17 



is not so mucli one of the problem having been overlooked as it is a 

 question of who has the responsibility. When you have a number of 

 different agencies involved, each with many things to do that are 

 established by law, during tight budget years, it is not unexpected 

 that some of these problems ^et no attention. 



One of the areas intriguing the Council at this time concerns the 

 problems of the seashore. We have increasing utilization of the sea- 

 shore for recreation, for commerce, for economic development consid- 

 ering our fisheries, both sport fisheries and commercial fisheries, and 

 the possibility of oil and gas off of our shores, including the east coast 

 — and we know now off the coast of Alaska — more than we ever ex- 

 pected. Paradoxically at the same time, the seashore is undergoing 

 degradation from the ravages of nature itself and from pollution. 



Here is a case where you have four or five different Federal agencies 

 involved, all in an unportant way : The Corps of Engineers ; the Fed- 

 eral Water Pollution Control Administration ; also within the Depart- 

 ment of the Interior the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, the Bureau 

 of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife ; the Geological Survey ; the Bureau of 

 Mines ; the Coast Guard. Our role is to try to illuminate the problem 

 and then bring together around one table representatives from these 

 agencies to exchange ideas, and to plan together on what we ought to 

 be doing that we haven't done in the past. 



Another program will also illustrate this very point. The f ood-from- 

 the-sea program is a responsibility of the Agency for International 

 Development. Nevertheless, its success depends on significant contri- 

 butions from the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries related to a better 

 understanding of where the fish are. Since this depends upon under- 

 standing distribution of temperature and salinity in the ocean, data 

 also utilized are collected by the Navy, the Environmental Science 

 Services Administration and other agencies. Again, to satisfy that 

 objective, we found a problem that in the past everyone recognized, but 

 there had not been a formulation of a plan or designation of respon- 

 sibility. 



I want to emphasize that these agencies are eager to work together on 

 these problems, and this has been one of the most encouraging results 

 of our legislation. Although they have worked together over the 

 years, the legislation now provides a new framework by which their 

 efforts are better mobilized. Verj^ often, lower levels of Government had 

 not been appreciated, and now we have Cabinet level officers examining 

 in detail what has been going on for years within these individual 

 departments. 



Mr. MosHER. You have not found any gap that is going to require a 

 recommendation for a new agency or anything like that? 



Dr. Wenk. Not in precise terms. What we are really trying to do at 

 this point is to understand better what the future uses of the sea may be. 

 Then the Council in its appropriate role will be better prepared when 

 the Commission renders its report to concern itself with how the Fed- 

 eral Government might possibly be realined in order to serve those 

 purposes. At the moment, we are concentrating first on what we should 

 do more of in the ocean rather than the question of how to reorganize. 



Mr. MosHER. I think you referred to the lack of adequate storage 

 and retrieval facilities for oceanographic data and your studying that 

 lag. That would be an extremely crucial lag if it exists. 



