166 



We got the report. We got the study, but not on your watch, but 

 your predecessor's. It never even got included in any budget sub- 

 mission. 



You made reference in your earher statement that you do have 

 a revised, updated program. I hope that program is one which we 

 will see evidences of and support for in your budget submissions 

 and that we'll be in a position to help you make those things hap- 

 pen. 



Dr. Baker. Thank you, Congressman Bateman. I will look at the 

 oyster disease program. That has been an important program. It's 

 one that we will certainly be looking at in the FY '97 budget proc- 

 ess. 



On the fleet modernization program, as you know, there was a 

 program that was put together earlier by NOAA. The cost of that 

 program was about $2 billion. It was my view, and I was encour- 

 aged in this view by many members of Congress, that that was 

 probably too expensive for us to handle in the current budget con- 

 text. 



We currently have a plan that is less than half of that. It still 

 costs money to replace ships, however you do it, whether you buy 

 new ones or you contract out. But less than half of that cost. 



And as I said, it gives us a mixture of in-house, private-sector, 

 and academia, and it allows us to look at the cheapest alternatives 

 of each way we go. 



We're working that through 0MB at the moment. Once we have 

 approval, you'll be seeing that. We have been able to brief staff on 

 some of the details of it and we'll keep you informed. 



Mr. Weldon. Thank you, Mr. Bateman. 



Our next questioner, Mr. Kennedy. 



Mr. Kennedy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



I just want to echo what's been said a couple of times here in 

 different ways. And that is, I think the problem for the public in 

 embracing the importance of this issue is that the knowledge is so 

 diffuse and its impact is so real. But we have yet to be able to tar- 

 get it and be able to answer some very specific questions. 



Now, when I was asking Dean Lynon from the University of 

 Rhode Island School of Oceanography the other day, why can't the 

 scientists and academicians come up with a way of hitting us be- 

 tween the eyes with the significance of the oceans and the survival 

 of the planet and both measuring global warming and identifying 

 the fact that, with the growing population, as Dr. Ballard was say- 

 ing, the reliance on seafood is going to grow, and the availability 

 of our natural resources to sustain an adequate supply of seafood 

 is going to diminish correspondingly as the population grows. 



What are we going to do to manage all of these resources that 

 are becoming so finite and precious? 



We need to be able to have predictions and predictive models 

 that unless we do X, Y is going to happen. And the difficulty with 

 science is that everything has to be down to the — the correlation 

 has to be so specific. As Dr. Ballard was saying, some of these cy- 

 cles with fish populations are natural, some of them are man-made. 



We need to be able to distinguish the diff'erence between the two 

 so we know what part of it we contribute to. 



