814 
There is enough hue and cry across the country now about the 
Federal Government running everything from Washington and that 
is almost true or at least it is the thinking of a great many people. 
I have people write to me today and say, “I am complaining about 
my water rate and my sewage rate.” 
You say, “Why.” 
They say, “Well, the Federal Government made a grant for a 
water line or a sewer line out to the sewage disposal plant. Yet you 
sit in Washington and let the people here charge this outrageous 
rate and my money through Federal tax helped build this plant.” 
That is the complaint we get and it is typical of the views of our 
people. 
Thank you for your appearance, Mr. Brooks and you, Mr. Flipse, 
too, for your splendid presentation. I am sure that counsel will be in 
touch with you from time to time to get your advice and help be- 
cause we certainly need it. 
This concludes the hearings until they will be resumed according 
to our schedule now, which I think has been approved, Mr. McElroy, 
beginning September 16 when we will have the privilege of hearing 
the Executive Secretary of the Marine Science Council and a number 
of Cabinet officers who certainly want to be heard and we are desirous 
of hearing them, too, with respect to their feelings on the Commis- 
sion’s report. 
Thank you very much. 
(Mr. Brook’s statement follows:) 
STATEMENT OF D. L. BrooKS, PRESIDENT, THE TRAVELERS RESEARCH CORP. 
My name is Douglas L. Brooks. I am President of The Travelers Research 
Corporation, a self-supporting organization of about 200 people in Hartford, 
Connecticut, engaged in contract research and consultation for government and 
industry on problems relating to the use or misuse of the environment. 
I am very pleased that you have asked me to comment on “Our Nation and 
the Sea,” the report of the Commission on Marine Science, Engineering, and 
Research. It is, in my opinion, an extraordinary report in both quality and im- 
portance, and I welcome this opportunity to underscore the portions of it I 
feel most strongly about. 
In doing so, I shall speak from a personal rather than a corporate view- 
point. Furthermore, I shall speak from the viewpoint of an outsider, or—to 
use a less modest term—a generalist. That is, I do not identify myself with any 
particular use of the sea, either for food, drugs, minerals, waste disposal, rec- 
reation, transportation, weather prediction, defense, education, or science. In- 
stead, for many years, I have viewed the sea and its contents as a complex, 
and many-faceted but essentially single resource, lending itself to ail these 
uses—as does the terrestrial environment—, but like it in jeopardy because of 
over-exploitation by some users, under-exploitation or outright neglect by others, 
and conflicts everywhere being resolved more by accommodation to the net 
pressure of special interest groups, on both a national and international scale, 
than by a management rationale clearly expressive of the national interest. 
This viewpoint is, I know, shared by many. It was at least implicit in the 
1959 report of the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Oceanography 
(NASCO) which in a sense led off the inquiry we are engaged in today. It was 
explicit in the Long-Range National Oceanographic Plan, “Oceanography—the 
Ten Years Ahead,” published by the Interagency Committee on Oceanography 
(ICO) in 1963 and in which I had a hand. It has pervaded the hearings held by 
this Subcommittee since its establishment in 1959 and most particularly the 
bearings conducted during August of 1965. It received a strong boost in the 
PSACG Panel Report of 1966, “Effective Use of the Sea,” in which I partici- 
pated, and in the NASCO Report of 1967, to which I also contributed. The three 
