114 



Captain Bauer. No, I don't, sir, but that would require some re- 

 organization of ESSA. For example, you would have to take out the 

 land functions of the Coast and Oeodetic Survey, which I believe it is 

 true are the largest and most important of their operational responsi- 

 bilities. 



If you take out the land functions of the Weather Bureau, then you 

 will have to split the Weather Bureau between the sea and the land. 



Mr. Hanna. I am not suggesting that. I am not suggesting that, 

 at all. 



I am suggesting that there could be, insofar as the field of the ocean 

 is concerned, or even as the environment as a whole is concerned, a 

 mission-oriented agency that would be funded on the basis of specific 

 mission, would call for the inclusion of a variety of talents drawn 

 from those places in our society where we always draw for missions. 



This has been happening ever since the Lewis and Clark days, and 

 before then, that they would draw from the Government and from the 

 academies and from business, and they would put the best of the talents 

 of society to work to accomplish a mission, and then the results of that 

 mission became, it seems to me, the workload of whoever had a general 

 responsibility in the continuing management function. 



I ask again, do you think that there would necessarily be a conflict, 

 because I do not see any real conflict between the existence of NASA 

 and the opportunities to utilize what is being developed in NASA in 

 those agencies we now have that have a general responsibility in a 

 continuing manner? 



Captain Bauer. I thoroughly agree with you, sir. 



Mr. Hann"a, As I say, Mr. Chairman, I have been very struck with 

 the gentleman's testimony, and I think that it will serve the com- 

 mittee very well to keep this as part of the work under our considera- 

 tion as we move out. 



I congratulate the gentleman for his excellent testimony. 



Mr. Lennon. I thank the gentleman from California. 



Captain, I recall so well your great service to those of us who have 

 been involved on this full committee, and especially this subcom- 

 mittee over the years. You were with us as a very outstanding con- 

 sultant up until the time that the act was passed by Congress which 

 authorized and directed the President to seek out and define and to 

 appoint a Commission of 12 people, individuals, from the private 

 sector with the capability, the technical background and skills and 

 experience, and three from the Federal Government, to form the Com- 

 mission on Marine Science. At the same time we attempted to estab- 

 lish a National Council, but met with frustration hither and yon, 

 especially in the executive branch of the Government, before we even 

 got into the passage of the final act that we are now talking about. 



You will recall the fight we had in convincing the administration 

 of what we thought was a plausible objective in creating this National 

 Council. 



The argument was, of course, that we had an interagency^ or ad hoc 

 committee on oceanography, and you will recall our experience with 

 that group, the gentlemen representing the various agencies of the 

 Federal Government, who were involved in varying and sundry de- 

 grees with the marine sciences and oceanology, and oceanography. 

 They did not represent, in our judgment, a level of policy making 

 in the decision process from the various agencies. 



