NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC PROGRAM LEGISLATION 171 



before Congress even Iniows whether there is a program in the works 

 we don't see those until tlie office, the Oceanographic Data Center, 

 shall we say, has fought for its dollars with some other program which 

 has more military implications some other sexier military program, 

 and so it does not, it just does not, survive. 



I am sure that the Oceanographic Data Center has asked for more 

 modern computerized systems and so forth and have been turned 

 down by the Navy before Congress ever got a chance to ask for it. 

 This is the problem with agency after agency. Oceanography is the 

 low man on the totem pole. It has to fight for the budget dollars that 

 are allowed to each one of those departments before it even gets its 

 head above water so that we know what requests are needed. We do 

 lionor them, because we recognize in Congress the importance of ocean- 

 ography. I think oceanography is such a popular subject right now 

 that when you bring a program up here for appropriations and once 

 it makes it through the gantlet down at the Budget Bureau and 

 through the various departments it will survive but too much of it is 

 lost before it even reaches us. 



Mr. Lennon". I think your counsel wanted to ask — oh, did you want 

 to ask a question ? 



Mr. Pelly. If you would yield, since Mr. Wilson mentioned taking 

 fisheries out from under the Interior Department, I thought that I 

 could certainly go along, if he would take conservation of fish from 

 the State Department, because their interest is in the overall picture, 

 and, as a result, we have always had difficulty, because the State De- 

 partment has considered our fisheries as being expendable. 



Mr. Wilson. Well, I have problems with the State Department, 

 when our tuna boats operating out of my area get apprehended 150 

 miles at sea down off Latin America. We can't even get the State De- 

 partment interested in the case, but you are right. I think when you 

 have to go to all these different agencies, you get the back-of-the-hand 

 treatment, usually, because there is no concentration of interest or 

 authority. 



Mr. Pelly. Well, we have these nations like Japan, the great fish- 

 ing nations, but they are not conservationists when it comes to fish, and 

 our State Department always seems to lean toward helping our for- 

 eign relations, and forgetting all about our fishermen here, or, at least, 

 not giving sufficient weight to the plea of our fishing industry. 



Mr. Wilson. Well, let me just say one further thing, Mr. Chairman. 



You are right about NASA being easier to form than an independent 

 agency for oceanography — mainly because it is a new area, a new area 

 of responsibility, and you are starting from scratch. It is like build- 

 ing a new building. In fact, what we have been trying to do is remodel 

 about nine different buildings for oceanography, and have something 

 worthwhile, and it does not work. It would be better to get out and 

 build a new building for oceanography, in effect, by forming a new 

 agency, than to try to spend the money we are doing in nine different 

 areas. 



It is harder, certainly. If it were easy, it would have been done be- 

 fore you have the gravest responsibility, Mr. Chairman, in trying to 

 solve this riddle. I don't envy you, because I think it is imperative 

 that something be done, and the wisdom of your decision is very im- 

 portant. It can mean billions of dollars to us. It can mean millions 

 of lives in the future. 



