Exhibit 99.4 - President's Letter to Shareholders - Reason for Offering


         C O A S T A L C A R I B B E A N O I L S & M I N E R A L S, LTD.


                                                        _________ __, 2002


    To:   COASTAL CARIBBEAN OILS & MINERALS, LTD. SHAREHOLDERS


Dear Fellow Shareholders:

         Enclosed with this letter are materials relating to an offering to the
Company's shareholders to purchase shares of the Company's common stock. The
funds to be raised through this offering would be used for general corporate
purposes and to continue the Company's litigation against the State of Florida
in which our majority owned subsidiary, Coastal Petroleum Company ("Coastal"),
seeks compensation for the State's alleged taking of Coastal's 224-A drilling
lease offshore Florida. This offering is necessitated by the fact that, although
the litigation is proceeding to trial in September, our present cash resources
are insufficient to litigate our claim to conclusion.

         A brief history is in order. More than 10 years ago, Coastal sought
permits to begin new drilling on its 880,000 acre leases offshore Florida's West
coast in the Gulf of Mexico. The State of Florida effectively denied drilling
permits by attempting to impose extraordinary conditions on Coastal Petroleum.
Illustrative of those conditions was the State's attempt to require a $4.3
billion bond, the largest on record in the history of our industry.

         Coastal challenged the State's attempt to impose its extraordinary bond
and, after an extensive hearing, an administrative law judge recommended that
the State issue Coastal's permit to drill one of its prospects on Lease 224-A
with a reasonable surety of $225 million. The State then applied a policy of "no
offshore drilling" and denied the permit. Upon Coastal's appeal of the denial,
the First District Court of Appeal held that under the constitutional provisions
protecting property, the State could deny the permit, but that the State's
permit denial would be unconstitutional "if just compensation is not paid for
what is taken." Subsequently, the Appeal Court stated that whether the denial of
the permit constituted a taking of Coastal's property should be determined by
the Circuit Court.

         After the Appeal Court's ruling, Coastal filed a 25 page complaint
against the State on January 16, 2001. The complaint seeks compensation for the
State's alleged taking of Coastal's property rights to explore for oil and gas
and recites much of the history of the State's efforts to prevent drilling. We
believe that the law of Florida is that Coastal holds a constitutionally
protected property interest in Lease 224-A which was granted by the State of
Florida for the purpose of exploring for and producing oil. We further believe
that the State has denied Coastal the use of its lease which Coastal has paid
lease rentals to protect until the day Coastal could realize the benefits of
drilling and production.

         On November 27, 2001, the Circuit Court set September 30, 2002 as the
date for a two week trial on the taking phase of the litigation. The State has
aggressively defended Coastal's action. It makes several arguments, including
that Coastal's leases are not constitutionally protected property, that the
denial of one permit does not constitute a taking of the entire value of
Coastal's leases, and that Coastal agreed in a 1976 Settlement Agreement with
the State to obtain environmental permits, which it has failed to do.

         Between now and September, we expect that there will be intense
activity in the litigation. The State has already made substantial requests for
document production and noticed at least __ depositions in addition to other
discovery depositions required by Coastal. Any litigation is usually costly, and
this litigation is especially expensive. If we are successful at the trial
level, we fully expect that the State would appeal the judgment.

         We have taken significant steps to conserve our cash during this
important time in the Company's history. The Company's directors, officers,
counsel and administrative consultants have agreed to defer all of their fees
until the Company has working capital of at least $1 million.

         You, the shareholders, have steadfastly supported your Company for many
years. We must once more ask for your financial support and sincerely hope this
will be the last time such support will be necessary.

         There are many risks associated with an investment in the Company and I
urge you to please read the enclosed Prospectus carefully before making your
investment decision. Thank you again for your loyalty to the Company.

                                                     Very truly yours,


                                                     Benjamin W. Heath
                                                     President


Statements in the foregoing letter are qualified in their entirety by the
Prospectus dated ___________, 2002. Statements which are not historical in
nature are intended to be, and are hereby identified as, "forward looking
statements" for purposes of the "Safe Harbor Statement" under the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. The Company cautions readers that
forward looking statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties that
could cause actual results to differ materially from those indicated in the
forward looking statements. Among the risks and uncertainties are: the
uncertainty of any decision favorable to Coastal Petroleum Company in its
litigation against the State of Florida; the substantial cost of continuing the
litigation; and the risks and uncertainties set forth in the Prospectus dated
__________, 2002, relating to an offering of the Common Stock of Coastal
Caribbean Oils and Minerals, Ltd.