We are fifth or sixth in fisheries, which makes me feel terrible, and I am sure it makes you feel terrible.

The CHAIRMAN. You heard this morning some of the testimony with Dr. Cain on this matter.

Dr. SPILHAUS. We have to have massive expenditures and this means that we need a group, and this is not belittling the work of ICO at all. In fact ICO may even have a reason to continue to exist, but that doesn't mean that we don't need a higher level group to coordinate the much greater order of magnitude and the different efforts that we need if we are going to be first in the oceans.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes; I would think-and I am sure you agree with me-that ICO ought to welcome something like this, because it would give it a chance to function better. It would give it better advice and it would help it to coordinate some of its efforts better.

Dr. SPILHAUS. I would think anybody who is sincerely interested in the United States being the first in the development of the oceans, would welcome the establishment of a group at the highest possible level to coordinate our activities in ocean engineering.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, I want to explore just briefly, because you are familiar and I suppose some of the other witnesses are too, the matter of industry providing service or taking the lead in this field. I take it that you feel that we are pretty sadly lacking in that and that ICO, even though they may want to do this, just doesn't have the authority and are too limited to be able to do it?

Dr. SPILHAUS. Yes, sir; I think we are missing a bet, because I think that imaginative industry is already looking toward the oceans, looking for ways in which, by the investment of their own capital and with some assurance of reasonable return, which any private industry needs, they are willing to invest in the ocean and I think they are floundering because they have no place to go, no place that can give them the answer.

The CHAIRMAN. That is right. And this, to me, is very important and the Government is going to have to sponsor some group or an independent staff of experts to help industry in this matter because you will find that industry seldom in a new field like this will go it alone.

Some industries, notably the oil industry, probably does so, but other than that, you don't have too much actual activity in industry unless the industry is so big that it can afford a lot of research. Smaller industry hasn't much chance in this field.

Dr. SPILHAUS. There are three elements in this thing, encouragement of industrial participation and exploitation of the oceans, and the one I mentioned was the establishment of what I have chosen to call sea grant colleges.

The history of the United States is that if we get a sea grant college, industries that are interested in the sea will cluster around that good college or university, and it could be in the State of Washington, in California, Texas, or in Rhode Island, or our other coastal States. The other thing is that we need a central point in our Federal Government where both industry and the colleges can go for support of their work.

The CHAIRMAN. There has been quite a revival of interest in other colleges than the ones that were in the oceanographic field prior to

this upsurge. I am glad to see this in many schools throughout the United States, which you are familiar with, but I do think they need some more help to get this going. It is similar to the situation I went through with the Space Agency, where we started out with a dozen, no correlation, and finally we had to end up with a separate

agency.

The Space Agency is urging colleges through grants to do work in that field, and it seems to me we are in that position with oceanography. This is what we are hoping to do.

Thank you very much, doctor, and I appreciate your coming. We are going to try and hurry this hearing this morning, but we will leave the record open for a few days in case any of you gentlemen wish to add to your testimony.

We will see that the clerk sends you a transcript of what you have said, and you may want to make some changes. There are a great number of trade publications and scientific publications and schools that are very anxious to have this testimony. So you may want to enlarge upon it.

Dr. SPILHAUS. Thank you, Senator The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, doctor. (Discussion off the record.)

The CHAIRMAN. Dr. Schaefer is the director of the Institute of Marine Resources, University of California, at San Diego. We will be glad to hear from you.

STATEMENT OF DR. MILNER B. SCHAEFER, DIRECTOR OF MARINE RESOURCES, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO, AND CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON OCEANOGRAPHY OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCE

Dr. SCHAEFER. It is very nice to speak before your committee again, sir. Mr. Chairman, with your pleasure, I have a prepared statement here.

The CHAIRMAN. Go right ahead, we will be glad to hear it. There are a great many people interested.

Dr. SCHAEFER. I thought perhaps rather than reading the whole statement I could perhaps cover some of the highlights.

The CHAIRMAN. OK.

Dr. SCHAEFER. As you know, I have been involved with the matter of the academic study of oceanography.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me ask you something. Are you physically located in San Diego or in La Jolla.

Dr. SCHAEFER. La Jolla is a suburb of San Diego. It is a little suburb of about 11 miles north of the center of town. I live nearer to the center of town, the Scripps Institution is located in La Jolla. The CHAIRMAN. The point I am making is that the university has taken over the Scripps Institutes, has it not?

Dr. SCHAEFER. Yes; the Scripps Institution of Oceanography is one of the units of the University of California at San Diego.

The CHAIRMAN. But formerly it was a private oceanographic research institution?

Dr. SCHAEFER. Not for a great many years. It started out as a marine biological station, endowed by the Scripps of the Scripps

Howard newspapers. It became a part of the University of California along in the early 1920's.

The CHAIRMAN. The point I tried to make is that, for many, many years little was being done in the field of oceanography except in small institutions such as Scripps, Woods Hole, and some two or three others.

Dr. SCHAEFER. Except the only thing is, sir, the Scripps Institution has been a campus of the University of California for a great many

years.

The CHAIRMAN. Go right ahead.

Dr. SCHAEFER. I have been involved in this developing oceanographic program and the exploitation of the resources of the ocean for a great many years and in the last couple of years, I have become director of our Institute of Marine Resources at the university and we have gotten fairly widely involved in not only academic research and some of the economic, social, and engineering aspects.

So, I think as Dr. Spilhaus was saying, this matter of oceanography is much broader than simply the academic research on the ocean, although that is the fundamental element on which everything else is based.

The ocean, of course, is very important to us in a great many ways. It provides a great many materials that we can extract from it to support our population. It is terribly important in determining weather and climate.

It is of vital importance in our military defense, and finally, the less known and less understood region of this planet earth, of which it covers nearly three-quarters, presents tremendous intellectual and technological challenge; it is the great frontier of the modern world.

As we all know, until just a few years ago, we have been extremely laggard in taking up this challenge. However, commencing in about 1959, 1960, the administration and the Congress have taken quite vigorous action to increase our understanding in utilization of the ocean.

Through the administration and support of the Congress, we have finally acquired some very good new oceanographic ships. For the first time in decades we have a number of craft that are especially designed and constructed for oceanographic research.

We are getting some new vehicles for working under the sea. Previous statutory limitations on the permitted areas of operation of several of the Government agencies have been removed, so they can participate in oceanwide programs.

Bureau of Mines, for example, is now beginning to look at mining of the sea bottom. Public Health Service is becoming involved with some of the oceanwide aspects of waste disposal, pesticides, and so forth.

I think all of these things are very important. The thing that really impresses me, however, is the increasing interest of capable young research scientists and engineers to the ocean.

As you mentioned earlier, sir, several universities that were not previously concerned with the ocean have developed new faculties and new curricula in ocean science and ocean engineering.

We have been able to attract a good many excellent scientists who already had advanced degrees in physics, chemistry and other subjects to apply their talents to the ocean and particularly in the last few years

The bill, S. 944, which is primarily under consideration at this time, appeals to me as being an important means of improving the coordination of our expanded activities in research and development in the world ocean.

Firstly, by establishing the responsibility at the secretarial level, it should be possible to achieve a better balance of activities, both between and within agencies. I think perhaps the most important feature of your bill is the provision of a highly competent, independent staff that would have no other duties than staff work for the council.

This should certainly be able to provide an improved basis of planing. I would hope also that under the authority of this bill, it might be possible to develop some means of obtaining better coordination in the review of the program and budget by the Congress.

I am not wise enough in this sphere to know how this could be worked, but I would hope that under this bill, it would be possible. Finally, I am very pleased to note that the bill recognizes the importance of international cooperation in research and development in the world ocean, in the context of our foreign policy.

As we all know, many of the underdeveloped countries are turning to the sea as an important source of the resources required to feed and otherwise support their people.

At the same time, many of the more advanced industrialized nations, both in the Eastern and Western Hemisphere, are rapidly increasing their uses of the ocean. As we all know, this great international common that used to be a fairly one-way, uninhabited place, has become pretty crowded, and I believe this trend is going to rapidly increase in the future.

There are going to be more people and more nations using the resources and opportunities of the ocean. I believe, therefore, that the developing of the resources of the sea equitably for the benefit of our own citizens, and all of the people of the world, presents one of the greatest challenges of our generation.

Therefore, I believe that this bill establishing the council is certainly a step in the right direction and should be very helpful in handling many of these problems.

The CHAIRMAN. It seems to me on page 9 of your prepared statement you point up what really has been bothering us a great deal, and why we want to proceed with something like this council. You say: further, with the imminent rapid development of applied engineering in the ocean, there will inevitably arise difficult problems concerning the proper balance between the application of knowledge already obtained and the acquisition of new knowledge on which future application must be based.

Now, leaving it as it is, with each agency in its individual mission, as you point out, you could lose a lot of your work, you could drop behind, or you couldn't do the kind of proper work that we hope to do in this field. Somebody may get lost over here, unless something like a council is to pull the agency activities together.

I presume that is what you are thinking about here?

Dr. SCHAEFER. Yes, that, and also the matter of the proper division between research funds and engineering development funds needs to be considered in a broader context within each agency.

You see, this always presents, as in the case of the space business, a very difficult problem because the amounts of money and the amounts

The ICO performs an essential function, as a means whereby these many agencies of Government can develop a more inclusive and better coordinated program pursuant to their individual missions than would be possible.

But it seems to me that by its nature, there are certain things that it can't adequately deal with. Two of them have to do with the administrative branch, and one essentially has to do with the Congress.

Since the members represent the individual agencies, and since the staff of the ICO is seconded from the agencies, it is most difficult for it to establish relative importance of different programs that are proposed by different agencies or the relative merits of different components within each agency.

Secondly, the budget for the national oceanographic program is composed of the budgets for the individual agencies that are incorporated into the President's budget, as it comes to the Congress, and this is arrived at, of course, by each department head within the overall budget limitations for his department.

Fragments of the oceanographic program in each department have to compete with the other unrelated programs of the department. The ICO representing individual departments and agencies has to work within the limitations of the budget ceilings for the individual departments and this may not always properly reflect the relative desirability of these different elements in a broader frame of reference. This is simply the way the business operates.

Finally, another difficulty is the fact that these individual components come to the Congress not in a single package, but the components consisting of agency components are considered individually by some, I believe 14 different subcommittees of the Appropriations Committee. Each agency component is judged individually by different subcommittees in relation to the multiple missions of each agency rather than a unified program and budget.

Well, this has all been talked about for quite a few months, in fact, for the last 2 or 3 years, and I think the fact that there have been so many different bills introduced and so much debating going on, emphasizes the importance of establishing some new machinery to make it possible to do the job that is now needed since the program has expanded much beyond what it was when the ICO was first set up. It seems to me the necessity for this is particularly urgent for those elements of the program that involve the present missions of several different agencies.

Such, for example, as the study of air-sea interactions, or particularly research and development on the extractive resources of the sea, things like fisheries, minerals, and so forth.

Finally with this eminent rapid development of applied engineering in the ocean, which I mentioned earlier, there will certainly arise difficult problems concerning the proper balance between the application of knowledge that we have already attained for engineering purposes and acquisition of new knowledge on which to base future engineering developments.

Again these problems I believe will demand consideration in a broader contention than the individual missions of the individual agencies.