sciences can be enacted during the remainder of this fiscal year, it seemed appropriate, and I think it is essential that we should consider extending the life of the Council for a reasonable period. In introducing these two bills, I believe that Mr. Mosher and I share the same feeling that we do not have any desire to perpetuate the life of the Council beyond such time as may be needed to properly and carefully enact the legislation necessary to provide an effective new Government organization to carry forward a strong national program in the marine sciences. However, we equally feel that it is vital that the splendid work of the Council should not be allowed to fail until a new organizational structure is created. Thus, we are meeting today to discuss with the distinguished executive secretary of the National Council on Marine Resources and Engineering Development, Dr. Edward Wenk, Jr., this legislation which would assure the continuance of the Council as a viable coordinating body for a reasonable period of time. We are honored and delighted to have you here, Dr. Wenk, and Dr. Adams and your other distinguished associates. The members of the committee have a copy of your statement in front of them. You may proceed. STATEMENT OF DR. EDWARD WENK, JR., EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, NATIONAL COUNCIL ON MARINE RESOURCES AND ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT, WASHINGTON, D.C.; ACCOMPANIED BY E. LEROY DILLON, SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR PROGRAMS AND LEGISLATION; GLENN SCHWEITZER, SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR NATIONAL AFFAIRS; AND DR. DAVID ADAMS, SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR COASTAL MARINE AFFAIRS Dr. WENK. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee on Oceanography of the House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries. It is an honor-and indeed a pleasure-to appear before this distinguished committee to discuss H.R. 5829 and H.R. 7895, bills to extend the life of the National Council on Marine Resources and Engineering Development. In this statement, I should like to review the role of the Council in providing advice and assistance to the President in carrying out his responsibilities to implement Public Law 89-454, and to discuss the legislation before this committee. PERSPECTIVE Enactment of the Marine Resources and Engineering Development Act (Public Law 89-454) on June 17, 1966, became an auspicious turning point in this Nation's exploration and use of the sea. Under this subcommittee's leadership in the House of Representatives, a new and clear statement of national policy was enunciated to "develop, encourage and maintain a coordinated, comprehensive, and long-range national program in marine science for the benefit of mankind ** The Nation's marine science activities are to contribute to the following objectives: To accelerate development of marine resources; food, fuel, and minerals; To expand human knowledge of the marine environment; To encourage private investment enterprise in exploration, technological development, and utilization of marine resources; To expand requisite scientific and engineering capabilities of ships, laboratories, and trained manpower; To preserve the U.S. leadership in marine science and resource development; To foster cooperation with other nations in endeavors of mutual benefit; and To manage Federal activities, in cooperation with other public and private interests, to gain most effective use of our scientific and engineering resources. On this latter point, the Congress recognized that marine science affairs embraced a wide range and diversity of public purposes, institutions, and disciplines, and involved missions of some 11 Federal departments and agencies. The Congress accordingly determined that it was essential to turn a fragmented, frequently unsteady and loosely knit collection of programs into a broadly based, coherent, and strengthened national effort. The President was given that imposing responsibility. To advise and assist him, the act provided two temporary bodies an interim Cabinet-level Council, chaired by the Vice President, and a public Advisory Commission to review the Nation's marine science activities, and recommend an adequate national oceanographic program and governmental organization plan. COUNCIL FUNCTIONS As you know, the Council was activated soon after the legislation was signed, on August 17, 1966. In accordance with authority granted by Public Law 89-454, the Council functioned in the last administration to: (a) Identify unmet needs and opportunities to which Federal marine science programs could be directed, especially gaps in programs that cross agency lines; (b) Recommend priorities on a Government-wide basis by selecting areas deserving additional emphasis; (c) Identify impediments to progress and strategies for their circumvention; (d) Develop policies by which the objectives and programs of one agency will not inadvertently conflict with equally valid but independent activities of another; (e) Recommend-in those cases where missions of several agencies may overlap-that one agency assume a lead responsibility for Government-wide planning, guiding, coordinating, and assuring fiscal support; (f) Coordinate-through a committee structure-programs which are of concern to many agencies; (g) Insure that the appropriate resources of the Federal Government are brought to bear on mutually agreed upon goals-in other words, to deliver on our promises; (h) Evaluate programs so as to eliminate marginal activities; and (i) Develop background, legal, economic, and technological studies for identifying alternative policies and criteria for choice. The Council has also provided policy advice to the National Science Foundation on the sea grant program established by Public Law 89-688 and assisted in coordinating Federal programs of international cooperation. I wish to call to this committee's attention that President Nixon has requested Vice President Agnew to assist him in fulfilling the responsibilities of the Marine Science Act. On February 24, the Vice President publicly announced his intention to continue the Council and convened its first meeting February 26. In carrying out functions mentioned earlier, Council activities may be divided into five categories: 1. Development of goals and priorities deserving Presidential attention-building on strengths of the separate and existing operating departments to employ actual and potential ocean capabilities, to widen opportunities for economic growth, world order, and enhanced quality of urban living. 2. Preparation of the annual report for the President to transmit to Congress. I believe you gentlemen have in front of you the third annual report which was submitted January 17, 1969: "Marine Science Affairs-a Year of Broadened Participation"; Third Report of the President to the Congress on Marine Resources and Engineering Development, January 1969. 3. Conduct of legal and long-range studies as aids to development of policy alternatives. 4. Communication with non-Federal institutions. 5. Review of the Commission's report. As to helping the President set goals and priorities, the starting point has been to examine how our often neglected attributes as a coastal Nation could provide positive solutions to a broad range of national needs. The challenge we found was this: Only one-third of our coast has sufficiently detailed storm warnings. More warning time might permit actions to reduce the tens of millions of dollars of destruction annually in these areas. Twenty million children live in metropolitan areas within sight of potential water recreation areas but are often denied their use. Only 3 percent of our ocean and Great Lakes coastline has been set aside for public use of conservation in spite of rapidly growing demands for such areas. Parenthetically, Mr. Chairman, at the present time, 45 percent of our Nation's population lives in those counties which border the coast and the Great Lakes, and 75 percent in those States which border the coasts and the Great Lakes. The projection to the year 2000 indicates that this will grow to 90 percent. We are reversing the trends of migration in our own country from coast inland; it is coming back. Pollution of our oceans and estuaries will increase manifold by the year 2000 unless there are drastic changes in waste handling; meanwhile, more than 50 million Americans engage in ocean swimming, fishing, and boating, and many millions more are also directly affected by degradation of the quality of our coastal waters. The average age of our port structures is 45 years and the average age of our merchant ships is 20 years, even though there is an urgent need to respond to the rapid changes in the character of ocean cargoes and technologies of cargo handling. Less than 10 percent of our Continental Shelf has been systematically explored although we are confident that abundant oil and mineral resources lie in other areas of the shelf. Only a small portion of the fishery stocks off our coasts are being fully exploited, and of the total U.S. consumption of fish products less than one-third is provided by U.S. fishermen. Only 6 percent of our international maritime commerce travels in U.S.-flag vessels. And on the international scene: Protein deficiencies plague millions in a number of the developing countries located near abundant fishery resources which could provide economical sources of protein. Unilateral acts to extend claims of national sovereignty great distances seaward threaten to erode the fundamental principle of freedom of the seas. Pollutants are gradually spreading to distant reaches of the seas as nations only slowly become concerned with maintaining the quality of ocean waters. POLICY PLANNING In response to these challenges, examples of policy issues considered previously by the Council and reported to the Congress include: To assist in the war on hunger, the Government acclerated technology for extracting fish protein concentrate at low cost; To improve our comprehension of the sea, chart its resources, improve weather forecasting and foster international understanding, an expansion of cooperative efforts of many nations was proposed; To strengthen multidisciplinary research and broaden our sources of manpower, the sea-grant college legislation was employed to build manpower resources to meet the needs of the seventies; To insure safety of life and property at sea, contingency plans were developed and put into effect to meet potential disasters from massive oil spillage—I need not remind this committee of the recent development at Santa Barbara and the need for contingency plans. Improvements advanced of navigation aids for civilian safety, and safety standards examined for offshore structures and research submarines; To foster development of marine resources while preventing neocolonial races among nations of the world, steps were taken to develop international law that would preserve the traditional freedom of the seas and create incentives for private investment; and To meet conflicts in use of the coastal zone where people and the sea meet, the groundwork was laid for both quality standards in our bays and estuaries and for locally or regionally managed coastal authorities responsible for land management in the public interest. This last point we are citing here is calling attention to a problem that has been growing and what has often been termed as a slow crisis but one which until this time did not seem to gain adequate recognition. The second major task of the Council relates to the Annual Presidential Report. 54-260-71-2 ANNUAL PRESIDENTIAL REPORT Section 7 of the act provides that the President shall annually transmit to the Congress a report: Describing Government-wide programs, accomplishments and funding; Evaluating programs of all Federal agencies in terms of statutory objectives; Setting forth recommendations for new legislation. Although not explicitly provided for in the act, the Council as its second major task has been requested to prepare an annual report to the President. After drafting by the Council staff, the report is reviewed by Council members and observers. At that time, unresolved issues, unclear jurisdictions, and controversial programs are clarified and resolved. By its scope and content, the report serves as a planning document to assist the Federal Government at various echelons to focus on common goals. It is intended to aid Congress in relating diverse elements of the program presented to more than 20 appropriations subcommittees and an equal number of legislative subcommittees concerned with the complex matrix of marine science affairs. The report should also assist industry, academe, State and local governments, and foreign nations concerned with relating their goals and programs to our national effort. The Council has also released reports and general background information concerning activities such as oceanographic ship operating schedules, university curricula in oceanography, potential of spacecraft oceanography, and marine science activities of some 100 countries. A list is attached. (The list follows:) Title REPORTS OF THE MARINE SCIENCES COUNCIL Marine Science Affairs-A Year of Transition: The first re- Aquatic sciences in the Great Lakes area- University curricula in the marine sciences, academic year Addendum to university curricula in the marine sciences, United States activities in spacecraft oceanography. Marine science activities of Canada and the nations of Marine science activities of the nations of East Asia. Marine science activities of the nations of Africa_ Oceanographic ship operating schedules, September 1968- Marine Science Affairs-A Year of Broadened Participation: 2 August 1968. 1 January 1969. 1 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. Available from Council's Committee on Marine Research, Education, and Facilities. Building 159-E, room 476, Navy Yard, Washington, D.C. 20390. |