NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC PROGRAM LEGISLATION 279 



has not been clarified. Secondly, there is a question also whether the 

 provision of funds to industry, as provided for by the bill, is a neces- 

 sary or proper function of the Federal Government at this time. 



Finally, owin^; to the large number of existing committees, commis- 

 sions, and councils, if any of the functions proposed in the bill are 

 established in law, serious consideration should be given to placing 

 them under the general jurisdiction of a major agency or department, 

 which is already performing similar or identical functions. 



Sixth, H.R. 7849, by Mr. Teague, to provide for the economic de- 

 velopment of the Continental Shelf and to establish a National Ocean- 

 ographic Council. This bill is essentially a combination of the defi- 

 nition, objectives, policy, and functional features of Pl.Ii. 5654 and the 

 features of H.R. 5884. For the reasons outlined in my previous re- 

 marks on these bills, I cannot recommend enactment of H.R. 7849. 



Seventh, H.R. 9064, by Mr. Rogers, a member of this subcommittee, 

 and identical bills by Mr. Reinecke, Mr. Hanna, and Mr. Downing, to 

 establish a National Commission on Oceanography. The objective of 

 the Commission, to make a comprehensive investigation and study of 

 all aspects of oceanography in order to recommend an overall plan for 

 an adequate national oceanographic program that will meet the pres- 

 ent and future national needs is clearly an important one. It is es- 

 sentially the same, however, as that of the President's Science Advis- 

 or}^ Committee's Panel on Oceanography that I mentioned earlier. 



Owing to the similar purposes of the two study groups, I cannot 

 recommend enactment of H.R. 9064 at this time. Nevertheless, I recog- 

 nize the possibility that there might be a need for a commission on 

 oceanography at a later date. 



I have asked the Panel on Of^eanography to report to the President's 

 Science Advisory Committee in the spring of 1966 — and, I might say, 

 to present interim reports in the meantime — at which time a more in- 

 formed and reliable judgment can be made on this point and on the 

 composition and mission of any commission which might be 

 established. 



Eighth, H.R. 5175, by Chairman Lennon, to provide for the study 

 of legal problems rel acting to the management, use, and control of 

 natural resources of the oceans and ocean beds. Although I am not 

 personally familiar with specific legal problems in connection with 

 the management of marine resources, I believe there are unresolved 

 legal questions relating to ownership rights of these resources. If a 

 legal study such as proposed by the bill were to be initiated, in view 

 of the mission of the Department of the Interior for resource manage- 

 ment, it would seem more appropriate that the study be sponsored by 

 that department. 



In summary, let me say that my reservations concerning these bills 

 relate not to purposes, in general, that seek to establish a vigorous and 

 efficient oceanographic program in the national interest. I am in 

 accord with these purposes. The central issue is how these purposes 

 can best be accomplished. 



It seems to me there is no practical alternative to the administration 

 of oceanography b}^ interagency cooperation. Except for the National 

 Science Fomidation and the Smithsonian Institution, the Federal 

 agencies are not interested in oceanography as a science, except as it 

 supports their mission. They need the varied kinds of information 



