1001 
Mr. Downine. Why? 
General Ko1scu. Iti is the natural life cycle of a lake. It would even- 
tually eutrophy, dry up, and disappear. 
Mr. Downtne. Is that true of the other lakes? 
General Korscu. Yes, sir. This is the normal life cycle of a lake. 
Mr. Downtne. Thank you very much. 
Mr. Lennon. Thank you, Mr. Downing. I think it was in the first ses- 
sion of the 87th Congress that this subcommittee considered essen- 
tially what we are considering now. 
Suppose, gentlemen, Mr. Secretary and general, that in substance 
there had been enacted into law what we propose here in the Commis- 
sion’s recommendations back in, say, the second session of the 87th 
Congress which would have been 1962 I should judge. Where do you 
think we would have been today with respect to a program for ocean 
science and environment ? 
Mr. Secretary, would we be further advanced now than we are 
today ? 
Dr. Froson. Predicting past history is always a difficult thing to do, 
but I think that from the point of view of the national marine program 
we would have probably a better consolidated program and very likely 
a program which had settled on some specific directions more than the 
current program and was carrying them out. 
I think the real question that Mr. Dellenback asked and that is 
whether from the overall point of view of national aims strengthening 
the ocean program would be generally nationally good and whether 
it would come at the expense of other mission-oriented things. 
For example, while such an agency might have strengthened, let’s 
Say, sea bottom mineral resource exploration and exploitation, one has 
to ask the question whether this would have left exploration and ex- 
ploitation on the land alone, whether it would have given it a stimulus 
or whether the exploration and exploitation at sea might have come at 
the expense of exploration and exploitation on land; and, having esti- 
mated the answer to that question, we would then have to decide 
whether that was a net gain or a net loss for the country. 
I have no way of doing that, but certainly from the point of view of 
marine affairs as such there would bea strengthening. 
Mr. Lennon. Suppose that in 1958 there had been nine Federal 
agencies involved in programs related to space. Do you think we would 
have put a man on the moon if we continued those nine agencies inter- 
ested in various aspects of the space program ? 
Dr. Froscu. No, I don’t think so, if for no other reason than it would 
have been impossible to assemble the budget capable of doing it if 
there were nine agencies working on the problem. 
Mr. Lennon. That is one of the points we have here, to get the na- 
tional impact budgetary- wise. 
General, on page 3 of your statement you enumerate what you say 
the problem involves and more specifically you say: 
The problem involves a multiplicity and diversity of resource, urban, economic, 
environmental and other people-oriented considerations. It seems unlikely to us 
that a single Federal agency can satisfactorily take all these factors into account. 
It seems to us that some type of interagency coordinating mechanism will be 
required. 
