Page images

new large research organizations, such as a national oceanographic institute or regional oceanographic institutes.

Such developments would throw the orderly growth of oceanography completely out of balance through their demands, not only upon the graduate training program but upon the small pool of oceanographers with the mature judgment and experience needed for leadership.

Last year Drs. "Hedgpeth, Pritchard, and Koczy, and myself, organized a study of the oceanographic manpower in the United States, in behalf of the National Science Foundation.

The results of this survey indicated that, out of about 3,700 persons working on oceanographic projects in the country, about 650 possessed the qualifications in research experience or training equivalent to that of a Ph.D. degree in oceanography.

This is a fairly reasonable ratio, since it represents about six assistants or technicians to each scientist at the Ph. D. level. It was found, however, that the ratio in Government agencies generally was more than 7 to 1, compared with less than 5 to 1 in private institutions and universities.

If we include fishery management and engineering, then the rates become less than 3 to 1 in universities, more than 4 to 1 in Federal agencies. These figures suggest that there has been a somewhat more rapid growth than average in some of the Federal agencies, with a resultant dilution of experienced and trained personnel.

Percentage of total respondents who are qualified as oceanographers, fishery specialists, and oceanographic engineers, 1964.

[blocks in formation]

The present enrollment of students in oceanographic institutes is over 400. The present level of oceanographic effort would require that 100 students be enrolled merely to keep pace with the loss of scientific manpower through the normal processes of attrition such as retirement or death.

Probably 600 would be needed in order to provide for the program recommended by ICO as well. On the other hand, oceanographers are also recruited from persons with degrees in the basic sciences, rather than in oceanography, who take up oceanographic research and become, as it were, oceanographers by experience. These account for a significant proportion of oceanographic recruitment, and help to reduce the burden on the schools of oceanography.

The available data show that the present supply of graduate students in oceanography, plus the recruitment from other sources, will barely suffice to meet the projected rate of growth-provided that no explosive or crash programs are developed and that no new major institutes are set up, and allowing for a lag of several years, due to the time required to train each student.

To establish large new institutes would place a further drain on the small group of experienced leaders and teachers. Instead, it is important that more support be given to graduate oceanographic programs in existing universities and teaching institutes to enable them to keep pace with the demand.

This can be done through the Government agencies providing active financial support for teaching faculties and for fellowships which will attract and support graduate students of good quality.

Since an important source of recruitment is from nonoceanographic graduates, it is also desirable that adequate provision be made for research participation of these graduates in established oceanographic programs at universities and elsewhere.

Since the growth of research and of graduate training must advance hand in hand, we believe it necessary that any coordinating committee or council for oceanography should be in a position to receive a direct input of information from those universities in which oceanographers are being trained as well as from Government and other agencies engaged in oceanographic research.

It must also be composed of individuals in a position to speak for and to make decisions for the agencies to which they belong. It must also have sufficient control over the development of the total oceanographic budget to insure that the agencies are able to fulfill their proper missions, while preventing unnecessary duplication of effort.

With regard to the method of coordination, it seems to be generally agreed that ICO has done its level best to undertake the responsibilities of coordination and cooperation but that it has not had adequate authority.

Most of us would agree that the individual members have worked hard and well to obtain and channel information and to recommend support for orderly plans of development. To the extent possible within the limitations of their authority they have been successful.

The effectiveness of ICO would be increased, however, if the agency representatives had a higher level of authority. I am not sufficiently versed in government to venture an opinion as to whether a Council could better achieve this effectiveness.

In fact, the only detailed study of this that has come to my attention is that of Dr. Donald Price, dean of the Harvard Graduate School of Public Administration, but this, unfortunately, was given to me verbally and secondhand.

In summation, we respectfully urge that adequate powers of integration and control be provided to insure that the activities of all agencies in oceanography be coordinated with those of the educational institutions which offer professional training in this field.

Senator BARTLETT. Thank you very much, Dr. Smith.

Also at this point, I wish to submit a letter of this date to the chairman from Senator John G. Tower, of Texas, a cosponsor of S. 944, and a copy of a speech on oceanographic needs delivered by Senator Tower in Houston, Tex., on March 15, referred to by the Senator in his letter to the chairman.

(The letter and speech referred to by Senator Bartlett follows:)


March 16, 1965. Hon. WARREN G. MAGNUSON, Chairman, Commerce Committee, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: I regret that I will be out of town and will miss your March 16 hearings on establishment of a National Oceanographic Council. As a cosponsor of that bill, I had hoped to present a statement to the committee.

However, since on March 15, I made a short speech on the Nation's oceanographic needs in Houston—a city vitally interested in this field—I hope that you will be able to incorporate this speech in the printed record of your hearings so that my support of the legislation will be noted therein.

I enclose for you a copy of the speech, and once again express my thanks for your leadership in this field. Sincerely yours,




It certainly is a great pleasure for me to be here today with so many deans of students and deans of men from Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Louisiana. As you all know, I have in my time worked for several deans. So it is with both caution and satisfaction that I speak to such a select group.

Inasmuch as deans are rather flexible people by the nature of their jobs— dealing as they do with varied and often unexpected problems and woes day in and day out-I hope I may be permitted the flexibility necessary for academic survival here.

Of course, I'd like very much to be able to lecture you upon how to be better deans and administrators, but rather obviously you all know more about that than I. Luckily, one of the speech topics suggested for me by a dean who is here, but shall not be named, was discussion of major needs and changes in higher education over the coming decade.

Starting from that general topic, I would like to draw upon some of the experience and background that I have had as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. I'd like to talk to you about something that I think you all are going to have to work more fully into your curricula this next decade. I refer to a very large topic and a very deep topic; the oceans.

I must say that the oceans are a rather obvious topic for increased attention to those of us who have traveled on them and over them. The various applications of national seapower are equally obvious to those of us who serve on the Armed Services Committees of the Congress.

But, too many of our colleges are academic landlubbers. And in the next decade the national survival of our Nation will increasingly depend upon development of a new generation of students of the sea. For we are being sorely challenged at sea by international communism.

And where we are confronting communism today it is seapower that is keeping our side of the fight alive. However, even in Vietnam our landlubber strategy did not recognize until very recently that the enemy was using sea lanes of supply fully as extensively as he was using land lanes.

So you deans are going to have to educate a generation that knows more about the sea than my generation does. It will be fully as important to them as is outer space.

You deans are going to have to do something about the fact that only some 40 American colleges conduct formal courses in oceanography. A statistic that is further limited when it is noted that many of these schools are newcomers to the field and that only a handful offer extensive and sophisticated programs.

And those of you from Oklahoma and Arkansas will need to convince some of your landlocked legislators and benefactors that the geopolitics of seapower and the exploitation of minerals from the sea is fully as important to the economy and progress of your States as it is to Texas and Louisiana-two States that have made some steps to meet this challenge of the future.

I must today urge-indeed implore you-to work in your colleges and universities to take out an insurance policy covering the seven-tenths of this planet's surface that is liquid space. Liquid space—the oceans—is fully as important as the outer space in which Americans appear so eager to participate.

Besides, it is on the liquid space of earth that the most serious long-range challenge to American freedom and national security is developing.

Plans of the Communist bloc—involving both the Soviet Union and Red China-for exploitation of the oceans are becoming graphically clear. The oceanic activity of the Communists is as dynamic and as challenging as their space feats. Communist sea strategy is big and bold. No area of activity is neglected in their determined push for world domination through sea domination.

The race in liquid space is one America cannot afford to lose. Yet few Americans really understand the stakes involved, and too few American universities are preparing their political scientists and journalists and engineers to understand the magnitude of this challenge.

To get the problem in perspective, there are some fundamentals we should note. Fundamentals that will help you and retrain the next decade's explorers and writers and Government officials.

First, North America is virtually an island. Right at our doorstep is an almost unexplored jungle. Huge mountain ranges, canyons, and strange creatures are found in these millions of cubic miles of sea water. This liquid space, about which we know so little and about which the Communists are finding out so much—this liquid space is a murky mass of discontinuities * * * full of sound ducts, currents, and thermal layers. Most incredible of all is the racket of noise rebounding through this undersea jungle.

Like the air above it, the sea is fluid, but many times as dense; and because of this it has the capacity to support objects on its surface with no expenditure of energy needed to keep them buoyant, but energy required only to move them from place to place over the quadrillions of molecular ball bearings in every cubic centimeter of sea water.

That's a rather basic concept; yet, how many of the students at your schools have ever given it any serious consideration? No doubt many more would do so if football were played in a swimming pool.

At any rate, movements of goods over the surface of the sea, in great bulk, has become an easy, inexpensive and essential business for every member of the oceanic confederation. This use of the sea has shaped history in a way that no other human activity has.

Today, more than 99 percent of all oversea tonnage travels on the surface of the sea. Ships are the sinews and strength of the free world alliance. Our strongest allies have a coastline and all our allies have access to the sea.

Have any of your students stopped lately to consider that this may be a major factor in why those nations are free?

It is my observation that we have too long taken for granted the doctrine of “Freedom of the Seas.” This is not in fact a natural condition and no divine authority guarantees the sea's continued use to us. Actually, the sea is free only because freemen have chosen to make it so, and it will remain free only so long as freemen have the strength and resolution to keep it free.

Our Nation and our allies depend upon the more than 60,000 miles of world sea lanes for economic survival and well-being in peacetime and for physical survival in war. Close or narrow the sealanes and our America would begin to strangle and die.

Of the 77 strategic raw materials which the United States requires for survival, we are self-sufficient in less than a dozen. Many of these vital items are taken entirely for granted by today's American student.

Our students needs to be asked to make a simple experiment. For instance suggest that in their mind's eye they take out all those things that depend upon the sea and stack them on the front lawn of the fraternity or in the dormitory driveway.

First, they will have to resign themselves to loss of their automobile, because its steel and alloys require cobalt, manganese chromium and antimony—and we import up to 90 percent of these metals by ship.

Let me immediately caution you that this little experiment is not really the answer to the campus parking problem.

Next they will have to pitch out the radio, TV set, and hi-fi record player, because the copper and mica essential for their operation are imported. The young lovers' telephone goes next, because nearly half of the raw materials used in making it come by sea. Then will go the pots and pans, toaster and vacuum cleaner, because more than 75 percent of our aluminum depends on ships reaching our shores. No more coffee at the student union either; all of that is imported.

All of the canned goods must go in the stack too; 100 percent of our tin comes from overseas. Meantime, those coeds not already barefoot will have to toss away their shoes, because the tanning of leather depends on imported chromium salts. And some three-letter man might as well climb on the roof and rip off the shingles if they have any asbestos in them—that's almost 100percent imported.

At any rate, by the time your students are about half finished with this mental experiment it should be crystal clear just how utterly dependent we are on things brought to us by ship across the sea. With this behind them, your students might show some interest in oceanography.

Oceanography no longer means just knowledge of winds and waves, tides and currents, shoals and reefs. It calls today for a mass of usable information about chemical and biological factors, bottom contours and sea-air interface, underocean rivers and terrain faults, thermoclines and temperature gradients, gravity, and magnetic characteristics.

Knowledge of all these things is essential for development of the vast store of food and mineral resources that abound in and under the oceans; for increasing the safety and efficiency of world travel and commerce on the high seas; for more accurate prediction of weather, climate, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions, and for the design and operation of seaborne weapons systems to defend America.

We must find new sources of food and minerals to support the growing population of the world. Already we know that the continental shelves-those underocean lands extending up to a few hundred miles offshore-contain 40 percent of known oil reserves. Virtually all of the world's commercially recoverable magnesium and bromine is in the sea. Fabulous diamond deposits have been found off the coast of Africa. There is 38 pounds of gold in each cubic mile of sea water.

We now harvest 35 million tons of fish a year and could increase this tenfold if we knew just a little more about their environment. The key to prediction of the hurricanes and tornadoes that harrass our four-State area well could lie in the interrelation of the sea and air.

But placing aside all these marvels which could excite your engineers and scientists, let us never forget there is something in sea study for the Government class as well.

Knowledge of the oceans is power-national power to exert military and economic influence around the world. America's ability to project military power over wide areas in the politically turbulent Mediterranean, and the Far East is an accepted fact.

But present American seapower is based—as we have noted-upon only the most circumspect knowledge of the real secrets of the oceans. And the Communist world knows that.

Sir Walter Raleigh observed in the 16th century that whoever commands the sea commands the world itself. But, communism was not around in the 16th century and that massive, land-based philosophy was late in learning the power of the sea. In fact, you will remember that Winston Churchill characterized the East-West struggle as a “conflict between the land beast and the sea beast” * * between the bear and the whale, so to speak.

Except that now the bear has learned to swim. I think it is not too farfetched to say that this swimming lesson was administered during World War II. In those trying years the Soviet Union was an impatient customer on the far end of Atlantic sea lanes, grumbling about the shortage of supplies and the time it took to get them to Murmansk. We told them why-Nazi submarines were sinking ships—often faster than we could build them. This was a basic lesson in seapower for the Russians; one that they learned well and have not forgotten.

So the threat the students of the next decade must face up to is not a great land bear, but a polar bear, if you will. A polar bear capable of swimming far from land, and underwater when necessary-a polar bear that will be just as content with our burial if that burial comes at sea.

« PreviousContinue »