365 



priority, we will find it ever more difficult to achieve some of our im- 

 portant objectives in marine science and technology. 



With regard to taxonomy and in relation to the Commission's laud- 

 able recommendation for the establishment of national laboratories, I 

 am of the opinion that there already exists a unique national labora- 

 tory, namely the Smithsonian Institution. Increased support for the 

 urgently needed training of additional taxonomists as well as for 

 taxonomical research, both in the Smithsonian Institution and in uni- 

 versities around the country, is the only reasonable solution to a most 

 serious but little understood problem. 



The Commission report also addresses itself to the requirement for 

 improved technology and more research in order to achieve an im- 

 proved capability for environmental monitoring and prediction. Cer- 

 tainly, I can give this recommendation my enthusiastic support. At 

 the same time, however, the report barely touches on a collateral ob- 

 jective in marine sciences which should receive our most earnest con- 

 sideration — namely, the need to develop a capability for ecological 

 prediction and assessment. 



Man's rapidly increasing capability of manipulating his environ- 

 ment is not limited to the 25 percent of the earth's surface which we 

 call land. His capability extends into the oceans as well as into the 

 atmosphere around us. Statistically the chances of producing irrever- 

 sible and deleterious environmental changes are increasing signifi- 

 cantly. We dare not continue to regard with complacency the con- 

 struction of such monumental projects as an Aswan Dam or a plan for 

 an interoceanic sea level canal without first predicting and assessing 

 the ecological risks involved. I regret to have to inform this subcom- 

 mittee that our present capability for predicting the ecological con- 

 sequences of man's manipulation of his estuarine and oceanic environ- 

 ment is vanishingly small. Here, too, we have a rapidly widening gap 

 between need and capability. Oil spills, thermal pollution, chemical 

 and domestic contamination, and land filling are but a few of the man- 

 produced insults to estuarine and coastal environments. If, in addition, 

 we divert the flow of rivers leading into estuaries, and indeed, change 

 the pattern of coastal currents, we can anticipate major and possibly- 

 catastrophic changes in the ecology of many of our coastal zones. 



I cannot overstress the importance of developing a national capa- 

 bility for ecological prediction and assessment. We must be prepared 

 to make substantial investments in the education and training of 

 marine ecologists and related biological specialists. We must be pre- 

 pared to make the investment in the very near future if we are to have 

 any reasonable expectation of closing the gap between need and 

 capability. 



In concluding this statement, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the 

 subcommittee, I wish to emphasize once again my support of the Com- 

 mission's report, especially the principles and guidelines which are 

 so clearly presented. What we need now, in my opinion, is a matching 

 inventory and assessment of the goals and needs both in terms of man- 

 power, as well as money and facilities of the basic scientific disciplines 

 that undergird and support marine science and technology. We must 

 be especially diligent in identifying those fields of scientific endeavor, 

 that although not usually recognized as an integral part of marine 

 science and technology, nevertheless contribute in an essential way to 



