953 
in amplification. The need for better organization for management 
of the marine environment is part of a larger problem which is better 
organization within the Federal Government for the management of 
the total environment and all resources. 
I cannot speak for the administration because I do not know its 
views on this, but I think that within the Department we are not satis- 
fied with our existing organizational arrangements, insofar as our own 
resources and environmental responsibilities are concerned. 
The Department, and indeed all of the resources and environmental 
responsibilities and organizations within the Federal Government 
have sort of grown over the years, without any particular logic to shape 
that organization has taken. I think most of us recognize that. 
So what I am saying here, I guess, is that I think there is a great deal 
of sense in only acting upon a reorganization of marine affairs as part 
of a look at the overall organization within the Federal Government 
for organization of all of its environmental and resource responsibili- 
ties. 
Now, assuming that further there are a number of alternatives, we 
could, I suppose, within Interior, suggest an Assistant Secretary sim- 
ply for marine affairs. There are all sorts of different organizations. I 
have even heard it suggested that there should be a new super depart- 
ment of resources and environment with perhaps subsidiary depart- 
ments, one of which could well be for marine affairs. 
These are some of the alternatives that I have heard suggested. 
Like all alternatives, or most alternatives, there is much to be said 
for most of them and also there are drawbacks to most of them. 
Mr. Mosuer. Mr. Secretary, on page 1 and on page 5 of your state- 
ment, you point, I think rightly, to a serious deficiency in our present 
national program in the lack of any defined responsibility within the 
Government for the development of civilian technology in marine 
resources. 
The Stratton Commission report repeatedly referred to this de- 
ficiency in our present setup. Now, if the Department of the Interior 
were to take the leadership in the field as an alternative to NOAA, are 
you suggesting that you could assume this responsibility, the respon- 
sibility of administering the research and development of new tech- 
nology that no other department seems to be doing now, and that 
desperately needs to be done? 
Mr. 'Trarn. I see no reason why we couldn’t do it just as well asa 
new agency. 
We are involved in marine technology. These have not been large 
leaps forward, but in small ways. We have been involved as you know, 
in the Tektite program which we are hoping to carry forward, this 
time under the full leadership of the Department of the Interior. 
So I think that we are learning our way in this field. 
Mr. Mosumr. You really are intimating that the Department of the 
Interior could do the job that needs to be done. One more question, Mr. 
Chairman. 
We have had testimony before this committee recently indicating 
that it is perhaps always very unwise to try to administer science and 
development programs at the same time and in the same department 
or agency that is conducting intricate and extensive day-to-day action 
operations. Do you feel that that is true, in your own experience in the 
