Confronting Economic and Social Realities, 1980–1999 159
DOCUMENT 128: Coastal Barrier Resources Act (1981)
Much of the energy of the environmental movement that gained ground in the 1960s was concentrated on
promoting legislation to protect oceanfront beaches and the salt marshes behind them. In 1972, the same
year that the Clean Water Act was passed, Congress approved the Coastal Zone Management Act, a measure
designed to convince states to develop broad management plans for their coastal regions and help them pay
for the planning process. However, the bill did not directly address any major problems associated with the
development of the barrier islands, including the risks to wildlife or the enormous federal expenses that would
stem from development. These issues were left for the Coastal Barrier Resources Act, passed in 1981.
The bill clearly affected how private property along the coast would be used. Although it did not restrict land
use, it did remove some federal support for the development of coastal lands, and therefore real estate interests
opposed it. Environmentalists favored the Coastal Barrier Resources Act because it promoted the conservation
of island and salt marsh habitats. Others supported the bill because they believed it would reduce catastrophic
property damage and loss of life due to hurricanes. Still others saw the Coastal Barrier Resources Act as a way
to reduce federal spending by eliminating federal insurance protection for residences and businesses built in high-
risk areas (where, it was estimated, payments for damages in 1980 exceeded premium payments by three to one).
At the hearings preceding the vote on the bill, two of the key speakers were James W. Pulliam, Jr., deputy
associate director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s National Wildlife Refuge System, who favored the bill; and
Lawrence Young, representing the National Association of Realtors, who opposed it. Their statements highlight the
fundamental conflict between wildlife managers and conservationists on one side and land developers on the other.A. The Bill
Sec. 2. Findings and Purpose
(a) Findings. The Congress finds that—
(1) coastal barriers along the Atlantic and
gulf coasts of the United States and the
adjacent wetlands, marshes, estuaries,
inlets, and nearshore waters provide—
(A) habitats for migratory birds and other
wildlife; and
(B) habitats which are essential spawning,
nursery, nesting, and feeding areas for
commercially and recreationally impor-
tant species of fin-fish and shellfish,
as well as other aquatic organisms such
as sea turtles;costly, and will constitute a smaller proportion
of our expenses in future years. And population
growth is likely to have a long-run beneficial
impact on the natural-resource situation.
Energy. Grab your hat again—the long-run
future of our energy supply is at least as bright as
that of other natural resources, though political
maneuvering can temporarily boost prices from
time to time. Finiteness is no problem here either.
And the long-run impact of additional people is
likely to speed the development of a cheap energy
supply that is almost inexhaustible.
Pollution. This set of issues is as compli-
cated as you wish to make it. But even many
ecologists, as well as the bulk of economists,
agree that population growth is not the villain in
the creation and reduction of pollution. And the
key trend is that life expectancy, which is the best
over-all index of pollution level, has improved
markedly as the world’s population has grown.
* * *
There is no physical or economic reason why
human resourcefulness and enterprise cannot for-
ever continue to respond to impending shortages
and existing problems with new expedients that,
after an adjustment period, leave us better off than
before the problem arose. Adding more people will
cause us more such problems, but at the same time
there will be more people to solve these problems
and leave us with the bonus of lower costs and less
scarcity in the long run. The bonus applies to such
desirable resources as better health, more wilder-
ness, cheaper energy, and a cleaner environment.
Source: Julian L. Simon, The Ultimate Resource (Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press,1981), pp. 5-6, 345-46.