1023 
not solve all problems of budgeting, it does provide a centralized authority with 
major mission responsibility for the oceans. 
The proposed reorganization will create a multitude of political and social 
problems. However, at present a unique opportunity exists to develop an organ- 
ization capable of assuming major responsibility for the national goal of the ef- 
fective use of the sea by man. Achieving this capability will be worth the 
problems. 
Mr. Lennon. I think it might be interesting to quote from a little 
of it, even though we will put the whole thing in the record. The panel 
of which you were a member recommends: 
* * * 9g major reorganization of non-Navy governmental activities in oceano- 
graphy. The recommended reorganization would place in a single agency all those 
Federal activities related to decryption, prediction, and attempts to develop ca- 
pabilities of modifying the environment (ocean, atmosphere, and solid earth) 
and those activities concerned with managing and developing resources of the 
ocean. 
I shall not attempt to read all that we are going to put into the 
record. 
In other words, as you say: 
In broad outline the reorganization would combine activities of the Environ- 
mental Science Services Administration the Geological Survey (both its land and 
ocean activities), oceanographic activities of the Bureaus of Commercial Fish- 
eries and Mines, and a portion of the Coast Guard’s oceanographic activities. 
* * * The Panel does not make any recommendations as to whether the new 
agency should be independent or part of an existing agency. 
But in the very next line you say, however: 
With the creation of a new agency oceanographic activities of the Nation would 
be supported in five ways— 
And then you enumerate them. Then you say: 
In summary the proposed new agency would be an operating agency whose 
mission is to provide for effective use of the sea by man for all purposes to which 
we now put the terrestrial environment. The agency’s responsibilities would be 
broader than just the quest of new knowledge and understanding. 
Now, actually, Doctor, this organization, this new Government 
structure that you recommended back in 1966 as a panel member, how 
does it basically differ from the Government structure recommended 
by the Stratton Commission, so far as its bringing into this composite 
organization the fragmentation of the agencies that are now existing ? 
How does it differ ? 
You bring in the Environmental Science Services Administration, 
which the Stratton Commission recommends. You bring in part. of 
the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, which they bring in. You bring 
in part of the Coast Guard, which they bring in. You bring in part of 
the Geological Survey, which they bring in. 
How does your recommendation in 1966 basically differ from the 
recommendation of the Stratton Commission 4 
If anybody reads this, I think any fair, reasonable-minded person 
reading it would get the impression that what the Commission of 
which you were a panel member recommended is basically, in sub- 
stance, what the Stratton Commission recommended. 
Dr. McEtroy. What we did not say at the time, as you correctly 
read, is that we did not identify an agency to accomplish these 
functions. 
