Ecosystem management is a very important in the world. New let us move from the general consed ration of control theory to specific examples to show that peoples attitudes toward the environment are really changing. Two examples from California should suffice to illustrate trends. First, the matter of deciding where future atomic power plants should be placed. In terms of environmental costs the least expensive site would be along the coast where large volumes of seawater are available for cooling purposes. Inland location with freshwater cooling ponds would be the next post , while installation of wet cooling towers would increase costs. The most expensive option would be dry cooling towers, which, however, would spare water for other uses. Ten ago decisions would have been made only on economic and engineering fronds with the likelihood that many power plants would be located along the coast. Now, with the public and environmentalists deeply involved in the discussions and decision making, it seems likely that very few power plants will be built on the coast because the natural scenic and recreational values are being given greater value, as evidenced by recent state wide ote in favor of the coastal protection ‘’proposition 20’’. The combination of setting aside large areas as natural reserves and the increasing cost of energy can act as powerful negative feedback that could be a beneficial factor in slowing urban type growth to a manageable rate.

A remarkable little book entitled the California tomorrow plan, edited by Heller and first published in 1971, is evidence of a reorientation of values and priorities on an even larger scale. This report, prepared by a citizens’ group, assisted by various professional groups, proposes that a state commission be set up by the legislature to design a land – use plan for public debate and eventual adotion. Such a plan would regulate the kind and intensity of development and would identify and preserve the life support function of the natural environment as well as preserve the quality of life in the cities. A unique feature of the plan is the proposed setting aside of large reserve where decisions on use would be postponed for sometime in the future, thus providing flexibility for future contingencies. Widespread resistance to planning at the present time is based on the very real fear of loss of individual freedoms as a result of increasingly dictatorial and bureaucratic control. As shown in which is reproduced from Heller book, this need not be the case. Regional control of environmental matters would seem to be a good compromise between central control which would not be responsive to local needs, and purely local control (as is now the case) which is inadequate to cope with the scale of the problems. In other words, what seems to be needed is expanded control of vital environmental matters in order to reduce central control of personal matters. Freedoms is not the absence of constraints, but is measured in terms of a variety of options available to the individual. Reservation of a wide variety of environments in functional balance provides the basis for  choices. This, then, must be the aim of ‘’ecosystem management’’ a new venture foe mankind. There has been a great surge of inters in research on comprehensive planning accompanied by growth in student enrollment in university schools of environmental design, environmental engineering, natural resources, urban planning, schools and departments of social and political and political science, and the like. Foundations, ‘’think tanks,’’ and consultant groups are all responding to the need. Perhaps soon schools, institutes, and centers of ecosystems man engagement ill be formed to coordinate all of these special interest applied groups.