178 



is in many respects a separate, and certainly is the dominant, part of 

 the problem. 



This type of proposal was submitted to the Congress as a result of 

 the estuarine study carried out by FWPCA, and is encompassed in the 

 present proposal by the administration. 



I think it could be disadvantageous in a way for the establishment 

 of the overall planning, management and regulatory- function to be- 

 come engaged, if it should, in details of consideration of the acquisi- 

 tion, although I am not against the acquisition, personally. 



I simply say that that is another feature of the problem, and the 

 administration emphasis is on the first and key feature of the problem : 

 to get some systems established for control. 



Mr. Hetward. I was merely pointing out, so that the record will 

 show it, that this legislation before this committee is not simply one 

 part of what the administration is proposing. It has features which the 

 administration does not address itself to in H.R. 4332. Thank you. 



Mr. Lennox. Do you liave any questions ? 



Mr. DE LxV Garza. 'No, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. QuARLES. I wonder if I might respond to one other small part 

 of what you said. 



Mr. Lennon. Yes, certainly. 



Mr. QuARLES. In part of your opening comments, sir, you referred to 

 the administration's emphasis on the environmental aspects of these 

 various subjects. 



Perhaps because of my own identification with the environmental 

 problems, I may have a slanted view on the subject, but we strongly 

 believe that the environmental aspects are tlie ones which require 

 dominant attention. 



They are the considerations which normally tend to get slighted. 

 Usually, the commercial, industrial, developmental interests will take 

 care of themselves, because there is a profit motive working whicli gen- 

 erates the momentum for whatever development or activity is desirable 

 from the viewpoint of society. 



Where society finds that its overall concerns are not adequately pro- 

 tected is on the environmental side of the ledger. If there is not some 

 specific governmental protection provided for the enviromnental 

 values, then those tend to be given short shrift in the Avorkings of the 

 free enterprise system. 



The reason that our emphasis in dealing with these proposals may 

 weigh more heavily on the enviromnental protection is not in any sense 

 because we feel that tliere are not other values that are important. We 

 recognize that there are. We recognize that there is a need for airports 

 and shipping facilities and all sorts of development and activit3\_ 



But, rather, it is our feeling that we need to give greater protection 

 to the environment so that we get what is. in fact, a proper balance 

 of values reflected in the development patterns that occur. 



Mr. Hetavard. I was not attempting to criticize the viewpoint, Mr. 

 Quarles. The point I was making was that I thought the administration 

 bill generally had been slanted toward environmental protection, which 

 I think is correct. 



I think this committee has shown by its past activities that they 

 were aware of that problem, and I do not think there is a more 

 important statute on the boolcs in that area than tlie National Environ- 

 mental Policy Act, which came out of this full committee. 



