama 36535 William J. Harkins
Marisa Gardner Department of Political Science
International Club University of South Alabama
111 Idlewood Drive University Boulevard
Chickasaw, Alabama 36611 Mobile, Alabama 36688

Nancy M. Garrett Royce Harrison
League of Women Voters of Mobile Mobile Press Register
311 Riviere du Chien Loop Post Office Box 2488
Mobile, Alabama 36619 Mobile, Alabama 36630

Jany Haywood Barbara Klass
International Paper Company Eastern Shore Junior Women's Club
Paper Mill Road Post Office Box 24
Mobile, Alabama 36601 Daphne, Alabama 36526

Sherry Herron Frank Kury
Eastern Shore Junior Women's WALA-TV
Club Post Office Box 478
207 South Bayview Mobile, Alabama 36619
Fairhope, Alabama 36532
Linwood L. Lewis
Verda Horne Mobile County Flood Insurance Program
Alabama League of Women Voters Mobile County Courthouse
Alabama Conservancy Mobile, Alabama 36602
708 Fairhpoe Avenue
Fairhope, Alabama 36532 Alicia V. Linzey
Mobile Bay Audubon Society
L. E. Husby 6312 St. Moritz Drive
Farm Bureau Mobile, Alabama 36608
St. Elmo, Alabama 36568
Dr. Donald W. Linzey
Willis Hyde 6312 St. Moritz Drive
Alabama Development Office Mobile, Alabama 36608
State Capitol
Montgomery, Alabama 36130 Grady Lloyd
John H. Friend, Inc.
J. S. Johnson 261 North Joachim Street
CIBZ=Geigy Mobile, Alabama 36601
Post Office Box 113
McIntosh, Alabama 36553 James R. Martin
Koppers Company
Thomas J. Joiner 1366 Spring Valley Court
Alabama Geological Survey Mobile, Alabama 36609
State Oil and Gas Board
Post Office Drawer 0 Robert C. Martin
University, Alabama 35486 Alabama Power Company
150 St. Joseph Street
Dianne Jones Mobile, Alabama 36602
Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant
Consortium Julius E. Marx
Post Office Drawer AG Marx, Inc. Realtors
Ocean Springs, Mississippi 39564 11 Japonica Avenue
Mobile, Alabama
Myrt Jones
Mobile Bay Audubon Society Mrs. Julius Marx
724 Brannan Court 11 Japonica Avenue
Mobile, Alabama 36605 Mobile, Alabama 36606

Reo Kirkland Edwin B. May
Office of the Lieutenant May Environmental Engineering, Inc.
Governor Post Office Box 9092
State Capitol Mobile, Alabama 36609
Montgomery, Alabama 36130

P. D. McAllister William F. Moore
President, Civic Roundtable Ameraport
Po8t Office Box 650 Suite 119, Bel Air Mall II
Mobile, Alabama 36601 3100 Cottage Hill Road
Mobile, Alabama 36606
Judy McConnell
Route 1, Box 1335 Sheldon L. Morgan
Irvington, Alabama 36544 Merchants National Bank
106 St. Francis Street
W. I. McElroy Mobile, Alabama 36622
Mobile Area Chamber of Commerce
Post Office Box 2187 Mrs. Duncan Naylor
Mobile, Alabama 36601 Alabama League of Women Voters
Route 2, Box 596
Jim McGough Daphne, Alabama 36526
Mobile County School Board
7 Princess Anne Road Gary Nelson
Mobile, Alabama 36608 Department of Commerce, NOAA/NMFS
Post Office Box 4218
W. M. McGough Panama City, Florida 32401
Dixie Engineering Company
1304 East Floyd A. Nichols
Mobile, Alabama 36618 Public Systems, Inc.
9512 Hemlock
J. B. McIlwain Huntsville, Alabama 35803
Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant
Consortium Albert Nonkes
Post Office Drawer AG 606 North Mobile Street
Ocean Springs, Mississippi 39564 Fairhope, Alabama 36532

Mrs. G. S. McKinstry Mrs. Albert Nonkes
3400 Riviere du Chien Loop 606 North Mobile Street
Mobile, Alabama 36609 Fairbope, Alabama 36532

Archie M. McMillan Thomas F. Odom
Baldwin County Commission Degussa-Alabama, Inc.
Alabama Coastal Area Board Post Office Box 606
Baldwin County Courthouse Theodore, Alabama, 36582
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507
Mason B. Oldham, Ar.
John McMillan U. S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Alabama State House of Mobile District
Representatives Post Office Box 2288
Post Office Box 253 Mobile, Alabama 36601
Stockton, Alabama 36579 Charles Owens
Larry Merrihew 7017 Felhorn Road
Merchants National Bank Mobile, Alabama 36608
106 St. Joseph Street
Mobile, Alabama 36622

R. D. Palmore Carolyn V. Scoggin
Radclivv Materials Route 4, Box 209
Post Office Box 2068 Mobile, Alabama 36609
Mobile, Alabama 36601
Joe E. Seward
Don Pruitt Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant
South Alabama Regional Consortium
Planning Commission Post Office Drawer AG
Post Office Box 1665 Ocean Springs, Mississippi 39564
Mobile, Alabama 36601
Gene Sheppard
James W. Reeder Degussa-Alabama, Inc.
President, Alabama Wildlife Post Office Box 606
Federation Theodore, Alabama 36582
660 Adams Avenue
Montgomery, Alabama 36104 Delane H. Small
Eastern Shore Junior Women's Club
Mrs. Wade H. Reeves 1 Fiesta Drive
Spanish Fort Garden Club Spanish Fort, Alabama 36527
3 Lancer Lane
Spanish Fort, Alabama 36527 Greg Smith
Flowerwood Nursery
Mary T. Richerson Route 1, Box 130
Attorney At Law Mobile, Alabama 36605
Secretary, Joint Legislative
Council Richard Spater
702-B Government Street Mannich Realtors
Mobile, Alabama 36602 8 Bancroft Street
Fairhope, Alabama 36532
David Roberts
Roberts Brothers, Inc. Mrs. C. W. Stafford
Mobile, Alabama Alabama League of Women Voters
Route 2, Box 7
Mrs. David Roberts Fairhope, Alabama 36532
Mobile, Alabama
Bill Starnes
Rex Roberts Alabama Development Office
Farm Bureau State Office Building
Route 7, Box 564 Montgomery, Alabama 36104
Mobile, Alabama 36608'
Judy P. Stout
Shellene Scarbrough Dauphin Island Sea Lab
Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Post Office Box 386
Consortium Dauphin Island, Alabama 36528
Post Office Drawer AG
Ocean Springs, Mississippi 39564 The Reverend Monsignor J. Edwin Stuardi
Catholic Diocese of Mobile
Elba Scott 370 South Section Street
Mobile Joint Legislative Fairhope, Alabama 36532
Council
502 Rosswood
Mobile, Alabama 36606

Shelby A. Sutton Bob F. White
Scott Paper Company State Oil and Gas Board
Post Office Box 2447 Post Office Drawer 0
Mobile, Alabama 36601 University, Alabama 35486

Hugh A. Swingle Ralph E. Whitson
Alabama Department of Conser- ALCOA
vation and Natural Resources Post Office Box 2647
Post Office Box 188 Mobile, Alabama 36601
Dauphin Island, Alabama 36529
Mrs. Ralph E. Whitson
Dr. G. Richard Thompson Post Office Box 2647
Post Office Box 727 Mobile, Alabama 36601
Mobile, Alabama 36601
John P. Wilson
Jeannette Tootle Vin-Rus Sub-Sea
Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Peter's Road
Consortium Harvey, Louisiana 70058
Post Office Drawer AG
Ocean Springs, Mississippi 39564 Lt. General W.K. Wilson
Southern Industries
Dr. E. Bruce Trickey Post Office Box 1685
Mobile United Mobile, Alabama 36601
Post Office Box 1243
Mobile, Alabama 36601 Arthur Wood
551 Shenandoah Road
Dirk Trusty Mobile, Alabama 36608
Mobile County Board of Realtors
Post Office Box 116546 David C. Wood
Mobile, Alabama 36616 Baldwin County Administrator
Post Office Box 148
Charles B. Vichery Bay Minette, Alabama 36507
Cooperative Extension Service
East Wing of Mobile County Mrs. Helen W. Wood
Courthouse Spanish Fort Garden Club
Mobile, Alabama 36601 106 Patrician Drive
Spanish Fort, Alabama 36727
C.W. Wade
Department of Conservation Rich Zellner
Post Office Box 188 Soil Conservation Service
Dauphin Island, Alabama 36528 3038 Springhill Avenue
Mobile, Alabama 36607
Carol Walding
National Campers and Hikers
Association
Post Office Box 8505
Mobile, Alabama 36608

John Walding
National Campers and Hikers
Association
Post Office Box 8505
Mobile, Alabama 36608

Riviera Utilities Building
Foley, Alabama
December 2, 1975

AGENDA

Opening Remarks: Dr. Philip E. LaMoreaux
State Geologist, Geological Survey of Alabama
Member, Alabama Coastal Area Board

Introduction: Willis Hyde (not included in text )

Review of Proposed Boundaries: Gene Cody (not included in text)

Questions by the Audience

Statements and Comments by the Public

Conference Participants

OPENING REMARKS

Dr. Philip E. LaMoreaux
State Geologist, Geological Survey of Alabama
Member, Alabama Coastal Area Board

We are going to start the meeting with a few introductions of some people
involved so that you will know the names of the players, at least. Most of us
here at the table are county, city or state employees of one type or another
My name is Phil LaMoreaux and I'm State Geologist and Oil and Gas Supervisor
for the State. In that capacity, the Governor appointed me a member of the
Coastal Area Board. The people that we have here at the front table are either
members of or alternates for the Coastal Area Board. To my right is Bill
Starnes, representing Mr. Red Bamberg who is Director of the Alabama Develop-
ment Office and Chairman of the Coastal Area Board. Next to him is Dr. Walter
Tatum of the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. He is
representing Claude Kelley, the Director of that Department. Immediately to
my right is Willis Hyde, who is with the Alabama Development Office and is the
man responsible for getting the work done in connection with the Alabama Coastal
Area Board. on my left is Dr. Sid Upham, a member of the Board, who is Director
of the Marine Environmental Sciences Consortium. Over here is Archie McMillan,
our Baldwin County Commissioner, a member of the Board. I would also like to
introduce Gene Cody, who is a staff member who works with Mr. Hyde.
Before we begin this meeting, this is not a formal public hearing. It is
really an opportunity for people, who are interested and concerned, to get
together and discuss some views on the proposed boundaries for the coastal zone
of Alabama. We are going to start by having a short presentation on the history,
the evolution and development, of coastal zone management. I think some of you
have done a lot of homework and reading and know pretty much what is involved
in coastal zone management legislation. So that we can start out together,
I'll have Willis Hyde present to you this historical background.
You will then have an opportunity to make some statements or ask questions.
Because we are limited in the amount of time that we have together tonight, we
cannot have someone monopolizing a great deal of time or we would be here until
after midnight. This will not be your last opportunity. There will be alot of
meetings in the future related to coastal zone management and the activities
of the Coastal Area Board. There are going to be a lot of opportunities for
you to present your ideas. Keep in mind that we are talking about boundaries
tonight. We would like to have your comments. Therefore, I am going to have to
run a tight meeting and limit statements to about three minutes per person and
not over five minuts.
In your folders there is a card to fill out regarding your desire to make
a statement or ask a question. Someone at the back of the room will pick these
up. We'll take those and use them as a guide to call on people for statement -
To make anything work in government (I know since I have spent over 30 years in
either Federal or State Government, as well as being a citizen) it is necessary
to try to organize your thoughts and present them precisely and briefly.

We appreciate and welcome you here at this meeting tonight and would urge
you to participate. With that, I'll ask Willis Hyde to start off with a brief
presentation to give you some background of why we're here and something about
the Coastal Area Board.

QUESTIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE

Dr. Philip LaMoreaux: We have an idea of three different boundaries that
will be considered for discussion. There are probably as many boundaries that
could be developed as there are people who are thinking about the problem, and
the problem is a complex one. Many things have to be considered in regards to
the final assignment of a boundary. Everyone is certainly not going to be
happy with the outcome of the final boundary.
First on the agenda, we have allowed some time for questions. I have
already received these cards that have been sent forward with some questions.
Any others that you have, send them across to Mr. Cody and we will try to
answer them.
I do not know how many of you have had the opportunity until this evening
to read the Alabama Law, Act Number 1274. For those who have not, the first
section of it describes the purpose of the Act, which is to promote, improve,
and safeguard the lands and waters located in the coastal area. The second
section is state policy, which is directed to preserve, protect, develop, and,
if possible, to restore and enhance the resources that are in the coastal
area. The third is a list of definitions so that we know what we are talking
about. Mr. Hyde has already given you one of those definitions relating to
coastal waters. The fourth section is a listing of things that do not apply.
Section five is the composition and appointments. Section six is development
of the program by the Board, and that is where we actually are right now in our
discussion tonight. Part A under this section is the identification of the
boundaries of the coastal area subject to any program that might be developed.
Mr. Hyde, will you come forward now and handle these questions?

J.R. Diamond: I have a three part question. (1) What happens if no plan is
adopted? (2) Will the entire program be dropped? (3) Will the Federal Govern-
ment take over the program?
Hyde: I went over this briefly in the material that I presented earlier. Let
me elaborate on that to answer this question. There are two sections in the
Federal Act that relate to what happens if no plan is adopted. The Federal
Act, Section 305, established a three year planning period for developing a
plan and federal funds are available on a 1/3-2/3 matching ratio during that
period. At the end of that planning period, if the State of Alabama has
developed a comprehensive plan that has been approved by the Governor and has
been submitted to the Department of Commerce and approved by the Secretary,
the State would then be eligible to participate in Section 306 of the coastal
zone management program. That section provides federal funds for implementing
the program. The answer to the question is, if no plan is adopted at the end
of three years, we have gone through a planning program and that is what we
will have--some planning documents.

I suppose the answer to the last question, what happens then, is the
coastal zone management program would be terminated. There is also a simple
answer to the second question, would the entire program be dropped, and that
answer is yes.
In the third question, a more complex answer is involved. Will the Federal
Government take over the program? According to the federal law, there is no
provision for the Federal Government to take over and implement a coastal zone
management plan. However, I think experience has taught us all that if we,
at the state and local governmental levels, do not deal with our own problems,
then the Federal Government is likely to deal with them for us. This is not
written into the law, and it may never be written into the law. But I offer
the comment that there is a possibility that it might happen.

Name not known: Referring to Sectio n 3 (a), coastal waters, how do your maps
fit this definition?
Hyde: As defined here, coastal area means the coastal waters, including the
Ea--n-Us therein and thereunder and adjacent shorelands including the waters
therein and thereunder, strongly influenced by each other and in proximity to
the shorelines of Alabama, and includes transitional and intertidal areas, salt
marshes, wetlands, and beaches. The area extends seaward to the outer limits of
the United States territorial sea and extends inland from the shorelines only to
the extent necessary to control the shorelines, their uses of which have a direct
and significant impact on the coastal waters.
In the case of the proposed map covering the entire counties, does it go
too far? The question of the others is, does it go far enough? These are things
that we can determine only by having input from you and that is why we are here.
We want to find out what you think. There are certain technical things that
must be included, such as the marshes, beaches and wetlands. We feel that from
the way we interpret the Federal Act right now-, the proposed boundaries probably
include an area large enough to include those things. There are many questions
that can be asked, and the first one usually is why do you stop the boundary at
the northern county lines? We could have taken the boundary all the way up to
the headwaters of the Tombigbee and Alabama Rivers, because those waters have
a direct and significant impact on the coastal zone. However, from a practical
standpoint, you must terminate the boundary somewhere. From an administrative
standpoint, it is much easier to implement if you adopt an existing recognized
line. Granted, this is not a good ecological line, and technically there are
many reasons that you can discount on that basis.

Hal Schneide : How far inland are these boundaries supposed to go? It seems
you contradict the three mile limit from the coast.
-H_yde: The three mile limit extends seaward, now landward. I answered the
first half ot the question, how far inland the boundary is supposed to go, in
the previous question. The boundary is supposed to go inland as far as we, we
being the people that are responsible for developing the program and you the
citizens, determine that there is a direct and significant impact on the
coastal waters.

Verda Horne: Since the alternate proposal, identified as the Citizen's Alliance
Boundary Proposal, has been introduced and is supported by a large number of
organizations, could you present it in the same general terms as the previous
three plans?

Hyde: I think that would be fair, and I have a copy of it here. Would you
like to present this proposal, Mrs. Horne?
Verda Horne: No, you go ahead.
Hyde: This is a boundary proposal, and those of you who have the material from
the Mobile meeting have a copy of it. I will read the first part to let you
know who it represented. It was presented by Alicia Linzey. Ms. Linzey was
acting as a spokesperson for a coalition of conservation groups known as the
Citizen's Coastal Zone Alliance. This Alliance was conceived during a workshop
sponsored by the Sierra Club that was held at Dauphin Island during the last
week in September. Quoting from the proposal:

At this moment, we represent almost 65,000 people who reside not only
in south Alabama, but throughout the state as well as in neighboring
states. We fully expect our roster of member organizations to grow
still larger in the coming weeks. The alliance currently consists of
the following organizations: The Alabama Conservancy, The Alabama
Wildlife Federation, Mobile County Wildlife and Conservation
Association, Mobile Bay Audubon Society, Birmingham Audubon Society,
Save Our Bay Club, Chattahoochee Chapter of the Sierra Club repre-
senting Alabama and Georgia, and the Gulf Coast Regional Conservation
Committee representing Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and
Louisiana. Our views are also concurring either fully or in part
by a number of other groups, and these groups will independently
trdnsmit their thoughts to the Coastal Area Board.
The Alliance was put together to allow citizen's groups to take
full advantage of our rights to participate in all phases of the
Alabama coastal zone management program. At one of the early meetings
of the Coastal Area Board, one of the members, I believe Dr. Upham,
suggested that the potential for public involvement here would be
so great that the citizens could write their own coastal zone program
if they so desired. We have fully accepted the challenge of that
suggestion and would like to acquaint you with our boundary proposal.

I will not go on to read this. Ms. Linzey, in coordinating this, has docu-
mented very well the actitivities that have taken place at the federal and
state scene. One comment here that I have noted previously is that the
Alliance is adamant in their feeling that the Coastal Area Board falls short
of taking in enough of the coastal watersheds to really control the majority
of uses impacting coastal waters. Generally, this boundary proposal goes
further up the river and takes in the drainage areas draining into the Tombigbee
and Alabama Rivers as far north as the Jackson Lock and Dam on the Tombigbee
and the Claiborne Lock and Dam on the Alabama River. A description of the
area is attached to the proposal. Is that an adequate description, Mrs. Horne?
Verda Horne: Would you care to critize that the same way with the positive
and negative?
Hyde: No, I am not prepared to do that.

Roland Walker: I would like to say that if you plan to do any dredging or pier
building or what not, now you have to get so many permits that it seems almost
impossible when you start to do a job. Is this coastal zone program supposed
to take care of that and make it more comprehensive or complete?

Hyde: It is specified in the state law that the Coastal Area Board will be
a -permitting agency. It also states that the Board will only become a permitting
agency once it has an approved coastal zone plan. The Coastal Area Board
realizes the tremendous, complex problem that permitting has become and we
realize that you must obtain permits from the Corps of Engineers, Water Improve-
ment Commission, Air Pollution Control Commission, Department of Conservation,
and others. What the Coastal Area Board would like to do, but we do not know
how at the present, is to expedite this pe-,.-mitting process somewhat, possibly to
act as a clearing house. How the mechanics of that would work, I would not
begin to guess. There is legislation now in Congress that would revise the
Coastal Zone Management Act. One of the amendments to that, introduced by
Representative Treen from Louisiana, would give the state the option of taking
over the Corps of Engineers permitting process, once it has an approved
coastal zone plan and has the technical capability. I do not know if the
states would want to take it over, since that is a bag of worms the Corps
would porbably like to get rid of. The permitting problem is recognized.
We have not solved it.

T
Aust: If this is not a public, formal hearing, how then is the public
mind to be served in this matter?
Hyde: The difference in this meeting, which is informal, and a formal public
hearing is that we are asking for your comments on three proposals that we
have presented or on any others that may be proposed. Eventually, after we
have the opportunity to get your comments and to have a feeling for what the
people in Baldwin and Mobile Counties would like, we are required by the
federal guidelines to have public hearings. 'At that time we will present a
coastal zone boundary that the Board is considering for adoption, and the
public will again have an opportunity to respond. Right now, we are really
throwing out ideas to spur your thinking and to solicit your comments.

Hattie L. Smith: What will coastal zone management regulate that is not already
regulated by existing agencies, such as EPA, AWIC, and so forth?
Hyde: I am not quite sure of the answer to that question. The coastal zone
management program is trying to put these things together. We are trying to
develop a plan that will allow a scheme for developing the coastal area and
preserving the environment at the same time. What we would like to do is
direct, insofar as possible, the best uses for the coastal area. I am not sure
what all we would regulate, but I would hope that it would 'not be significantly
more than is already regulated.
Gene Cody: Willis, you might add that other federal programs will be a part
of this plan and will be incorporated within it,
Hyde: There is one feature in the coastal zone act that is unique to federal
legislation. This is the federal consistency policy. It states that once a
state has an approved coastal zone plan, all of the federal agencies will comply
with the plan. What it will mean if it is tested in court nobody knows, because
no plan has been adopted. This is one of the things that encourages the states
to participate in coastal zone management. It is a way of having some control
over the federal activities in the coastal zone. Alabama, of course, does not
have a tremendous amount of federal development in the coastal area, but some
states do. Florida, for example, has many miles of coastline tied up in military
bases and other things. This is a big factor.

N. W. Gamble: Will the citizens of Mobile and Baldwin Counties be allowed to
vote on this in any way?
Hyde: I do not believe there are any plans to have a vote on it. You should
work through your local Legislators. Many of the local Legislators have been
very much involved in this program. When the Act was passed in 1973, it
appointed a Board that is supposed to represent the Governor and the local
elected officials.
N.W. Gamble: WE have no chance to vote for or against it then?
Hyde: As far as a formal referendum, I do not believe so. That is why we are
trying to get some opinions now. We want your vote tonight, whatever it may be.

Bob Griffiths: I want to know what this means to agriculture in Mobile and
Baldwin'Counties? How is it going to involve us when we get ready to go out and
plow our ground or whatever we decide to do to our dirt? Are you going to come
along and tell me I cannot plow it, or what? What does it mean? I do not
understand.
Hyde: Tonight we are considering a boundary, and, of course, agricultural
lands that wouldcome in the defined coastal area would be a part of the coastal
zone program. I do not believ e it says anything in the Act about any restric-
tions on agricultural developments.
Dr. Sidney Upham: That is right. Do not look at this Coastal Area Board as
a thing that is going to come along and tell you that you cannot do this or
you cannot do that. This is not what we are here for. What we are here for
is to help keep the coastal zone, and have it grow in an intelligent manner.
We are going to help. We are not going to hinder. Does that help you a little?
Bob Griffiths: That helps a little, yes.
Hyde: We realize you would like a black and white, pin-point answer, and we
cannot give you that, because we are formulating a program right now. It is
difficult for us to answer these questions, and we are being as candid with you
as we can.

Clarence C. Horton: All through your presentation you have made a point of the
negative aspects of certain plans, such as saying there might be controversy
between a property owner who would be included against on who would be excluded.
It seems to me that you indicate the person who was the property owner in the
coastal zone management area would be disadvantaged. Therefore, as a represen-
tative of the people of Alabama, would it not be in your own best interest and
that of those people you represent to try to draw up the smallest possible zone
which would comply with the federal law?
Hyde: I think you have stated an opinion. I do not know if there is an answer
to it. What we want to do is determine what is the minimum area. Whatever we
can determine as the minimum area, there are going to be some people who are
going to be included who would like to be out, and there are going to be those
who are excluded that would like to bd in.
Clarence C. Horton: I cannot imagine anybody who would like to be in. The
property owners in this zone will certainly be disadvantaged.
Upham: He will not be disadvantaged. He will be advantaged. Actually, the
person who is going to be in the coastal zone, as defined by this Board,
eventually will have an advantage of having a Board who is going to work through
the county and city political systems. People, we are going to help you regulate
your own coastal zone. That is what we are here for is to help. That is not
being done now. This was proven by Congress when they took a two year study all
over the United States with the best scientists they could find. They found that

the coastal areas of the United States are not being tended to the way they
should. If we do not tend to them, we are going to lose them. What we are
trying to do is not lose them, because we all like the coastal area, including
myself. That is why I am here.
Clarence C. Horton: I do not want to belabor the point at all, but again I do
make the point t t when you present things as a negative aspect, you always
list the possible controversy between those who would be included and those who
would be excluded. So I think you must feel that the man in the coastal zone
is disadvantaged. He will be restricted as to what he can and cannot do.
LaMoreaux: I would agree with Mr. Hyde that your statement should be entered
into the -record as to how you feel regarding the definition of the boundaries.
I would point out that the Board as it is constituted would give you as a
cizizen, your county commission and your local officers an opportunity to voice
your feelings regarding any development in the coastal area. For example, I
do not think any of us would like to see a paper mill go into Gulf Shores. That
would not be good coastal management in my opinion. Likewise, there are places
you would not want to put an oil refinery or develop a pipeline corridor. This
Board, again, would give you the forum to object to that kind of thing. There
are many acres of wetlands that are fragile and that should not be disturbed
if we retain something of the unique and interesting environment that we have
in coastal Alabama. The Board gives you a forum to protect that kind of thing.
That is really what these gentlemen are saying. Let us not confuse why we
are here. You have a Federal Act and you have a State Act and there is nothing
that we can do about that right at this minute. If you do not like those, then
your objective should be to go to your Congressman, Senator, or Legislators, and
have them change the acts. That is the only way you can change it.
Clarence C. Horton: I would just like to say something. The only thing I
proposed was that we try to keep the zone as small as we can.
LaMoreaux: I would agree there, too. That is why we are presenting some alter-
natives--to get a feel for your opinions before we even get to the point of
formal hearings. This is an opportunity for you to get across to us, the members
of the Board, your feelings about these things. The point that the coastal
zone be restricted to the smallest area is one point that should be made. Others
feel quite contrary. Some of the environmentalists are concerned about the
area above the delta, the flood plain, and the valleys of the Tombigbee and
Alabama Rivers. Others would like to carry it inland to the point where tidal
effects cease, which would take you up to Jackson and Clark Counties. Some
would like to take it all the way up further to, perhaps, Tuscaloosa which is
still in a flood plain area. Obviously, as Mr. Hyde pointed out, we are limited
by the economics andthe practicality of administering the area as to how
much we can include. What we do want, through the Board's action, is to try to
get your voice into the definition of the boundaries, and then eventually into
some coastal management and planning, so that we can preserve what we have
here in coastal Alabama.

STATEMENTS AND COMMENTS BY THE PUBLIC

George P. Kaiser: I am a farmer and landowner here. From what I have heard,
we do not know exactly how we are going to be affected by this, so I cannot
help but agree with Mr. Horton (minimum boundary). Not knowing what we are
going to get into, I believe that we should keep these lines to a bare
minimum. If they are beneficial, I am sure that everyone will want to extend
these lines, but if we go too far and get ill feelings from everyone, I am
just wondering if we are not going to do a lot more damage than good.
LaMoreaux: This is a good, constructive statement, and this is what we want to
hear. We appreciate that.

Jean Kutack: I am President of the Baldwin County League of Women Voters. I
simply want to make the statement at this time that we are advocating the Citizenis
Alliance proposal. The reason we are doing this is that in the very beginnil-
of coastal zone management, the National League of Women Voters started,
throughout the whole country, an indepth study of coastal zone management.
There was a federal grant given to the National Board. It was studied in great
detail. Then at the state level several years ago we started an indepth study
in Alabama concerning coastal zone management. After having studied it for so
many years by so many diligent and sincere women, we believe in the National
coastal zone management law. We believe in the State's coastal zone management
law. We believe that we are on the planet earth. We are not isolationists
any longer. We believe in the whole coastal zone management program, and
furthermore, we particularly believe in the last proposal, which is that of
the Citizen's Coastal Zone Alliance.

Verda Horne: Like Mrs. Kutack, I 'live on the Gulf Coast and have lived here
for forty years, within or on it actually, but that is not my concern. I am
concerned that this kind of law was passed by our neighbors and by other legis-
latures along both the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Now it was not done in
Washington. It was done by these representatives, particularly Senator
Earnest Hollings, who saw what was happening by irresponsible treatment of the
coast of his state. It has been damaged. It is not that he wants to stop
development. Senator Hollings is as intent as we are on getting jobs for people,
but he is also worried about food and fiber. He did not want to lose their
sports fishing industry, and he did not want to lose their residential areas.
Remember more than half of all of the 213 million of us now live within 50
miles of the coast. This is growing greatly. We expect 75% of all Americans
will be living on the coastal fringe by 1980, and this is pretty close. It
means that we have to decide where we are to do what things. That means some
way that you who have homes and businesses on the Gulf Coast ought to have some
fair assumption that you can go on having your home protected, having your
business protected where it is. It also means that industry, when it moves into
the coastal area to use those resources which are invaluable to them, will know
ahead of time where they can locate and under what conditions and under what

restrictions. I think they deserve this just as the residents and home owners
and farmers deserve to know what they can do and under what kind of conditions
and restrictions.
It is because of that, that we are banking on an inclusive plan, not a
hard plan that cannot be changed. If you will read the law, the law assures
you that all of these boundaries can be modified as the need arises. I'do
not think there is a single soul on the Coastal Area Board that wants to go
out and tell you that today you cannot plow,your land, tomorrow you cannot
raise chickens, and next week you cannot milk your cows. This is ridiculous.
They will tell you this if this is what you wish and this is what you prefer.
They will tell you they are trying their best to carry out the law that was
passed with your cooperation. I do want to say that it is in the law that these
men have to prove that they have sought and received citizen participation.

M.L. Aust: My mentally prepared statement has all been blown. I may ad lib a
little iTT-t. I am in the engineering and survey business, and I have some comments
that do not seem like they are at first sight in relation to boundaries. However,
I would like to sum it up later if I get it all together.
One of the supporting factors for these boundaries was that if we could
limit them to geographical features, we could eliminate the need for costly
surveys. I would take exception to that. Anybody who is going to develop
within any of the areas is going to require a survey at his own expense. At
that time he is going to establish horizontal and vertical control or he is
either within or out of a section. He is north of a line or south of a line.
He knows where he is. He is either above or below a contour. Therefore, he
should be able to determine whether he is within the zone or out of the zone.
This is no expense to the taxpayer or to the Board.
The other comments that I would take exception to in relation to these
boundaries is that we include any future Ameraport or any oil or gas exploration
within these boundaries. These activities and particularly the Ameraport are
excluded by law. Therefore, that is not a valid argument for the boundary.
In relation to what the Act says, a regulated activity is involved in the
following activities: dredging, excavating or moving soil, mud, sand, gravel,
flora, fauna, or aggregate of any kind from any coastal area. I would say that
technically this does not exclude farming. I read it nowhere in the state or
federal. law that this activity would be excluded. The coastal area, or the
coastal zone, is what we are about. Therefore, if we set the coastal zone to
include a farm and if this act does regulate that farm, then he is regulated.
Let me make my position perfectly clear. I am for preservation of the
coastal waters, I think this is a necessary thing. I think that we have had
many, many abuses. I am not originally from Baldwin County, but I am from
Mississippi. We do not have coastal waters in north Mississippi, but we have the
Mississippi River, which is dirty enough. When I came to Baldwin County in 1960
you could see the bottom of Mobile Bay at four or five feet. You can no longer
do that. You may get a skin disease if you swim in Mobile Bay. I believe
that we should take action to prevent this thing from becoming worse, and if
possible, turn it around and bring it back the other way. However, I think that
the citizens of Alabama, and particularly the citizens of Mobile and Baldwin
Counties, should do this.
Let me bring out one more point. . The federat and state acts say Lliat the
shorelines will be regii1ated only, and I eniphasize Lliat word, to the extent
necessary to control shorelines. We will set these boundaries only to that
extent. I think the key to the Alabama law is the fact that the Secretary of

of Commerce is authorized to make annual grants of federal money. We all know
what happened to our schools. We took federal money and we no longer have a
school system. We have an awful lot of private schools, but we seem to have
something less than what was desired in our public schools. We have busing,
which was a great controversy, all because of federal money. Here we go again.
The management program, as defined in th@_- federal law, includes objective
policies and standards to guide public and private uses of land. What I am
saying to you is that this federal law here is a land use regulatory law. This
is not necessarily true of the state law, since I do not believe our Legislature
wanted a land use regulatory law. But this is what they have got, because the
federal law all through refers to land use programs.
The Board here, and I recognize the intent of you members of the Board,
wants a good coastal zone managmenet program. But, gentlemen, you are not going
to have that because the Secretary of Commerce is going to regulate what you do
in your own management program. Therefore, let me direct you to Sections 305
and 306, in particular Part 2, of the federal law. This means that if we decide
from a regional standpoint that we want a park here somewhere, that this would
not restrict that. Further, it is written into the law that any public land use
regulation by the government, the Federal Government, later on would not be
precluded by this law. In other words, they could come in andput their own
land use regulation in here. I think it is a bucket of worms from the federal
standpoint.
I would submit to you that we should do it ourselves with state funds.
Forget about the Federal Government. Keep the boundaries to the smallest
possible extent consistent with providing the intended outcome. To protect our
waters and our coastal zone, we should forget about these boundaries, keep them
as small as possible, and forget about the federal money. It will die a natural
death if we do not set any boundaries. Thank you.

Paul Carpa: This Board idea is beautiful in one respect. The boundaries are
something nice. We want protection, but where is all this money going to come
from to run this operation? Sure, federal money is available, but that is our
tax money. If we are looking at tax money, up goes our property taxes.
LaMoreaux: That is correct.
Paul Carpa: We have a bunch of people working on the Board for what?
LaMoreaux: The Board members are not paid.
Paul Carpa: What about the people working for the Board members?
LaMoreaux: These people are staff people and they, pf course, are paid. They
are paid by the funds that are made available from the federal grant for
coastal zone management activities and by the matching money from the state
government. I beg to differ with your point of view here. You have a right
to make them, but the point that you are making is not related to this meeting.
I am neither agreeing or disagreeing with this point of view. You are
raising questions that you need to ask your Congressman, Senators, or repre-
sentatives, not this Board. We can listen to you and record those, but they
are not goind to do any good. You are going to be effective in changing the
law only if you go to the proper place. This Board has been charged by appoint-
ment of the Governor to carry out a law that has been passed by your Legislature,
representatives of yours. If,you do not like what they have passed, you need
to change it with them. You can voice your opinions, but I cannot help you
change the law.

There have been monies set up in the Congress for coastal management plan-
ning, and that is the stage that we are in right now. It does take time. You
resent the federal and state dollars that it takes to pay the staff. I am State
Geologist and Oil and Gas Supervisor and these men on the Board are directors of
various state agencies. We have regular responsibilities, and we are here
with you tonight to listen to you and try to do the best job we can with the
legislation that your representatives and mine passed. If we want to change
that, we need to go to the right place. Tonight we need to get into the record
positive statements with regards to your feelings on this boundary.
We have not yet begun to get down the road on coastal management imple-
mentation'. We have not even defined the complex problem of what the boundary
of the area is. That is why we are having this meeting. We are just trying
to find out from the people what their attitude is. You are telling us. That
is good, and this is being recorded. We have many other things to do in
addition to the identification of the boundary. The resources of the area have
to be defined, the potential uses of the resources, what constitutes permissible
land and water uses in the area, and many other things have to be considered.
It will take much work. Supposedly, if we carry out the intent of the laws,
federal and state, we can come up with some guidelines that will result in
better use of our coastal area. This is what we really are considering, and
let us direct our attention to boundaries.

Garret Griggs: I live in Orange Beach. I was just wondering why the approach
would be to define boundaries before determining permissible land and water
uses. Why would you not establish the uses first, which would eliminate some of
the concerns of these gentlemen?
LaMoreaux: This is a possibility, a possible approach.
Garret Griggs: We are here tonight setting boundaries, we are not setting uses.
LaMoreaux: But you have made the point that this is another approach, and
that is good. Are there any other statements?

Mrs. James H. Keeton: all lands, the use of which would affect the coastal
waters, which would certainly be an absolute minimum that would not quite
cover that (Parts of this tape cannot be understood).
LaMoreaux: I think that is a pertinent point. I know from my own experience
in geol-ogy and water resources work in the state that the influence from a mile
or two or three back sometimes can be very great on the quality of the coastal
waters. One gentleman made a point that he could not see the bottom of the
Bay, and I think he was relating also to the fact that we need to implement
the rules and regulations that we have through the Alabama Water Improvement
Commission and our water quality regulations. We need to implement those rules
and regulations just as thoroughly as possible. There are going to be factors
back two and three miles that will have a great impact on coastal waters, and
they will have to be considered.

Name not known: I would like to reiterate the same subject that she brought
up. Perdido Bay runs adjacent to Florida, Escambia County. What jurisdiction
would the Board have supposing a plant in Florida is polluting the Bay, which
it is today. Florida has their laws, and they could be conflicting with ours.
LaMoreaux. I can give you an example of how they define it. Alabama, Florida
and@Mississippi are all operating under federal and state laws in developing
their rules and regulations, boundaries, and management plans. In existing
mechanisms of state government, and I will use the Oil and Gas Board because I

5 5

am most familiar with it, when we have a field that covers or crosses state
boundaries, the regulatory agency in Florida under their Oil and Gas Supervisor
meets with our regulatory agency and together they regulate that resource
activity. The same thing is true with regards to our water resources regulatory
agency, the Alabama Water Improvement Commission, and the state regulatory
agency for water in Florida. When there is a problem of water quality that
overlaps the state boundaries, they work together.
I would envision that if implemented, the coastal management program would
operate the same way. There would also be that overlap of the federal agencies
involved. Possibly one of the best things that can come out of this gathering
and the others is that information about the federal and state laws is being
disseminated to you. You are obviously here because you are interested.
One of the things that I would call to your attention is that in state
government the agencies that are involved in regulatory activities are repre-
sented on the Board. This is an attempt on the part of the Governor and the
Legislature to force these agencies to think together in the development of
any Coastal Area Board activities. All agencies are involved: the Health
Department, Alabama Water Improvement Commission, Alabama Highway Department,
Department of Agriculture and Industry, Alabama Public Service Commission, Oil
and Gas Board, Geological Survey, Air Pollution Control Commission and others.
There is an attempt to pull together those regulatory agencies in the develop-
ments of the Coastal Area Board activities.

Fairly Chandler: I am very interested in taking good care of our coastal
waters, a lot better care than we have been taking in the past. I do not really
know where measurable salt content leaves off in our coastal system. I know
something about the tidal area. It would seem to me that it would be wise for
us to, at least, include in the secondary area all the water that flows into
the, Alabama coastal waters, the watersheds of Mobile Bay and Perdido Bay.
LaMoreaux. I believe you are stating the tributaries to the streams in
Mobil d Baldwin Counties.
Fairly Chandler: That is right.

Mary Beech: I am from Magnolia Springs. I would like to say that time is
running out to save our rivers. A few years ago we were able to see ten or
twelve feet down into the Magnolia River. Now it is filled up to where we
see the bottom at two or three feet, if we see the bottom at all. 1, for one,
would not like to put any further burden on farmers who feed us, but in the
last two years we have been aware of the hedge at the little streams which
come into the Magnolia River. Now all the trees, grasslands, and so forth
have been cut down right along the drainage path so the land can be cultivated.
One area, in particular, is where Weeks Creek starts. That land comes in and
takes the farmer's top soil and plants it right in the middle of Weeks Creek.
it is just a big, stinking mudhole when it rains. It is filling not only
Weeks Creek, but our rivers and our bays, too.
LaMoreaux:. In other words, you are saying to broaden the boundaries beyond
just the bare minimum.

J.P. Coleman: Since we are talking about the coast, we are talking about
elevation, aren't we?
LaMoreaux: Yes, sir.

J.P. Coleman: What is so wrong with taking a topo map and picking an elevation
that surrounds this coastal area and let that be it? You will make this map
one time. In fact, they are already made.
LaMoreaux: Mr. Coleman, you are right and it can be done that way. That was
one of the maps that Mr. Cody held up. It was to take different elevations
and use those elevations to define the coastal zone.
J.P. Coleman: He pointed out that all of the surveying had to be done. The
coastal maps, once surveyed, are very rarely changed.
LaMoreaux: You could define that boundary on the basis of elevation. It
would be a complex boundary as he pointed out, but it could be done.
J.P. Coleman: One time, and one time only.
LaMoreaux: I agree.

Johnny Sims: I am in the real estate business. I think I have the interest of
our county here, the watersheds, as muchas anyonein this room or this county.
I know we have the good waters, and we are proud of that. But there is one thing
that keeps ringing in my mind, and it has for the past few years. These
regulatory agencies, beginning on a major basis back in the 60's, are seeming
to me to destroy the rights of the American people as a whole, or the backbone
of this nation. True, we would like to have clear water. We like to have fish.
We would like to have everything. But our population explosions and our con-
centration of that population is changing MUch of our nation today. We are
not like we were when our forefathers came and cut the timber off our hills, and
so forth. I do not think you are putting enough emphasis on the balance
between do we survive and stay here with the thing not as ideal as we want it
or do we protect the things that will be here when we are gone?
Above all, I think the American people today are tired. With due respect
to you on the Board, and not a reflection, the people are getting tired of
regulatory agencies and bodies. There are so many of them in America today that
pretty soon we will be told how we tie our shoes. Now that is far fetched,
but the communistic movements, if we read history throughout all of these
thousands of years and study the nations that have fallen, has proved some of
this. This is very small, but if you put it all together, the taxpayers who
are paying the bill will be regulated out of business. Their way of life
is being destroyed. This has nothing really to do with what you are talking
about here, but it is a thought that I wanted to leave with you at this meeting.
LaMoreaux: I guess probably I do not like to be regulated or told what to do
any more than the next person. Maybe I will have to reflect a little bit
because 15 or 16 years ago I became Oil and Gas Supervisor. That is the first
regulatory responsibility I ever had. At that time, we had three oil fields in
which the salt water was allowed to discharge into the streams and the oil
waste went onto the land surface. Literally, dozens of acres were made barren
because the regulatory agency of which I became the Director was not doing its
job. The salt water was contaminating the streams and there were very few fish.
The aquatic life and the vegetation inthe stream were affected for long
distances.
I could not agree with you totally. I think we can be over regulated. I
am not talking about this Board. I am talking in general terms, philosophically.
I think we can become over regulated just as you pointed out. That regulation
can approach the "big brother" socialism, communism type of thing which none of
us here want. Too, I think we can be so unregulated that one neighbor can
destroy the environment, the enjoyment of living, for his next door neighbor.

I have learned that the Oil and Gas Board has to regulate those oil wells.
If we do not, the water supplies in that area, both ground and surface water,
can be contaminated and destroyed for man for a long distance around.a well
or well field. So I recognize that whether we like it or not, we must have
some regulation. I would have to say that we have to have some regulation to
protect the environment in which we live, because as more and more people come
on this earth and we crowd together closer and closer, these problems are going
to get greater and greater.
Johnny Sims: I will say this briefly and then sit down, because it probably
has no bearing on this meeting. At the present time you have many agencies
that really affect the coastal area, including environmental regulating bodies.
LaMoreaux: Some 15 or 17, right.
Johnny Sims: So with all of these and the U.S. Engineers, State Docks, and
so forth, when you put them all together, we have already got three good coastal
plans, even though there is not a plan. When you put all those together, you
have pretty well got to decide on what you do to these coastal lands.
LaMoreaux: Now I think we have come to a point of agreement. I think we have
probably got most of the regulatory agencies that we need. If they did their
job, and if the people supported them in letting them do their job, then we
would have what we needed in the way of good regulation.
Johnny Sims: One other comment. I think we have become a slave of federal
grants beginning on a city basis, county basis, and state basis.
LaMoreaux: I might applaud with you on that. Thank you.

James Keeton: I would like tolpose, I think, the feeling of the Board with
regards to boundaries and agree with Mr. Coleman. We are talking about ...
LaMoreaux: Wait now, the Board has not formed an opinion. We have tried
to give you some alternatives.
James Keeton: I said it was my opinion. We are talking about waters, both
the sea waters, bay waters, and tributaries. There is no one thing that relates
to them like the topography and like the contours. I would like to add my voice
to Mr. Coleman's

ROLAND WALKER: I don't know whether you followed the Perdido Bay hearings or
not. They defined very distinctly the Perdido River and the Styx River as
affecting Perdido Bay. Why would they be eliminated from this coastal area?
LaMoreaux: They would not necessarily have to be. If you make the statement
that you think they ought to be included, it will be a matter of record and
that would be considered.
Roland Walker: I feel the Perdido and Styx Rivers ought to be included for the
reasons given in reports on pollution and water quality in Perdido Bay in
Alabama

Bob Griffith: It would be a lot easier for me to tell you where to put the
boundaries if I knew what you were going to do after you got them.
LaMoreaux: Why don't you read the Coastal Area Act, and then we will get
together again and talk some more.

M. L. Aust: I am sure that the Board has considered technically setting the
boundaries or requirements along the lines of technical requirements of stream
flows, velocities of stream flows, water quality, water sheds, or something
like that. Could you briefly go into that, if you will?

LaMoreaux: Let me explain how the alternatives that have been presented to you
have evolved. The technical staff, working with representatives of some of the
state and federal agencies, particularly the Geological Survey of Alabama,
came up with several definitions or delineations of areas that might be
considered. Instead of meeting here together and not having anything to
start from as far as discussions are concerned, we tried to present to you
two or three as a beginning for discussion.
We did consider topographic delineations. We talked about hydrologic
boundaries. We could use the salt water-fresh water interface or the
marshland-salt water-fresh water areas as a basis for definition. We mentioned
considering tidal effects, which extends all the way to Jackson. That is one
way that we might define the area. Another is just on the basis of topography.
You could say that the 11.5 foot line, the 100 year flood line, could be used.
That is a physical feature that can be outlined on the map. We could arbritrarily
set the 20 foot contour, which means twenty feet above sea level, or the 50
foot or the 100 foot contour. We could generalize those boundaries. In other
words, not make them so wriggly in detail but just generalize them and still
define an area. We took pInysicall and cultural features into consideration.
That was part of the delineation in some of these maps. We considered the
political, and by political we mean the county boundaries, as a possible
alternative.
Nevertheless, we used a variety of criteria for defining different kinds of
areas that you might consider. i would tend to agree with the gentleman who
mentioned that we try to confine it as much as we can to do the detail
planning. Perhaps, we could have a larger area where we could put some more
generalized planning criteria and apply those to it. Maybe we should not be
quite so strict right away.
There are many alternatives that we might use in approaching this problem
of defining boundaries. What we did was to try to give you some alternatives.
We presented those to you in an effort to get some feeling, some feedback,
from the public on how they felt about these boundaries.

Name not known: I have one more question. We have all of these boundaries. Is
it your idea to present them to the Federal Government, and see which one they
will accept2
LaMoreaux: No, not yet. in fact, as Mr. Hyde pointed out, we think that the
minimum zone we mentioned earlier would meet the criteria of the federal
legislation.

Betty Diamond2 1 have lived in several places that have coastal problems. Have
we considered what effect Mississippi and Florida will have on our waterways?
Have we considered what they are trying to Go to improve their area, and how
they are handling their boundary problems? It seems we should try to coordinate
all of this together, so that we will get quality waterways from all of the
Gulf states.
LaMoreaux: Not only have we considered Florida and Mississippi, but also up
the East Coast and on the West Coast. Our staff has pulled together their
criteria and 'has analyzed those with respect to our own boundary definition
problems.

Donald Grantham: Once you establish these boundaries and submit them and they
are passed on, will there be any conflict of interest in who controls the use
inside these boundaries?
LaMoreaux: Once you defined the boundaries, especially if you went to a two
or three zone type of boundary definition, you will have one zone which would
be the most critical and another area a little less critical. Once you define
those zones and define some general planning or objectives for development in
those zones, then you, as a citizen, could have some input in any planning and
any changes in that planning for future development.
Donald Grantham: Suppose this Board okayed a particular activity of mine I
proposed to do within this coastal zone boundary. Could the EPA then come along
and overrule you?

LaMoreaux: The Board could not overrule the EPA, but the Board would have to
adhere to the EPA, Alabama Water Improvement Commission, or if it is related
to.oil and gas, the Oil and Gas Board. You are not going to get around this .
This Board would have to consider those in any planning that they did. That
is why members of those agencies are represented on the Board, to insure against
the development of plans that would be in conflict with the AWIC or the EPA
rules and regulations.
Donadl Grantham: In other words, if I got a permit to do something from the
EPA,the Board could still stop me. So either way, you have two'controlling
interests in the same area.
LaMoreaux: If EPA stopped you, that would be enough in stopping you from your
development.
Donadl Grantham: Right, but if you permitted me inside of this area, I would
still have to adhere to EPA requirements. It looks like EPA is already
controlling this area.
LaMoreaux: But EPA has only one aspect of control. It is only concerned with
the environmental aspect of it, the water quality.
Donald Grantham: Anything you would do within this area where you have tribu-
tary streams would come under EPA.
LaMoreaux: Not necessarily. You could do certain things there that would have
no bearing on EPA regulations.
Donald Grantham: Not too many.
LaMoreaux: If the regulations regarding the U.S. Engineers are passed with
regards to development of streams, then you still have another set of rules.
But again, this Board would have nothing to do with those.
M. L. Aust: Isn't the Corps of Engineers slated to extend their regulatory
powers and authorities?
LaMoreaux: That is right, along tributary streams.
Donadl Grantham: On the farmlands like some of these fire ant programs and
all that, will they say that this area can be treated because it does not run off
into a stream? It is going to come on down into the Bay.
LaMoreaux: The fire ant program, since it involves the use of chemicals, could
fall under the EPA Act and AWIC Act.
Bob Griffiths: What about all of that pollution that comes from all the rivers
in the north part of the state? What are they going to do about that?
LaMoreaux: They also fall under the AWIC and EPA. The Geological Survey of
Alabama supplies data to the AWIC and EPA which is being used to clean up streams.
We are implementing a series of satellite monitoring stations in the state.
These stations are located on streams and transmit data to the satellite every
hour and twenty minutes. As it goes around the earth, information on stream

gauge height and flow and quality of water is transmitted. In two hours time
that data comes back to us. There is information that can be used as far as
water quality control. We are doing a lot of things that are improving the quality
of water in the state at the present time. Water quality in Alabama streams
and underground has improved substantially over the past several years, and it
is going to continue to improve, because we have become concerned about water
quality and we are doing something about it.

Clarence C. Horton: When will you firm up your decisions on the boundaries?
LaMoreaux: I cannot answer that. It is going to be December 16 before
the public comments can be evaluated. We can then see whether we have any
unanimity of thought. Then, in my opinion, the alternatives can be narrowed
down to one or two. It may be that we will have to hold another series of more
serious hearings in regard to the boundaries. It will just depend on what the
outcome is to this group of meetings that we are trying to carry out at the
present time.

Donald Grantham: All you are doing now is trying to establish a boundary. What
would be the next step after the boundary is established?
LaMoreaux: A lot of different steps. They are the ones that I read. I think
you are going to have to identify the boundaries andthe resources that are
involved, and then the possibilities of guidelines on the uses of land and
water. Then you can consider some planning in the area, at which time
the public will come back into the picture to determine what sort of uses would
be best for an area.

Bob Griffiths: You say uses for an area, but I own that property. I have some
rights to that property.
LaMoreaux: You absolutely have.
Bob Griffiths: If I want to build a hog pen on my property, I want to have the
right to build a hog pen. I don't anymore. This coastal zone management
is just another thing saying I can't do this.
LaMoreaux: I think we need to sit down and talk about that type of problem
at a different time. I think we have got to stick to the issue here tonight.
Bob Griffiths: Let's just keep this thing as little as possible.
LaMoreaux: We have your point.

M. L. Aust: I am through being negative. I am going to be positive for a
minute. If we have the Corps of Engineers, who are extending their authority to
the tributary streams, why couldn't you then, since that seems to be the most
far reaching federal agency insofar as boundary is concerned, limit your boun-
daries to whatever the Corps of Engineers' boundaries are? I don't know how it
is defined adjacent to those streams, or how it will be affected there. Am I
in error in assuming that they are the most far reaching?
LaMoreaux: They could be the most far reaching, if the present legislation
that is being considered is passed.

MEETING PARTICIPANTS

Foley, Alabama

M. L. Aust, Jr. Fairly Chandler
Aust-Ponder Company Magnolia Springs Community
Post Office Box 236 Association
Daphne, Alabama 36526 Post Office Box 142
Magnolia Springs, Alabama 36555
C. E. Barnett
Barnett Mill Works, Inc. Cecil G. Chason
Water Route 10 City Attorney, City of Gulf Shores
Magnolia Springs, Alabama 36555 Post Office Box 458
Foley, Alabama 36535
Liz Bates
The Onlooker Edward A. Clark
Drawer C Baldwin County Wildlife Federation
Foley, Alabama 36535 Post Office Box 146
Silverhill, Alabama 36576
Mrs. Gould Beech
Magnolia Springs Garden Club Gene Cody
River Route, Box 43 Alabama Development Office
Magnolia Springs, Alabama 36555 State Planning Civision
State Capitol
Joe Beech Montgomery, Alabama 36130
Foley, Alabama 36535
J. P. Coleman
Dan A. Benton 119 South McKenzie Street
Bailey, Taylor & Benton Foley, Alabama 36535
Post Office Box 361
Fairhope, Alabama 36532 James J. Cooper
Mayor, City of Silverhill
Mrs. William A. Bodiford Post Office Box 1
Post Office Box 681 Silverhill, Alabama 36576
Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542
Harry E. Crawford
The Reverend William A. Bodiford Chairman, Bay Area Water, Sewer
Post Office Box 681 and Fire Protection District
Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542 407 South McKenzie Street
W. J. Bradford Foley, Alabama 36535
Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542 Bebe D. Daniel
Magnolia Springs Garden Club
Water Route, Box 144
Magnolia Springs, Alabama 36555

J. R. Diamond Verda Horne
Mobile County Baord of Health AlabAma Conservancy
248 Cox Street Alabama League of Women Voters
Mobile, alabama. 36604 708 Fairhope Avenue
Fairbope, Alabama 36532
C. J. Ebert, Jr.
Post Office Box 1784 Clarence C. Horton
Foley, Alabama 36535 Director of Public Relations, Town
of Gulf Shores
Frank J. Fabre Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542
Baskerville-Donovan Engineers
311 Gulf Breeze Parkway Willis Hyde
Gulf Breeze, Florida 32561 Alabama Development Office
State Planning Division
Les Farmer State Capitol
Post Office Box 704 Montgomery, Alabama 36130
Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542
Eugene Ingram
Richard G. Fifield Mayor, Town of Gulf Shores
Alabama Farm Bureau Federation Post Office Box 299
Post Office Box 11000 Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542
Montgomery, Alabama 36111
T. D. Johnson
N. W. Gamble Executive Director, Baldwin County
Route 3, Box 1264 Industrial Development Division
Foley, Alabama 36535 Post Office Box 27
W. J. Godard Fairhope, Alabama 36532
Fairhope Yacht Club Mrs. T. D. Johnson
Post Office Box 333 Post Office Box 27
Fairhope, Alabama 36532 Fairhope, Alabama 36532

Harris C. Grant Dianne Jones
Post Office Box 365 Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant
Silverhill, Alabama 36576 Consortium
Post Office Drawer AG
Donald Grantham Ocean Springs, Mississippi 39564
Route 2
Foley, Alabama 36535 George Kaiser
Route 1, Box 102
Robert Griffiths Elberton, Alabama 36530
Griffiths Bros. Farm
Route 1, Box 387 George Kaiser
Foley, Alabama 36535 Route 2, Box 23
Garrett Griggs Foley, Alabama 36535
Orange Beach Hiking Association Paul Karpa
Orange Beach, Alabama 36561 Star Route, Box 1069
Orange Beach, Alabama 36561
Richard Holk
Post Office Box 220 James H. Keeton
Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542 Water Route, Box 62
Magnolia Springs, Alabama 36555

Mrs. James H. Keeton G. M. McLeod
Water Route, Box 62 State Department of Conservation
Magnolia Springs, Alabama 36555 Star Route, Box 9
Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542
Frank Kury
WALA-TV Thomas A. McLeod
210 Government Street Post Office Box 396
Mobile, Alabama 36609 Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542

Mrs. Jean Kutack Mrs. Thomas A. McLeod
League of Women Voters Post Office Box 396
607 Hancock Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542
Fairhope, Alabama 36532
Arthur C. Maelender
Dr. Philip LaMoreaux Meyer Real Estate, Inc.
State Geologist, Alabama Post Office Box 238
Geological Survey Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542
Member, Alabama Coastal Area
Board Gil Melcher
Post Office Drawer 0 Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542
University, Alabama 35480 Mrs. Gil Melcher
Patricia Davis Laraway Star Route, Box 202
League of Women Voters of Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542
Baldwin County
Route 1, Box 153 R. C. Miller
Silverhill, Alabama 36576 R. C. Miller Agency
Post Office Box 217
Neil Lauder Foley, Alabama 36535
Baldwin Countv Commission
Star Route, Box 254 W William F. Moore
Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542 Suite 119, Bel Air Mall II
3100 Cottage Hill Road
Guy E. McAliley Mobile, Alabama 36606
Riviera Utilities
Post Office Box 550 Thomas B. Norton, M.D.
Foley, Alabama 36535 Gulf Shores Town Council
Post Office Box 475
Jesse D. McCallister Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542
Riviera Utilities
Route 2, Box 205 A Claude J. O'Connor
Foley, Alabama 36535 Councilman, Town of Gulf Shores
Post Office Box 276
Mrs. Jesse D. McCallister Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542
Route 2, Box 205 A
Foley, Alabama 36535 E. M. Passmore
Catholic Social Services
J. Baron McIlwain Route 1, Box 198
Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Summerdale, Alabama 36580
Consortium
Post Office Drawer AG
Ocean Springs, Mississippi 39564

James W. Pate H. E. Smith, Jr.
Route 1, Box 157 A Baldwin County Wildlife Federation
Foley, Alabama 36535 Mobile Press Register
Post Office Box 1053
W. K. Pearcy Foley, Alabama 36535
Post Office Box 55
Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542 Hattie Little Smith
South Baldwin Chamber of Commerce
H. A. Peters 111 117 North McKenzie Street
Baldwin County Wildlife Foley, Alabama 36535
Federation
Star Route, Box 105 A David R. Spivey
Orange Beach, Alabama 36561 Spivey Realty
Post Office Box 328
Jacob Ruegg Foley, Alabama 36535
Route 1, Box 395
Foley, Alabama 36535 Roy Spivey
Post Office Box 328
R. Sanders Foley, Alabama 36535
WALA-TV
210 Government Street Bill Starnes
Mobile, Alabama 36601 Alabama Development Office
State Planning Division
H. Sewell St. John, jr. State Capitol
Riviera Utilities Montgomery, Alabama 36130
Post Office Box 550
Foley, Alabama 36535 Neil G. Stevens
Shellene Scarbrough Summerdale, Alabama 36580
Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant R. E. Sullivan
Consortium Gulf Shores Planning Board
Post Office Drawer AG - Post Office Box 59
Ocean Springs, Mississippi 39564 Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542

Al Schneider Gerard W. Sweet
Route 1, Box 157 Callaway Real Estate
Foley, Alabama 36535 Post Office Box 434
Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542
oe E. Seward
Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Walter M. Tatum
Consortium Alabama Department of Conservation
Post Office Drawer AG Post Office Drawer 458
Ocean Springs, Mississippi 39564 Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542

Linda Ann Shumate Thomas J. Terrell
International Paper Company Post Office Box 1784
Post Office Box 170 Mobile, Alabama 36601
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507
C. L. Thompson
J. 0. Sims Baldwin County Wildlife and Conservation
Post Office Box 327 Association
Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542 Bay Minette, Alabama '36507

Courtney Trotter
Callaway Real Estate
Post Office Box 434
Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542

Dr. Sidney D. Upham
Director, Alabama Marine Environmental
Sciences Consortium
Member, Alabama Coastal Area Board
Post Office Box 386
Dauphin Island, Alabama 36528

Roland Walker
Star Route, Box 17
Orange Beach, Alabama 36561

Wade Ward
Meyer Real Estate
Post Office Box 238
Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542

W. P. Whiddon
Route 3, Box 2755
Foley, Alabama 36535

John Winefordner
Southern Services
Birmingham, Alabama 35202

City Courtroom, City Hall
Citronelle, Alabama
December 9, 1975
Opening Remarks: Bay Haas AGENDA
Commissioner,.Mobile County Commission
Member, Alabama Coastal Area Board

Introduction: Willis Hyde (not included in text)

Review of Boundary Proposals: Gene Cody (not included in text)

Questions, Comments and Statements by the Public

Conference Participants

OPENING REMARKS

Bay Haas
Commissioner, Mobile County Commission
Member, Alabama Coastal Area Board

Judging from the people here, all of the questions must have been
answered about coastal zone management at the first two meetings of
this series. There are some people I would like to introduce before
we begin. Next to me is Bill Starnes, representing Mr. Red Bamberg who
is Chairman of the Alabama Coastal Area Board and Director of the Alabama
Development Office. Hugh Swingle is here representing Mr. Claude Kelley,
Director of the Department of Conservation and a member of the Coastal
Area Board.
The purpose of these meetings is to discuss some tentative boundary
proposals that, hopefully, will be developed eventually into an area that
would be under the regulation of the Alabama Coastal Area Board. I'm going
to turn the meeting over to Mr. Willis Hyde, who is on the staff of the
Coastal Area Board in the Alabama Development Office. He will make a
presentation and answer any questions you might have.

QUESTIONS, COMMENTS AND STATEMENTS BY THE PUBLIC

Willis Hyde: At this time we will accept comments and questions from the
audience. We would like to restrict the topic to the coastal zone boundary,
rather taking the whole broad spectrum of coastal zone management.
I have a letter that I would like to read into the record from Anne W.
Amacker, Auburn, Alabama:

Dear Mr. Hyde: As a member of the League of Women Voters and
as a citizen born in Montgomery and at various times a resident
of Birmingham, Verbena, Selma, Mobile, and Auburn, I am writing
to express concern aboutthe protection and responsible use of
Alabama's coastal area. I hope this area can be kept in a con-
dition that will be good for posterity, as well as for the pre-
sent generation.
For the League, I have just written a letter to the members
of the Congressional Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee,
expressing some concern about this area. To you and through you
to members of the Coastal Zone Management Board with whom I want
you to share this letter, we members of the League of Women
Voters would like to say that we are in accord with the definition
of Alabama's coastal zone and the reasoning therefore proposed by
the citizens' group known as the Citizen's Alliance for Coastal
Zone Boundary Definition, whose spokesperson is Alicia Linzey.
The League is not affiliated with the Alliance.
Further, we would like to express to you our concern that our
State's coastal zone management does not apply to oil exploration.
Finally, we feel that the present constitution of the Alabama
Coastal Zone Management Board may not be consistent with the
federal law which calls for such boards to be independent. We feel
that this Board should not be located within any one agency or
office of the state government, but should be truly independent
and representative of a broad spectrum of the public, particularly
the public in the entire region to be impinged upon by potential
coastal or offshore developments.
We note that there is only one person from Baldwin County on
the Alabama Coastal Management Board. We realize that Legislators
are the people who must take care of some of these matters, but
we did want to convey our feelings and would be happy to receive
any information you may have on the matters we have mentioned.
Most particularly, we would appreciate being put on your mailing
list and so forth. Yours very sincerely, Anne W. Amacker, Auburn,
Alabama.

Alicia Linzey: My name is Alicia Linzey and I am from Mobile. The state-
ment that I am presenting now is a modification of a more detailed state-
ment that was presented at the 18 November, Mobile meeting. I am here
this evening as a spokesperson for a coalition of conservation groups
known as the Citizen's Coastal Zone Alliance. This Alliance was conceived
during the last weekend in September. At this moment, we represent 65,000
people who reside not only in south Alabama, but throughout the State as
well as in neighboring states. The Alliance currently consists of the
following organizations: The Alabama Conservancy, The Alabama Wildlife
Federation, The Mobile County Wildlife and Conservation Association, The
Mobile Bay Audubon Society, The Birmingham Audubon Society, The Save Our
Bay Club, The Chattahoochee Chapter of the Sierra Club (representing Georgia
and Alabama), and the Gulf Coast Regional C'onservation Committee of the
Sierra Club (representing Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and
Louisiana). To those unfamiliar with this roster, these organizations take
in a wide spectrum of conservation minded individuals, from the most idealistic
to the most pragmatic. Included are not only "little old ladies in tennis
shoes", but also hunters, fishermen, business and community leaders, educators,
scientists, and just plain folks. Our views are also concurred in either
fully or in part by a number of other groups, and these groups will inde-
pendently transmit their thoughts to the Coastal Area Board. This Alliance
.was put together in order to allow citizens' groups to take full advantage of
our right to participate in all phases of Alabama's coastal zone management
program, the first of which is drafting of a boundary definition.
The federal coastal zone management law gives little guidance on boundary
setting, but requires that a state's coastal zone take in shorelands, "the
uses of which have a direct and significant impact on the coastal waters."
Paraphrasing the language of the law, it is not our purpose just to set
a line on a map. That line must minimally take in those shorelands being used
in ways that have an effect on coastal waters. For example, industries dis-
charging to coastal waters; forest and land development practices that result
in erosion and siltation; draining, filling, or destruction of swamplands and
marshes; oil and gas production in offshore and inshore areas; and so on. It
must include also areas of particular natural value such as, for example, the
Mobile-Tensaw River Bottomlands, which has been listed in the National Registry
of Natural Landmarks by the U.S. Department of the Interior. A state, however ,
may set wider boundaries than those meeting the minimal requirements of the
federal law. I believe that some people have gotten the impression that a
coastal zone boundary line is a preservation line, but let me remind you that
the areas enclosed by the line will remain subject to the full spectrum of
current uses. Furthermore, it is unlikely that permits will be'required for
any uses that do not already require a permit from some other agency.
The Alabama Coastal Area Board received federal funding for its first year
of operation on 30 June 1974, and must have its management plan approved by
30 June 1977. Among early actions by the Board was the adoption of a preliminary
boundary definition for use in applying for federal funding. This preliminary
boundary consisted of three "tiers" of elevation, each with a differing degree
of management or control. Although boundaries based on contour lines are now
thought to be impractical, the "tiered" approach, or setting of boundaries for
differing levels of control, remains valid.

The Coastal Area Board subsequently decided to consider the three proposals
that have already been presented to you. Our own evaluation resulted in the
drafting of a counter proposal, which is contained in the map and boundary
definition that have been distributed. Copies of the full background statement
are also available. Please bear in mind that the map that you see is the result
of the input of all of the member organizations of our Alliance, and that it
has been fully approved by each of them individually.
In developing our boundary definition several guidelines were used. Because
we are a group of citizens for whom environmental concerns are paramount, our
most important premise was that the boundary be valid in an ecological sense.
Of equal concern was that the boundary be defensible in terms of the federal
law and its attendant rules and regulations. Neither have we been unaware of
the political and social pressures that hover in the background.
Because of the desirability of adopting a workable line, we have followed
the lead of the Coastal Area Board and chosen readily identifiable man-made
and physical features as a means of enclosing natural systems insofar as has
been possible. In trying to determine the proper placement of the line, we
were guided primarily by natural drainage patterns, considering that rivers,
streams and wetlands draining into coastal waters should be a part of the
coastal zone. We also took into consideration coastal zone definitions of
neighboring states, runoff patterns from agricultural lands, areas serviced
by sewage systems that outfall in coastal waterways, and the necessity for
including areas of unique natural, cultural, historical and recreational
significance.
We are adamant in our feeling that the Coastal Area Board proposals fall
short of taking in enough of the coastal watersheds to really control the
majority of uses impacting coastal waters. Also, the use of census enumeration
districts as boundary lines, although useful and convenient from several
viewpoints, is meaningless unless these districts can be aligned with natural
systems. Specifically these boundaries do not take in areas from which there
is or shortly will be direct sewage outfall to coastal waters. Neither would
they control uses affecting two of south Alabama's most valuable recreational
streams, the Escatawpa River in Mobile County and the Styx River in Baldwin
County. Legislation that would bring the Escatawpa River into the National
Wild and Scenic Rivers System is currently pending in Congress, and both
the Escatawpa and Styx Rivers have been designated by the State of Alabama as
candidates for wild, scenic, and recreational rivers status in a potential state
program. Also, rules and regulations (15 CFR 923.13) attendant to the federal
legislation outline eight areas of "particular concern" with the requirement
that a state include these areas within its coastal zone even though their uses
may not directly affect coastal waters. Among these eight areas of particular
concern are at least two that speak to this particular situation. Number 1,
which cites areas of unique natural habitat or scenic importance; and Number 3,
areas of substantial recreational value and/or opportunity. We suspect that
many interests would like to adopt a boundary that includes even less of Alabama's
coastal 'area than any of the Board proposals. It should be clear to you,
however, that the adoption of a narrower zone would defeat the purposes of the
federal and state legislation and, therefore, be unapprovable.
We find partial concurrence with the Coastal Area Board proposal that takes
in the entire two county area, but only if this area is to be designated as
having the highest or primary level of control under the Board's current defi-
nitions. However, we part company with the Board when we reach the Mobile-
Baldwin County line, and our boundary extends northward along the Alabama and

Tombigbee Rivers to the extent minimally necessary to control impacts on coastal
waters. Saying that our coastal zone is restricted to the two coastal counties
may be a convenient political decision, but this stance makes little sense
from a natural viewpoint, because the Alabama River forms the northern boundary
of Baldwin County. In essence, the Coastal Area Board is saying that they
claim control over lands and waters south of the river, but are not interested
in what happens on the north bank of the river. Since uses on both sides
impact the same water, this position is untenable. When you consider such
things as the locations of present and planned industries, impacts directly
and indirectly re 'sulting from the proposed Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway,
proposed oil and gas activities, and so on, it becomes obvious that we must
go farther north in order to exercise some control over the future of our
coastal area. The locks and dams on the Tombigbee and Alabama Rivers provide
the ideal northern terminu@s of our coastal zone, not only because the tidal
influence terminates here, but also because these sites provide a convenient,
identifiable boundary. You might also be interested to know that the area
between the rivers is replete with archeological remains of early Alabamians,
which gives it significance as "an area of particular concern" under the
federal regulations, specifically as an area of historical significance and
historical value. I will not go over with you every inch of our map,
because you and the Board members have been given a detailed boundary
description. I would reiterate, however, that we are proposing our entire
area as a primary control area and that we have selected those identifiable
man-made and physical features which conform to natural systems and patterns
of shoreland use that impact coastal waters, as well as taking into consideration
areas of particular concern as outlined in federal regulations.
Let me comment on the matter of tiered, or differing levels of control.
Although we have designated our entire area as having a primary level of control,
we are not opposed to the concept of differing levels of control for different
areas of the coastal zone. However, the current Board stance is to define a
secondary zone as an area of no control and subject only to coordination with
other state agencies. This is in contrast to their original definition of
secondary, which called for control over uses that affect the primary area. We
recognize that some areas within our boundary could reasonably be subject to
a level of control less than a primary level, but not under current definitions
being used by the Board.
I realize that there may be many people here tonight who wish that they
had never heard of coastal zone management. It is unfortunate that the level of
misinformation surrounding this issue has been such that a great deal of emotional
opposition to any coastal zone plan has developed. We believe that those of
you from rural areas in the coastal zone should look toward this law, not as a
threat, but as a potential instrument for protecting your present way of life.

Hyde: Are there others who would like to come forward and make a statement
at this time?
R. B. Jefferies: I am fron Citronelle. I don't know whether I represent anybody
or not. I have been with the Mobile County Soil and Water Conservation
Commission since 1958 as a Supervisor. On your trip from here to Mobile, during
most any weather, you pass over .some very beautiful, clear streams. The only
one that isn't that way is the one that directly heads up into Citronelle. It
receives much erosion from the oil fields, roads, and things like that. We are

366 feet on some maps and 362 feet on others above sea level. This is the
highest point on the Gulf Coast until you get to the Carolinas. We are a long
way above sea level. I imagine you hit tidewater when you get quite a ways
down the road, probably close to Eight Mile. This (pointing to the map) is
the breaking of the water here in Citronelle. Everything that is on that
side of the tracks goes to the Tombigbee River, and everyth-ing on this side
either goes to the Mobile River or the Escatawpa River. The Escatawpa River,
commonly called Dog River up here, is one of the prettiest rivers in the state,
and it takes a tremendous rain to ever make it muddy, murky, or even a little
dark. The main reason of that is that we have very little agricultural activi-
ties in this territory. However, I am getting off the subject here.
The reason I said that is because I believe that it would not be practical
to put anything as high as we are above sea level into a coastal zone. Now,
of course, the more farmers that you can let along and not fool with, the better
off you are. I just wanted to bring that up. You may recognize the fact that
we are that high above sea level. We are the highest place on this railroad
from Mobile to St. Louis. I am interested in this for the good of all people,
having worked as long as I have in conservation. We want to do it the easiest
way and the best way. When it comes to it, I would like to do what I can do
to help. Thank you.
Hyde: Thank you, Mr. Jefferies. Are there others who would like to make a
statement or ask a question?

Name not known: Were the citizens aware of this meeting?
Hyde: Yes, sir, the citizens should have been aware of it. We attempted to
publicize it. We sent letters to all those people who had made any indication
they might be interested in coastal zone management. We published announce-
ments in the Mobile papers and the Washington County paper, as well as the local
papers all around.
We realize, just as Mr..Jefferies pointed out, that this is an area that
many people would not consider coastal zone, and we don't know if we consider
it coastal zone or not. That is why we are trying to get comments such as
yours. I wish there had been people here to make comments one way or the other.
I have received a number of letters, most of which were just asking for
information, but the letter I read previously will be put into the record. If
anyone would care to write, we would certainly welcome their comments. If you
know anyone who would like to express an opinion, we would like to include it in
our analysis of the public's opinion.
The reason we are having these meetings is that we would like to find out
what the people want. After we conclude this series of meetings, we plan to put
all of this information together. The comments that have been received in these
five meetings will be incorporated into one document. This will be available
to all those participants and any others who would like to have copies.
Do we have other comments? If not, we will conclude our meeting for this
evening. Thank you very much for coming. We appreciate your interest. The
next public meeting will be held tomorrow evening at 7:30 in Bayou La Batre.
The meeting format will be the same as tonight. Anyone who is interested and
would like to make the trip to Bayou La Batre will have an opportunity to
make comments, just as you did here.

MEETING PARTICIPANTS

Citronelle, Alabama

H. T. Babcock Dr. Donald W. Linzey
Citronelle City Council 6312 St. Moritz Drive
Post Office Box 53 Mobile, Alabama 36608
Citronelle, Alabama 36522
J. Baron McIlwain
Gene Cody Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant
Alabama Development Office Consortium
State Planning Division Post Office Drawer AG
State Capitol Ocean Springs, Mississippi 39564
Montgomery, Alabama 36130
W. D. Mims
Bay Haas Route 36
Mobile County Commission Creola, Alabama 36525
Coastal Area Board
Post Office Box 1443 William F. Moore
Mobile, Alabama 36601 Suite 119, Bel Air Mall II
3100 Cottage Hill Road
L. Willis Hyde Mobile, Alabama 36606
Alabama Development Office
State Planning Division R. D. Russell
State Capitol International Paper Company
Montgomery, Alabama 36130 Post office Box 2448
Mobile, Alabama 36601
R. B. Jefferies
Mobile County Soil and Water Joe E. Seward
Conservation District Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant
Post Office Box 485 Consortium
Citronelle, Alabama 36522 Post Office Drawer AG
Ocean Springs, Mississippi 39564
Dianne Jones
Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Bill Starnes
Consortium Alabama Development Office
Post Office Drawer AG State Planning Division
Ocean Springs, Mississippi 39564 State Capitol
Montgomery, Alabama 36130
Alicia V. Linzey
Mobile Bay Audubon Society Hugh Swingle
6312 St. Moritz Drive Alabama Department of Conservation
Mobile, Alabama 36608 Post Office Box 188
Dauphin Island, Alabama 36528

Jeannette Tootle
Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant
Consortium
Post Office Drawer AG
Ocean Springs, Mississippi 39564

James D. Turner
State Oil and Gas Board
Post Office Box 216
Citronelle, Alabama 36522

C. W. Wade
Alabama Department of Conservation
Post Office Box 188
Dauphin Island, Alabama 36528

City Courtroom, City Hall
Bayou La Batre, Alabama
December 10, 1975

AGENDA

Opening Remarks: Dr. Sidney Upham -
Director, Alabama Marine Environmental
Sciences Consortium
Member, Alabama Coastal Area Board

Introduction: Willis Hyde (not included in text)

Review of Boundary Proposals: Gene Cody (not included in text)

Questions, Statements and Comments by the Public

Meeting Participants

OPENING REMARKS

Dr. Sidney D. Upham
Director, Alabama Marine Environmental Sciences Consortium
Member, Alabama Coastal Area Board

I would like to welcome you to this Coastal Area Board meeting tonight
and introduce some of the members or alternates that are here. On my right
is Bill Starnes, who is Director of the Planning Division of the Alabama
Development Office. He is representing Mr. Red Bamberg, Chairman of the
Coastal Area Board. Next to him is Paul Moser, who is representing Dr. Philip
LaMoreaux, State Geologist. Then we have Willis Hyde, who is on the staff of
the Coastal Area Board. On My left is Hugh Swingle, representing Claude Kelley
of the Department of Conservation. Next to him is Gene Cody, who is also on
the staff of the Coastal Area Board.
This is not a formal hearing. Rather it is a meeting to discuss some
tentatively proposed coastal boundaries. It is preliminary in that we would
like to get your feelings on what these boundaries should be. We will, in
case you are not familiar with the coastal area, have a brief discussion of
our coastal zone management program by Mr. Hyde. Then we will go over some
of the proposed boundaries that were set up by the Coastal Area Board merely
as a starting point for something to discuss.
In the handout material that you received when you registered,there is a
card which can be used if you want to make a statement or ask a question.
Somebody will collect those cards at the end of the program. We will then try
to answer whatever questions you might have. If you do want to make a
statement, please limit it to five minutes. When you ask a question, please
;state your name and organization you represent, if you represent one. We will
be taping this and would like to know who is making the statement or asking
the question. I will now turn the meeting over to Mr. Hyde who will give you a
brief discussion on the background of the coastal area.

QUESTIONS, STATEMENTS AND COMMENTS BY THE PUBLIC

Dr. Sidney Upham: Before we have questions, Jerry Mitchell, leader of
the coastal zone management program for the Mississippi Marine Resources
Council, is with us tonight. Jerry, could you give us a brief discussion
outlining where Mississippi is in this coastal zone boundary question.
Jerry Mitchell: Mississippi is perhaps thirty days behind the State of
Alabama concerning its coastal zone boundaries. Our Council is now going
through various processes of coastal zone boundary determination. We will
be having a series of public meetings such as this one in Mississippi begin-
ning at the end of January. We anticipate several types of approaches similar
to this. We have a larger planning area than the Coastal Area Board.
When I am talking about planning area, I mean that we are looking at all the
lands and waters within six counties. This includes the three coastal counties
and the three adjacent counties to the north of the coastal counties. Somewhere
we feel our boundaries will fall within this area. I think our schedules
are somewhat similar to Alabama's.
Upham: Thank you. If you have any written questions, will you pass them
into the center and somebody will pick them up. Miss Linzey, would you
like to make a statement?

Aliciz Linzey: (See Citronelle meeting for text of Ms. Linzey's statement)

Mark Nelson: I have several questions to ask and a few comments to make. My
name is Mark Nelson, and I do not represent any designated group. I just repre-
sent myself and a few concerned people.
First, I'd like to talk about the sincerity of the people in Bayou La Batre.
These people make their living off the ocean, and they have been here for years.
They know the impact of pollution, they know the cost of that pollution, and ,
they know the cost of people not being concerned with their environment. They
also know the cost of economics. They also know the cost of other factors that
can go into the fishing industry. These people are, indeed, concerned and
sincere about their environment. However, we have heard a lot of laws talked
about tonight, but we haven't heard any interpretations of those laws. You
can get five different people reading the same law and you will get five dif-
ferent interpretations. We should like to know how these laws are going to be
interpreted in the future and what implications it has for this.
Secondly, I have several questions. I'd like to find out who makes the
final decision on the boundary. I don't believe it's clear to a lot of people
who is going to make the final decision.
Next, what are some criteria for coastal zone management? (A) Has a defi-
nition of what shall constitute permissible land and water uses within the coastal
zone, which has a direct and significant impact on the coastal waters, been made?

(B) Has an inventory of natural and man-made coastal resources been made as
manifested in the Act? (C) According to the Office of Coastal Zone Management
Boundary Principles and Acceptable Inland Boundaries, Page 2, Paragraph 3,
"before a state can determine the inland boundaries for management purposes ,
it must determine which uses are to be controlled and the location of those
uses.11 We would like to know if this has been done, and specifically, what
are they talking about?
Thirdly, I'd like to talk about pollution control. (A) Is There a
program in Alabama to control nonpoint 'sources of pollution, specifically, the
agricultural runoff sediments, pesticide uses, etc.? (B) Will the coastal
zone management program encompass the control of nonpoint sources of pollution?
Specifically, the Act in 923-11(a)-l calls for the control of theshoreline, the
uses of which have a direct and significant impact upon the coastal waters.
I am talking about agricultural runoff as manifested in this Act. Now, to the
extent that these people want to control any particular part of the coastal
zone, why are they not going to control the entire coastal impact area? In
other words, are they going to control agricultural sediment that is going to
occur in one part of the county and not control agricultural sediment in
another part of the county that happens to not be in the coastal zone? Indeed,
it is going to affect this coastal part of the county.
Finally, what implications does the Act have in terms of the "taking"
issue? Specifically, do the courts interpret the Fifth Amendment of the Consti-
tution to define a "taking" as "unreasonable restraint on land use"? In other
words, is someone, who is going to be restrained of the use of a particular
area, going to be compensated for that restraint?
I support the Citizen's Coastal Zone Alliance. I believe that it is
counterproductive to have an arbitrary decision on what is going to be controlled
and not controlled to that extent. The Federal Act calls for a comprehensive
program to control the management area. How can you have a comprehensive
program to control the management area if you're going to use just geographical
discretion? Why not have ecological discretion? That is what the Act
manifests. That is what ought to be done, and not jusc have arbitrary geo-
graphical discretion. It should be an ecological discretion. That's all.
Thank you.
Upham: That was part statement and part question, and we thank you for the
statement, because that is what we are trying to get at. As I said before,
these things that we brought up this evening are starting points for arguments,
and I think you have taken that. On the questions, you brought in a lot more
than just the boundaries. We would like to hold this to boundaries tonight,
if possible. But we are working on some of the other things that he was
talking about.
Hyde: I think we should take the questions one at a time. I don't think I
could attempt to answer them all at once.
Mark Nelson: Basically, what I want to know is why isn't the nonpoint pollution
or the agricultural runoff, that has a significant impact on the coastal area,-
going to be controlled just like any other part of the coastal zone? According
to this definition, the people who live in this area are guilty of misconduct
or misuse of the coastal zone, while the people who are farming further up here
and letting the sediment and pesticides come down the streams and destroy the
estuaries are not being condemned for that.

Upham: Aren't you saying, then, that you feel this particular bounda .ry isn't
big enough?
Mark Nelson: That particular one, yes. I agree with the Citizen's Coastal Zone
Alliance.
Hyde: I think I can respond to that. We are not attempting to supercede, in
any way, the activities of the Alabama Water Improvement Commission. The nonpoint
source runoff and other stream pollution comes under the Water Improvement
Commission. I won't agree or disagree whether this is a large enough boundary.
But if you want to project this upward, everything that falls on Alabama and
erodes soil anywhere in the drainage basins of the Tombigbee or Alabama Rivers
could also be implied to come under this. This would mean that we should include
the whole State of Alabama, except for the Tennessee Valley, as part of the coastal
zone. Now, I think that is probabaly not practical.
Mark Nelson: Well, administratively it might not be practical, but ecologically
it would certainly be practical to control it all, wouldn't it?
Hyde: Politics has been defined as the art of the possible. Whether we like
it or not, we are dealing in a realistic, practical, political world. I can't
argue your ecological consideration, but we must also attempt to deal with what
we can practically implement and what would be practically acceptable to the
people. The State of Washington, at one time, defined their coastal zone back
to a third tier. It went back to what would be comparable to all the State
except the Tennessee Valley. The federal people said that this was too much
for a coastal zone.
Mark Nelson: Specifically, as definedin the Act, what uses are going to be
controlled and what uses are not going to be controlled?
Upha : You're getting away from the boundaries again.
Mark Nelson: No.
Upham: Yes, you're too far away from the boundaries on that.
Mark Nelson: My point was that if you haven't determined what uses have an
impact on the ecology, then how can you draw an arbitrary boundary.
Upham: Well, this is the chicken and egg situation. We are trying to work on
the boundaries right now, and this is the point that we should be concerned
with tonight.
Mark Nelson: But uses, I believe, should determine the boundary.
Upham: Well, then, perhaps we should change our minds and not work on the
boundaries anymore, but go ahead and get the uses defined first.
Mark Nelson: No, no, no. The only thing the law calls for is a definition of
the uses and a definition of what is going to be controlled and not controlled.
Now the law calls for that, and . . .
Uph : It's a question of which we do first. If you think, perhaps, that we
should consdier the uses first before we set the boundaries, that might be the
way we should go.
Hyde: For a point of information, we are presently trying to gather technical
and background information to determine what should be permissible uses. Now
this, it may seem is a simple thing, but to try to satisfy 50 people in this
room is difficult. To try to satisfy all those people who might be included
in the defined coastal zone is impossible. So you have to make a decision
which way to go and we made the decision to attempt to define the boundary and
then work on permissible land and water uses.

Mark Nelson: Who is OCZM?
Hyde: Office of Coastal Zone Management.
Mark Nelson: Is that a federal agency?
Hyde: That is a federal agency.
Mark Nelson: Now, I quoted directly from that. It says, "before a state can
determine the inland boundaries for management purposes, it must determine
which uses are to be controlled and locate those uses." That's what the OCZM
states. That is what the law states.
Hyde: Well, that's true if you want to go to the Alabama Law. I don't think we
need to belabor this point one way or another. This is an administrative
decision that has been made. The state law says that the first thing you do is
determine the boundaries.
Mark Nelson: I skipped my first question, which was who makes the final deci-
sion on the boundary?
Upham: The Coastal Area Board and the public.
Mark Nelson: Then there will be a referendum?
aham: There probably won't be a referendum, but there will be a hearing
Mark Nelson: I think that's about it. Thank you.
Hyde: Thank you for your questions. They have been well thought out questions.

Upham: Does anyone else have any questions that they's like to bring up at
th@s time?
Ray Horn: I think Alicia Linzey gave us a little leeway as to what we can and
cannot say here tonight. It seems that she talked about everything but sex. I
don't agree with all her "do good" organizations and things like that, but I do
have a lot more respect for her. She lives on San Moritz Drive in Mobile. These
things are affecting us. We live here. This is our home, and this is our land.
And then we have to have people like Congress and the Alabama Legislature come
in here and tell us how to live arid tell us what we're going to do with our
land. Now, if the Congress of the United States and if the Legislature of
Alabama would have come down here and bought this when they decided what to do
with it, or if Ms. Linzey can afford to buy it, then nobody would object as to
what they'd do. But they are talking about our land, where we live, where we've
lived, where our parents have lived, where my grandparents and their grand-
parents have lived.
These are the things you are talking about. They just set up a (I don't
know, but I guess the government did this, since they get blamed for everything
else) policing committee to tell us what we're going to do. Alright, the
Director of the Alabama Development Office, I don't know who that is and could
care less, and it goes on down. Mr. Kelley is an outstanding man. I have no
control over Mr. Kelley, but he's a fine man. He's the only one on the Coastal
Area Board that I know. I get to vote on only one man on the whole Coastal
Area Board, the County Commissioner. I don't know which one it is. There is
one I don't like and one I do like, and you can bet your bottom dollar it will
be the one I don't like. I'll go up there and talk about what I can do with
my land.
We in Bayou La Batre sometimes have a lot to put up u-ith. When yatll
come down here and have meetings or you have them in Foley and Robertsdale and
all of those places, we're not interested in where you're getting the money.
We know you're getting paid or you wouldn't be here. And you took 30 minutes
to tell us that.

Upham: I'd like to take exception with that. The Coastal Area Board members
don't get a cent. Not any member of it.
Ray Horn: You're not getting paid, mister?
Upham: I'm not getting paid.
Ray Horn: I didn't ask you, Doctor.
Hyde: I'm not a member of the Coastal Area Board.
Ray Horn: Well, you're the one that told us where the money is coming from.
And this other man over here doesn't feel like we can read a line. We can't
do too much more, but we can read lines.
Now we're not big welfare people down here in Bayou La Batre. We work for
a living. We have a lot of independent business people that start our real poor.
They'll get them a trailer. Doctor, you've seen this, since you live in Mobile
County. Then they'll get them an oyster boat and start catching oysters. I
saw this just yesterday. And they'll bring those oysters home and the wives
will sit there with the baby, and she'll hull the oysters while that old fool
is out there getting some more oysters for her to hull. I know that's against
the Board of Health regulations, but it's the way they do. I asked, "You
know, that looks like kind of a hard row to plow." She said, "Yeah, but, you
know, we've been working on getting us a house. Then we're going to get us
enough land so we can put an oyster shop on the back of it. And then we will
be successful." With this bunch of bureaucrats that we're going to have regu-
lating this poor ole soul, she might as well forget that thing and go on out
there tomorrow and apply for that welfare. You know, you get our Congressman
(and it makes me so mad, I voted for him every time) and come election time,
he gets up there in that TV, that boob tube. He sounds good and looks good,
and he's sharp. He talks about the poor welfare people. Well, I know some
of these welfare people.
Upham: We're not talking about welfare here.
Ray Horn: Yes, sir, but it really relates to ya'll. And he talks about how we
need to get rid of this welfare, but then at the same time he votes for some-
thing like this. He creates a bureaucratic welfare that we'll never have
an end to--people who won't get out and work, but will get up and administer
to us about something that we own, that we worked our lifetime for. We don't
like it. And I'll say this before you stop me. I want the whole state to be
in this zoning thing. I want everybody to put up with it. Thank you.
Upham: Just remember when you think about it that this is not a bureaucratic
situation that you've talked about at all. If we were all good citizens and
minded our own business, we wouldn't need any police, would we? But we have
them. If you live in the coastal area, you know what's happening to it. You
can see it, and if you don't see it here, you can go places where they have
let it go and see what has happened. What we're thinking about tonight and in
coastal zone administration is to try and have an intelligent plan which will
keep our coastal zone the way we want it. I live in the coastal area. I like
the coastal area, and I would hate to see it change. That's why I'm here
tonight.
Another thing is that you've got to look into the future. In ten or
fifteen years we may almost double the number of people living in the coastal
area. What's going to happen if we just let the whole thing go and not worry
about it. Should we do that, or should we have an intelligent plan? That's
all this is. We're not going to take anything away from you or anything like
that. If you do think that, then you have not read the law through correctly.

Russell Steiner: My name is Russell Steiner with Steiner Shipyard. Just
recently we purchased some property in the City of Bayou La Batre as an indus-
trial site. We went through the Corps of Engineers and the State for
permits. I'm sure you, Dr. Upham, have received a letter concerning our problem
of the land that was taken away from us. We purchased this property and later
on they came in and said it's a swamp area. But we got aerial photos
(not understandable on tapes) because no one was right there at that time.
The State came down (which I have letters) and through politics tried to take
some more property away from me which was right in between two businesses
going in force right now. And finally I had to negotiate and had to give
rights ( and I have pictures of this) to the State and pull dirt back and plant
marsh grass out on a certain area of land that we paid a good price of money
for. Any you are taking something. It happened to us, and I've got proof
here and letters. You, Dr. Upham, have a copy of this letter, which was a very
poor letter written from the Attorney General. And I believe, Mr. Willis Hyde,
you've got a copy of it. Are you familiar with the letter?
Hyde: No, I am sorry. I probably have a copy of it, but I'm not familiar
with it.
Russell Steiner: Could I show you a copy of the letter.
Hyde: Yes, sir, we would be happy to see it.
Russell Steiner: Do you think this is a real nice letter to write to a tax
paying citizen?
Upham: We're getting away from the issue.
Russell Steiner: It's what you're doing, sir.
Upham: No, we're getting away from what we're trying to do tonight. We are
going to have other meetings that will take up things like this. But I would
like to keep this meeting on the boundaries as much as possible.
Russell Steiner: Well, we had the boundary, and the way ya'll have got it, it
doesn't make any difference to us because we're going to get what you said
anyway. (tapes not understandable) , and then tell us what you're going to do.
Upham: Let me answer this from the other viewpoint. If there were no regula-
tions, and anybody that wanted to fill the marshes and build buildings and so
forth on them could, eventually we wouldn't have any.
Judy McConnell: What would happen is we lost all our rights. That's what it
is, the rights of owning property.
Upham: No, it's not. We're not talking about that at all. If you lose the
marshlands, you lose your fisheries.
Russell Steiner: The only thing I'm trying to say, sir, is that basically the
property I was on was not really a marshland. Now if you were talking about an
island, and if I had done this on an island, you would have a right to stop
me, because I took an island out there that was all marshland and wasn't developed.
But I was in a developed area. If it would not have been for the Corps of
Engineers, I feel, going to try (tapes not understandable) , the State would
have taken the whole pieceofproperty. You should have seen the cat that came
down and tried to take all my land.
Upham: Well, I certainly hope nothing like that happens with us.
Russell Steiner: I have some pictures and I have an area down there where I
had to get a bulldozer and replant some grass. I am right next to the State
docks.
Upham: I can't answer that question. I have no right to. Are there any
other questions?

Judy McConnell: First, I'd like to know when these hearings were announced
and where and how they were announced?
Hyde: Gene Cody, I think, might be able to answer that.
Gene Cody: First of all, the use of the word hearing is incorrect. They have
not been advertised as hearings, although some people have used that synono-
mous with meeting. This is a public meeting because it is not a formal hearing
and is not conducted as a formal hearing. This meeting is to solicit discus-
sion and get ideas for further development of the proposal or similar proposals.
Judy McConnell: Well, when was this announcement made?
Cody: The Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Consortium has had administrative input
to these meetings by setting up the arrangements for the facilities, recording,
preparing summaries, and so forth. They sent letters to an enormous list of
people who were at previous meetings and conferences over the past year and
a half. Also they went to various organizations and compiled extensive lists
and mailed out the information on these meetings. Prior to the first meeting
of this series of five, the Alabama Development Office Publicity and Information
Division, put out news releases to 17 newspapers, weeklies and dailies, that
circulate in this two county area. They sent releases to 13 radio and TV
stations, including Biloxi and Pensacola. Follow-up releases were made just
prior to each meeting as it takes place on the schedule.
Judy McConnell: How were these lists compiled? Were they just organizations or
did you specifically try to get in touch with individuals that own property
within the boundary you were considering? Just how could my name get on a list
if I weren't aware that a bill had even been passed to do what this has been
doing?
Cody: Now, you're going back to the bill, and that's going beyone the realm
of priority, too.
Judy McConnell: I didn't even know this existed until I saw an article in the
November 16 edition of our Sunday paper telling of a November 18 meeting at
the Hilton Inn. This is the first time that I knew that any bill had been
passed. And that's what I had been wondering. Just how could the general
public, the property owners, who are the main ones that are concerned with the
control of their property, be notified that all these different agencies
and bureaus . . .
Hyde: If I may come in, Gene, I think you have answered the question. That's
exactly the way we have been trying to get the information out to the people.
And you responded to it, apparently, by reading that in the newspaper. No,
we did not go to the property owners list in Mobile and Baldwin Counties.
We don't have the st.Aff to do it. Mr. Cody and I are the staff of this program,
and you can see that that would be a laborious job. But we have attempted,
through all the public media, to announce these meetings. The list that
Mr. Cody was speaking of was compiled primarily from the South Alabama Regional
Planning Commission list which they have developed over the last several years
and by lists of names that we have compiled from previous conferences. We
would be more than happy for you to supply us with names of everybody you know
who would be interested, and we will send them a notice of everything we do.
Judy McConnell: I'd like to be on the list for one. And what I was referring
to was that I noticed in the federal law that it says these announcements
should be made 30 days prior to any hearing.

Hyde: Mr. Cody defined that these are not hearings. These announcements were
made 30 days, I think, prior to this meeting. The first announcement went out
before November 16. We attempted, as best we could, to notify the public of
that meeting. We're open to any suggestions that you might have.
Judy McConnell: I'm very concerned about this bill. It is in great violation
of our Constitutional right in that we are a republic. In a republic, an indi-
vidual has the freedom, the liberty, to own and to control his own land, and
there is no state planning that will control that land for him. When state
planning comes in and controls a private individual's property, that is
socialism,on the way to communism. We are on the eve of celebrating our 200th
anniversary as a republic, and I'm afriad that we already have laws on the books
that make us not a republic but a socialistic state. I think everyone should
be aware of this, and we should try to stop planning for the individual but
plan with the individual. Spend time and money to contact us personally,
and not let the intellectuals get together and tell us what is best.
Hyde: I appreciate your saying that, because that's exactly the reason we
are here this evening. We're trying to get to the people and we're solicit-
ing your comments.
Judy McConnell: The federal bill (CZM Act of 1972) says that it is to establish
a national policy and develop a national program for the management, beneficial
use, protection and development of the land and water resources of the nation's
coastal zone and for other purposes. That "and for other purposes" is very,
very bad. Just what does that take in?
Hyde: I'm sorry, but I cannot define that. I am not an attorney. I would
like to add one other thing. I do not disagree with any of the things that you
have said. I think you are completely correct in many of your views, but this
is not the place to change those things. If you want to change the law, then
you should contact your State Legislators and National Congressmen. That is
where to change the law. Tonight we are simply responding to an Act that has
been passed, and we've been given the responsibility, whether we like it or
not, to carry it out. If you want to change the Act, we are not the people who
can change it.
Judy McConnell: I realize that, but the reason I'm saying this is you haven't
thought along those lines. I know there is a lot of good that is intended by
this law. But i just wanted to bring it to your attention that this is a
(tapes not understandable) to us. Please go as slow as possible until we can
get that law taken off the books.
Upham: Are there more questions?

Hyde: I have a couple of questions here that were passed in, and I will attempt
to answer them. The first question by JUDY STOUT asks, "If the Alabama Act
1274 specifies that oil and gas exploration, superport, and so forth are not
affected, why is the inclusion of these areas a positive feature of any boundary?
This seems to be deceptive." The second question by J.R. DIAMOND of the Mobile
County Board of Health says, "Each of your three plans has listed a positive
stated consideration that it include areas that wit.1 be affected by oil and
gas development, onshore and offshore, Ameraport, and so forth. This appears
to be in direct contradiction to parts of the Alabama law."
We didn't intend to be deceptive. The State law, Act 1274, has been
reviewed at the federal level and has been found to be deficient in some areas.
One of these is the list of exceptions that's included in it, particularly as
it relates to oil and gas development. The Legislators from this area, two in

the House and one in the Senate, introduced bills in the past Regular Session
and the fifth Special Session to eliminate some of these exceptions. Those
bills did not pass. Whether they ever will, I don't know. But at the time
we were working on this, we were cognizant of the fact that the State law
excepted those things. We were also cognizant of the fact that if we ever
develop a viable coastal zone plan, those things have to be included in it.
Upham: I don't know whether the report on the Stratton Commission is still
available, but when Congress really wants to find out about something, they
can. They can be the best informed body of men and women in the world. When
this whole thing started there was a study being made by some of the foremost
scientists in the country, who lived inthe coastal area and had been involved
in marine work all of their lives. The report by this Commission is the most
beautiful piece of reading, and it explains all of the reasons why this Act
came about. If you can possibly get it, it would give you a background of this
whole business.

J. E. Green: I'd like to make a statement. You mentioned about we should
contact our Legislators to get the law changed. Well, this to me is like inte-
gration and busing. They divide and conquer. (Tapes not understandable) , but
now they're getting it. Now you take a little bit of this thing, put that under
the control of this agency, and as soon as that's in control, then they'll
widen it up and take in a little more. You can't get enough Senators and
Congressmen to go along with us.

Clarence Steiner: I wanted to make a remark on this marsh situation. If it
hadn't been filled in, there would be no Bayou La Batre. When I lived here,
there was marsh on both sides of (Tapes not understandable) . As far as
environment, what about this shopping center, Bel Air Mall? If they hadn't
cleaned up the swamp, there would be no Mall just like there would be no
Bayou La Batre. Take a little place like that where they want to plant marsh
where it has already been filled in on each side. Now if there is any justice
to that, then I don't want any.

Mark Nelson: I have a question and then a comment. Why do you have boundaries?
Upham: Mostly for administrative purposes. We have been charged to come up
with a plan for the coastal zone. This is a plan to insure that the coastal
area will grow in a good and normal way. If a business or industry comes in, it
will be placed where it should be, where the land can stand it, because some
of the land cannot take it. In some areas it won't even take housing, and
this housing will deteriorate under the stress. Itts the coastal area that we
are primarily concerned with, and that's why we have to set boundaries. We
cannot just not set any boundaries and go the whole state, because we could
not manage it administratively.
Mark Nelson: You can't include the whole state? Why not? Every bit of it
drains down ...
Upham: I know, but I think probably if we did that, we'd be ridden out of town
on a rail. You have a right to your own opinion. What I am trying to tell you
is that there is a reason for this coastal zone management. The reason that
I am here is because I think the coastal area is good and I live here. I hope
it stays the way it is, and this is what I am going to try to do. That's why
I'm here.

Name not known: The general purpose of this is to protect the environment? Is
that right? The coastal environment?
Upham: That's one of the purposes.
Name not'known: We'll, what are all of them?
Upham: That's the first thing in the law.
Name not known: Well, if your purpose is to check, I don't think you should
have a boundary. What if you have a problem somewhere upriver or all the way up
into Birmingham where some company can dump whatever they want in the rivers?
Then when it gets down here into your boundary, what can you do about it? You
canit clean it up.
Upham: Anything over which any state or federal agency has control must conform
to the state's coastal zone management plan. We expect cooperation.

G. C. Dempsey: Maybe there's a lot of this that I don't quite understand yet.
I might be wrong, but take this man over here. This commission seems to hold
him back from his building up his land as he sees a need for it. By the same
token,take Gulfport and Biloxi over in Mississippi. If that beach and coast-
line had not been built up by man, man's hands, what would the beach be down
there like today if they didn't fill it in and build it up?
Upham: That's a very good point. And that's restoration of the coastal area.

Name not known: We are all concerned. The law is there. It is in Congress,
and it's on the books. This is going to happen and the best thing I can say
is let's make it happen the best way possible. Get the best results out of it.
Keep an eye out for the person's civil rights.
.Upham: Well, let me tell you that as far as we're involved, and I think I can
speak for most of the people on the Board, we are concerned. And we are concerned
that we find out what you want. That's why we are having all these meetings.
It's no fun for us to go to these meetings. I pay my own way, and I take the
time to do it. I have to study and I have to sit up and argue with you people
when I get here. But we're bringing you the message, and you're giving us the
answers. This is what we're trying to do. That's what this is all about. The

They're all going to make an impression. That's what we're here for.
things that you've brought up tonight have been recorded, and will be gone over.

Lorraine Revel: We feel that we're just very, very fortunate in being able to
own a little bit of property and live on the coastline like this. My recommen-
dation is that the whole state be taken in, because we get everything from all
upstate. There are waterways all through the state, and I don't see why we
should suffer and be restricted in what we do with our land when a lot of that
comes from up the country. I think that the whole state should suffer. And
then you would have more people who would become more involved, because they
would realize that this is trying to be a land use type thing with the Federal
Government.
Upham: I certainly hope that you don't suffer, because I look at this Coastal
Zone Management Act as a saviour of the coastal zone. If we don't do something,
weire not going to have any coastal zone. I am positive of that. You can see
where this has happened in other states. Right now, we're in good shape, and
other states are in far worse shape than we are.
Lorraine Revel: You say we're not going to suffer. I'm sorry, I disagree with
you.
Upham: I know. I can't understand it.

Lorraine Revel: You say we're not going to suffer, but the article in your law
says that we must get a permit before we can do these regulated activities. Do
you realize the power that you eight men must have in this boundary zone?
I just can't imagine. You will have more power than the Governor or even the
President, really, because we will have to petition you, make application
on whatever we want to do of these regulated activities, which you have not
named yet.
Upham: Now we have come to you with the boundaries, and we will come to you
with the regulated activities, so you're going to have your way. What you put
into this Board is what's coming out. Remember that.

Jack Rudloe: I'm Jack Rudloe of Gulf Specimen Company. I'm sort of a neighbor
of yours from Panacea, Florida. I feel I have a little bit of input here
tonight, because we both share the same waterway. To the gentleman back there
and everyone else who is so concerned about ownership of land, I feel I have a
joint ownership of the water. He owns tidal lands, but all of our public
waters wash on these tidal lands. Those streams, creeks and tributaries all
belong to the public.
I don't speak as someone that's a little bit removed, since I own marshland.
I pay taxes on marshland. I have fought this Coastal Zone Management Act like
mad for the last several years. In Alabama, as Dr. Upham said, you're all very
fortunate. I drove a little bit through your coastline and have been on shrimp
boats the last few years. You have pretty much a beautiful, unspoiled coast.
Go down to Boca Chica Bay in Florida and see what's been done there. Go
on and look at what used to be beautiful grassbeds, places where you could drop
a shrimp net, make a five minute tow, and just load it up on the boat. Go
back and see what seven dredges pumping day and night did to that place. They
pumped it out, chopped it up into canals, silted it, and polluted it. Go back
and see what's left of the grassbeds, and see what you get if you drop your net
out there. You get silted mud and muck and that sort of thing.
As far as pollution, you know we haven't come anywhere in this country. You
talk about the poor little lady with oysters and the baby and think we're going
to put her on welfare if we fill in the marsh or stop her from building and
that sort of thing. What's going to happen if you go ahead and let them fill
in marsh? It doesn't happen overnight. It occurs by attrition, acre by acre,
foot by foot. I've seen marshland fall. I've seen coral beds, that I drove
over just one year previously to get specimens, become dead coral beds. You
don't have that here. You have a little bit more stable coastline than we have
over in Florida.
I can't say that I want to see any governing body reach in and grab anywhere.
I'm not sure that I like regulations, because I have been regulated to death.
But I know one thing. Unless we come to some kind of conclusion and find some
way to stop the destruction of tidal wetlands and destruction from upland
pollution, we're just going to lose everything we have. We're not going to
accomplish this by shooting at Boards like this. I think a county like this
(Mobile) that makes as much of its living on seafood as it does, needs to be
standing behind the protection of marshlands, not fighting it.

Bob Glasson: I run a charter boat from Dauphin Island. I look at that map up
there and I see the lines all drawn for the coastal zone boundaries. I see the
waterways on both sides outside the boundaries. On many of these waterways

there are plants dumping their wastes into the waterways. If you're going to
take one part of it, I can't see why not take the whole thing, because you're
going to get it (pollution) from outside each side of the boundary. Yet
you're going to have one little specific waterway covered with boundaries.
Upham: I might add that we're working very closely with Florida and
Mississippi, so that there is a kind of agreement along the whole coastline of
those three states, as well as Louisiana.

Name not known: You say you're working with Florida and Mississippi. That's
not the answer to it. The answer is the whole state, the whole three states
or none.

Hyde: May I add a comment here? We're talking about one thing and you're
talking about something else that goes together to make one problem. Maybe
what we ought to have in this state is one environmental protection agency, but
we don't have. We have a number of agencies that are responsible for environ-
mental protection. The Alabama Water Improvement Commission is responsible for
this exact thing that you're defining. We don't have any intent or any reason
by law to duplicate their program. What we are particularly interested in, as it
says on everything that you've seen tonight, is the coastal zone. Now I agree
with you 100% that the pollution problem may lie outside the defined coastal zone.
It is not within our area of responsibility to attempt to control pollution.
In fact, it is specifically stated that we shall not govern point sources and
other types of pollution.
Name not known:. What are you going to do? Are you going to put a gate across
each little street and river and bay that empties into this coastal zone?
Hyde: No, sir, we're going to expect that the Water Improvement Commission
would be as responsible in carrying out their activities as we'd like to be in
carrying out ours. I think our Water Improvement Commission in this state is
doing an excellent job with the facilities that they have. I'm sure that all
of you are aware of their programs.
Name not known: Very much so.

Gussie Marshall: I think you probably could help us out a whole lot. Since
you've got all these committees and things set up, why couldn't we have somebody
from this area on that Board, so we can know what's going on?
Upham: Good point. We brought this up earlier. It was introduced, as Mr. Hyde
said, into the Legislature this year. As you know, a lot of the legislation
never hits the floor. Unfortunately, this was one of them. It will be intro-
duced again next year.

Name not known: It seems like you are pretty determined on not taking in the
whole state.
Upham: No, we're not determined.
Name not known: I firmly agree. I'm interested in the coast, too. I don't
want to see it polluted or messed up or destroyed. I live in this state. If
you can't get the whole state, at least get the biggest area that you can.
Upham: Any other questions? If not, let me thank you very much for coming out
this evening.

MEETING PARTICIPANTS

Bayou La Batre, Alabama

R. 0. Barker Scott Chesser
Horn Realty Dauphin Island Sea Lab
120 South Coden Avenue Route 5, Box 355 R
Bayou La Batre, Alabama 36509 Bessemer, Alabama 35020

Harvey W. Baxter Charles A. Clarke III
Councilman, City of Bayou Post Office Box 63
La Batre Coden, Alabama 36523
367 Henley Street
Bayou La Batre, Alabama 36509 Gene Cody
Alabama Development office
George T. Bennett State Planning Division
Citizen's Coastal Zone Alliance State Capitol
Dauphin Island, Alabama 36528 Montgomery, Alabama 36130

Joseph L. Billmeier Cynthia Denise Cook
Dauphin Island Sea Lab Marine Environmental Sciences
3261-B Warringwood Drive Consortium
Birmingham, Alabama 35216 2008 Center Street, South
Birmingham, Alabama 35205
James Earl Bosarge
Councilman, City of Bayou George Crozier
La Batre Dauphin Island Sea Lab
Post Office Box 84 Dauphin Island, Alabama 36528
Bayou La Batre, Alabama 36509 Laverne Deakle
Vincent Bosarge Route 1, Box 875
Post Office Box 38 Irvington, Alabama 36544
Bayou La Batre, Alabama 36509
J. R. Diamond
K. E. Buck Mobile County Board of Health
1951 North Belle Cour Drive 248 Cox Street
Mobile, Alabama 36605 Mobile, Alabama 36604

Stanley Cajigas Tom R. Eubanks
2345 Harbor Drive International Paper Company
Point Pleasant, New Jersey 08742 Post Office Box 2448
Mobile, Alabama 36601

James Fibbe Dr. Donald Linzey
Co unty Board of Health 6312 St. Moritz Drive
248 Cox Street Mobile, Alabama 36608
Mobile, Alabama 36604
Bill Lucas
Jimmie E. Fowler Mississippi Marine Resources
Gulf Stream Enterprises Council
83 South Coden Avenue Post Office Drawer 959
Bayou La Batre, Alabama 36509 Long Beach, Mississippi 39560

Captain Bob Glasson Judy McConnell
Post Office Box 506 Route 1, Box 1335
Dauphin Island, Alabama 36528 Irvington, Alabama 36544

J. E. Green J. B. McIlwain
Post Office Box 114 Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant
St. Elmo, Alabama 36568 Consortium
Post Office Drawer AG
Ralph Havard Ocean Springs, Mississippi 39564
Marine Resources Laboratory
Dauphin Island, Alabama 36528 Sylvia Minor
I Mississippi Marine Resources
Ray Horn Council
120 South Coden Avenue Post Office Drawer 959
Bayou La Batre, Alabama 36509 Long Beach, Mississippi 39560

L. E. Husby Jerry Mitchell
Farm Bureau Mississippi Marine Resources
St. Elmo, Alabama 36568 Council
Post Office Drawer 959
Willis Hyde Long Beach, Mississippi 39560
Alabama Development Office
State Planning Division W. 0. Monteith
State Capitol Marine Environmental Sciences
Montgomery, Alabama 36130 Consortium
Dauphin Island Sea Lab
H. Johnson Dauphin Island, Alabama 36528
Mobile County_News
Bayou La Batre, Alabama 36509 William F. Moore
Suite 119, Bel Air Mall II
Dianne Jones 3100 Cottage Hill Drive
M.ississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Mobile, Alabama 36606
Consortium
Post Office Drawer AG Paul Moser
Ocean Springs, Mississippi 39564 Geological Survey of Alabama
Post Of f ice Drawer 0
Alicia V. Linzey University, Alabama 35480
Mobile Bay Audubon Society
6312 St. Moritz Drive Mark Albin Nelson
Mobile, Alabama 36608 Route 1, Box 167
Coden, Alabama 36523

Glenn Parsons Joe Snyder
Marine Environmetal Sciences Marine Environmental Sciences
Consortium Consortium
128 Avalon Avenue Dauphin Island Sea Lab
Hueyton, Alabama 35020 Dauphin Island, Alabama 36528

Bruce Patterson Bill Starnes
Dauphin Island Sea Lab Alabama Development Office
113 Heflin Avenue State Planning Division
Birmingham, Alabama 35214 State Capitol
Montgomery, Alabama 36130
Mark Pool
19 Shadowood Circle Clarence H. Steiner
Birmingham, Alabama 35215 47 Rabby Street
Robert C. Reames Bayou La Batre, Alabama 36509
Marine Environmental Sciences Russell R. Steiner
Consortium Steiner Shipyard
110 Hollywood Boulevard Post Office Box 742
Homewood, Alabama 35209 Bayou La Batre, Alabama 36509

Mrs. J. E. Revel Judy P. Stout
Post Office Box 25 Dauphin Island Sea Lab
Irvington, Alabama 36544 Post Office Box 386
Dauphin Island, Alabama 36528
Eric A. Robertson, Jr.
Councilman, City of Bayou Hugh Swingle
La Batre Alabama Marine Resources Division
Post Office Box 517 Post Office Box 188
Bayou La Batre, Alabama 36509 Dauphin Island, Alabama 36528

Anne Rudloe M. G. Temme
Gulf Specimen Company Councilman, City of Bayou La Batre
Post Office Box237 Post Office Box 794
Panacea, Florida 32346 Bayou La Batre, Alabama 36509

Jack Rudloe F. 0. Thompson
Gulf Specimen Co., Inc. Post Office Box 225
Post Office Box 237 Bayou La Batre, Alabama 36509
Panacea, Florida 32346
May Tillman
Robert M. Scott Dauphin Island Sea Lab
Marine Environmental Sciences Post Office Box 386
Consortium Dauphin Island, Alabama 36528
Route 6, Box 518 H
Bessemer, Alabama 35020 Jeannette Tootle
Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant
Joe E. Seward Consortium
Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Post Office Drawer AG
Consortium Ocean Springs, Mississippi 39564
Post Office Drawer AG
Ocean Springs, Mississippi 39564

Dr. Sidney D. Upham
Director, Alabama Marine Environ-
mental Sciences Consortium
Member, Alabama Coastal ARea
Board
Post Office Box 386
Dauphin Island, Alabama 36528

C. C. Vincent
98 South Coden Avenue
Bayou La Batre, Alabama 36509

Betty Jean Vining
John Birch Society
98 South Coden Road
Bayou La Batre, Alabama 36509

Dr. Barry A. Vittor
University of Alabama/Marine
Environmental Sciences
Consortium
Post Office Box 386
Dauphin Island, Alabama 36528

C. W. Wade
Alabama Department of Conser-
vation
Post Office Box 188
Dauphin Island, Alabama 36528

Jimmy Wigfield
324 May Street
Bayou La Batre, Alabama 36509

J. M. Wigfield, Jr.
324 May Street
Bayou La Batre, Alabama 36509

J. A. Wintzell
Mayor, City of Bayou
La Batre
13 South Coden Highway
Bayou La Batre, Alabama 36509

Johnny Yoe
Dauphin island Sea Lab
2844 Shook Hill Road
Birmingham, Alabama 35223

Circuit Courtroom, Baldwin County Courthouse
Bay Minette, Alabama
December 16, 1975

AGENDA

Opening Remarks: Dr, Sidney Upham
Director, Alabama Marine Environmental
Sciences Consortium
Member, Alabama Coastal Area Board
(not included in text)

Introduction: Willis Hyde (not included in text)

Review of Boundary Proposals: Gene Cody (not included in text)

Questions, Statements and Comments by the Public

Meeting Participants

QUESTIONS, STATEMENTS AND COMMENTS BY THE PUBLIC

Wallace McElroy: Gentlemen of the Board and ladies and gentlemen of the audience,
my name is Wallace McElroy. I am a resident of the City of Mobile. I am appear-
ing here tonight as an interested citizen and also as a spokesman for the Mobile
Area Chamber of Commerce. I would like to read a statement for the record. This
statement constitutes the Chamber's official position regarding the boundaries
of the coastal zone. I have copies for each member of the Board, as well as
for the public. I would like to read the statement:

To: The Alabama Coastal Area Board
From: Mobile Area Chamber of Commerce
William H. Holland, President
Subject: Statement for the Record

Gentlemen:
The Mobile Area Chamber of Commerce is very interested in maintaining
a balance which provides for continued development, while at the same
time, preserving those environmental and wildlife features implicit
in the attainment of a quality of life for all citizens.

The Chamber, through its Environmental Committee and other committees,
is extremely concerned with the management of the environment, and this,
by all means, includes our coastal zone. We have participated in public
hearings dealing with a range of activities from disposal of dredge
material to offshore drilling, and in every instance appropriate
steps are taken to adequately protect and preserve our environment
and wildlife. This has not changed in our approach to the establish-
ment of a coastal zone.

Our Environmental Committee has met on several occasions and has recom-
mended that we submit a statement for the record in keeping with the
intent of the 1972 Federal Act, Public Law 92-583, and Act 1274 of the
Alabama Legislature.

The Chamber concurs with the statements in Section 302 of PL 92-583,
"there is a national interest in the effective management, beneficial
use, protection, and development of the coastal zone." However, with
the opening of the Tennessee-Tombigbee, the projected growth we see in
the late 1970'2 and early 80's, to arbitrarily remove areas which may
be of vital importance to the continued growth of the region would be
disastrous not only to Mobile, but to the entire state and to an
extent to the nation.

The Chamber is familiar with various proposals before the Board as well
as additional proposals submitted by individuals for the Board's
consideration. We have reviewed these proposals and concluded that, in
our opinion, the best direction which the Board might adopt would
be to establish a zone consisting of the smallest possible area. Our
reasons are quite simple. We feel that with an unknown program the
smaller area to be managed is the most desirable. At such time as
these rules and regulations are adopted the boundaries of the coastal z
zone could be reconsidered.

For this reason, we recommend that the Board adopt boundaries for
its zone using the following general physical and natural features:

Beginning at the Mississippi line following the shoreline
(south side) east to its junction with the shoreline of Mobile
Bay; north along the west shoreline of Mobile Bay (east side)
to its junction with Mobile City limits; thence along Mobile
City limits east and north to south shoreline of Pinto Island;
thence along said shoreline to midline of Tensaw River with
the Blakely River (midline); thence south along midline of
Blakely River to D'Olive Bay; thence south along shoreline
(west side) to its junction with Intracoastal Waterway; continue
east along Intracoastal Waterway (south side) to Florida line.

Because our area is now regulated by EPA, Corps of Engineers, AWIC, State
Oil and Gas Board, Bureau of Fisheries, the United States Coast Guard,
and others, we feel further regulation by the Coastal Board could be an
unnecessary duplication of effort.

Therefore, we feel that the law should be repealed as it is not in the
best interest of the taxpayers, workers and property owners of our area.

I would like to insert at this time that this is in no way to be construed
as a reflection on any member of this Board. I think we have a good,
sound Board with men of integrity appointed to it. I think we have been
most fortunate. If we are going to have to have a Board, I think they
did a good job in selecting its members.

The Board of Directors of the Mobile Area Chamber of Commerce is concerned
with the Alabama Coastal Area Board's intention to define the boundaries
for the coastal zone prior to developing and publishing a comprehensive
program for the zone's administration.

In the meantime, if the preceding cannot be accomplished, then we recommend
mend control of a lesser area, and respectfully request that the Board
establish a zone consisting of the area as outlined in our definition.

Respectfully submitted,
William H. Holland, President

MOBILE AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BOUNDARY PROpOSAL

Hawthorn
Iew
! Ca J) d,
ea"rd 6r-r, (,z
0
f ter
4
Uriah
McInt
?
osh

s Chapel 3
S7 C,
C,
CP

d
h@lou
7 L j
7 CIS Tensaw -Yms

f
@-2

Moun
Vornon
0-
V -0,
P, fit%
P96. qRa

Sir more
'&0
toc ton
--4

V,
Chu Ax

G a-
A
Q. le
Ql

ILA 4;
I N
'a
U@g 4Greek-.
ILA ton
.4 0

i
iteelvii Giteswoo
teelvii

Soamsif
Fort 4
Seven ill$
Malbis
rf MO I'll

Village
Loxf6y
4
oze R er'Pt . ........ ... ..
lf6,e
Be st
S. Ragged
Montrose

T,leoacovre L, h, I I Robert dal
/F , @rthi opi s
e
Sj Sem-
Elmo Ile ontaine Battles Wharf Summerdale 'e
C-: P-t C, 4@\ z A.
-Sbuth Qlc@jrc@ Point Cle3r cla, C.tv
Grand 8 Marlow 1V
Dixon Louis \N.,
Corner B A Y 7
'j 1agnQIja Elbe,t@
Sayolf; La Ba Dejlchamos)t F I ------

bama Port Pet
Isle Au. He, an Bay
+ Perdido
Joseph, oooooop
Bon Secour ig L
Barron I ar Pt Bay Wolf Shy
SOON Se-ou@@ ran
ter 4.
Mississippi W rl@* 4 aw
Chin Island Lill,
Poi.11 Clear
Pei FI Gasque
Po
M(irgan Gulf Shores
Pit
Ots,lphin Isl d Pelica
Pelt- I.I..d Pay I mob.I
S-W 111-d / i - Scale 1:500,000
1 inch equals approximately 8 miles

to 0 10 20 30 40 it

10 0 to 20 30 40 5o Kilometers

Verda Horne: I'm a member of a number of organizations, which have worked
quite consistently to study both the federal law and the state law and to
watch what was happening as the law began to be effective locally. Several
of us have participated in those meetings to the extent that we even asked to
be allowed to be present at the early meetings. We have certainly received
courteous treatment by the Board all of the time.
I agree about the members of the Board. I am particularly happy about
these meetings. I had no doubt that the citizens' participation meetings would
happen when we found that Dr. Upham was on the Board. I don't know how much
you know about the New England town meetings, but Dr. Upham grew up in New
Hampshire, and they don't decide things up there at the federal level. They
decide things at the local level. We are permitted to participate with
local level comments on a law which was passed by our representatives in
Congress, both Congressmen and Senators. Those laws are now on the books. It
is up to us to see that they work in behalf of the people, whose activities they
are going to affect for better or for worse, and we hope, for better.
It was, in essence, because of the lack of information on the part of the
citizens that caused a group of us to get together. We took two days to read
through the laws and thrash out what kinds of things we needed to be doing if
the laws were to become effective. Out of that meeting grew another symposium
which was held in September at Dauphin Island, during which we had participation
from the members of the Board, federal agencies, several state agencies, staff
members of the Board, and several others. Participation from the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in Washington was Mr. Bob Knecht, who
has been connected w4th the Office of Coastal Zone Management from its beginning.
A good many other people were there including some from California where some
of the more horrendous examples of both failure and success are apparent
Out of that meeting, the Alabama members who participated in that conference
said, "OK, what do we do next?" The concensus was that we would at least try
to find a volunteer who would put together a proposal for a boundary which we
thought we could live with. This was done after much consultation with all
the organizations oriented towards conservation in the states. Soon after that,
the three proposals that you have heard presented here tonight were made avail-
able to us and we looked at those also. Through the work of one of our members,
Ms. Alicia Linzey, we came up with a fourth alternative. This is in your folder.
It is blue and you can see what it says.
I am going to review considerably what has been given to me to read by the
committee itself, because I labor under some handicaps with vision. I may not
be able to read as well as I ought to. The organizations which are represented
in this coalition incluaa the Alabama Conservancy, Alabama Wildlife Federationo
Mobile County Wildlife and Conservation Association, Save Our Bay Club, Birm-
ingham Audubon Society, Mobile Bay Audubon Society, Chattahoochee Chapter of
the Sierra Club which includes both Georgia and Alabama, Gulf Coast Regional
Conservation Committee of the Sierra Club, and several other organizations.
Some of us belong to organizations whose constitutions preclude our becom-
ing members of alliances, but do permit us joining together in a coalition for
specific purposes. One of those is an organization which I represent for the
State, which is the Alabama League of Women Voters. Most of you will recognize
these organizaticns as representing a wide range of conservationist interests.
They are composed of individuals who range from idealistic to pragmatic, I
suppose. They include hunters and fishermen, business and community leaders,
educators, scientists, and just plain citizens. Some organizations concurred,
of course, wholeheartedly. Others debated a long time about each little seg-

ment of the boundary. They all participated finally in all parts of the planning,
and then considered these proposals individually.
The National Coastal Zone Management Law, as you know, gives very little
help regarding the requirement that the state define its coastal zone. Para-
phrasing the language of the law, our own law says we must identify and include
those shorelands that are being used in ways that have a direct and significant
effect on coastal waters. Uses that have a direct and significant effect on
coastal waters, now that is the criteria for choosing boundaries. Land use and
development practices that result in erosion and siltation come to mind very
quickly. Industries that discharge into coastal waters is obviously an example.
Other examples are draining, filling, offshore and inshore area destruction.
Included also in the federal law are (again, this is specific) those areas of
particular natural value, such as river bottomlands. We have some of our own in
the Tensaw-Mobile district, an area which has been listed in the National -
Registry of Natural Landmarks by the U.S. Department of the Interior. A state
is permitted, however, to set wider boundaries than those meeting the minimum
requirements of the law.
It has become apparent that many citizens have the impression that the
coastal boundary is a preservation line, within which no development, agricul_
tural or industrial, is permitted. This, of course, is not the case. The
coastal area remains subject to the full spectrum of uses. Those uses, though,
must be planned. In fact, it seems unlikely that permits will be required for
uses that do not already have permits from some other agencies which already
require permits, and they will not stop requiring permits for the coastal zone
law, whatever way it goes.
The Alabama Coastal Area Board rE!ceived federal funding for its initial
year of operation on 30th June, 1974, not very long ago. It must have its
management plan, which is in the second year now, approved by June 30, 1977.
Very early, the Board had to adopt a preliminary or temporary boundary definition
for use in applying for federal funding. For that boundary, they chose contour
lines. That is topographical, sealevel or contour lines. Although boundaries
based on those lines are valid and are used in some states, there are difficulties.
Let me remind you that even if we chose three zones or three tiers of boundaries
(suppose the 10 foot, 50 foot or 100 foot levels, which would affect a great
deal of Baldwin County) they would leave untouched any kind of activity or use
or development in Montrose, for instance, which shoots up 200 feet above the Bay,
very close to the shoreline. The Coastal Area Board, of course, has to take
into consideration this kind of development. Also, this surveyed area would
difficult to control or to manage. This, in fact, was why they went to census
areas or boundary lines, which are more easily followed by already designated
limits.
As we looked over these three plans, we found some deficiencies which we
feel are significant. It is our conclusion that the proposals that have been
made fall short of including enough of the coastal watersheds to control effectively
the majority of uses that have a significant impact on coastal waters. Also, the
use of census enumeration districts as boundary lines is convenient, but is
meaningless in some cases. We conclude that also census boundary districts,
though convenient enough, may not include those areas from which direct sewage
outfalls are now being planned or may be planned in the future. Therefore, they
do not.control the pollution of the water. Neither would they control uses
affecting two of south Alabama's most valuable recreational streams, the Esca-
tawpa River in Mobile County and the Styx River in Baldwin County. Legislation

100

that would bring the Escatawpa River into the National Wild and Scenic River
System is currently pending in Congress, and both the Escatawpa and Styx Rivers
have been proposed by the State of Alabama as suitable for Wild, Scenic and
Recreation River Systems in Alabama's comprehensive recreation program. This,
of course, has already been published and is available to you. Again, the
federal legislation outlines eight areas of particular concern. This is a quota-
tion from the federal law, with the requirements that a state include any of
these areas within its coastal zone, even though their uses may not directly
affect coastal waters. Among these eight are two that I shall mention. The
first is an area of unique natural habitat or scenic importance, and the second
is areas of substantial recreational value or opportunities. Both of these,
of course, are present in Baldwin County, not to mention Mobile County where
also they may be found.
Many of us, no doubt, wish that the difficult choices would go away if we
simply adopted the simplest of boundaries and let it go at that. It is clear
however, that for the purposes of the federal law, we could not meet the require-
ments by adopting the boundaries proposed by our friends from Mobile. The
boundary proposals will have to fit the federal law criteria, because the federal
law was passed by individuals from every state in the Union. Many of these were
hesitant at first and only belatedly joined with those who have coastal areas,
because they saw no possibility of local protection or control doing anything
about preserving our fisheries, our coastal areas, nor our waters which feed
into those coastal areas.
We are in partial concurrence with the Coastal Area Board proposal that
takes in the two county area (I think it was the first one), only if it is given
the highest or primary level of management designation. As we go, however, to
the upper part of Baldwin and Mobile Counties (I don't care which of the maps
you look at in your book), you will remember that the northwest boundary of
Baldwin County is the Alabama River. What we are really saying if we accept
that two county boundary is that the waters of the Alabama River on the south
side must be controlled by our Coastal Area Board, but this Board has no control
over the north side of the river. I don't need to tell you that isn't the way
water works. Surely, whatever activity or use is permitted on the northern
boundary must also be permitted on the southern boundary. This, of course, is
also true on the Tombigbee River.
Instead, we chose to propose the Alabama River up to the Claiborne Lock
and Dam and the Tombigbee River up to the Jackson Dam be included in Alabama's
coastal zone. Also included should be a corridor on each side and the lowlands
between those two areas designated, The Alabama River and the Tombigbee River,
including the land between them, have significant affects on the waters of the
estuaries and bays and coastal rivers. Present and future plans for industrial
uses in these areas, direct and indirect effects of,the Tennessee-Tombigbee
Waterway, proposed oil and ges activiites and so on, all make it obvious that
we must go farther upstream in order to exercise some degree of control over the
future of the waters in our coastal area, The locks and dams on the Tombigbee
and Alabama Rivers provide a feasible northern terminus of our coastal zone,
not only because the tidal influence extends that far, but also because these
sites provide a convenient identifiable boundary, an important point.
Furthermore, the area between the rivers is rich in archeological habitat
and artifacts. The early Alabamians lived there. This gives significance as an

101

area of particular concern under the federal law. Specifically, it is an area
which is defined by the federal law as being of historical significance and
cultural value. We could extend these descriptions and these requirements, but
we will not need to do so.
We are proposing, therefore, the entire area included in your map as a
primary area. We have selected those identifiable, man-made and physical
features which conform to natural systems and patterns of shoreland use that
affect coastal waters, as well as those areas of particular concern which we
have outlined as having been listed by the federal regulations.
We could add that we are not opposed to the concept of topographic ele-
vation for differing areas. Those have essentially been abandoned, I believe,
by the Board. However, the current Board position is to define the secondary
zone as an area of no control and subject only to coordination with other
state agencies. This is in contrast to their original definition of secondary,
which calls for control over uses that affect the primary area, which in turn
affect the coastal waters. We recognize that some areas within our boundary
could reasonably be subject to a lesser level of control than is the primary
zone. Under current definitions that the Board is using, we believe that is
not possible.
I realize there are many people here tonight who would like to abandon the
whole business of control altogether. Many wish they had never heard of the
Coastal Zone Management Law. So much misunderstanding and lack of information
is abundant that we believe it behooves all of us.to study both laws and then
attend these meetings and hearings. Go back and look again at what it is we
want to come out of any kind of coastal management.
I might interpolate here to say that I feel there are some very serious
problems around regarding fisheries. I was on a citizen's review board called
by 140AA to look over the national fisheries plan. I was appalled by some of the
problems that are being faced by commercial fishermen, as well as sports fisher-
men. I think we need both of them. I don't see any possibility of protecting
them short of having some coastal zone management. We believe the same is true
of the fishing industry as is true of the parks and recreation industry and
the other industries that depend on the water and coastal resources.
The federal law demands proof of public participation, Our being here tonight
proves that we have participated. It does not, however, demand that we do oul
homework and study the laws and help to implement them or to modify them as,
indeed, we tried to do in the last Legislature. I hope we can do this in the
next Legislative Session. I must say, as I touch this point, the one member
of the Board who has not missed any of the Board meetings is our Baldwin
County Representative, Bill McMillan. There were times when this Board could
not meet, not because it hadn't scheduled a meeting, but because it did not have
a quorum. Archie McMillan, or Bill as you know him, was there every single time.
I would like us to see that more Baldwin County people are put on that Board.
I don't know whether you helped any last time in the Legislature, but there are
some Legislators in Baldwin County. I think they know very well we deserve more
representation on that Board. It is those of us who are participating, who attend
meetings, who read the law and look at what we have in front of us and behind us
on this Gulf Coast, who can make it work or can break it. Thank you.

Stephen McMillan: Mr. Chairman, I am representing the Baldwin County Board of
Realtors. Before I go into our recommended coastal area, I would like to make
a statement as to what the realtor's policy is on planning and land use. Realtors

102

have always favored reasonable local controls on land use. Realtors believe and
work for the free and unhampered use of land in the best interest of the public.
The interests of our nation and its citizens require the highest and best
distribution of land ownership and land use, creation of adequate housing,
development of productive industries, development and maintenance of productive
farms, preservation of healthful environment, and conservation of productive
forest lands. Realtors believe in the principle of autonomy of local govern-
ment and support reasonable, carefully planned actions that will improve the
environment without introducing new and serious economic and social restrictions
that, in effect, are more undesirable than the conditions they are designed
to remedy. Control on environmental matters is necessary, but these areas
must be clearly defined and limited so that the ultimate decisions lies with
local government. The determination of what to do with the land of this nation
must be left at the local level. I hope you will notice the continuous refer-
ences you are going to hear throughout the night to satisfying the Federal
Government, because we feel one of our major concerns about this whole coastal
zone is that it is putting us on the road to federal land use.
The Baldwin County Board of Realtors recommends a primary coastal area
which will include the area 200 feet inland of the mean highwater line of those
waters adjacent to the shoreline, which contains a measurable quantity or
percentage of seawater. I would like to briefly go over the positive aspects of
the area that we recommend: (1) It is an easily determinable boundary and eli-
minates the need for costly on-the-ground survey. (2) It eliminates to a great
degree possible controversy of some county property owners being included and
others excluded from coastal zone management. It minimizes controversy when
property on one side of a road or stream is in the coastal zone while that immed-
iately across the road or stream is not included. (3) It keeps the management
area to minimal size and thereby allows a small administrative staff to oversee
the program and controlled areas already partially or totally controlled by State
and County Health Departments, State Highway Department, Federal Housing Adminis-
tration, Veterans Administration, Department of Housing and Urban Development,
Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Improvement Commission, County
Planning Commissions, County Commissions, County Building Inspection Departments,
City Building Inspection Departments, City Planning Commissions, and the Corps
of Engineers, just to name a few, and I could name a few others. (4) It eliminates
potential interpretation of regulations which may lead toward no-growth policies
in A-arge areas. (5) It minimizes the possibility of Baldwin and Mobile Counties
being put at a severe disadvantage in efforts to attract any type of new industry.
I might add that 10% of the residents of Baldwin County have to commute out-of-
county every day to work. (6) It minimizes the area of duplication with already
existing local, state, and federal regulatory agencies and minimizes disputes
and misunderstandings about which governmental agency has jurisdiction. (7) It
permits the Alabama Coastal Area Board an opportunity to determine the ramifi-
cations of this agency in this Act, which if proven successful and beneficial,
can be then expanded. I point out that we think there are too many unknown and
too many unpredictable effects for any agency to fairly administer this law as
it is currently written. (8) It protects transitional and intertidal areas,
salt marshes, wetlands and beaches, which was the original intent of the Act.
(9) It eliminates the use of man-made features in determining the coastal zone
boundary. That is the end of our positive statement, and the only thing negative
we can see about this is that it may or may not satisfy the requirements of the
Federal Government.

103

I would like to make some recommendations to the members of the Legislature
present and the Coastal Area Board: (1) The definition of regulated activity
needs to be more specific. Under present definitions we question whether or not
without a permit an individual homeowner could make an addition to his home or
fence his yard, the owner of timberland could harvest his trees, a farmer could
clear an existing fence row, or a city could clean out already existing drainage
ditches, just to mention a few of the items which need further clarification.
(2) Realtors support planning. However, the Coastal Zone Management Act
creates not a planning agency, but another regulatory agency whose permit require-
ments duplicate for the most part, those of already existing agencies.
(3) If we must have a Coastal Zone Management Board, we strongly recommend that
its purpose and role be changed to that of a clearhing house agency to assist
an applicant in obtaining permits from the existing agencies to minimize harass-
ment of free enterprise, aggrevation of inflation, and duplication of red tape
requirements. Thank you.

C. Thompson: To the Board and especially to our representative on the Board,
the Honorable Bill McMillan, we are getting into something new which is land
management. It is brought on by the Federal Act. I offer the following as
President of the Baldwin County Wildlife and Conservation A.ssociation, and we
have almost 1500 members. We have been given what might be three choices and
they are very generous in their choices. This one apparently takes in less
territory, and for an experiment here in Alabama, the least territory that they
can take in would be helpful. If you don't have too much land, you can't make
too many mistakes.
You will notice there are a number of reasons why they picture three dif-
ferent maps. I don't necessarily agree with them on the reasons. I just say
that if they can make it any smaller, based on the law, it would seem to be the
best thing. It would seem best if they could possibly reduce it to a degree.
Coastal area means coastal water from reading the Alabama Act by Senator
Dick Owen. It includes the adjacent shoreline and the waters therein and there-
under. It also includes transitional and intertidal areas and marshes and
swamps and so on.
To the gentlemen of the Board, we feel that a two-point classification of
primary and secondary would be the most reasonable approach. We urge the
Board to set the primary area where saltwater stops, because this, basically,
is for the protection of saltwater areas. The primary area should certainly
not go further up the river than where the tide stops. If they can limit it to
that, we can begin to live with what's there. I wouldn't worry too much if they
put it from Highway 43 in Mobile County and Highway 225 in Baldwin County.
We have certain questions that have never been answered, and I ask the
Board to consider them. The answers to those are involved in establishing what
they are going to use. Final inland boundaries for program approval must be
determined after a clearly defined and documented procedure which incorporates
permissible uses. We haven't had a list of permissible uses. If the Board will
keep that in mind and limit the permissible uses that we've been given to
understand then if they limit the area accordingly, the expansion of uses can
expand the area. It is a simple approach.
Going further into the explanation, coastal zone management, therefore,
requires control to all uses. So it is clearly a matter of control for manage-
ment purposes. It must be determined what is going to be controlled and locate
them. That is the thing that we need for the Board to consider before they
begin actually tying it down. If they are going to have to set the boundary
first, we urge that they set it close to the water on both sides. Then, just

104

as this law by Senator Owen was passed and an amendment was prepared last year,
an amendment will be prepared next year, The law can be changed to meet their
requirements or to restrict the Board's actions, which I am sure they realize.
We don't need to take all of the counties in. Based on the information
brought to us here tonight, we would urge a limited width of this coastal zone,
Let us have a sample of the management and there may be benefits there that
would be worth expanding the areas to include the entire counties and even
the entire state. We need to see that first.
Now, we have one thing that I think will be of interest to the people here.
That is the list of our Board members. First, there is the Director of the
Alabama Development Office. Those who are in the real estate business should
find some hope from that because this man's business is developing Alabama. Next,
the wildlife people shouldn't have to worry with the Department of Conservation
on their side. Also, the Director of the Alabama State Docks is a member of
the Board. The bill that was to amend this did not get through. I think they
were going to relieve Colonel Wheelis of that responsibility, because I don't
think he has time, Also included are members from the Mobile City and Mobile
County Commissions and a member from the Baldwin County Commission. It sort of
looks like the people who wrote this act think that one of our commissioners
(Baldwin County) is worth two of anybody else's, because they gave them twice
as many members as they gave us. The State Geologist certainly would be a
help and the Director of the Marine Environmental Sciences Consortium is cer-
tainly necessary.
I don't mean to take up too much of your time, Mr. Chairman, but if the
Board will consider those suggestions that they've received and keep in mind
that this is a beginning of something, they won't experiment with too large
an area.

Michael Akridge: I am Mike Akridge and I represent the Alabama Power Company.
Alabama Power Company appreciates the opportunity to comment on the proposed
boundary for Alabama's Coastal Area. This is an area most vital to the continued
growth of our state and the nation as a whole.
While the impact coastal zone management will have on Company operations
cannot be judged until more detailed development of the administrative program is
completed, one area of particular concern at this time is the effect any new
regulations would have on the Company's planned steam electric generating faci-
lity to be located on the Tensaw River west of the Hurricane Community in Baldwin
County. As presently proposed, all three of the boundaries would include the
proposed site.
The growth of the Mobile-Baldwin County area has been tremendous in the past
decade and growth projections for the next decade show a steady increase, with
an accompanying increase in the demand for electrical service. Based on these
determinations, the Barry and Chickasaw generating plants in Mobile County will
not be able to meet the projected demand by the mid 1980's.
As a result of this growth and future demand determinations, Alabama Power
Company began the search for a new plant site in southwest Alabama early in 1971.
During 1972 and 1973 extensive preliminary site investigations were conducted in
southwest Alabama to determine a suitable site for additional generating
capacity. Factors to be considered in any site investigation include environ-
mental matters, foundational stability, the adequacy of the water supply, available
transportation corridors, and the proximity of the site to electrical load centers.
These preliminary investigations indicated that among the several sites considered,
this site had the best potential for meeting all the various requirements.

105

In January, 1974, public announcement was made of our intent to construct
a new generating plant on the Hurricane site in Baldwin County. Land purchases
began in mid 1974 and to date approximately 48% of the necessary property has
been acquired, with land acquisitions continuing at this time.
This new plant will be constructed to conform to all applicable federal,
state and local regulations, including air and water pollution control and solid
waste management. This facility will be environmentally compatible with the
area. Alabama Power Company will continue to work with the Coastal Area Board
and the technical staff to comply with rules and regulations established by
the Board governing developments within the selected boundary of the coastal
area. We feel that the intent of Alabama Act is stated explicitly in Section
2 - State Policy and Section 6 - Development of a Program by the Board in
addressing the energy needs of the coastal area. Section 2 declares that it
is state policy "to assure that in development of the state's coastal area ade-
quate consideration is given to such uses of the coastal area as the establish_
ment of ... utility plant sites, utility generation, transmission, distribution
and transportation facilities: Section 6 further states that development of a
comprehensive coastal area administration program shall include "provision for
adequate consideration of the local, regional, state and national interest
involved in the siting of facilities for the development, generation, trans-
mission and distribution of energy..." The Board is certainly cognizant of both
the requirements stated in these two sections and the need for reliable, eco-
nomical electric service in the coastal areas of Alabama.
In summary, we hope that the Board will develop and administer the coastal
area program, including the establishment of the boundary, in such a manner that
will not preclude the development by Alabama Power Company of this optimum
site for the location of future electrical generating facilities which will be
essential to the area's long-term economic and industrial growth. Thank you.

J. D. McCallister: Gentlemen of the Board and ladies and gentlemen, I come here
before you tonight, not as a representative of any organization, civic minded
group, major utility, or any other great or significant organization. I guess
I'll have to stand out then. I represent that almost forgotten organization
called the family, you know, husband, wife, and little children. I clean up the
beaches where our sports fishermen throw their beer cans, because I have property
on the beach. I see the damage that is being done, but I also see a few other
things that I would like to point out tonight if I might.
First of all, I would like to give recognition to our League of Women
Voters. They are certainly doing a very good part in bringing to our attention,
along with television and the other media, some things about conservation prac-
tices, not only in this state but in many other states as well.. I think these
people are on the right course, but I'll have to take exception with Mrs. Horne's
procedure tonight. I believe they are just a little bit in the over-developed
vein. I would like for us to reflect on just a little bit of common sense,
plain old everyday type reflections, if we might for just a couple of minutei
Let's review the Federal Government's record in procedures or matters 1%e
this. We f ind f ederal subsidies in the schools and what do we f ind there.
Well, I don't know what your experience has been, but I can tell you very brie ly
of one of mine. Classbury's State Teachers College in the State of New Jersey,
where we lived prior to coming to Alabama, was a fine college from what I
understand until federal regulations, federal subsidies, and federal grants
got in there. They had to lower the entrance exam requirements. They've finally

106

done away with that. That was too restrictive on certain parties. They finally
got around to eliminating just about everything up to and including class
attendance. I ask you what good was Glassbury9s State Teachers College after
that point?
We found some results in our own state, the Federal Government moving in
and running things for us. Maybe we are a little slow in our local areas
about getting down to the nitty-gritty of everyday living, but I think the
Americal people, you and I, the people that work, the people that live in their
homes, the people that run the little cities, should be able to get it done
if we try.
How about another federal accomplishment, forced busing? Would anybody
like to go with me to Boston tonight? I doubt it. I understand that city
is in pretty much of a turmoil. Of course, I am using the medium of television
as my source of information. I don't think I would like to be there.
How about another, the EPA? We've heard that there is a duplication of
authority, permits, and so forth. EPA has put out regulations requiring certain
standards for drinking water safety, which I'm not against, believe me. If I want
to drink a glass of water, -,- would like to at least think that it's safe. The
irony of it is, EPA has set forth these standards and they can't even give you
a test, whereby you can determine whether or not you have met those standards.
You want to carry on some more? How about OSHA? Does anybody know about
that animal. I saw the OSHA cowboy. I'm not sure he could play for the
Dallas Cowboys, but he sure can play something--Federal Government. I might also
add state government, to some degree, is noted for going from less control to
more and more and more control.
Therefore, I contend that this Board should start out with the minimum
standards or the minimum boundaries prescribed. I would like to see adopted the
procedures the gentleman from the Chamber of Commerce in Mobile outlined. If we
start out with something small and it turns out to be something worthwhile, then
I am sure that we can increase the boundaries or increase the control. Have any
of you ever had any trouble getting your children to take a second cone of ice
cream? No! Pow about feeding them a persinmion? In other words, ladies and
gentlemen, if it is good and worthwhile, it is going to be easy to increase it
and make it even more worthwhile. Right? If it is a green persimmon, which we
don't know at this point, then we won't have any problems determing that later ,
will we? Must we go to such full extremes as prescribed by some? I guess you
are goirg to callme an extremist, and I don't mind. Must we go that far to
start out with?
This State Act, Act 1274, which I hold a copy of here in my hand, seems to
amount to almost a practical power of attorney over the lands which are yet to
be determined aP6 will be involved in this matter. If you are interested, check
Sections 2 and 3 of it. You all have a copy of it.
I would lill-e to ask you one other question. Baldwin County and Mobile
County, both the counties that are involved in this matter are primarily what
type of counties? Baldwin is primarily agricultural, isn't it? Mobile has some
industry and some agriculture, and is pr4marily the city. Check with Section 3 G
in this little article. Read it for yourselves. I have. I have to wonder if a
farmer can gEt out there and plow his ground, because the way I understand it, if
he plows the ground and turns under these weeds, he is in some manner or in some
way destroying or materially harming the flora and fauna of that particular

1C7

area. I'm not saying this would be carried to that extent certainly, but it is
in the law, isn't it?
Permits are another item and my final item. There have been no values set
on what the permits will cost the individual and exactly how many and what nature
he will have to receive or obtain. Isn't it quite possible that there are .
enough regulatory bodies throughout the entirety of this state and the United
States? They should get their heads together and come up with a comprehensive
program that would eliminate a lot of this duplication rather than having another
form of it. I heard the proposal tonight that this particular committee be
altered to become a clearing house committee, and I suggest, gentlemen, that is a
very good idea. Certainly, if we could get all this information into one point,
it would facilitate matters for the necessary permits. I believe that certain
permits are necessary. I believe that we have to have some conservation, but
let's avoid extremes. Thank you.

Dale Crittenden: Mr. Chairman and members of the Board, I'm Dale Crittenden and
I represent the Baldwin County Home Builders Association. This is an organiza-
tion which is part of the Alabama Home Builders Association and, in turn, a part
of the National Association of Home Builders with approximately 75,000
members. Now I don't propose to represent those 75,000 members. I am authorized
to speak only for the building industry of Baldwin County. I dare say what I
will speak about tonight, but builders around the country, especially those from
the thirty coastal states, are going to be directly affected by this coastal
zone management. Most builders will substantially agree with what I have to say.
Contrary to a lot of people's thinking, builders are people also. We like good
environment and we like clean streams and big fish and pretty birds, and even
vicious alligators. We think that the environments of these animals should be
protected and cleaned up. I know that there has been positive action so far
by combined state agencies, city agencies, and industry where substantial progress
has been made in this direction before coastal zone management was ever created
You all know about Lake Erie. A few years ago, if you put your toe in it, your
whole foot would fall off. Now the water is almost drinkable. There is a river
in Cleveland, Ohio, that is no longer a fire hazard. This is a result of a
cooperative effort on a local and state basis.
There is a real need for upgrading our environment, but we should contain
the impact of the environmental law to that area specifically associated with
the coastal waters. We should implement a program to defeat the idea, and as
someone mentioned here, use common sense so that the cure isn't worse than the
disease.
Let's look at cost. What is this going to cost? I'm speaking from the home
builder's standpoint. I'm not even going to get into the increased taxes that
it is going to cost to keep this organization afloat. Just look at what it is
going to cost a home builder. In this Act, it says that any person who digs or
excavates or moves dirt, flora, fauna, ore deposits or such things shall get
a permit. I'know there are a lot of people who say, "Well, that isn't enough.
We really don't mean all the people. They are going to dig a post hole. This is
not our intent to draw this area into our controls." Let me tell you about the
intent in the government programs. This is in a different but closely aligned
area of control. The Court of Appeals recently ruled the filing of a document
to justify land for sale under the Interstate Land Sales Act, which in itself
constitutes a major federal action, thereby requiring an environmental impact

108

study. The Interstate Land Sales Act was enacted and intended to protect poten-
tial purchasers from making bad investments on land, because they didn't have
the proper information about the land. These land sales companies were taking
advantage. This intent was terriffic, but the result of this decision is that
every land developer now has to prepare an environmental impact statement for
what was previously considered private enterprise. This is in direct contra-
diction of the intent of the National Environmental Policy in 1969, which
was enacted to insure environmental quality of federal activities with regard
to development. So much for intent. Intent of law means nothing when it comes
to the restrictions governing areas, restrictions where government areas of
control are concerned.
Suppose this is going to take a building permit that is $25. That doesn't
seem like an earth shaking thing. But yet when we have to have publications in
our newspapers for three weeks running. that is another $25. Then we are going
to have to get the names and addresses and all the other data from all the
surrounding property owners. For this we've got to go to a title company and
they will work a couple of days on it and charge a couple of hundred dollars.
-Then we have to get an engineer to do the surveying, get his chains out and take
grade levels and high tide and low tide and all the other things. Even in a
little thing, he will work a day at $25 an hour. This is another $200. Now
we are at $500. The highest estimate was $5,000 if there are no complications.
You are going to have to spend the minimum. at least, the way the law reads, if
you are going to put in a driveway or dig a swimming pool or harvest some
trees.
Assume we add this $500 to the price of a house and assume this person is
borrowing this money along with the rest of his mortgage at 91-4% interest, which
is the current rate for thirty years. This will cost that buyer $1,483. Now
suppose we go to the highest estimate of $5 000. That will increase the cost of
that home by $15,138. If we split it in half, the medium $2700. it is still
going to cost him $8100. Now, is there anybody in this room here who is willing
to put up that kind of money to get a permit, a bunch of papers of dubious value.?
Wait, that isn't all the cost. There is time involved in preparing and
submitting and receiving approval of the application. This can take as much
as six months or more. Now the state law provides for a 60 day waiting period
for objections to an application plus ten days for a hearing and then public
notice in local newspapers for three weeks running. That is a minimum of
three months. That still isn't all. Then, under the Federal Act the state
agency shall notify the federal agency that the state agency concurs or objects
M to the certification supplied by the applicant, If the state agency fails to
furnish the required notification within six months after they have received
certification, the federal agency will assume that the applicant is qualified.
Then, and only then, will the federal agency issue a license or permit, I can
hear them now. I've work with federal agencies for 15 to 18 years, and I can
hear them now telling you why they couldn't meet the six months deadline. All
the while the builder or developer is going broke and the home owner is living
with his inlaws and letting all the contamination and fallout of the federal
bureaucracy smother him. Where we need the cleanup is in the bureaucracy.
The medium price of a new home in 1965 was $20,000 and in the second quarter
of 1975, the medium price of a new home was $39,000. Thanks goes, in a large
part, to the inflationary policies and money mismanagement of the Federal
Government generated to feed its swollen bureaucracy.

109

Must we create yet another monster and add to the cost of such a basic
thing as shelter? If we must, and I'm not very optimistic about stopping it
let.'s define and restrict its influence to that area directly adjacent to the
coastal area. The Mobile Area Chamber of Commerce has spelled it out. The
gentleman that was just here spelled it out. Let's keep the coastal management
out of the interior of our counties. Leave that to the county land planning
commissions, city commissions. county commissions, FHA,-VA HUD. There are all
-kinds of agencies to take care of that. You know the housing industry has
enough troubles right now, so let's not add to them. Thank you very much.

M. L. Aust! I'm in the engineering surveying business. Primarily, I do'con-
sulting engineering. I am also a citizen of Baldwin County. I am concerned
about the management of our coastal zone. I am concerned that we should enhance
our coastal zone, that we should preserve and protect it, I am also concerned
about my constitutional rights.
I know these people on the Board are tired of hearing me say this. I am
concerned about the public. I believe the public has too long stood back and
said, "Well, we are just the public." You are not just the public. Section
306, Paragraph C-3 of the federal law, that is our Public Law 92-583 which you
have a copy of, requires that in order for a management program submitted by a
coastal state to be granted approval, the Secretary of Commerce or the Federal
Government shall find that the state has held public hearings in the development
of that management program. Section 308 requires that all public hearings shall
be announced and all pertinent materials be made available to the public'. It
was reported in the December 14 edition of the Eastern Shore Courier that the
Baldwin County Board of Realtors had a meeting with the technical staff of the
Coastal Area Board. They stated that the public hearings now being held were
for the purpose of informing and educating the public to insure that they have
a voice in the development of the coastal zone boundary. The newspaper article
further stated that the Board is placing major emphasis on working with an
informed public. Those intents are to be applauded and the rights of the public
to insist on being heard should be jealously guarded.
Within the federal law, Section 302, Congressional Findings, and Section 303,
Declaration of Policy, these sections are precise in their explanation that it
is necessary to preserve, protect, develop and, where possible, to enhance the
resources of the nation's coastal zone for this and succeeding generations.
These sections are likewise noble in their avowment that it is the national
policy to encourage and assist the states in the accomplishment of that objective.
one would think that the establishment of boundaries for the purpose of consider-
ation of the management or regulation of the area would be of prime importance
and one of the first steps in the development of that program. It makes sense
that we should have an area in which we are going to regulate. The federal act
so indicates that by placing such at the top of a list under Section 305-B, which
is in the federal law, that you have a copy of. However, in the handout of the
Office of Coastal Zone Management Boundary Principles and Acceptable Inland
Boundaries on page 2, it states that final inland boundaries for program appro
val must be determined after a clearly outlined program, which incorporates
permissible uses and areas of particular concern has been applied. The text
goes on to state that by definition the coastal zone extends inland only to
the extent necessary to control shores, the uses of which have a direct and

110

significant impact on the coastal waters. I question why we never heard that
word only in all of these presentations and in all the times we have heard this
definition repeated. We have never heard the word only. It logically follows
that before a state can determine (I'm quoting again from the state act, too)
management purposes, it must determine what uses are to be controlled and locate
them. Permissible Land and Water Uses, which you also have a copy of, says
nothing specific. It only outlines a procedure. It says this process is more
thoroughly explained in the permissible uses paper which the Office of Coastal
Zone Management is developing, apparently not yet developed.
I submit to you that we are at a public meeting, not a formal public hearing.
The difference is that in a public meeting you can direct the progress or the
discussion along specific lines. I believe that this boundary consideration is
a little more important than that, or the whole thing is a little bit more
important than that. I submit we are in a public meeting, not a formal public
hearing, in order to hear and discuss one of the most important and conceivably
far reaching aspects of the coastal zone management program. These boundaries,
as presented here by the Board and all the other boundaries proposed during this
series of meetings, are illconceived and in violation of the OCZM Boundary
Principles just previously quoted. If they are not, then the public has certainly
not been informed. As one man put it in Foley, "I don't necessarily mind you
doing something to me, but I just want to know what it is you're going to do."
In line with that thought on public awareness and concern, let's look at
a few of the things that the public is either poorly informed of or is not aware
of or is misled. First, in the category of the misled, the very words in the
title Coastal Zone lead the majority of the public to believe that it only
affects that area immediately adjacent to the coast, such as the Town of Gulf
Shores. As we have seen here, nothing could be farther from that truth. The
average citizen commonly assumes that he will never be involved in any dredging
activity. Man, he can't afford one of those things. A better word would be
digging. Even the word excavating conjurs up visions of a huge, big Old hole
in the ground. I'm engaging in semantics here, but I believe there have been
some semantics engaged in otherwise and also in detriment to the public.
As for ill informed, it has been publicly stated at one of the meetings by
Mr. Gary Greenough, who is a mamber of this Board, that the Federal Government
said that if we don't do it, they, the Federal Government, will do it for us.
This is simply not true at this point, and nowhere in the Act does it say or
imply that. I have been told that this sort of bureaucratic threatening has been
done at other times and at other places. the desired affect being to have the
recipient throw up his hands and say, "Well. there's nothing I can do about it."
Well, you can roll over if you want to, but it makes me see red. We are continually
being told in the defense of the federal involvement that the State of Alabama
must approve the plan. What is not said is that the Secretary of Commerce or
the Federal Government is the final approving authority.
Lastly, the public is certainly not aware of all the aspects and implications
of the state and federal laws, nor is it, as a whole, going to take the time and
trouble to make itself aware. If the Board is serious about public involvement,
it is their duty to bring these facts to the floor. Some of the aspects of the
program that the public should know are the Federal Government through the
Secretary of Commerce shall approve the program only when it is in accordance

ill

with his rules and regulationst any amendment to the program must be approved
by the Secretary before additional grants are made the Secretary shall conduct
a continuing review of the program and its performance. In other words, they
shall continually run it and shall have the authority to terminate any finan-
cial assistance.
The overall intent of this Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 is to promul-
gatep and otherwise put into effect, a federal land use program within
the coastal zone. All you have to do to determine this is to read the Act and
count the number of times that land use is referred to. You might also put
that in the category of misled. We are going to clean up the waters, but yet
we've got a land use program which I understand is why they say that. I first
submitted to you that all boundary proposals presented in this series of meetings
have not been in accordance with the evolved intent of the federal law to
regulate only that area necessary to protect the coast and its contiguous
shorelines, only after a determination of the uses to be controlled is made.
On the other hand, those proposals which only call for a bare minimum of boun_
daries are not addressing themselves to the problem.
Those who have said that we should wait until the Federal Government does it
for us are like an ostrich sticking his head in the sand. The presentation of the
boundary choices generated by the Board are in themselves a violation of the
principals advocated by the handouts. I refer to page 2 as previously quoted.
The only real and valid argument for any of the boundaries presented is that they
would be acceptable to the Federal Government. We have some words and we have
some positive statements for them, but they are not significant. The only
significant statement is that it would be acceptable to the Federal Government.
We can get some boundaries and if we were to define what their uses are, then
we can get some management. Put some better words on them than that.
I further submit to you that these unofficial publictearings are in violation
of the intent of the federal requirement that public hearings be held, Section
306, C-3, in that sufficient notice was not given. These meetings have been
held during the holiday season, when the public is least likely to attend or get
involved and there has been inadequate information and education of the public
presenting all aspects of the program. Its implication was not conducted prior
to this series of meetings. Therefore, the public cannot be expected to be
rationally involved. As a net result, we have seen conducted five hearings, spent
a lot of money, yours and mine, raised everybody's blood pressure, and have
really gotten nowhere closer to sitting down to any sort of rational solution to
the problem.
Gentlemen, I say again we've got a problem, and we've got to come up wi@h a
rational solution. I simply say that federal money and federal involvement is not
the answer. Your involvement as the public and doing it yourself is the answer.
As a member of the public, I request that another series of meetings be held after
it has been determined what uses are to be controlled, the affected areas have been
located, and the manner in which they are to be controlled has been defined. I am
assuming here that the more rational approach would be that some areas would be
controlled differently from other areas, depending upon location and land use.
For example, I can't see the logic in controlling a patch of piney woods three miles
north of Bay Minette the same as you would control a patch of piney woods three
hundred yards off the Gulf of Mexico. I don't believe that you could go three
miles north of Bay Minette and tell any difference in appearance between a patch
of piney woods there and a patch of piney woods three miles north of Columbus,
Georgia. Why don't we just extend them (boundaries) to Columbus, Georgia, if that
is what we are concerned about? During this subsequent series of meetings that I

112

am advocating, I would anticipate that a more rational input of public opinion,
relative to the establishment of boundaries and to the whole implementation of
the coastal zone management concept, would and could be made. Thank you.

A. B. Hankins, Jr.: Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the Coastal Zone Commission,
I'm Sonny Hankins, Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners here in
Baldwin County. First off, I would like to say to the Board members here that you
all are to be commended with the job that you were appointed to do.
The other day the County Commission was notified that in Washington, D.C.,
a seminar put on by the National Association of Counties, would hold a meeting
for the coastal counties of the states in the United States. Commissioner Clarence
Bishop, David Wood, the County Administrator, and myself attended that seminar
in Washington. Mr. McMillan couldn't go because of the coastal zone meeting
being held over on the Causeway.
I'm not like a lot of people that were up there. I didn't know anything
about the coastal zone. I still don't know too much about it, but I do know
that it has grave ramifications. I know that when I went on the Commission in
1973 when we were meeting with different government agencies about different
things including land use, subdivision regulations and other things, we discussed
it. By and by the word coastal zone would keep popping up. Someone would
say not to worry about that, the coastal zone will take care of that later on.
You don't have to worry about that. In a year or two the coastal zone will
handle that problem for you, We learned a lot of things pertaining to the
Coastal Zone Management Act. We learned in 1972 that the Federal Government, in
the closing moments of a Congressional debate up there, passed the Coastal Zone
Management Act, that allowed the states to appoint a Coastal Zone Management
Board, whereby they could regulate the coastal zone. This law. as Mr. Aust
has already stated, was purely permissible as far as the states were concerned.
They could perform or they could come under this Act if they so desired. It
was not mandatory. The law does not say a state shall have a Coastal Zone Board.
It says it is permissible. I understand from a reliable source while we were up
there that the reason the State of Alabama got involved was because the Governor
and the Alabama Development Office, as all of you recall, were trying to get a
superport out in the Gulf. The federal authorities told them at that time that
the state must have a coastal zone management plan before they could qualify to
get a superport.
We also learned that the intention of the Coastal Zone Management Act that
was passed in Alabama was that the people in the area of the coastal zone would
be the ones who would be represented on the Board. As all of you know, Baldwin
County and Mobile County are the two counties that have a coastal zone in the
State of Alabama. Baldwin County has over 70% of the coastline, and we have one
member on the Board. The intention of the federal act was that the local people
would be the ones acting the law.
I aiso thought, and I found out this was a misconception, that as a result
of the hearings that were going on down here, local participation would be con-
sidered in designating the coastal zone. I have a copy here of the plan I
believe that you all adopted. The Alabama Coastal Area Board Application Plan
on page 22 says that the primary responsibility of the staff has been to see that
the work program generally follows guidelines set out in the federal application,
and that it is completed in an expeditious manner. In other words the Federal

113

Government is telling us that if we want to participate and if we want to have
a coastal zone, they have funds to help us put together a coastal zone area and
to help us implement our plan. However, we have to follow their federal guide-
lines that they hand out. Those guidelines include land use regulations, zoning
regulations, and the right of condemnation. All of you know what the right of
condemnation is.
We also learned that the coastal zone boundary line and the land use regulations
that would take effect in the coastal zone boundaries should be worked or should
progress along the same lines. After talking with Mr. Hyde here and reading in
your plan of application, you all haven't gotten into the classifications of the
land use regulations within the coastal zone. What I am saying in simple language
is that we don't know yet what the Coastal Zone Management Board is going to
require in the coastal zone area, but we do know that there are federal guide-
lines that have come down from the Federal Government that say you must have
zoning regulations, land use regulations, and the right to condemn private pro-
perty if the need arises.
I have here a copy of the North Carolina plan. I have only one that I
picked up at the seminar. It is going to the Secretary of Commerce. By the
way, there were thirty-four states represented and one hundred counties repre-
sented at this seminar. There was 98% in attendance of the coastal counties of
the United States. In this plan, I believe, they used approximately a thousand
yards inland from the coast as the boundary. This plan has not been approved
by the Secretary of Commerce. My contention is this: I don't believe Vm so
naive as to think that if this Board were to put together a plan that left out
federal guidelines pertaining to national land use, zoning regulations and the
right of this Board to condemn, the Secretary of Commerce would approve it. He
would turn it down.
I also have a copy of the California plan. In its plan, the issue got so hot
that when the Legislature met, they passed an act stating that when the Califor-
nia'.Coastal Zone Plan was put together, it would have to be submitted to the
State Legislature. They would have to approve it before it would go to the
Governor. Then it would be sent on to the Department of Commerce. We had com-
missioners on both sides at the seminar. There were commissioners from up in the
northern part of California who were opposed to it and said it wouldn't pass.
There were also commissioners from Los Angelos County, those industrial and
highly populated areas, who favor the plan and said it would pass. I feel that
we may have the cart ahead of the horse. We need to know what the federal guide-
lines are. We need to be aware of what the regulations are going to be before
we set this plan.
At the same time we were attending this seminar, there was another seminar
that we attended. It pertained to the outer continental shelf, that portion
beyond the three mile limit out in the Gulf that belongs to the Federal Govern-
ment as someone said here a while ago. Now, as I understand it and as the story
was presented to us, in the event they drill an oil or gas well out there and
it becomes productive (They gave us some figures on the production they believe
is out there, Biy-Haas, the County Commissioner from Mobile, was sitting by me
and he had some figures on the Citronelle field. One well out there was equal
to about five of Citronelle's production today and in the last thirty years, so
you can see what kind of production they are talking about with 500 wells out
there.), and they come ashore with a pipeline. Also needed will be all the neces-
sary refining equipment and all of the storage facilities and all of the roads

114

and schools and the sewers and the water systems that are going to have to be
there when all the people come in to do this. Then if this area is not in the
coastal zone designated area, we can't qualify for the funds that the Federal
Government says in an act that they are preparing to pass. They are going to have
up to $600 million for these areas in the event this takes place.
What I am getting back to say is this act is not on a voluntary basis. I am
reminded of our flood insurance program. All of you are familiar with that. You
developers and all of you people who live on the coast were told that it was
purely voluntary. It started off that you could have it if you wanted it. If
you didn't have it, then don't ask the government for it. Well, by and by, all
of you know the story about that, They told us that if we didn't have it and
if we didn't keep up the guidelines that the federal authorities, Veterans Admin-
istration, national banks, and savings and loan institutions handed out, all of
these lending agencies wouldn't loan any money in those areas * Consequently what
did we do? We all have a flood insurance program here in.the county. This
is not the time and place to discuss that, but what I am saying is this, that
we learned up there the fact that we don't know where this is leading *
We've got the plan. This thing is already implemented It is on its way.
There is no way that we can get@out of it, as I see it. I read in the paper
somewhere last week that if we just kind of let it wither on the vine, Mr. Hyde,
it will just go away. Well, now they didn't tell us that the other day in
Washington.
What I think we need to do and what I have implemented since I have been
back and after talking with Congressman Edwards is that we need to amend this act.
We can get support from the National Association of Counties and there are people
on Capitol Hill to lobby for us. We have asked the County's attorney to write an
amendment and send it to Congressman Edwards. He will introduce it on the Floor
to amend the Coastal Zone Management Act, whereby if a state has a coastal zone
plan 'then the people on the Board (with all due respect to this Board) shall be
constituted of a majority from the coastal zone areas. In other words, this will
insure the people in the coastal zone areas that they will have representation on
the Board, which will set up a plan that you and I and all of us are going to
have to live by.
I think that we have to have some type of system whereby we can control the
abuses that the Federal Government has put on us. I have read these things, gentle-
men, through and through and front to back. Nowhere in there does it respect
the right of private ownership. It seems that has been totally left out, If we
go a thousand yards inland, I don't think the Secretary of Commerce will buy that.
I am reminded of some of the Tennessee-Tombigbee folks whenever they were pro-
moting their story. With Chicago being a seaport town, maybe we ought to take
in Illinois now. Let it be included since it's a coastal zone area. This is how
ridiculous some of it can be. I know this may not be the place that we need to
discuss it, but I think it is being misrepresented to make you think this input
that you gentlemen and ladies have given here will help decide this thing. because
it tqon't. What will decide where the coastal zone will be is what those federal
guidelines say, which were handed down to this Board. That is what you all are
going by, because if you don't go by it, the Secretary of Commerce is not going
to approve it.
What we need to decide is how much the public wants to put into a program
like this. One of the commissioners from California, in his final statement, said
that in their plan they proposed $2.4 billion to buy, through the right of condem-
nation if need be, all of the coast up and down California. They even had'it

set out where they could pay $300 million a year for the next thirty years to pay
it off, and it would belong to the public. That is pretty good planning, but you
and I are going to have to pay for it. How much of it are we going to be willing
to pay for?
I think we need to also remember that this country was founded on the right
or private ownership to buy land or to sell it. At the same time, I feel that
private ownership has done a pretty good job of protecting some of our vital
resources. We still have a few ducks left, a few fish, and some bears. I talked
to a lady from Louisiana who was at the seminar, and she tells me they have a
few alligators left. What I am saying is before you decide on a coastal zone
boundary line, tell us what the federal guidelines are going to be and how much
restrictior and what the restrictions are so that we will have some kind of
knowledge of what we are going to have to put up with. Because, you see, if it is
going to be you and I and these people out here who are going to have to live
with it.
Since I've been a County Commissioner, I've seen a lot of federal programs
come and go, but for the public record, I'm going to tell you here tonight, ladies
and gentlemen, that this is the worst piece of legislation that I;ve ever seen.
It absolutely takes the right of private ownership away from everybody in the
area they decide is a coastal zone. It is not just another regulatory agency.
It goes far beyond that. It has every right that private ownership has plus
anything else they might want to do in that area.
I want to remind you in closing of a story that you all know. It is the
policy of the Federal Government to want to offer you a plan and say, "If you will
do it like I want you to do it. I'm going to give you some money to go along
with it." You all remember back in the 40's when they told us they had a fe.-w
extra dollars up there and our schools needed a little money. We could just
take the money and spend it on our schools, and they were not going to tell us
what to do with it. Now you all know the moral of that story.
I'm here tonight to go on public record to say that you, the citizens of
Baldwin and Mobile Counties, need to get up and get in nDtion to help provide
the plan that these gentlemen are going to have to put together. If it is a
plan that the Secretary of Commerce won't buy, then that may be the plan that we
need to go along with, because it will be your plan. The only way we can do
that is to have representation on this Board. I could care less if he is a
Bay Minette bureaucrat or a Montgomery bureaucrat or a Washington bureaucrat.
They are all bureaucrats as far as I'm concerned. Thank you.

George Kaiser: Chairman, members of the Commission, and ladies and gentlemen I'm
George Kaiser, a farmer in Baldwin County. I'm a little tired and I guess you
are too, but I became concerned about some of these programs including coastal
zone management,,.land use, clean water and a lot of these other things, because
I felt they concerned me as a landowner and farmer. I found out that I wasn't
the only one@conderned. I found out that my fellow farmers were also very much
the State of Alabama. We have been discuss
concerned in'Baldwin County and in ing
this among ourselves. I know you are tired and I would probably reiterate a lot
of things that have already been said, so I am going to refrain from making any
comments and stick with the script I have prepared. That way, I'll get through
much quicker and you won't get quite so tired.

116

One of the major problems with land use planning is that most of us are not
familiar enough with the concept. We have seen other forms of permit and regu-
lation imposed by other agencies under circumstances where we have had the feel-
ing that the motivation for the program was through well meaning but poorly
informed individuals and groups acting on emotion, rather than firm, scientific
or ecological data. We are here this evening to discuss the boundaries of an
area which will delineate shore zone. This area, when designated, will be pro-
tected and developed according to some plan which will be established later.
I am certain that there is no one in this room who would argue against some
plan which would protect the fragile ecosystem of shore and wetland or who would
propose unlimited random growth of population and industry. We agree with the
need to protect the historic and aesthetic qualities of this area The farms
and forests of the area will suffer first and foremost from any type of random
development. However, it must follow that there is the potential for hurt in
any regulatory or permit program, as well.
Some of Alabama's most unique and productive land lies within the areas we
are discussing and which are proposed on your maps. Normal agricultural practices
on these areas are already regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency under
pesticide control, Water Pollution Control Act Corps of Engineers OSHA, State
Department of Agriculture and Industry State Health Department Alabama Develop-
ment Office and others. Through these watchful eyes. we feel that there is al-
ready sufficient protection for ecology of the shores and wetlands from any
alleged degradations of agricultural and silvicultural practices. The farmers
who opened and developed this unique agricultural resource contend that they must
be allowed to continue to sustain production on the land. The economics of the
state and nation depend on it.
Designations on the use or sale of land which would define one area agricul-
tural, one commercial, one residential or industrial implies a value designation
on that land which could restrict the landowner's ability to optimize the value
of his investment. The farmer who has been steward of the land for generations
must be able to manage his investment and receive compensation. A farm located
in or near an area designated for another use would change in value more than one,
restricted to agricultural use or placed in an industrial area. We would suggest
that it would require an extremely complicated system of designation and compen-
sation to provide an equitable solution to this one question, The ultimate effect
of our discussion here this evening is to establish a boundary and subsequent
program which would influence land values.
It may be significant that in both the federal and state acts there is a
conspicuous omission of any reference to agriculture or silviculture. Alabama
Act 1274 has working definitions which are predicated on coastal area, coastal
waters and estuary. We would first remind you of the definition of coastal area
where the intent of the law clearly states that the area "extends inland from
shorelines 2Tly to the extent necessary to control shorelands."
We contend that this represents legislative intent and may be in conflict
with some of the proposed areas suggested by your maps. Further, we would take
exception to the definition of estuary which is not compatible with that used in
geological literature. We feel that "unimpaired connection with the open sea"
could be used to extend the boundaries inland far beyond the intent of the law.,
I am representing the citizen members of the Alabama Farm Bureau Federation,
an organization of over 176,000 families whose delegates voted unanimously to
seek solutions to land use questions which would have minimum impact on farm
production and farm land and maximum input from local citizens in their establish-
ment and implementation.

117

We, therefore, propose the 11.8 foot, 100 year flood contour as the ultimate
reach of the zone. We also recommend that a citizen's commission be established
which would base its membership on a land affected basis and that all decisions
regarding the designation of land for specific use be submitted to this commis-
sion before its ultimate adoption. Further, we would appeal to the Board not to
make any decision on the boundaries of the area without first assessing the
resources that are involved.

Upham: I know that you have listened very patiently throughout many statements
tonight. This is the most we've ever had at one of these meetings. We will
not try to answer any questions. I'll stay here just as long as you do, but
those of you who would like to go at this time, please feel free to do so. For
those of you who have questions and would like to learn a little bit more
about this, we'll be glad to answer any questions that we possibly can. You
have one of these question@cards in your folders if you want to ask a question.

James W. Reeder: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members of the Committee, ladies and
gentlemen, I'm James W. Reeder, President of the Alabama Wildlife Federation,
representing 17,000 people in the State of Alabama. I would like to pose a
question to the gentleman as to just how we bypass obeying the requirements of the
Federal Government when we already are using HEW funds, Corps of Engineers,
federal highways, and food stamps. In just about every walk of life, the Federal
Government is involved. We are involved with them in one way or the other. How
do we get around this without complying with some of the things they set forth
for us today?
In speaking to those who have referred to Mrs. Horne's statement as being
far out, I would have to say that this is wrong. Mrs. Horne is only helping to
comply with what the Federal Government requires of you Alabamians if we are going
to be given the opportunity to draw the boundary line. This will'be defined
later as the coastal zone and will be managed by the people of Alabama. If we
are narrow minded and sit on our behinds, then the Feds will do it for us.
The lines that we submitted tonight are not necessarily the ones that will
be drawn or the ones that will be accepted by the Federal Government. This
meeting means that we have complied with the requirements of holding the
required public meetings. We are now ready to begin drawing lines if the Feds
accept what we have done thus far. Thank you, sir.

Upham: There have been a number of statements on the acceptability of a line
which doesn't take in as much territory as we have shown. Unless I am very much
mistaken, I think the 100 year flood line is acceptable as far as the Federal
Government is concerned. That is my own opinion. I don't know whether I'm
right or not, but I will find out. I also would like to say that this is only
one of the first of many meetings concerning what we hope to do as far as our
plan goes. You, very definitely, will be involved. I must say that I am tremen-
dously pleased that so many of you turned out tonight. We have so many different
opinions. This is the way, as far as I'm concerned, government should work. The
people should take part in it, and it should be their government.

Kenneth Cooper: What is this Board's next step after completion of these hearings
for determining the coastal zone boundaries?
Upham: We are going to go over all of the hearings that we have had so far. We
will try to determine what the public wants and come up with some kind of plan that

118

we hope will fit in with what most of you have said you would like to have.
Then we will come back to you once again and say that this is what you wanted
as far as we can determine. Are we right?

yme Ebenstein: May I make a short statement on something I don't think has been
emphasized enough? In order to determine the boundaries, I think one of the
P

things that we should consider more than anything else is preservation of the
wetlands. I don't think most people realize that the wetlands and the marshes
and the swamps are the breeding grounds, the nursery grounds, of sea life. We
depend to a great extent on fish, crab and shrimp and so does the county and the
rest of the world. We are going to become more and more dependent on food from
the sea.
In connection with that, I would like to tell you that those precise areas
of the wetlands are the most desirable for what is called development. To give
you an example of how the real estate people feel about something that is on the
water, welve just had an addition to our shoreline in Fairhope. There are apart-
ments called condominiums. The ones that are right on the Bay where the windows
look onto the Bay sell for $54,000. The ones just a few hundred feet inland where
the windows face the other way sell for $27,000. So that is how the real estate
people feel about water. They are going to drain swamps and buy up and dvelop
these precious wetland areas if they can. The country simply cannot spare any
more of the coastline. It has filled in more than $70 of the original wetlands.
Fish are getting more scarce to the point where the Russian boats are already
fishing right off the shores of Long Island. This is now becoming an important
issue in Washington--national security, because food is our greatest weapon.

John Richburg: How will coastal zone management be affected by Section 404, Regu-
lations of the Corps of Engineers? That is the Clean Air and Water Act.
Hyde: I'm sorry, but I can't give you a specific answer to that, because I am
not familiar with Section 404 of the Corps of Engineers Regulations right off
the top of my head. I do know this: The Corps of Engineers from the national
level has put out a policy statement stating they will cooperate in everything
they do with the coastal zone management planning activiites. I assume that
coastal zone management and Section 404 Regulations would be compatible.

Bob Willis: Why has the news media not been informed formally that this and
other meetings were to be held?
Hyde: This is a question that came up last week, too. Mr. Cody answered it by
saying that we had informed 17 local newspapers, weeklies and dailies. We sent
news releases to all the radio stations in Baldwin and Mobile Counties and also
as far as Biloxi, Mississippi, and Pensacola, Florida. As far as we know and
as far as we were able to determine through the Public Relations Office of the
Alabama Development Office, we contacted every radio station and every newspaper
about each one of these meetings. If you didn't get the word maybe we can blame
another federal program, the U.S. Post Office. That is the only answer I have
to that question.

John Dixon: I don't know how many of these folks have had the occasion to seek
a permit to dredge in navigable waters. I had the occasion to seek such a permit.
It took me from April 22 until September 16 in a given year to obtain a permit to
A dredge an area 50 feet wide and 75 feet long to a depth of 12 feet. Now when
this coastal zone management goes into effect, from what I can gather, there
will be an additional eleven agencies which must be contacted. There is a
catch-all phrase in the law which says if the other agencies say you can have
the permit, then you may go ahead. Let's suppose a man own's a piece of property,

119

a residential block or lot on the water and he wants to build a five foot pier.
He's going to have to follow the same channels as the Alabama Power Company if
it wants to put up a steam generating plant on the Tensaw River. Is this the
case in this thing?
Upham: I don't think that will happen.
John Dixon: You don't think so, but I didn't think that I would have any trouble
with it either.
Upham: I realize, and I think a lot of people realize, that this permitting
business is very difficult.
Name not known: I waited two years on a pier permit.
Upham: I think the suggestion that was made tonight about a clearing house has
come up before. We have brought it up ourselves at the Coastal Area Board
meetings to try to get some kind of a clearing house where you can go to one
place and find out all about what you've got to do. I think this is a very good
idea.
John Dixon: Don't think that will ever happen to tell you the truth.
Upham: Well, I hope it does. I know that there is some very serious consideration
going on between the federal agencies to try and come up with some means of
cutting down the time that is required on the permits.

Name not known: Some mention has been made of the property values involved in
this, and it happens that I own waterfront property. I know another gentleman
who owns a great deal of property on the waterfront. Since the advent of environ-
mental protection agencies, the property values in this particular area have
dropped better than 60%. I'm not saying that I'm not going to give up the
property if that's necessary to preserve the environment, but if I'm to give it
up, why not everyone else? Why don't they just go through a procedure of
eminent domain and take the.whole blooming lot and relocate us somewhere. I have
to have some decisions pretty soon, because I've invested about half my life in
this mess. I don't feel like falling back now and waiting another 10 or 15 years
while we resolve the problems over this bureaucratic nonsense to come up with an
answer to satisfy the needs of the moment.
Upham: The Coastal Area Board is in no position for these kinds of questions.
I realize this is going on. All you have said isgoing to be published, so your
statement is going to be made public.

Name not known: We came here expecting a decision on boundaries. Now everything
points to the fact that this is not related to boundary establishment. As such,
will this meeting be considered the final say?
Upham: No, entirely not. This is a preliminary meeting for our own good as well
as yours. We found out an awful lot from these hearings, and it has given us a
good idea of what we should do. We really appreciate it.
Name not known: Do you intend to hold further meetings?
Upham:. We intend to hold many further hearings on everything concerning coastal
zone management.
Name not known: May I suggest that you publicize these future meetings through
all of the news media including the television?
Upham: We will if they will.
Name not known: I surely hope so, because the only time we picked this up was
strictly by accident.

120

Upham: Well, that's too bad, because we have really tried to hit the news
media just as much as we possibly could. We have contacted all the newspapers.
radio stations and television stations. Are there any other questions?

Name not known: I was kind of interested in a statement that was made about this
law and many of our other laws. I feel it is getting to the point where it is
discouraging men from owning property. When I own something personally, I like
to have control of it and do what I want to with it, drill a hole in it, burn it,
or get rid of it. You get to the point where you have spent your own money, and
then you can't do what you want with it. That, to me, gets very upsetting.
Upham: Well, it upsets me, too. I happen to own land on the waterfront. I can't
even sell it.
Name not known: That to me is more important than where the zone is placed. What
are we going to do with the people?
Upham: We are getting away from what we are trying to do here and at every one
of these meetings. People, I think, have been thinking about these things for
quite some time, and this is the first chance they have had in a public meeting
to get up and speak their mind. This may be a good thing. We may be doing
something that is going to help.

A. B. Hankins, Jr.: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask when you take up the
business of your land use after you decide the coastal boundary line, will you
have public meetings to take up this segment of it?
Yphan@: I think we will probably have public meetings on each one of the work
systems that we have to do.
A. B. Hankins, Jr.: At that time, would it be appropriate?
Upham: That would be the time. Of course, every time we have a meeting we have
a few more people that know a little more about what we are trying to do and
what coastal zone management means. They are going to keep their eyes open, I
hope, from now on. We've got their names and we are going to send them things.
We may succeed, but I don't know.

Mrs. Duncan Naylor: I just wanted to show you something that came out of the
newspaper on coastal zone management. This was in the Mobile Register on Sunday,
November 15, giving an outline of all the meetings. I heard it on the radio, too.
I've seen it in the newspapers, and I've seen lots of television news about it.
I think that you have let the people know about these meetings.

Ella Taylor: I would like to know just how the coastal bouncary is going to
affect our roads in our state. There are quite a few people right here tonight who
work on the highways and the country roads. How is this going to affect them, when
you can't move dirt from one place to the other? Can you answer that?
Upham: It's not going to affect it at all.

Charles Partin: Does the Board have a target date to establish boundary lines?
Upham: No

Wesley Grant: If the Federal Government is interested in this, why is federal
land exempted from the program? I noticed that you cannot include federal land
in this program.
Upham: This is mostly defense land.

121

Wesley Grant: Not all. The public parks could be included. I don't see why
they exempt their property from us when they are advocating coastal zone
management.
Upham: Well, I don't know exactly whey they do either. I never asked them that
particular question. I will tell you something that I think is very important.
Of all our coastline that we have in the United States, and we have an awful
lot, only 6% is open to the public. We haven't got much more left to save.

Bob Willis: Several people have mentioned the fact that we only have one repre-
sentative from Baldwin County. I haven't heard yet who initially decided who
would be on the Board or the number that would be on this Board. Why was only
one Baldwin County representative included when you have a County Commissioner
from Mobile County and also a City Commissioner from the City of Mobile? There
are no representatives from Gulf Shores nor from the Eastern Shore on the Board.
Yet there is a representative from the City of Mobile on the Board.
Upham: This was set up by the Legislature. Then the Governor appointed the
Board. This amendment that was mentioned earlier and has been brought up two
or three times is specifically designed to get more people on the Board from
Baldwin County.

122

MEETING PARTICIPANTS

Bay Minette, Alabama

R. Michael Akridge Jeffrey H. Blood
Alabama Power Company South Alabama Regional Planning
600 North 18th Street Commission
Birmingham, Alabama 35291 Post Office Box 1665
M. L. Aust Mobile, Alabama 36601
610 Spanish Main L. F. Boescher
Spanish Fort, Alabama 36527 Route 2, Box 199
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507
Gene Bastian
Spanish Cove J. T. Bradley, Jr.
Post Office Box 218 14 Hand Avenue
Lillian, Alabama 36549 Bay Minette, Alabama 36507

Dr. Burton C. Beck Beulah N. Bryant
J. H. Faulkner State Tensas Tributaries Association
Junior College Post Office Box 301
Faculty Drive Stockton, Alabama 36579
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507
Hal Bryars
Thomas H. Benton First National Bank of Mobile
Sheriff, Baldwin County 6 Denniston Lane 1-D
Route 2, Box 185 Mobile, Alabama 36609
Foley, Alabama 36535
Harold Bryars
Z_- Robert F. Berry Tensas Tributaries Association
USDA Soil Conservation Service Star Route A, Box 61
Post Office Box 969 Stockton, Alabama 36579
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507
Mrs. Harold Bryars
C. H. Bishop Stockton, Alabama 36579
County Commission
Baldwin County Courthouse Greg Bryton
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507 Baldwin County Wildlife
Route 1, Box 389
Walter Blaylock Bay Minette, Alabama 36507
Walter Blaylock Realty
Post Office Box 274 Frank Caraher
Foley, Alabama 36535 Post Office Box 194
Fairhope, Alabama 36532

123

John W. Carter Frances G. Dyson
Faulkner State Junior College 16 Cliff Drive, Apartment 1
U. S. Highway 31 South Fairhope, Alabama 36532
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507
Phil P. Dyson
Gene Cody 16 Cliff Drive, Apartment 1
Alabama Development Office Fairhope, Alabama 36532
State Planning Division
State Capitol Charles Earle
Montgomery, Alabama 36130 Post Office Box 438
Fairhope, Alabama 36532
Kenneth Cooper
Attorney At Law Pyme Ebenstein
501 East 4th Street Save Our Bay Club
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507 156 White Avenue
Fairhope, Alabama 36532
Joseph A. Crane
Post Office Box 55 Cliff Eddins
Stockton, Alabama 36579 Route 1, Box 394
3ay Minette, Alabama 36507
Dale Crittenden
Baldwin County Homebuilders F. B. Ellison
Post Office Box 517 Faru Bureau
Fairhope, Alabama 36532 Route 1, Box 124
Robertsdale, Alabama 36567
David E. Dean, Jr.
Star Route A L. D. Fenner
Atmore, Alabama 36502 Route 1, Box 116 A
Summerdale, Alabama 36580
Fulton E. Duck
Councilman, City of Bay Minette Richard Fifield
108 East 6th Street Alabama Farm Bureau Federation
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507 Post Office 11000
Montgomery, Alabama 36111
Joe R. Duncan
South Alabama Regional Planning. Barry Gaston
Commission Save Our Bay Club
Post Office Box 1665 Post Office Box 389
Mobile, Alabama 36601 Fairhope, Alabama 36532

Donald E. Dunn Wesley Grant
Extension Service Rural Development Commission
Post Office Box 389 Post' Office Box 703
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507 Fairhope, Alabama 36532

Craig F. Dyas Alton B. Hankins, Jr.
Twin Beach Road Baldwin County Commissioner
Battles Wharf, Alabama Rosington
Robertsdale, Alabama 36507

124

John M. Ha stie Lynn Hastie Jones
TATA TATA
Post Office Box 69 Post Office Box 69
Stockton, Alabama 36579 Stockton, Alabama 36579

David R. Hastie Bob Kaiser
TATA 16 Lee Circle
Post Office Box 69 Spanish Fort, Alabama 36527
Stockston, Alabama 36579
George Kaiser
W. H. Hodges Alabama Farm Bureau
Stockton, Alabama 36579 Route 2, Box 23
Foley, Alabama 36535
W. L. Hood
International Paper Company Michael J. Keener
Post Office Box 2448 Alabama Geological Survey
Mobile, Alabama 36601 Post Office Drawer 0
Thomas R. Horne University, Alabama 35480
708 Fairhope Avenue Harold King
Fairhope, Alabama 36532 Post Office Box 119
Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542
Verda Horne
League of Women Voters Frank Kury
708 Fairhope Avenue WALA TV News
Fairhope, Alabama 36532 210 Government Street
Mobile, Alabama 36609
Bobby G. Hutto
International Paper Company Jean Kutack
Post Office Box 179 League of Women Voters
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507 607 Hancock
Fairhope, Alabama 36532
Willis Hyde
Alabama Development Office C. Joe Lambert
State Planning Division Route 4, Box 187
State Capitol Spanish Fort, Alabama 36527
Montgomery, Alabama 36130
Neil Lauder
S. Starke Irvine Baldwin County Commissioner
Earle, McMillan & Niemeyer, Inc. Post Office Box 148
Post Office Box 438 Bay Minette, Alabama 36507
Fairhope, Alabama 36532
Bruce Little
Dianne Jones Baldwin County Wildlife
Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Route 1, Box 392 B
Consortium Bay Minette, Alabama 36507
Post Office Drawer AG
Ocean Springs, Mississippi 39564 Henry Little
Route 1, Box 392 B
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507

125

Jesse D. McCallister Neil McMillan
Route 2, Box 205 A Post Office Box 224
Foley, Alabama 36535 Stockton, Alabama 36579

Mrs. Jesse D. McCallister Raymond McMillan
Route 2, Box 205 A Stockton, Alabama 36579
Foley, Alabama 36535
Stephen A. McMillan
Steven McDavid Baldwin County Board of Realtors
University of South Alabama Post Office Box 337
628 Tuthill Lane Bay Minette, Alabama 36507
Mobile, Alabama 36605 Albert Martin
Wallace I. McElroy Post Office Box 786
Mobile Area Chamber Of Commerce Bay Minette, Alabama 36507
Post Office Box 2187
Mobile, Alabama 36601 John E. Mixon, Jr.
Alabama Antipollution League
J. B. McIlwain Route 3, Box 2180
Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Foley, Alabama 36535
Consortium
Post Office Drawer AG William F. Moore
Ocean Springs, Mississippi 39564 Suite 119, Bel Air Mall II
3100 Cottage Hill Road
Archie M. McMillan Mobile, Alabama 36606
Baldwin County Commission
Baldwin County Courthouse Earl W. Mundt
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507 Route 3, Box 2132
Foley, Alabama 36535
J. M. McMillan
Post Office Box 79 W. A. Murray
Stockton, Alabama 36579 Riverside Motel
Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542
John McMillan, Jr.
State Representative, Alabama Mrs. Duncan Naylor
House of Representatives League of Women Voters
Post Office Box 253 2011 Old County Road
Stockton, Alabama 36579 Daphne, Alabama 36526

Mrs. John M. McMillan Jame s K. Nelear
Post Office Box 253 Route 3
Stockton, Alabama 36579 Foley, Alabama 36535

Kathye L. McMillan Chester H. Norris
Post Office Box 253 Stockton, Alabama 36579
STockton, Alabama 36579
Mrs. C. H. Norris
Mrs. Marian G. McMillan Stockton, Alabama 36579
Stockton, Alabama 36579

126

Charles R. Partin Martha Summons
1100 McConnell Avenue Mobile Press Register
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507 Mobile, Alabama 36601

Madison R. Powell George Skipper
Alabama Marine Resources Division Jones & Skipper
Post Office Drawer 458 Route 1, Box 120
Gulf Shores, Alabama 36542 Robertsdale, Alabama 36567

Roy F. Price Philip Smith
Alabama Forestry Commission Baldwin Times
Post Office Box 998 Bay Minette, Alabama 36507
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507
Randy Smith
James W. Reeder 366 Charleston Court
Alabama Wildlife Federation Mobile, Alabama 36608
660 Adams Avenue
Montgomery, Alabama 36104 Richard Smith
Route 2, Box 54
Mrs. James W. Reeder Stockton, Alabama 36579
660 Adams Avenue
Montgomery, Alabama 36104 S. K. Smith III
Route A, Box 54
John Richburg Stockton, Alabama 36579
USDA Soil Conservation Service
Post Office Box 638 Samuel K. Smith, Jr.
Grove Hill, Alabama 36451 Route A, Box 54
Stockton, Alabama 36579
Paul F. Rider
Home Builders Association Chris W. Stafford
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507 Route 2, Box 7
Faiihope, Alabama 36532
Shellene Scarbrough
Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Helen S. Stafford
Consortium League of Women Voters
Post Office Drawer AG Route 2, Box 7
Ocean Springs, Mississippi 39564 Fairhope, Alabama 36532

Joe E. Seward Bill Starnes
Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Alabama Development Office
Consoritum State Planning Division
Post Office Drawer AG State Capitol
Ocean Sorings, Mississippi 39564 Montgomery, Alabama 36130

Linda Shumate Harry Still
International Paper Company City of Bay Minette
Post Office Box 179 Post Office Box 770
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507 Bay Minette, Alabama 36507

127

Mrs. Ella Taylor David C. Wood
212 North Boulen Avenue Baldwin County Administrator
Bay Minette, Alabama Post Office Box 148
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507
C. L. Thompson
Baldwin County Wildlife and G. W. Woodson
Conservation Association Post Office Box 356
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507 Bay Minette, Alabama 36507

David A. Toenes C. K. Zehner
Mobile Area Chamber of Commerce Baldwin County Health Department
Post Office Box 2187 Post Office Box 150
Mobile, Alabama 36601 Bay Minette, Alabama 36507

Marvin 0. Toler, Jr.
Baldwin County Wildlife and
Conservation Association
Route 2, Box 454
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507

Jeannette Tootle
Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant
Consortium
Post Office Drawer AG
Ocean Springs, Mississippi 39564

Dr. Sidney Upham
Marine Environmental Sciences
Consortium
Alabama Coastal Area Board
Dauphin Island Sea Lab
Dauphin Island, Alabama 36528

Bob Willis
SBCA Radio
Post Office Box 426
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507

Thomas B. Willisson, Jr.
Crossroads Route, Box 344 A
Bay 14nette, Alabama 36507

Donald Wilson
Baldwin County Wildlife
Association
1707 McMillan Avenue
Bay Minette, Alabama 36507

Edward E. Woerne
Route 1, Box 378
Elberta, Alabama 36530

128

JOAA COASIAL SERIICES CTR LIBRARY
3 6668 14110877 1