39 



ment liking its money as much as the State does, so that we have 14,000 

 wells offshore coming in at the rate of 500 a year, if you take the 

 average, but can the State afford to lose its fisheries because of Federal 

 interest in royalties from offshore mineral development? 



This is the kind of thing that we are faced with. We are operating 

 outside the 3-mile limit. Through agreement with the Department of 

 the Interior and Geological Survey and other Federal agencies, we find 

 that the State is doing all of the seismic regulation. We make the 

 regulations, and then turn around and attempt to enforce them. 



We also try to do something about pollution. It is not easy. 



The thing that you have to look at when you get involved in multiple 

 uses is to beware of the spectacular. These oil wells blow out, and the 

 spills and accidents that occur are inherent in industry. 



When you industrialize, you are going to have accidents, but no in- 

 dustrial accident, or for that matter no national catastrophe of short 

 duration has ever really destroyed a biological population. There is an 

 inherent insurance in biological populations where they rebuild 

 themselves. 



The problem is when j^ou permanently destroy the environment, and 

 here is actually a competition for space. You put so much industry in 

 one place, and you cannot have something else. 



We are reaching this point in Louisiana. We are reaching it offshore. 

 We have problems between navigation and the oil industry. We have 

 problems with navigation and rules of the road between the seismic 

 companies and the fishing industry. 



This happens to be international. Rules of the road and lighting is a 

 Geneva Convention thing, not done at the Federal level or the State 

 level. 



One of the our real problems today has to do with who is going 

 to regulate the dumping, and permission of dumping solid waste ma- 

 terials offshore. Dumping of this material will be theoretically in the 

 ocean. Theoretically, we have enough water to disperse it, but econom- 

 ically, we cannot do it that way. 



All we have is compromise. We get in and debate and argue and talk 

 about it, and say this will not hurt this small area, but a lot of small 

 areas will eventually ruin the entire system and I think at least in 

 Louisiana we are getting pretty close to it. 



I hate to disagree with my colleague, but I do think that this is a 

 situation that exists today, and it can exist in the United States within 

 the next 25 or 30 years. 



Thank you. 



Dr. Adams. Thank you, very much. 



Lyle St. Amant has had some very close relationship with these 

 problems in Louisiana. 



His comment was directed to Mr. Sessums. 



Do you have any reply ? 



Mr. Sessums. Actuallj^, I don't think Lyle was directing that to me. 

 We have worked on these problems for many years, and still work 

 together on these problems. 



I would like to commend him for his statement. There is no differ- 

 ence in opinion, really. As I mentioned, these problems have to 

 be resolved. You come to the situation VA^here you either do this or 

 that. 



