815 
annual reports of the Marine Sciences Council express it, and finally it receives 
its most impressive development to date in the Commission Report we are re- 
viewing today. 
In brief, although budgetary starvation of many if not most U.S. Marine ac- 
tivities has been generally cited as an important contributory cause to the 
generally unsatisfactory state of our marine posture, these ten years of study 
by a wide variety of highly qualified groups has identified the fragmentation 
of the effort and the lack of a central authority with overall responsibility for 
its harmonious and balanced development as the key and primary problem need- 
ing solution. 
I would like, therefore, to focus my remarks on the Commission recommenda- 
tions (in Chapter 7) for an independent agency reporting directly to the Presi- 
dent and, to use the Commission’s words, “to provide the means for undertaking 
the full range of actions needed to realize the Nation’s growing stake in the 
effective use of the sea.” 
Having done so, I would like then to come to what in my opinion is the most 
urgent management problem demanding the attention of such an agency, heading 
off an impending environmental crisis in the coastal zone. (Chapter 3). 
Finally, if there is time, I should like to comment briefly on the Commission’s 
recommendations for global environmental monitoring and prediction, as devel- 
oped in Chapter 5. 
Federal Organization 
As I have already said, I consider the question of Federal organization the 
most important issue bearing on effective use of the sea facing the nation today. 
Fortunately, it is one that the Commission has dealt with extremely well, and I 
cannot find fault with either the rationale, the analysis, nor the recommenda- 
tions that stem from them. In fact, I should like to indicate my admiration for, 
as well as my endorsement of, the material in this section of the report. 
I would like to say more. It is my opinion that if the recommendations of this 
chapter were the only recommendations of the report adopted by the Federal 
government, all the remaining recommendations that were sound would ulti- 
mately be adopted as a consequence of this one. Conversely, without such an 
agency, and the corresponding modifications of the committee structure of Con- 
gress to simplify the jurisdictional oversight, the other recommendations of the 
report however desirable and important, would remain in jeopardy. 
I am aware that the entire Federal Executive structure is under review, and 
that major changes may be in the making over the next several years. In my 
opinion, the formation of NOAA as an independent agency should not wait for 
this review. The Commission report provides adequate and persuasive reasons for 
thinking that whatever the ultimate Department structure, the activities pro- 
posed for consolidation in NOAA belong together under a single administrator, 
and that this consolidation is already long overdue. Whether NOAA would con- 
tinue as an independent agency or be placed under some supervening depart- 
mental structure is a second-order question that need not be answered now. The 
decision to establish NOA/A, however, cannot wait. 
To come to matters of detail, I have in the past favored a somewhat more 
inclusive grouping of agencies than the Commission proposes for NOAA. My 
reasoning started with a concept of the functions to be performed by the new 
agency and its internal organization to exercise these functions. In particular, 
it seemed desirable to avoid creating a loose federation of quasi-independent 
fiefdoms made up solely of existing agencies amputated from their present de- 
partments. I should be glad to provide the Committee with the paper where these 
thoughts are developed. For the present, however, I do not wish to detract from 
the specific recommendation of the Commission, which does quite adequately 
include the key agencies providing a viable and desirable core, to which other 
activities could be added over time should further consideration show there is 
merit in doing so. 
Management of the Coastal Zone 
For the last two years (1967, 1968) I have chaired the Marine Council’s Con- 
sultant Panel on Multiple Uses of the Coastal Zone. Currently, The Travelers 
Research Corporation is working with the Nassau-Suffolk Regional Planning 
Board of Long Island on improved planning and management of Long Island’s 
marine resources. I am also a member of NSF’s Sea-Grant Consultant Panel. 
These three activities have served to reinforce an earlier conviction that, 
