498 



6. The proposal to change the Interior Department into a Department of 

 Environmental Sciences seems to me a genuine example of hating off more than 

 can he chewed at the present time. Furthermore, Prof. Bauer only proposes to 

 strengthen the Interior Department by giving it the Weather Bureau and the 

 Ooast and Geodetic Survey. Since he would not give it the Coast Guard ( or 

 presumably ESSA), he would not be granting it any real resources for oceanog- 

 raphy. In other words, he would create an agency charged with a tremendous 

 responsibility hut lacking elementary tools to carry out the task. 



i have not commented on all of Prof. Bauer's statements hut only those which 

 appear to me to require a reaction. 

 Sincerely yours, 



George E. Reedy. 



Comments of John H. Perry, Jr., President, Perry Publications, Inc., on 

 Statement by Paul S. Bauer, Adjunct Professor op Earth Science, the 

 American University, Consulting Engineer 



When the Commission on Marine Science, Engineering, and Resources filed its 

 report, "Our Nation and the Sea — A Plan for National Action", it anticipated 

 that there would be tremendous opposition to the Commission's recommendations 

 among those agencies whose present ocean roles and responsibilities would be 

 i-educed in favor of a strong centralized executive/administrative air and ocean 

 environmental agency, identified by the Commission as the National Ocean and 

 Atmosphere Agency. Professor Bauer's statement appears to be a manifestation 

 of this anticipated opposition on behalf of the Department of Interior. 



Professor Bauer raises what he terms a fundamental objection to the proposed 

 oi-ganization of N.O.A.A. because "basically, any organization which desires to 

 effectively study an environmental system, such as planet Earth, must consider 

 the whole as well as its parts." He cites as an example the structure of our Con- 

 tinental shelves and slopes and says, "Studies of the Continental Shelf can not be 

 interpreted without a consideration of the complete air, land and sea system." 



Professor Bauer apparently has not read the Commission's report with care be- 

 cause it is in agreement with his views on the Continental Shelf studies. The 

 Commission takes the position that as man's involvement with the ocean becomes 

 more pressing, the more people and agencies become involved, the more scattered 

 and frag-mented become identifiable jurisdiction, authority and responsibility. 

 This is as true in the Congress — with its proliferation of committees and subcom- 

 mittees with an ocean or marine environmental interest — as it is within Wash- 

 ington's administrative structure. And it is precisely this that the Commission 

 ■seeks to correct with the organization of N.O.A.A. It seeks to improve the capa- 

 bility for a proper study of all parts of our evironmental .system by concentrating 

 areas of effort and cooperation and eliminating duplication and overlapping. 



Professor Bauer's objection that the creation of N.O.A.A. as an agency re- 

 porting directly to the President would eliminate any higher echelon of manage- 

 ment which is concerned with the total environment is difiicult to comprehend. 

 This level would be top echelon. Does he envision an echelon higher than presi- 

 dential level? If so, this is as illogical as his statement about a group of en- 

 thusiasts concerned with cancer research wanting a separate agency reporting 

 directly to the President. 



Professor Bauer's third objection that the creation of N.O.A.A. w^ould result 

 in the Interior Department being no longer concerned with the marine environ- 

 ment is not completely true. But even if it were, it would not be a bad situation. 

 In the first place, the Interior Department, I am sure, has enough other activities 

 to keep it and its personnel busy. Secondly, its present areas of concern with the 

 marine environment are fragmented and no doubt overlap those of other agencies. 

 So, actually it would be beneficial, as the Commission has proposed in its pro- 

 gram, to eliminate this fragmentation and duplication. 



Professor Bauer's statement that all of the current functions of the U.S. 

 Geological Survey would be duplicated by the Coast and Geodetic Survey is not 

 true. There is no need for this kind of duplication. Intelligent planning and co- 

 oiJerative effort is what is needed and it would be attained under the proposed 

 functions of N.O.A.A. working with other government agencies. Many such co- 

 operative arrangements now in existence could be continued under the new 

 . setup. 



Professor Bauer's statement that to remove the Bureau of Commercial Fish- 

 eries from the Department of Interior would be "a disastrous backward step" is 

 totally imrealistic. He points out that this Bureau has attained a posture of 



