The CHAIRMAN. I think it would be well if Dr. Haworth would come up here in case we want to ask some questions. Come and sit here, both of you. Dr. HORNIG. This is an opportune time for a comprehensive review of oceanography. Until the late 1950's oceanography had not received the support its potential justified. Stimulated by the influential report of the National Academy of Science entitled "Oceanography, 1960-1970" the Congress, Senator Magnuson, and the executive have taken a much greater interest in its development. The CHAIRMAN. Now there, to put another group in perspective, the National Academy created its oceanographic group in the middle fifties, or comparatively recently in this field. Dr. HORNIG. That is correct. Dr. MORSE. 1956. The CHAIRMAN. And made recommendations to the Congress, which we have, on a minimum program? Dr. HORNIG. That report basically outlined a substantial scientific program. It was followed by, of course, studies both in the Congress and then one of the early acts of the Interagency Committee was to formulate a 10-year program based on the National Academy of Science's recommendations. The CHAIRMAN. All right. Dr. HORNIG. The oceans are inherently fascinating. Water covers almost three-quarters of the globe. Man's efforts to cope with and to use the seas can be traced to prehistory-to legends and stories from all culture bordering on the seas, and this includes the Great Lakes. We now know just enough about the oceans to realize how much we do not know. The CHAIRMAN. Well, the chairman sometimes has made talks or speeches on this subject, and I have usually started out with the statement that we know more about the back side of the moon than we do about three-quarters of the earth's surface. Would you say that is correct? Dr. HORNIG. It is symbolically correct. The CHAIRMAN. All right. Dr. HORNIG. Only recently has the existence of vast mineral stores on the ocean bottom been known. Much more remains to be discovered before we can deal realistically with the economic exploitation of this resource. While we have known of the Gulf Stream for centuries, the existence of other flows and counterflows in the oceans-some on the surface and some under the surface is just being discovered. Years of patient work will be required before we have a reasonably complete idea of these complex currents. This is not only an absorbing scientific question, but one potentially related to some practical matters. And I should interpolate not potentially, but right now. These flows affect, for example, the distribution of fish, undersea navigation and transport, and the vast and immensely powerful transfers of energy between air and sea which in turn have much to do with the climate of the seas and continents and of their weather patterns. I will not expound upon these areas of scientific interest, but I do wish to convey to the committee the sense of challenge and opportunity which is felt by those who work in this field. in the world? Dr. HORNIG. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. You do not need to do it no Dr. HORNIG. Now that we are beginning to emphasis is shifting to their best use. For t and survey expenditures of the Federal agencies over the past few years and are growing. In search and survey expenditures totaled $86 m $99 million in fiscal year 1965, and will rise to a lion in fiscal year 1966. Altogether, by the end of fiscal year 1966, we imately three-quarters of a billion dollars on o year 1960. Of this, approximately $400 milli in fiscal years 1963 through 1966. That is in period. To put the $140 million budgeted for o in perspective, I might point out that the fisca water research and surveys amounts to $100 mil posing to spend substantially more for oceano our internal problems of water supply and other hand, the President's budget for fiscal y pheric sciences amounts to $220 million, subs oceanography. I make these comparisons sim tee a basis for assessing our relative investm areas. One of the central problems which was poi National Academy of Science report was to ex to strengthen the scientific foundation of th oceanography. Very considerable prograss direction, but it is hard to say precisely whe encounter a very difficult problem of measuren not a single discipline, but rather an area of The CHAIRMAN. At that point, how many schools, universities, now give a degree in oceanography? Do you know? Dr. HORNIG. I know of only one that gives an undergraduate degree in oceanography, and that is Washington. Graduate degreesThe CHAIRMAN. Well, I wanted that in the record, of course. I think the University of Rhode Island has made some moves toward that. Massachusetts, is it? Well, anyway, we will get it for the record. Dr. HORNIG. We will check it, but the number for graduate degrees is approximately 16. The CHAIRMAN. Go right ahead. Dr. HORNIG. Now, the people engaged profesionally in oceanography include physical oceanographers, fishery biologists, engineers, physicists, marine biologists, chemists, and geologists. I am sure there are more. Graduate enrollments in oceanography, as such, have approximately tripled since 1959, but most of the expansion in the number of reseach workers occurs by the entry of people with other training into the field. The development of the field has not been hampered by having too few people available for research or survey work. Nevertheless, competent observers are still concerned whether enough people are available to provide scientific leadership and imaginative innovation. The primary manpower problem in oceanography is one of expanding the number of people capable of exercising imaginative scientific leadership of the highest quality. In summary, then, the situation at the moment is that we have brought about a very impressive expansion of our physical facilities over the past 5 years. We have expanded the pool of talent available for work in the area and the scientific accomplishments have been impressive. So far as research is concerned, we must continue to develop not only ships and seaborne instruments, but the set of resources on shore that are required for healthy evaluation of the field. Oceanography, like other sciences, flourishes best in a scientific environment. This means that the strengthening of oceanography as part of the science structure of universities is important, because this association is perhaps the best way to provide the intellectual stimulus, the injection of new ideas, and the scientific criticism that is essential to sound scientific work. Much also remains to be done in the related areas of surveys. The data that could be collected are infinite. Therefore, rational choices, based either upon a scientific idea or upon a need to test or exploit some immediately practical opportunity, have to be made. One of the most difficult problems of surveying, and one on which a great deal of progress has been made, is to design a total program that provides the maximum return-in terms of science and in terms of immediate exploitation of the resources of the sea-for the investment. The varied areas of challenge and opportunity in oceanography point up its diversity. Oceanography is not a discipline in the sense that physics, chemistry, or geology is a discipline. It is a broad area of inquiry requiring the skills of many disciplines. It is not a field of activity that is built around a single technology, nor is it a field. which is centered upon a homogeneous set of applications. The practical results of research and surveys in oceanography relate to expansion of food resources, extension of our reserves of nonferrous metals, extension of the period over which we may make reliable long-range weather forecasts, and an extension of our national defense capability. The only unifying element tying oceanography together is the link to the sea, to the sea bottom and what lies below the sea bottom, to the volume of the seas themselves and to the air above the seas. The magnitude and character of the effort in many of the subdivisions of oceanography are more properly assessed in the context of the purposes they serve, and hence in the context of the missions of an agency, than they are in the general context of oceanography. Let me be explicit on this point. The Department of the Navy must steadily expand its knowledge of the oceans because it must be prepared to defend this country by operations conducted on, in, and above the seas. This knowledge must be diverse. For example, schools of marine life affect the transmission of sound. The contours of the ocean bottom are related to long-range underwater navigation. All these affect the operations of the Navy. The Public Health Service is interested in the flow of river water into the ocean because the nature of this flow affects offshore pollution. The Bureau of Commercial Fisheries is interested in the vertical patterns of water movement in the oceans because the phenomenon has an important effect on the distribution of organic material, and hence upon the concentration of fish. Each of these Federal agencies is not interested in oceanography as such, or for the sake of oceanography itself. They need the varied kinds of information provided by the activities encompassed by oceanography in order to do their jobs. In fact, this link to the missions of the agencies makes the oceanographic program productive and viable. At the same time, different agencies often need the same information, and only one agency then need obtain it. The information collected by a single agency has to be available to all agencies, and to the scientific community. In short, the necessary dispersion of activities also generates a need for coordination. Retention of the major base for oceanography in the programs of the various agencies is sound and should continue. It would be a mistake in principle to attempt to centralize in a single agency the great bulk of the work which is carried on most effectively and most properly in connection with the missions of the various agencies. About half of the Federal investment in oceanography is made by the Department of the Navy. The activities of the Navy, which Dr. Morse can describe in great detail if the committee wishes, include the construction of facilities, an ocean survey program, and a diversified research and development program. This broad array of activities is related to the mission of the Navy, but it should be and it is available to the civilian agencies, except for that part which is militarily classified. Ninety percent of the Nation's oceanographic program is contained within four agencies, the Navy, the National Science Foundation, the Department of the Interior, and the Department of Commerce. A large number of additional agencies have interests in oceanography, but the big four constitute the center of the Federal oceanographic effort. The role of the National Science Foundation is to provide the core of basic science relevant to the oceanographic activities of all agencies and to the field of oceanography itself. It should be pointed 48-071-65--2 out, however, that although the National Science Foundation is indispensible to the progress of the basic science related to oceanography, a great deal of basic research is properly and necessarily carried on by each of the major agencies in the course of carrying out their missions. The CHAIRMAN. Do you recall offhand the number, other than the so-called big four, of other agencies involved? Dr. HORNIG. Dr. Morse says he will give that for the record during his discussion. The CHAIRMAN. All right. Dr. HORNIG. The existence of varied activities divided among a number of agencies and requiring coordination is not unique to oceanography. Whenever a scientific or technological activity with common characteristics is conducted in several Federal agencies we have the problem of coordination. This situation is often encountered because science is simply not organized to fit the structure of the Federal Government. Whenever programs cut across agency lines, a means of coordination must be developed. At this point I would like to indicate to the committee how the Executive Office of the President is organized to deal with these problems. In the Executive Office of the President there is the Office of Science and Technology. This organization, created by Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1962, is a small executive agency which reports directly to the President. It is ultimately responsible to the Congress as are other executive agencies. I am the Director of OST, as it is called, and I also serve in a different but related capacity as the special assistant to the President for science and technology. The essential task of OST is to advise and assist the President with problems of science policy and with the coordination of Federal activities in science and technology. The Office has other functions, but these are the essential ones so far as oceanography and other coordinated Federal programs are concerned. Two important committees provide advice to the President on Federal activities in science and technology. I am currently chairman of both groups, and OST provides the staff for both of them. The first group is the President's Science Advisory Committee, composed of distinguished scientists, experienced in public affairs as well as in scientific matters, drawn from universities, from industry, and from other nongovernmental research institutions. The President is fortunate in having a group of this quality as advisers. The great contribution of this committee is that it can look with an informed, experienced, and detached eye across the full range of Federal scientific and technological programs. For example, I periodically ask the President's Science Advisory Committee to review the Nation's program in oceanography, and the opinions of the members are influential. The second advisory group is the Federal Council for Science and Technology. This is composed of the policy officials in the executive agencies who are responsible for research and development activities. The Federal Council for Science and Technology provides the central forum for discussion of common problems, technical problems in general, by Federal officials. It is the channel through which views and information are exchanged through which a coordinating structure for Federal programs is established. The primary mechanism for coordination is the establishment of committees of the Federal Council |