1250 
We cannot delay taking all possible steps to make sure the arms race is not 
extended to the seabed. This is an area I began to work on weeks after the 
Council came into being in 1966 and I am pleased to see the spadework of that 
era now developed by the administration in a draft treaty set before the Highteen 
Nation Disarmament Conference. In my view, however, the scope of the prohibi- 
tion of nuclear warfare in the oceans should be broader than that proposed in 
Article One of the U.S. draft. We should propose to cover in this treaty activi- 
ties and weapons, such as mobile nuclear bottom launchers, which may be under- 
taken by military planners to the fullest extent that existing and projected 
detection capabilities will permit. 
Fortunately, these and other marine science issues have never been partisan 
issues, and this same spirit must continue to prevail. The two branches of the 
Congress, however, must elevate this area to a more conspicuous level of atten- 
tion. For one thing, we now have the recommendations of the Stratton Commis- 
sion that was authorized by the 1966 Marine Sciences Act, and I commend this 
powerful and persuasive document, prepared by 15 distinguished citizens, to all 
who have interest in our nation’s future. I find myself in substantial agreement 
with their findings and recommendations. 
I want to comment particularly on the Commission’s recommendation for 
strengthening our governmental apparatus to meet the needs of the 1970’s and the 
1980’s. They propose that a new independent civilian agency be created out of the 
fragments now spread among numerous departments having broad missions to 
which their marine science bureaus contribute only peripherally. I fully support 
this concept. 
I was pleased to see that the management capabilities of the Council war- 
ranted support for a one year extension by President Nixon, but no matter how 
effective it has been and continues to be as a policy planning unit to provide 
coherent guidance to this government’s program, it is no substitute for a strong 
operating agency. The Navy has shown us how to mobilize marine’ research 
and engineering to serve military objectives. We need the same approach on the 
civilian side for all the purposes I outlined earlier. The present efforts of the 
civilian agencies simply do not add up to a capability that would permit the 
U.S. to maintain its leadership in marine science and oceanography. 
We have just witnessed the dramatic extension of man’s presence to the sur- 
face of the moon—an event which satisfied the innate curiosity of all people about 
the world around us. 
We can do no less for the sea. And in gaining a greater comprehension of its 
potential, we can direct its utilization to practical benefit that would serve our 
nation well, and serve all mankind. 
Sincerely, 
Husert H. HUMPHREY. 
OCEANS GENERAL, INC., 
MIAMI, FLA. 33130, September 26, 1969. 
Hon. ALTON LENNON, 
Chairman, House of Representatives, Subcommittee on Oceanography of the 
Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, Longworth Building, 
Washington, D.C. 
DEAR CONGRESSMAN LENNON: I appreciated received from you a copy of H.R. 
13247 and the invitation to submit comments to the Subcommittee. 
On May 22nd, 1969 I testified before the Subcommittee on Oceanography as 
a spokesman for the National Oceanography Association. At that time I was 
speaking to the Report of the Stratton Commission and I single out for particular 
note the recommendations with regard to Federal organization pertaining to the 
establishment of a responsive. National Ocean Program. I gave unqualified sup- 
port to the creation ‘of a National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Agency and 
a companion National Advisory Committee for the Oceans. It is quite natural 
then that I personally endorse most whole-heartedly HR 13247, a legislative em- 
bodiment of the recommendations of Dr. Stratton and his able Commissioners. 
With specific legislation to consider, I do feel obliged to comment on two sec- 
tions in which the language, but more particularly the possible interpretation 
of the language, leaves some question in my mind. However, I want to emphasize 
the fact that I have no reservations with regard to the philosophy espoused, the 
fundamental mechanism proposed for administrating a National Ocean Program 
or the constituent parts of NOAA. 
