309 



I think that we haxe a larger stake and that work among maritime 

 nations who have the principal interest and the principal technical 

 capability for exploration and exploitation will be in the long run 

 better for world population than if we go the delegation route, the 

 delegation to the United Nations. 



I think that the natural forces in the economy will make it advis- 

 able for the principal industrial nations of the world, the maritime 

 industrial nations of the world, to explore and exploit for deep sea 

 resources as the need is generated and as there is an economic rationale 

 for so doin^* that, and that there is no need in effect to delegate this to 

 an international body Avhich I believe is relatively insensitive to some 

 of these market factors and certainly is a very difficult body in which 

 to achieve any unanimity, any general agreement on courses of action. 



I don't think that we have seen in the past the kind of leadership 

 coming from the United Nations as supposedly a cohesive world body 

 that gives me any confidence that as a world we will be able to move 

 ahead in exploration and exploitation of the deep sea resources. 



I think this has to be left to the principal industrial nations. It will 

 be done more efficiently, more effectively, and the population of the 

 world will generally benefit to a far greater degree if we leave it to 

 this kind of a natural mechanism and the bilateral treaties, multilateral 

 treaties, I believe, are the mechanism for providing the legal frame- 

 work in which this exploration and exploitation can go forward. 



Mr. ScHADEBERG. I am in complete agreement with you on that state- 

 ment. I am glad to have it for the record because many times we are 

 asked that and want to know Avhat some thinking on it may be. Thank 

 you very much. 



Mr. Hathaway. Mr. Karth. 



Mr. Karth. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



I am sorry, Mr. Clotworthy, that I was not able to hear your full 

 statement. As unfortunate as it may appear to be, constituents always 

 come first. I do want to commend you, though. I think this is the most 

 forceful and specific statement that we have received before the sub- 

 committee by anyone other than perhaps those who were members of 

 the Commission. 



As I went through some of the statements which I was not privileged 

 to hear I could not help but see this $773 million figure. It is the first 

 time I have seen it related specifically to ocean research. 



I wondered if you could be more specific and perhaps for the record 

 break down where the $773 million was spent this year in civilian 

 oceanography activities. 



Mr. Clotw^orthy. I will try, if we can find the section of the Com- 

 mission report very quickly here. 



Mr. Karth. I thought they were talking about $500 million or there- 

 abouts. It seems to me that this $773 million is new to me specifically 

 relating to civilian ocean sciences. 



Mr. Clotworthy. The $500 million may be the Council's figure. This 

 is a terribly difficult problem, the accounting problem, because it all 

 depends on what you wish to include in that general grouping of 

 moneys that support civilian oceanography. 



Mr. Karth. I think it would be helpful to the committee if someone 

 could do this bit of accounting. If it comes up to the three-quarter 

 billion dollar mark, it might make it easier for the committee in the 



