872 
Seek funds for additional capability for the marine sciences where there is 
a relative scientific technical or operational void in the Federal establishment 
and where management by the Department can be clearly cost-effective and in 
the national interest. 
We believe this policy is in complete accord with the objectives of 
H.R. 13247 and the commission’s report, and reflects the close relation- 
ship of those objectives to our national transportation objectives. We 
are convinced that, without impairing the unified direction of the Goy- 
ernment’s transportation functions by removing the Coast Guard from 
the Department, we can continue to efficiently and effectively serve the 
national interests in both marine science, engineering and resources, 
and in transportation. 
This concludes my prepared statement, Mr. Chairman. I shall be 
pleased to answer any questions the committee may have. 
Mr. Lennon. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. The gentleman from Ohio, 
Mr. Mosher. 
Mr. Mosuer. Well, first, Mr. Chairman, as a Congressman represent- 
ing one of the Great Lakes areas, I want to say how much I appreciate, 
and I suspect Mr. Karth, the gentleman from Minnesota would agree 
with me in saying how much we appreciate the emphasis early in your 
statement on the Great Lakes area and the important role that the 
Coast Guard plays there, and the crucial importance of somehow hav- 
ing more effective pollution prevention in our area. 
Also, I want to complement you on your emphasis on the need for 
more effective weather prediction. Certainly we in our area of Ohio, 
with the July 4th tragedies so fresh in our minds, understand the 
emphasis you have placed there. 
Karly in your statement at some point here, you warned against 
precipitous decisions and on the top of page 5 you say ranking is 
essential in terms of national priorities for these various important 
functions. 
Ranking by whom? Where are you suggesting that this decision 
should be made? I judge you are saying that this decision should be 
made before the reorganizational problem is attacked. Should this 
ranking of priorities begin right here in this committee? Is it in Con- 
gress this this decision should be made? 
Mr. Beces. It is my view that that certainly is an appropriate fune- 
tion for the committee. In answer to your question of whether it should 
proceed before organization, that, too, is my view. 
I think the program and the policy should precede the organization. 
I believe that the establishment of any new organization, or any as- 
signment of additional responsibilities within an ‘existing organization, 
should be preceded by a clear outlining of what the objectives are, and 
the priorities of the program. 
My past experience in the marine resources area leads me to believe 
that the development of the coastal zone and the inland waters, the 
Great Lakes, rivers, the whole watershed areas, is of very high | pri- 
ority because we are ’ proceeding down the line where we are destroying 
many of the environmental characteristics of those areas. 
I served for a period on the National Resources Board of the State 
of Maryland and I was made very painfully aware of what we are 
doing to some parts of the Chesapeake Bay. 
IT am also aware by reason of business experience of the lack of atten- 
tion to much of the fundamental research and, indeed, the technology 
