269 



hand toward a single geophysical system representing the ocean and 

 tlie atmospheres together, but on the other hand to be oriented also 

 to tlie probkMus of people living along the coast. A new Federal orga- 

 nization might be focused on one or the other of these. Can it be focu.sed 

 on both? 



These are offered as some of the questions about organization which, 

 indeed, came up in our discussions and which Congress will need to 

 consider. The statement contained in "Oceanography 1966" is still 

 gei'mane : "We repeat that it is not our present intent to recommend 

 any specific structure to accomplish the necessary improvement. We 

 do point out that any change in the managerial structure must be con- 

 sistent with the continuing needs of those existing agencies whose 

 primary missions involve ocean activities." 



At this time, therefore, individual members of the Committee on 

 Oceanography could give you individual opinions as to which agen- 

 cies they think might be involved in reorganization structure. As a 

 group, we have no consensus opinion. 



My own individual posture on this has been stated in a letter which 

 I addressed to President Nixon in which I have expressed the view 

 that whatever is done ought to be within the context of a broader 

 reorganization of the Federal Government with attention given to 

 our needs for a Department of Natural Resources and Environments. 



In the letter which I read at the outset, NASCO has identified six 

 specific program items of high priority. Members of the committee 

 who are with me this morning will speak to some of these points and 

 to others of major interest to them, and they are also free to talk on 

 the reorganization question and give their individual opinions. 



Some members of NASCO have appeared already before this com- 

 mittee as spokesmen for other groups. I would point out that one mem- 

 ber. Dr. Knauss, is a member of the Commission. Dr. Paul Fye gave 

 a statement on the need for a fundamental technolog}^ program which 

 I am sure the other members of NASCO would endorse. 



Before I turn to these other persons, however, I wish to urge this 

 committee to move ahead with all speed to implement the thrust of 

 the Commission report. Although we may differ on details, none of us 

 differ with its message. The Commission has j)erformecl a mighty 

 service for the Nation in this respect. 



As with all affairs of men, there comes a time to act. We think our 

 Nation has reached this point with respect to marine resources. We 

 have seen the development of ocean science through an age of classical 

 oceanography followed by a more recent era of broader marine in- 

 vestigations. Parallel to that, of course, we have had always an em- 

 pirical use of the ocean which began with man's earliest ventures into 

 the sea for transportation and fishing and which continues to date in 

 a not greatly modified sense. 



These two broad avenues of involvement, the scientific and the 

 pragmatic, are now slowly coming together. If the marriage can be 

 stimulated, there is much promise for mankind. Already, in the court- 

 ship phase, it is possible to see how scientific activity has made some 

 contributions to the empirical uses of the sea. Conversely, it is ap- 

 parent that the role of engineering has stimulated greater scientific 

 activity. What is now needed is a catalyst for speeding up the reaction. 



The public is not unaware, in our opinion, of the promises of the 



