1049 
The area of recreation is of course closely tied to environmental qual- 
ity—yet there are problems here, other than pollution, which have to 
do with esthetics or with simple access and availability with which 
the proposed NOAA has apparently little direct concern. 
In this case, as in the ease of pollution mentioned earlicr, NOAA 
will be a major modifier of the environment, and as such should clearly 
be directed to consider environmental quality. NOAA should have 
its programs specifically reviewed and approved by agencies such as 
the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation (BOR), or the Department of 
Housing and Urban: Development (HUD), to insure that modifica- 
tions, particularly coastal, do not conflict with Federal, State, or 
local planning objectives. 
In fact, NOAA should be specifically charged with furthering the 
Commission’s recommendation that public recreation and access to 
water be included in urban planning, with Federal grants to be con- 
tingent upon such provisions. 
The inclusion of the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries and the 
marine and anadromous segments of the Bureau of Sport Fisheries 
and Wildlife wisely places in NOAA the agencies responsible for the 
conservation and management of our Nation’s living marine resources. 
Control of the nonliving resources is somewhat more complex, but 
it does appear essential that Federal programs having to do with 
marine mineral resources development be included in NOAA. 
Specifically, we recommend that the marine minerals programs of 
the Bureau of Mines be transferred to NOAA. These efforts would 
be particularly important within the NOAA framework, and would 
be of special importance to California. 
I might note at this point our great concern in California that the 
marine minerals program of the Bureau of Mines, based at Tiburon, 
has been greatly reduced to the detriment of our needs in this area. 
The problems of oil and gas exploration, leasing, and development 
are tied to so many Federal agencies, that is, the FWPCA, Bureau of 
Land Management, U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Oil and Gas 
Exploration, and others, with a major orientation toward Jand-based 
operations, that some consideration should be given to including 
within this bill provisions for coordination between NOAA and these 
agencies regarding the use of offshore oil and gas resources. 
One way this might be done would be to give NOAA the authority 
to write or approve the offshore drilling regulations which should be 
developed in cooperation with the CZA, and of course be consistent 
and compatible with the master plan of the contiguous States. 
Such an approach may very well help reduce the chances of another 
“oil spill” such as occurred earlier this year in the Santa Barbara 
Channel. 
Most of these matters involve both State and national interests, 
going far beyond boundaries of a single State. Federal funding must 
be made available to the operation of NOAA, and in a large propor- 
tion to the funding of the CZA. The CZA, managing programs in- 
separably bound to Federal planning and implementation, must as a 
consequence receive some Federal support. 
This funding, of course, is essential and I am concerned that, if the 
only funds available are those which transfer with each agency into 
NOAA, then there will truly be no room for imaginative, vigorous 
