It has to be done with laws with the State and Federal.

Senator RIBICOFF. Thank you very much for your perspective comments, Mrs. Van Zandt. I know the work you have done: I know your credentials in the whole field of conservation. Not only are you a person who talks about things, but you are a person who gets things done, and I do appreciate your comments.

Mrs. VAN ZANDT. Thank you.

Senator RIBICOFF. Glad to have you here.
Senator Mathias?

Mrs. Bertrand Brown, please.

STATEMENT OF MRS. BERTRAND BROWN, LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF CONNECTICUT

Mrs. BROWN. Senators, I am speaking today for the League of Women Voters of Connecticut. The league appreciates this opportunity to submit testimony on the very necessary comprehensive study and plan for Long Island Sound, one of the great natural resources of the northeast.

The league's interest in planning and orderly development of estuarine areas and coastal land arose from over 14 years of study and action on water resources management, including the quality of fresh and coastal waters. We have found that we must concern ourselves with land use, insofar as land determines what happens to water.

For too long we have taken Long Island Sound for granted. We have used it for navigation and trade, recovery of sand and gravel, cooling water for power production, marinas, industrial waste, and garbage disposal; yet, we also expect it to provide shell and finfish habitat, commercial and sport fishing, plus unlimited outdoor recreation for the millions of people who live nearby.

Now, all of a sudden, we are beginning to realize that the sound is a limited natural resource and that the public good requires a detailed study and a carefully designed plant to protect its unique assets.

The Connecticut Research Commission has recently completed a survey for minerals on the bottom of the sound. We now face the immediate threat of ecological change from sand and gravel mining on neighboring oyster beds. Only a detailed comprehensive study can determine just how great that threat is.

Any decision on gravel mining should be based on the facts gained from such a study. Time is short. We should begin the necessary research immediately.

Senator Ribicoff is to be commended for his foresight in introducing this bill establishing an intergovernmental commission on Long Island Sound. It would make a much-needed comprehensive study of the sound and adjacent shoreline and formulate a plan for optimum use. He is to be commended also for holding these hearings. They will focus attention on the matter and make it possible to gather information from a wide range of sources.

The league has placed at the major focus of the proposed study environmental considerations. Ecological knowledge should be the fundamental basis for any plan. Priority should be given to those uses which are compatible with the productive functioning of coastal and natural systems and which cannot be provided elsewhere. Where de

velopment is permitted, it should be designed to minimize damage. to these natural systems.

Every area on the sound need not fulfill all possible uses. Careful study of each area is needed to see what it can accept without damage and what uses must be prevented in the area to continue to satisfy long-range social values. Multiple use is not always the best use.

The league recognizes that any planning for Long Island Sound must be comprehensive and include a study of economic pressures for adjacent land hearings. The tremendous pressures of economic growth have caused many of the problems we are concerned with. Yet this economic growth has provided a high standard of living which no one wants to relinquish.

Somehow we must weigh the facts to achieve a reasonable balance between needed development and needed preservation of natural systems. For some places, industrialization may be the least desirable choice; reserving some places for particular purposes will preserve environmental variety and prove to be a sounder economic decision than would uncontrolled urban and industrial development everywhere. We endorse the provisions in the bill for consultation with appropriate State, regional, and local officials, as well as other interested groups. We suggest that every attempt be made to solicit ideas from private citizens. The total planning process should involve the planning activities of all State, local, and private groups, or implementation of the resulting plan could be difficult at best.

The league is somewhat concerned that the commission proposed in this bill would be disbanded at the end of the study. We have seen many excellent plans gather dust because no one was given responsibility for implementing them. It seems to us the plan would have a better chance for success if the people who formulated it were also responsible for carrying it out.

We are concerned, too, about the prospect of adding another governmental agency to the many that exist already. League studies have made us very aware of the many governmental bodies and special districts, as well as interstate, State, regional, and local agencies that exercise jurisdiction, sometimes conflicting, near the sound. Coordination of these activities has been a major league objective for many

years.

For this reason we suggest that, in existing, an intergovernmental agency be charged with making the study and formulating the plan. The salient portions of S. 2472 should remain as they are the findings of fact and declaration of policy, the duties of the study group, the powers and administrative provisions, the scope of the study and the time allotted for application of the plan.

The only change we are suggesting is that an existing body be utilized-most logically a Federal interstate body, with essentially the same makeup as spelled out in S. 2472. This would eliminate the need for a new agency and would also enhance the possibility for successful implementation of the resulting plan.

It is easy to understand why people living on the sound might want a special commission concerned only with the unique problems of the sound Unfortunately, however, a small, temporary agency would be at a disadvantage in many ways, particularly in attracting qualified staff and accomplishing coordination.

51-566-70-pt. 1—— 6

In view of these considerations, the league respect fully suggests that the New England River Basins Commission be the agency charged with the responsibilities spelled out in S. 2472.

I was very pleased in hearing you say that you were planning to work with the River Basins Commission.

Senator RIBICOFF. Yes.

We do appreciate your coming.

The river basins group will be testifying before us in Washington. We will explore this. And they do have the administrative setup, and it is my hope that we could shift gears and channel this work to them. They would have to have additional appropriation, but so would this commission; but I think it might be cheaper. We will explore this with them when they testify before us.

Mrs. BROWN. Very good. This is just what I was going to say, so I am delighted to hear you say it.

That is the end of my statement. Thank

you very much. Senator RIBICOFF. Thank you very much, Mrs. Brown.

Senator MATHIAS. Let me say Mrs. Brown has restored my confidence. In the State of Maryland we could not hold a hearing of this nature without active participation of the League of Women Voters. So she has appeared on the scene to restore my confidence.

Let me just add this one comment, Mr. Chairman, if I may:

Dr. De Santo testified this morning that he would estimate that 98 or 99 percent of the existing environmental problem, pollution, presently results from activity which is either the direct action of government at some level or action which is licensed by government.

This is a great challenge for a group such as the league, because you have testified here as to your concern about the establishment of further Federal machinery-a concern which the chairman and I share.

But the fact is that 99 percent of the problem, according to the testimony we have heard today, results from action which could be controlled by the presently existing governmental machinery. And this is, of course, the answer to Senator Gunther, who just testified. The fact is that the machinery exists-it is in State hands-but the problem isn't being met. You may be able to prompt State action, so this is a great challenge to you.

Mrs. BROWN. Yes, we have been very busy on the State level with our pollution control program. I think it is coming.

Senator RIBICOFF. Thank you very much.

Senator John Pickett.

STATEMENT OF STATE SENATOR JOHN F. PICKETT,
MIDDLETOWN, CONN.

Senator PICKETT. Senator Mathias and Senator Ribicoff, thank you for the opportunity of testifying this afternoon.

Perhaps I should preface my remarks with the simple statement I am not in favor of a jetport.

Senator Ribicoff's hearings examining the potential of a 3-year study of Long Island Sound are an important step in guaranteeing a prosperous and pleasant life for our Connecticut shore. Senator Ribicoff's concern and efforts for preserving the vitality of Long Island Sound deserve our energetic support.

Along the sound's shoreline grows the world's most populous and complex metropolitan area; at least a quarter of all Americans live within a day's automobile drive from the sound. Its waters_move vast quantities of commercial shipping and serve the large and multiple needs of industry. The sound nourishes and cleanses the modern Society of the 11 million people living along its shore.

Long Island Sound is also one of America's great estuarine areas. Its shore is an integral part of the life cycles of most of the aquatic and marine life in the area.

Henry David Thoreau once described the sea as "the site of human life," "the sure foundation and nucleus of a nation," "the face of nature" and "at least a private station." Long Island Sound, with its 250 miles of Connecticut shoreline and marshland, certainly fulfills Thoreau's description.

In addition, the sound has provided a place of recreation, relaxation, and retreat for thousands of Americans. Along the shores of the sound, thousands of families have swum, sailed, fished and discovered adventure. In the beauty of the sound, many have found quiet insights and their own "private station."

For many years the sound has satisfied without any apparent conflict both the needs of industry and government, and the needs of individuals and nature. This is no longer the situation. Today, the increasing demands on the finite resources of the sound are threatening the beauty and the very usefulness of the sound itself.

In New London, the blue shell crabs and the scallop beds of the Thames River have disappeared. Fishermen in New London state that the mackerel, squid, shad, and striped bass that used to swim in the Thames 6 years ago have also vanished. Some fishermen who have managed to catch striped bass just beyond the mouth of the river complain that the fish smell and taste of diesel oil.

Bathers at beaches in the New London area complain of swimming into floating rubbish, oil slicks, and human waste.

The same is true of the beautiful Connecticut River, one of the most scenic areas in this world of ours.

In addition to pollution, landfills are destroying precious shore

areas.

The deterioration of the sound mirrors our own carelessness and indifference; beneath all of the various causes of the sound's decline is simple neglect. Businesses have pursued residential and commercial development without carefully considering consequent damage to the sound. In many cases, profit has been given a higher priority than prudence.

Even the Federal Government must accept part of the blame. The Navy continues to dump raw sewage from its submarines and the subtender, the U.S.S. Fulton, into the Thames River in New London.

As the abuse of the sound continues, time becomes an increasingly critical factor. We must begin now to develop a comprehensive, perceptive plan for the socially responsible use of the sound. Development and conservation must be brought together. The sound can and must be saved.

Senator, I listened with interest to the dialog concerning the feasibility, the desirability, of State compacts. As you know, I have served in the State senate since 1958, and I respectfully suggest and hope that you will continue with your course of action.

If the States do get together-I certainly do not wish to assume the role of a pessimist, but, if the States do get together and enact important legislation, of course, the Federal Government will step out of the picture. But unless you continue, unless the Federal Government continues with this proposal of yours, I don't believe that we will ever have the steps, the measures, necessary to correct the situation to which we are addressing ourselves today.

I salute you all, particularly you, Senator Ribicoff, and urge you to keep going with this important legislation.

Senator RIBICOFF. Thank you, Senator, very much.
Senator Mathias?

Senator MATHIAS. No.

Senator RIBICOFF. Miss Phoenicia Candy, please.

STATEMENT OF MISS PHOENICIA CANDY, SECRETARY, FEDERATION OF BEACHES OF OLD LYME

Miss CANDY. Senator Ribicoff and Senator Mathias, my name is Phoenicia Candy, and I happen to be secretary of the Federation of Beaches of Old Lyme.

There are nine beaches in Old Lyme, and they constitute, may I say, one-third of the tax base of the town of Old Lyme. That is not the point, however, at issue that I would like to make.

I realize that we, at the beaches, look with apprehension upon the increasing pollution in Long Island Sound. We were treated not too long ago specifically, it was 3 years ago-to the first oil slick that I know of that came to that region. It crept up on us in the night. It was due to a barge running aground, or a tanker, near Saybrook, and the next morning the early bathers were treated to their oil bath. It was bunker oil, and the sight of those children, among others, encased in that oil was something we didn't soon forget.

I realize that it takes time to get things done, unfortunately. I would hope, however, that we won't have to wait until we have lost the privilege of going in the sound before we can get relief from the pollutions that threaten it.

So, therefore, Senators, all speed to you, our good wishes to you, best of luck, and thank you for letting us come.

Senator RIBICOFF. Thank you very much, Miss Candy.

Mrs. Conover.

STATEMENT OF MRS. CONOVER, DIRECTOR, CONNECTICUT RIVER WATERSHED COUNCIL

Mrs. CONOVER. Senator Ribicoff, I have had the pleasure of working with you in 1952, since we started the Natural Resources Council. I am a director of the Connecticut River Watershed Council, Connecticut River & Park Association, and of the wetlands committee, all of which have been making statements or been put on file today.

I will not open my letter at all, but simply say that I am also a member of the Long Island Sound Association, and at your hearing in New York they intend to present to you a bibliography of the studies, all of which have been made on the sound, so you will have that information.