NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC PROGRAM LEGISLATION 169 



Mr. DowNiN(j. No questions, only (he comment that you made a fine 

 statement, and you .made a gTeat contribution, 

 Mr. Wilson. Thank you, Mr. Downing. 

 Mr. Lennon. Mr. Dow ? 



Mr. Dow. No, sir. 



I enjoyed your statement, Mr. Wilson. 



Mr. Wilson. Thank you, Mr. Dow. 



Mr. Lennon. Mr. Wilson, you commented on the political realities 

 with respect to establishing a central agency of oceanography, that 

 would coordinate and correlate all of the various agencies which have 

 various interests in it. 



My recollection is that at the time NASA was established statutorily, 

 tliat you had basically only the armed services in a sijigle Department 

 of Defense who had a real governmental interest in a space progi-am. 

 Is that a fair statement ? 



Mr. Wilson. Well, the Navy and the Air Force and the Arni}^ all 

 had space programs, but .don't forget that the NACA, National Ad- 

 visory Committee for Aeronautics, which as a civilian agency, I be- 

 lieve, mider Commerce or it might have been under the Smithsonian 

 Institution, was also conducting independent space research, and it 

 was a combination of military and nonmilitary functions that formed 

 NASA. 



Mr. Lennon. Yet, I believe one of the factors in the final establish- 

 ing of that, though, was because it was not a proliferation in the 

 program, as we have in oceanography. Now, here w^ere find ourselves 

 dealing with the Department of Defense, right on down to the De- 

 partmnt of Army and the Corps of Engineers, the HEW, the Coast 

 Guard, that is, the Treasury Department, about nine agencies Avho 

 have some funding every year, and in the Department of Commerce, 

 of course, and Weather Standards. I just think it Avould be imprac- 

 tical, and even if we had a kind of look at such a proposal, even at 

 the administration level, I doubt the practicality of trying to bring 

 them into a central group that would be responsible for the recom- 

 mendations or the funding of each one of them. That is the thing 

 that concerns me. 



Mr. Wilson. I think in contrast to Senator Bartlett's testimony 

 yesterday, I believe that an executive agency like this should take all 

 of the aspects of fishing from the various other departments. Interior, 

 and any other departments that have fishing as an interest. 



State Department, even has an Office of International Fisheries, if 

 I am not mistaken. 



I think fishing is a prime area of responsibility for your ocean- 

 ographic agency. This would be the start, of it, and then meteorology 

 and other related ocean sciences would come into it. 



But, Mr. Chairman, imless you get an agency that can come down 

 here and deal with one committee and then go to the Appropriations 

 Committee and deal on a package basis, and point out the importance 

 of a tremendous program, rather than piecemeal, you are going to 

 have the small bite-size approaches to the Appropriations Committee 

 also whittled down, and never given the proper attention. 



Unfortunately, in every aspect except perhaps the military, ocean- 

 ography is a completely side-pocket operation of the major department. 

 Interior has an Office of Fisheries, but this is not the prime respon- 



53-367 — 65 ^12 



