Marine Science Affairs

— A Tear of Plans and Progress

vM

r^r^'^''••

^rr""^

.^^ s^,^^

r"

THE SECOND REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT
TO THE CONGRESS ON MARINE RESOURCES
AND ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT

MARCH 1968

Marine Science Affairs

— A Tear of Plans and Progress

THE SECOND REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT
TO THE CONGRESS ON MARINE RESOURCES
AND ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT

FEBRUARY 1968

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price $1.00

Washington, D.C.,

March 1968.
To THE Congress of the United States :

Science and technology are making the oceans of the world an
expanding frontier.

In preparing for the coming decades, we must turn our attention
seaward in the quest for fuels, minerals, and food — and for the natural
beauty of the seashore to refresh the spirit.

Yet the sea will yield its bounty only in proportion to our vision,
our boldness, our determination, and our knowledge.

During the past year we have taken new steps to strengthen the
Nation's scientific and technological base for understanding and using
the oceans. We have made good progress but much remains to be done
in the years ahead.

The National Council on Marine Resources and Engineering
Development, chaired by the Vice President, has made significant
progress in mobilizing the resources of the Federal Government to
meet these challenges. I am pleased to transmit to the Congress the
Council's recommendations and annual report.

The Fiscal Year 1969 Budget, which is now before the Congress,
includes $516 million for marine science and technology programs.
Increased funding is proposed for:

— Broadening education and research in marine sciences, particu-
larly in the Sea Grant and other university programs.
— Speeding up our research for an economical technology for
extracting fish protein concentrate for use in the War on
Hunger.
— Development of improved ocean buoys to collect accurate
and timely data for better prediction of weather and ocean
conditions.
— Expanding the Navy's advanced technology needed for work

in the deep oceans, and for rescue, search and salvage.
— Constructing a new high-strength cutter for the Ice Patrol and

oceanographic research in Arctic and sub-polar areas.
— Preventing and alleviaiting pollution from spillage of oil and

other hazardous ship cargoes.
— Continued mapping of the continental shelf to assist in resource
development and other industrial, scientific, and national se-
curity purposes.

iii

— Increased research and planning to improve our coastal zone
and to promote development of the Great Lakes and of our ports
and harbors.
— Application of spacecraft technology in oceanography, and im-
proved observation and prediction of the ocean environment.
Other nations are also seeking to exploit the promise of the sea. We
invite and encourage their interest, for the oceans that cover three-
fourths of our globe affect the destiny of all mankind. For our part,
we will :

— ^Work to strengthen international law to reaffirm the traditional

freedom of the seas.
— Encourage mutual restraint among nations so that the oceans

do not become the basis for military conflict.
— Seek international arrangements to insure that ocean resources
are harvested in an equitable manner, and in a way that will
assure their continued abundance.
Lack of knowledge about the extent and distribution of the living
and mineral resources of the sea limits their use by all nations and
inhibits sound decisions as to rights of exploitation. I have therefore
asked the Secretary of State to explore with other nations their interest
in joining together in long-term ocean exploration.
Such activities could :
— Expand cooperative efforts by scientists from many nations to

penetrate the mysteries of the sea that still lie before us;
— Increase our knowledge of food resources, so that we may use
food from the sea more fully to assist in meeting world-wide
threats of malnutrition and disease;
— Bring closer the day when the peoples of the world can exploit
new sources of minerals and fossil fuels.
While we strive to improve Government programs, we must also
recognize the importance of private investment, industrial innovation,
and academic talent. We must strengthen cooperation between the pub-
lic and private sectors.

I am pleased and proud to report that we have made substantial
progress during the first full year of our marine science program,
dedicated to more effective use of the sea.
We shall build on these achievements.

" T-vxrnmvr T\ .

Lyndon B. Johnson.

The White House.

The Vice President,

Washington.
Dear Mr. President:

I am pleased to forward the second annual report of the National
Council on Marine Resources and Engineering Development entitled
"Marine Science Affaire — A Year of Plans and Progress.'"

This report is an account of policies, programs, and accomplishments
of the Federal Government for utilizing the oceans more effectively in
meeting goals and aspirations of our Nation. The report highlights
opportunities deserving special emphasis and details funding require-
ments for marine sciences included in your Fiscal Year 1969 proposals
to the Congress. Finally, the report contains an evaluation of progress
toward meeting public needs and identifies impediments to further
advancements related to this Nation's stake in the sea.

During the past year the agencies of our Government, separately
and collectively, have continued to develop a substantial base of re-
search. And they have focused ideas, facilities, and manpower with a
clearer sense of direction and priorities to :

— strengthen our economy by identifying new sources of food,
fuel, and mineral resources; by encouraging innovation in
marine technology ; and by enlarging U.S. participation in the
world's maritime activities ;
— enhance the quality of urban living by arresting degradation
and erosion of the shoreline, fostering urban waterfront de-
velopment, and expanding water recreation opportunities;
— strengthen world understanding and security through inter-
national, cooperative marine endeavors, international legal
arrangements to avoid potential conflicts, and an unexcelled
naval capaibility to deter aggression ;
— foster education and training of oceanographers, engineers,
technicians, and those from other professions through collaib-
oration with and assistance to our universities and technical
institutes.
The Council has endeavored to clarify goals, to identify unmet needs
and opportunities — especially those of concern to several agencies —
and to meet urgent problems by encouraging constructive programs.
We have provided guidance for implementing the marine science initia-
tives that you recommended to the Congress last year.

Finally, we have endeavored to utilize the high quality base of
science and engineering within an institutional framework which will
insure that new concepts can be translated effectively and promptly
into practice — a framework that includes participation by State and
local Governments, private industry, and the academic community.

The Council has selected several areas for additional emphasis in
Fiscal Year 1969, and is recommending that we :

— inaugurate an expanded program of international ocean

exploration ;
— intensify our use of Food from the Sea in the War on Hunger ;
— promote optimal use of the Coastal Zone with stress on Fed-
eral, State, and regional cooperation;
— prepare for improvements to our harbor and port systems;
— institute new measures to insure safety of life and property

— increase investments in manpower and research, including

support of the Sea Grant College programs ;
— foster marine applications of new technological developments
such as spacecraft, deep ocean buoys, and automatic data
processing ;
— improve our capabilities to work in the deep oceans;
— expand Arctic and subpolar research ;
— extend reconnaissance mapping of the Continental Shelf.
There have been many recent reminders that our task has only begun.
The world population continues to grow while food supplies stretch
thinner. The U.S. has slipped from fifth to sixth place among fishing
nations. Oil slicks frequently wash ashore on our beaches. The need
for new recreational opportunities becomes increasingly critical as our
coastal cities expand and impose new demands on our limited sea-
shores. And attempts by some nations to unilaterally abrogate the
traditional freedoms of the seas have threatened long-standing prin-
ciples of international law.

The Marine Resources and Engineering Development Act of 1966
estaJblished a clear mandate for this Nation to employ the sea, as we
do the land, to meet the growing needs of our expanding population.
I can report to you that with the full cooperation and support of all
agencies we shall use our marine resources to respond to the challenge
of the decades ahead.

This program is dedicated to the pursuit of excellence. It is proving
how the power of science, transformed through our various institutions
and the democratic process to a technology, may serve our Nation's
diverse interests.

Sincerely,

islUutffU^

The President,
The White House,
Washington., B.C.

Hubert H. Humphrey

VI

A Report to the President From the National Council
on Marine Resources and Engineering Development,
February 1968

This Report to the President on Marine Science Affairs is prepared in ac-
cordance with Public Law 89-454, the Marine Resources and Engineering Develop-
ment Act of 1966, which states that the President shall transmit to the Congress an
annual report including ( 1 ) a comprehensive description of the activities and the
accomplishments of all agencies and the departments of the United States in the field
of marine sciences during the preceding fiscal year; (2) an evaluation of such activi-
ties in terms of the objectives set forth pursuant to Public Law 89-454; (3) such
recommendations for legislation as the President may consider necessary or desirable
for the attainment of the objectives of Public Law 89-454; and (4) an estimate of
funding requirements of each agency and department of the Federal Government for
marine science activities during the succeeding fiscal year.

The Marine Resources and Engineering Development Act was amended by P. L.
89-688, the National Sea Grant College and Program Act of 1966, which also re-
quires an annual report by the President on sea grant colleges and programs.

This Report on Marine Science Affairs is submitted to the Congress in response to
both requirements. It was prepared by the National Council on Marine Resources and
Engineering Development. The Council, located in the Executive Office of the Presi-
dent, is composed of —

chairman:

Hubert H. Humphrey, the Vice President.

MEMBERS :

Dean Rusk, the Secretary of State.

Paul R. Ignatius, the Secretary of the Navy.

(PaulH. Nitze until September 1, 1967)
Stewart L. Udall, the Secretary of the Interior.
Alexander B. Trowbridge, the Secretary of Commerce.

(John T. Connor until February 1, 1967)
John W. Gardner, the Secretary of Health, Education, and

Welfare.
Alan S. Boyd, the Secretary of Transportation.
Glenn T. Seaborg, Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission.
Leland J. Haworth, Director, National Science Foundation.
observers:

James E. Webb, Administrator, National Aeronautics and Space

Administration.
S. Dillon Ripley, Secretary, Smithsonian Institution.
William S. Gaud, Administrator, Agency for International

Development.
Charles J. Zwick, Director, Bureau of the Budget.
(Charles L. Schultze until January 29, 1968)
Arthur M. Okun, Chairman, Council of Economic Advisors.

(Gardner Ackley until February 15, 1968)
Donald F. Hornig, Director, Office of Science and Technology.
executive secretary:
Edward Wenk, Jr.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Part One

INTRODUCTION 1

I. MARINE SCIENCES AND NATIONAL GOALS 7

Role of the Marine Sciences Council 8

Role of the Marine Sciences Commission 10

Implementation of Fiscal Year 1 968 Initiatives 12

Council Encouragement of Multi-Agency Cooperative Endeavors. 14

Areas of Increased Emphasis for Fiscal Year 1969 15

The Fiscal Year 1969 Program . 18

II. EXPANDING INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND UNDER-
STANDING 21

Marine Science in the United Nations 23

Other International Bodies 26

Bilateral Cooperation 26

International Fishery Arrangements 27

Consultation with Other Nations 28

Federal Policy Coordination 28

Strengthening International Arrangements 30

III. ACCELERATING USE OF FOOD FROM THE SEA 35

State of the Fishing Industry -- 36

Federal Programs to Assist the Fishing Industry. 39

Using Food from the Sea in the War on Hunger 41

Accelerated Development of Fish Protein Concentrate 44

Supporting Studies 44

Looking Ahead 45

IV. ENCOURAGING DEVELOPMENT OF NON-LIVING RESOURCES. 47

Significance of Offshore Production 48

Federal Marine Minerals Programs 52

Resource Management 56

Future Development of the Continental Shelf 57

V. ENHANCING BENEFITS FROM THE COASTAL ZONE 61

Rational Uses of the Coastal Zone 62

Coastal Engineering 65

Water Quality 66

Health 67

Conservation and Recreation 68

Case Studies : Chesapeake Bay and Seattle Harbor 69

Increased Emphasis 71

Federal-State Cooperation 72

ix

Page

VI. FACILITATING TRANSPORT AND TRADE 73

The Ocean Transportation System 75

System Performance : National Significance 76

Federal Activities in Maritime Transportation Development 77

Planning and Research 78

Navigation and Safety Aids 80

Technology for Maritime Cost Reduction 81

Oil Pollution Control 83

Channel and Harbor Research 84

New Initiatives 85

VII. STRENGTHENING MILITARY PROGRAMS FOR NATIONAL
SECURITY 89

The Fiscal Year 1969 Budget 90

Surveys for Defense Systems 91

Marine Science and Technology 92

Undersea Search, Rescue, Recovery, and Man-in-the-Sea 93

Construction of Oceanographic Ships 96

Project VELA-UNIFORM 97

New Facilities 98

The Future 98

VIII. UNDERSTANDING AND SURVEYING THE OCEAN ENVIRON-
MENT 101

Ocean Observations and Predictions 102

Mapping, Charting, and Geodesy 106

Current Exploration 106

New Emphasis on Technological Developments 107

Planning Ahead 109

IX. INFORMATION MANAGEMENT.... 113

Data Center Operations 115

National Oceanographic Data Center 1 15

National Weather Records Center 117

Great Lakes Data Center 117

Smithsonian Oceanographic Sorting Center. ., 118

Data Management Study 118

Preparing for the Future 120

X. SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH 121

Current Research Capabilities 130

Federal Funding of Research and Facilities 132

Oceanology Highlights 135

New Research Programs 136

Continuing Importance of Basic Research 137

XI. MANPOWER: EDUCATION, TRAINING, AND FACILITIES 139

Manpower Currently Available 143

Educational Opportunities 144

Initiation of the Sea Grant Program 145

Investing in Manpower 148

XII. ENGINEERING IN THE OCEAN 149

General Purpose Engineering in Fiscal Year 1 969 150

Ocean Engineering Programs of the Navy 150

Power for Underwater Tasks 151

New Initiatives 153

Safety of Manned Civilian Submersibles 154

Instrumentation and Communication 155

Safety on the Continental Shelf 156

Engineering for Non-Military Objectives 157

X

Page

XIII. PARTNERSHIP WITH NON-FEDERAL INSTITUTIONS 159

Industry 160

State, Local, and Regional Interests 162

Recent Financial Analyses 163

Conclusion 163

XIV. THE NATION AND THE SEA: QUESTIONS FOR THE FUTURE. 165

FIGURES

Fig. no. Page

I. Marine Science cind Technology Dollar 19

II. 1 United Nations Agencies 24

III. 1 U.S. Market for Fishery Products 37

III. 2 World Catch of Fish and Shellfish, Etc. by Leading Countries, 1956-1966.. 38

III. 3 Phasing Chart for Food-from-the-Sea Demonstration Program 43

IV. 1 Worldwide Drilling Activity in Offshore Areas as of June 1967 51

IV. 2 Federal Marine Minerals Program 53

V. 1 Federal Funding for Conservation and Recreation 64

VI. 1 Federal Marine Science Funding for Ocean Transportation 79

VI. 2 Coast Guard Cutter Hamilton 80

VI. 3 A Port for Container Ships 82

VI I . 1 Prototype of the ASR Submarine Rescue Vessel 94

VI I . 2 Design Sketch of the Personnel Transfer Capsule ( PTC ) 95

VIII. 1 Ocean Features Revealed in a Space Photograph 105

X. 1 Funding for Oceanographic Research 131

XI 1 . 1 Ranges of Applicability for Underwater Power Sources 152

XII. 2 The Research Submersible Alvin 154

TABLES

Table no. Page

1 . 1 Federal Agencies Having Marine Science Activities 9

1 . 2 New Initiatives and Program Areas of Increased Emphasis Fiscal Year 1 969. . 1 6

I. 3 Total Federal Marine Science Program by Major Purpose 20

1 . 4 Total Federal Program by Department and Agency 20

IV. 1 Value of Mineral Production from Oceans Bordering the U.S. 1960-66.. 49

IV. 2 Recent Marine Mining Activities 50

VII. 1 Ships for U.S. Navy Oceanographic Program 97

VIII. 1 Funding for Ocean Observation and Prediction 103

VIII. 2 Ocean Exploration — M apping. Charting, and Geodesy 106

IX. 1 Fiscal Year 1969 Budgets Marine Data Centers 115

IX. 2 NODC Data File 116

X. 1 Science and Technology for Attaining National Goals 122

X. 2 Research Ship Operating Costs by Agency 133

X. 3 Research by Agency (Excluding Ship Operating Costs) 134

XI. 1 Oceanographic Degrees Granted 1960-67 140

XI. 2 Employers and Professional Specialties of Oceanographic Personnel in the

U.S., 1964 and 1967 141

XL 3 Ocean Sciences Curricula 1962-1968 142

XL 4 Institutions Offering Marine Sciences — Engineering Technicians Training

1962-1967 143

XI

Part Two
APPENDICES

A. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MARINE SCIENCE PROGRAM FISCAL

YEAR 1969 171

Table A-1 Total Federal Program by Major Purpose and Organi-
zation (with detail by program) 171

Table A-2 Total Federal Program by Department and Agency (with

detail by Bureau or major subdivision) 176

Table A-3 Total Federal Program by Function and Agency (with

detail by agency) 176

Table A-4 Special Analyses — Continental Shelf; Great Lakes; and

Estuaries 183

Table A-5 Excess Foreign Currency Program 185

B. FEDERAL LEGISLATION RELATED TO THE MARINE SCIENCES- 186

C. COMMITTEES OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL ON MARINE RE-

SOURCES AND ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT 188

D. CONTRACTS AWARDED BY THE NATIONAL COUNCIL ON

MARINE RESOURCES AND ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT 189

E. ACTIVITIES OF INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND OTHER

NATIONS 191

Table E-1 Selected International Organizations Active in the Marine

Sciences 191

Table E-2 United Nations Resolutions 192

Table E-3 Nations which have Ratified, Acceded To, or Consider
Themselves Bound by the Geneva Conventions on the
Law of the Sea 195

Table E— 4 Breadth of Territorial Seas and Fishing Jurisdiction

Claimed by Members of the United Nations 197

Table E-5 Selected International Treaties in Marine Affairs to

which the U.S. Adheres 200

Table E-6 Excerpts of Marine Science Interest from International

Summit-Level Declarations and Speeches 20 1

F. LABORATORIES AND INSTITUTIONS ENGAGED IN MARINE

SCIENCE RESEARCH 202

G. SHIPS 209

Graph G-1 Estimated Growth of the Oceanographic Fleets of the

United States and the Soviet Union, 1 963-70 209

Graph G-2 Merchant Fleets of Selected Nations, 1 962-67 210

Graph G-3 Estimated Growth of the High Seas Fishing Fleets of

Selected Nations, 1958-67 211

Pane
H. ECONOMIC AND INDUSTRIAL STATISTICS 212

Transportation and Trade

Table H-1 Volume of Cargo Handled in Waterborne Commerce at

Thirty Selected U.S. Ocean Ports, 1955 and 1965 212

Table H-2 Coastal Channel and Harbor Projects Currently Under-
way 213

Offshore Petroleum

Table H-3 U.S. Oil and Gas Drilling Activity and Production,

Total and Offshore, 1958-66 215

Table H-4 Estimated Value of Offshore Production of Crude Oil and

Gas From Submerged Lands off California and

Louisiana, 1960-66 216

Table H-5 Industrial Expenditures on Offshore Oil and Gas Leases

by State and Recipient Governments, 1954—66 217

Table H-6 Rents, Royalties, and Bonuses on Outer Continental

ShelfLands, 1967 218

Table H-7 Petroleum Potential of Continental Shelves of the World . . 218

Ocean Industry

Table H-8 Employment in Selected Ocean-Related Industries in

Coastal States and in those Bordering the Great Lakes. . 219
Table H-9 Reporting Units (Selected Ocean-Related Industries) in

Coastal States and in those Bordering the Great Lakes. . 220
Table H-10 Taxable Payrolls Reported to the Social Security Ad-
ministration by Establishments in Selected Ocean-
Related Industries in Coastal States and those Border-
ing the Great Lakes 221

Fisheries

Table H-1 1 World Catch of Fish, Shellfish, etc. by Leading

Countries, in various years, 1 954—66 222

Table H-12 Disposition of World Fish Catch, various years, 1938-65. 223
Table H-1 3 U.S. Catch of Fish, Shellfish, etc., in various years,

1940-66 224

Table H-14 U.S. Imports and Exports of Fishery Products, 1950-66. 225
Table H-1 5 U.S. Fishery Employment, Craft, and Establishments,

various years, 1 930-65 , i.. 226

Table H-16 U.S. Fishing Fleet of 1965 by Period of Construction.. 227
Table H-1 7 Disposition of U.S. Fish Catch, 1958 and 1961-65 228

A Report to the President From the National Council
on Marine Resources and Engineering Development,
February 1968

INTRODUCTION

America's involvement with the sea began when maritime explorers from
Europe discovered and settled this new land. America's utilization of the sea
began soon after. Our history reveals cycles of maritime interest and apathy,
and today we are re-examining our stake in the oceans in a new context of
modern science and technology.

The early seaboard colonies, with a hostile wilderness to their backs, de-
pended for survival on a thread of logistic support 3,000 miles long. As a
consequence, this Nation's founding fathers recognized the importance both
of the concept of the freedom of the seas and of the necessity for expanding
maritime programs and policies.

In the 19th Century we began to explore and develop a continent. Steam
power replaced sail ; the railroads replaced the pony express ; and the people
turned their attention to the opening of the West, strictly a land frontier.
Interest in the oceans declined.

Only in the 20th Century, as the United States became a great world
power, did the importance of the surrounding oceans and of seapower once
again become evident. Two world wars demonstrated to the United States
that it must have both a strong Navy and merchant fleet.

Since World War II, the Nation has become increasingly aware of the
geography of economic and strategic competition, in which the oceans are
the principal highways to world trade.

Man's involvement with the oceans is, however, far broader than national
security and trade :

— The oceans are the principal source of rainfall.

— They help to stabilize our climate, for the seas gain and lose heat from

the sun more slowly than the land.
— They supply food of great variety, rich in protein.

1

Marine Science Affairs

— The seabed contains abundant oil, gas, minerals, and precious metals.
— ^The coastal zone is a major arena for rest and recreation and the

nursery for marine life.
— The entire marine environment serves as a gigantic laboratory of
science.
In the middle 1950's, the Government requested a major review by the
National Academy of Sciences to assess the importance of oceanography in
peace and war. The resulting landmark study treated two important
questions :

— Should both naval and civil uses of the sea be expanded to help meet

national goals and aspirations?
— Is man's basic knowledge of the marine environment growing in
proportion to his diverse requirements?
Answers to these questions were influenced by broad developments in
economic and political affairs at home and abroad, and, after 1959, by
specific developments in the marine sciences themselves. The United States
had become ever more deeply concerned over the danger of conflicts and
threats to world order. Simultaneously, advances in scientific research and
space exploration had made man appreciate how little he knew of his natural
world and impatient to apply science and technology, whenever possible,
to the improvement of society.

In the maritime field, a new impetus occurred to explore and exploit
the sea. First, a technological readiness began to emerge from broad ad-
vances in science and engineering. Next, important new international con-
ventions provided a legal framework more conducive to orderly development
of marine resources. Finally, over the past decade, the United States devel-
oped a high-quality fleet of research ships, supporting laboratory facilities,
and a substantial body of scientific and engineering personnel.

Despite such evidence of progress in the oceans, the Nation remained
undecided as to what fraction of its scientific and industrial resources should
be devoted to marine science affairs.

In 1966, declaring that the public interest required a clear statement of
national determination to utilize the seas and the Great Lakes more effec-
tively, the Congress created a mechanism by which Federal marine science
programs would have greater momentum and sharper direction.

It passed the Marine Resources and Engineering Development Act of
1966, Public Law 89^54} This measure set forth an unprecedented

^ Following are some abbreviations and definitions generally used in the marine
sciences field :

The Act is customarily called the Marine Sciences Act.

The National Council on Marine Resources and Engineering Development is
usually abbreviated to the Marine Sciences Council.

The Commission on Marine Science, Engineering, and Resources is usually referred
to as the Marine Sciences Commission.

Marine science is a term employed in Public Law 89-454 to describe scientific

Introduction

national policy to intensify study of the sea and to convert to practical reality
its inherent promise for man's benefit. It reaffirmed the leadership of the
President of the United States in marine science affairs. It provided the
President with two new instruments of assistance — a policy planning and
coordinating Council at Cabinet-level chaired by the Vice President, and
an advisory Commission of distinguished citizens to develop long-range
recommendations.

As the Act recognized, scientific research, exploration, and development
of resources in the oceans must be related to man's activities on land. Thus,
while marine science goals, policies, and programs must be examined in
terms of unique characteristics of the natural environment which they
share in common, they must also be examined in relation to the social
environment — the major goals of society and the Nation.

The Chairman of the Marine Sciences Council enumerated many of
these relationships between the sea and society when he reported to the
Congress that:

There are one and one-half billion hungry people in the world. The full
food potential of the seas, seriously neglected in the past, must be realized to
combat famine and despair. Technologies now at hand can be directed
toward increasing the world's fishing catch and enriching the diets of the
underfed.

Seventy-five percent of our population lives along our coasts and Great
Lakes. Nine of our fifteen largest metropolitan areas are on the oceans and
Great Lakes, and three are on ocean tributaries. Twenty million children
live in these metropolitan areas within sight of potential water recreation
areas but are often denied their use. Only three percent of our ocean and
Great Lakes coastline has been set aside for public use or conservation.

More than 90 percent by value of our intercontinental commerce travels by
ship. Although there have been rapid changes in the character of ocean
cargoes and technologies of cargo handling, the average age of our port
structures is 45 years and the average age of our merchant ships is 19 years.

The continuing threats to world peace require our Navy to maintain a high
level of readiness and versatility through a sea-based deterrent and undersea
warfare capability. Middle East conflicts following closure of the Gulf of
Aqaba vividly emphasize the urgent need for a strengthened code of inter-
national law of the sea.

Thirty million Americans swim in the oceans, eleven million are saltwater
sport fishermen, and eight million engage in recreational boating in our
coastal States. All these activities are threatened by the dumping of in-
dustrial wastes into ocean tributaries. This pollution will increase seven-fold
by the year 2000 unless there are drastic changes in waste handling.

research, engineering, and technological development related to the marine
environment.

The maTine environment is considered to include the oceans, the Continental
Shelf and estuaries of the United States and its territories, the Great Lakes, and the
resources of the oceans and Great Lakes.

287-921 O— 68-

Marine Science Affairs

Ocean-generated storms cause millions of dollars of damage annually along
our coasts, but marine weather warning services are available to less than
one-third of our coastal areas.^

The first annual report to the President, entitled Marine Science Affairs- —
A Year of Transition, described initial efforts to respond to these challenges.
It emphasized the transition from scientific oceanography to application of
these scientific discoveries, and the transition from considerations largely
at the program level to a new concern and responsibility at the policy level
of Government. The phrase marine science affairs reflects the necessity of
coupling marine science and technology to the publicly agreed upon needs
and desires of our society.

During the past year, the agencies of the United States Government,
separately and in collaboration, have made many accomplishments.

The transition to more effective use of the seas has been continued and
accelerated.

This Second Annual Report to the President is entitled Marine Science
Affairs — A Year of Plans and Progress. The first chapter outlines the Govern-
ment-wide program and approach and highlights new developments. The
next six chapters describe Federal programs in marine sciences that serve the
following basic needs and national purposes :

— expanding international cooperation and understanding

— accelerating use of food from the sea

— encouraging development of non-living resources

— enhancing benefits from the Coastal Zone

— facilitating transport and trade

— strengthening military programs for national security

The remainder of this report is primarily devoted to activities oriented
to serve a variety of purposes, namely :

— understanding and surveying the ocean environment

— information management

— scientific research

— manpower: education, training, and facilities

— engineering in the ocean

Each chapter sets forth priority areas in marine sciences recommended
by the Council to the President and reflected in the President's budget for
Fiscal Year 1969, now before Congress. To place these special areas in
perspective, the report also discusses on-going efforts and associated fund-
ing for the Government as a whole, with funding data delineated both by
purpose and by agency. Also described are recent accomplishments of the

" Letter from Vice President Hubert H. Humphrey to the Honorable Alton A.
Lennon, Chairman, Subcommittee on Oceanography, House Committee on Merchant
Marine and Fisheries, August 17, 1967.

Introduction

Federal Government's marine science operations. Finally, the report dis-
cusses those recommendations arrived at collectively by the Marine Sciences
Council in setting goals, identifying priorities, clarifying agency responsibili-
ties, especially for programs crossing agency lines, and other steps to assist the
President to implement the Marine Sciences Act.

The report concludes with a discussion of Federal partnership with non-
Federal institutions and with a look ahead.

A number of broad issues are presented in this concluding chapter on
"The Nation and the Sea: Questions for the Future." These are intended
to illuminate such long-range questions as "What is the Nation's — and the
world's — stake in the oceans?" and to guide inquiries in seeking answers.

"There is one thing stronger than all the Armies in the World, and that is
an idea whose time has come." — victor hugo

Chapter I

MARINE SCIENCES AND
NATIONAL GOALS

The Federal Government has continued a broad set of action programs in
response to the mandate of the Marine Resources and Engineering Develop-
ment Act of 1966 "to develop, encourage, and maintain a coordinated,
comprehensive, and long-range national program in marine science for the
benefit of mankind to assist in :

— protection of health and property,

— enhancement of commerce, transportation, and national security,

— rehabilitation of our commercial fisheries, and

— increased utilization of these and other resources."

This mandate of the Congress and the President further identifies eight
objectives related to these goals. Specifically, the marine science activities
of the United States should "contribute to the following objectives :

- — The accelerated development of the resources of the marine
environment.

— The expansion of human knowledge of the marine environment.

— The encouragement of private investment enterprise in exploration,
technological development, marine commerce, and economic utili-
zation of the resources of the marine environment.

— The preservation of the role of the United States as a leader in
marine science and resource development.

— The advancement of education and training in marine science.

Marine Science Affairs

— The development and improvement of the capabilities, performance,
use, and efficiency of vehicles, equipment, and instruments for use
in exploration, research, surveys, the recovery of resources, and
the transmission of energy in the marine environment.

— The effective utilization of the scientific and engineering resources of
the Nation, with close cooperation among all interested agencies,
public and private, in order to avoid unnecessary duplication of
effort, facilities, and equipment, or waste.

— The cooperation by the United States with other nations and groups
of nations and international organizations in marine science activi-
ties when such cooperation is in the national interest." ^

Role of the Marine Sciences Council

The Marine Sciences Council, in the Executive Office of the President,
assists the President in policy planning and coordination of the activities in
24 bureaus of 11 Federal departments and agencies (see Table I.l) by
seeking to: (a) identify unmet needs and opportunities to which Federal
marine science programs could be directed, especially gaps resulting from
programs that cross agency lines; (b) recommend priorities on a Govern-
ment-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 agen-
cies may overlap — that one agency assume a lead responsibility for Govern-
ment-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; (h)
evaluate programs so as to eliminate marginal activities; and (i) develop
background legal, economic, and technological studies to help in identifying
alternative policies and criteria for choice.

The Council has met 11 times since August 1966. It has developed a
number of program and policy recommendations discussed in subsequent
chapters. Most of its attention has been devoted to isolating urgent problems
deserving priority attention, planning programs, and insuring that necessary
funding and leadership are provided.

' PL 89-454.

Table 1.1 — Federal Marine Science Activities

Agency Mission

Department of Defense All phases of oceanography relating to national

security.
Navy; Advanced Research Proj- Naval technology.

ects Agency; Army Corps of Statutory Civilian Responsibilities:
Engineers. Great Lakes, river, harbor, coastal, and ocean

charting and forecasting; Great Lakes,
river, harbor, and coastal development, res-
toration, and preservation.

Department of the Interior Management, conservation, and development of

Geological Survey; Federal marine natural resources.
Water Pollution Control Ad- Measurement and enforcement of water quality
ministration; Bureau of Com- standards.

mercial Fisheries; Bureau of Acquisition, preservation, and development of
Sport Fisheries and Wildlife; coastal areas.

Bureau of Mines; Bureau of Identification and development of technology
Land Management ; National for evaluation of mineral resources.
Park Service ; Bureau of Out- Identification of sources and interrelationships for
door Recreation ; Office of supply of fresh water.
Saline Water.

National Science Foundation Basic and academic oceanography.

Facilities support.

Sea Grant Colleges and Programs

Department of Commerce Environmental prediction and description; tsu-

Environmental Science Services nami and hurricane warning.
Administration ; Maritime Ad- Charting and mapping of coastal and deep-ocean
ministration. waters.

Central responsibility for air/sea interaction

program.
Research on ship design, shipbuilding, and ship

operations.
Marine transportation and port systems.
Department of Transportation, _ Safety and protection of life and property in port
Coast Guard. and at sea.

Office of the Secretary Delineation and prediction of ice masses.

Navigation aids; oceanographic and meteorolog-
ical observations.
Transport systems analysis and planning.

Atomic Energy Commission Radioactivity in the marine environment.

Development of marine nuclear technology.
Department of Health,

Education, and Welfare Human health, healthfulness of food, biomedical

Public Health Service ; Office of research, and support of education.
Education; Food and Drug
Administration.

Department OF State United States' participation in international

organizations.
Support of international fisheries commissions.
International marine policies.
Agency for International

Development Foreign assistance and food resources for devel-
oping nations.

Smithsonian Institution Identification, acquisition, classification, and

ecology of marine organisms; investigations of
the geophysical factors of oceanic environment.
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration Feasibility, design, and engineering of space-
craft and sensors for ocean observations.
National Council on Marine
Resources and Engineering

Development Policy planning and coordination ; assistance to

the President.

9

Marine Science Affairs

To strengthen these governmental marine science programs, the Council
created four interagency committees to coordinate policies and programs
and to develop recommendations as to issues requiring Council-level atten-
tion.^ These committees, which report to the Vice President, are :
Marine Research, Education, and Facilities
Ocean Exploration and Environmental Services
Food-from-the-Sea
Multiple Use of the Coastal Zone

Additionally, at the request of the Vice President, the Secretary of State
has established a fifth committee on International Policy in the Marine
Environment, to serve the mutual interests of the Council and the Depart-
ment of State.

The Marine Sciences Council's professional staff of 14 persons includes
specialists in ocean sciences, engineering, national security affairs, public
administration, law, economics, and international relations. The Council
staff serves to identify policy issues, to develop and analyze facts, and to
propose alternative plans for Council deliberation and action.

More than 40 consultants contribute as needed to the work of the Council.

Council staff maintains communication with many public and private
groups — with the Congress, key officials of the Executive Office of the Presi-
dent, Federal and State agencies, industry, the academic community, and
professional societies — -to insure that considerations affecting all marine
science interests are brought to the attention of the Council, and to interpret
Government-wide plans and policies. Consultations have also been under-
taken with senior policy officials in more than a dozen countries and numer-
ous international bodies with which the U.S. has or contemplates coopera-
tion in marine science policies and programs.

Rote off the Marine Sciences Commission

The Marine Sciences Act also provides for an independent advisory
Commission on Marine Science, Engineering, and Resources, to be com-
prised of fifteen members appointed by the President from Federal and State
Governments, industry, laboratories, and other marine science institutions,
together with four members of Congress designated to serve as advisers
to the Commission.^

" Details of scope are given in Appendix C. These committees were established on
September 18, 1967, as the successors to the Interagency Committee on Oceanography
of the Federal Council for Science and Technology.

'The President appointed the Commission on January 9, 1967. Dr. Julius A.
Stratton, Chairman of the Board of the Ford Foundation, was named Chairman, and
Dr. Richard A. Geyer, Head of the Department of Oceanography, Texas A&M Uni-
versity, Vice Chairman. Other members of the Commission are : Dr. David A. Adams,

10

National Goals

Specifically, the Commission is charged to "make a comprehensive
investigation and study of all aspects of marine science in order to recom-
mend an overall plan for an adequate national oceanographic program that
will meet the present and future national needs."
Further, the Commission shall :

-—"Review the known and contemplated needs for natural resources
from the marine environment to maintain our expanding national
economy.
— -Review the surveys, applied research programs, and ocean engineer-
ing projects required to obtain the needed resources from the
marine environment.
— ^Review the existing national research programs to insure realistic
and adequate support for basic oceanographic research that will
enhance human welfare and scientific knowledge.
— Review the existing oceanographic and ocean engineering programs,
including education and technical training, to determine which
programs are required to advance our national oceanographic
competence and stature, and which are not adequately supported.
— Analyze the findings of the above reviews, including the economic
factors involved, and recommend an adequate national marine
science program that will meet the present and future national
needs without unnecessary duplication of effort.
—Recommend a Governmental organizational plan with estimated
cost."
By Public Law 89-454, as originally enacted, the Commission was re-
quired to submit to the President, via the Council, and to the Congress a
report of its findings and recommendations not later than 18 months after
its establishment. Authority for the Marine Sciences Council was originally
due to terminate 120 days after the submission of the Commission's report.
These dates were changed by enactment of Public Law 90-242, which
amended the Marine Sciences Act and was signed into law on January 2,
1968. The amendment (a) extended, for an additional six months, the

North Carolina Department of Conservation and Development; Dr. Carl A. Auer-
bach, University of Minnesota; Honorable Charles F. Baird, Under Secretary of the
Navy; Jacob Blaustein, Director, Standard Oil Company (Indiana) ; Dr. James A.
Crutchfield, University of Washington : Frank C. DiLuzio, EG&G, Inc. ; Leon Jaworski,
Fulbright, Crooker, Freeman, Bates & Jaworski, Attorneys; Dr. John A. Knauss, Uni-
versity of Rhode Island; John H. Perry, Jr., Perry Publications, Inc. ; Taylor A. Pryor,
Makapuu Oceanic Center; George E. Reedy, Struthers Research and Development
Corporation; Dr. George H. Sullivan, Northrop Corporation; Dr. Robert M. White,
Environmental Science Services Administration.

Congressional Advisors: The Honorable Warren G. Magnuson, U.S. Senator from
the State of Washington; The Honorable Norris Cotton, U.S. Senator from the State
of New Hampshire; The Honorable Alton A. Lennon, U.S. Representative from the
State of North Carolina; The Honorable Charles A. Mosher, U.S. Representative
from the State of Ohio.

11

Marine Science Affairs

time within which the Commission's report could be submitted, namely
to January 9, 1969; and (b) changed the expiration date of the Council to
June 30, 1969, in order to insure continued assistance to the President.

Implementation of Fiscal Year 1968 Initiatives

On the recommendation of the Council last year, the President selected
nine areas of marine science for priority attention and support during
FY 1968. These initiatives are discussed in later chapters, and highlights of
their implementation follow :
1. International Cooperation.

— The United States proposed to the United Nations General Assembly
that it establish a Committee on the Oceans to foster international
cooperation and to take steps for the evolution of an international
legal structure which would enhance exploration and use of the
seabed.
— During the Latin American Summit Meeting at Punta del Este and
in the communique following the visit of Japanese Premier Sato
to the United States, marine science cooperation was identified
as an area for special emphasis.
— As the result of efTorts by the United States supported by a number
of other nations, the International Telecommunication Union set
aside radio frequencies for exclusive use in transmitting oceano-
graphic data.
— ^Plans were developed to propose establishment of international

marine preserves.
— Fifty foreign scientists participated in the global scientific expedi-
tion of the OCEANOGRAPHER.

— British, Australian, and Canadian divers entered aquanaut training
in the United States in preparation for their participation in
SEALAB III experiments in the summer of 1968.

— Administrative delays in arranging for Soviet fishery research ships
to call at U.S. ports have been greatly reduced to promote bilateral
research projects of mutual benefit.

— Legal studies were undertaken under Council contracts to gain new
insight into some of the international problems involved in develop-
ing marine resources.

— Studies were completed of the marine science programs of other
nations and of international organizations.
2. Food from the Sea. — This program was established to exploit the
untapped food resources of the sea as a new source of inexpensive protein

12

National Goals

for the undernourished in the developing nations, especially through Fish
Protein Concentrate (FPC). The Agency for International Development
was designated to be lead agency for the program ; the Bureau of Commer-
cial Fisheries is to develop the necessary technology.
During the past year :

— The Agency for International Development established a new office

to carry out its lead agency responsibilities for the new Food-from-

the-Sea Program. This office surveyed a large number of countries

and selected Chile for pre-investment market surveys.

— FPC produced from hake-like species was approved for human

consumption by the Food and Drug Administration.
— The Bureau of Commercial Fisheries planned for the construction
of a pilot plant in the Pacific Northwest to produce FPC.

3. Sea Grant Program. — The National Sea Grant College and Program
Act (Public Law 89-688) was enacted to accelerate training and education
of specialized manpower, especially ocean engineers and technicians; to
initiate and support applied research; and to disseminate marine science
information. To implement the legislation, the National Science Foundation
has:

— established a new Office of Sea Grant Programs ;

— issued policy guidelines for use by prospective grantees;

— -made its first project and institutional awards.

4. Data Systems Study. — Because development of marine science and
technology depends upon the effective flow of information from producers
to users, special attention was focused on means to improve oceanc^raphic
data systems. The first phase of a study by the Council was completed under
contract, characterizing the "user community," including the increaising
needs of State and local governments, scientists, and private industry, and
establishing criteria for needed information.

5. Estuary Study. — Planning continued for programs using a new labo-
ratory, under the Corps of Engineers, to study estuarine navigation, water
quality, shore erosion, and the effects of pollution and natural influences on
fish, shellfish, health, recreation, and beauty of the Chesapeake Bay. One
important aim of the program is to evolve a multi-agency, multi-disciplinary
approach to the general problem of estuaries. This study is closely correlated
with pollution studies of the Federal Water Pollution Control Administra-
tion and other agencies of the Federal and State Governments.

6. Surveys of Mineral Resources. — The objective is to accelerate planning,
surveys, and survey methodology related to marine minerals. In FY 1968,
new mineral deposits off" Alaska were delineated, and surveys were continued
off the Atlantic and Northwest coasts. To assist in the orientation of
future Federal programs in marine mineral resource development, the Coun-
cil sponsored a contract study of the economic potential of mineral resources
of the U.S. Continental Shelf and Slope.

13

Marine Science Affairs

7. Ocean Observation and Prediction. — Increased emphasis during FY
1968 to strengthen ocean observation networks has resulted in:

— initiation of an experimental breaker and surf forecasting service
for beaches of southern California for the protection of bathers and
coastal commercial fishermen;

— completion of a comprehensive study indicating the technological
feasibility of ocean data buoys for monitoring ocean and atmos-
pheric processes;

— establishment of the Regional Center for Tropical Meteorology in the
National Hurricane Center at Miami, and strengthening the
National Hurricane Center itself, to provide shore communities
and industries and marine operators in the tropical Atlantic with
improved weather information.

8. Deep Ocean Technology. — The increasing requirements for the Navy
to operate throughout the ocean environment, and the loss of the U.S.S.
Thresher and of an unarmed nuclear weapon off the coast of Palomares,
Spain, pointed up the importance of a strengthened capability for search
and salvage systems in the deep ocean. The Deep Submergence Systems
Project of the U.S. Navy was accordingly accelerated, and the Deep Ocean
Technology program was initiated to develop components for future sys-
tems. A standby capability for such emergencies has been established by the
Navy.

9. Subpolar Oceanographic Research Vessel. — A replacement Coast
Guard ship, previously authorized for the International Ice Patrol, was to be
specially designed and constructed to permit oceanographic research in sub-
polar regions. The Congress did not approve funds, and the request is being
renewed.

Council Encouragement of Multi-Agency Cooperative Endeavors

With assistance by the Council, member agencies are cooperating to
attack a number of problems of priority concern. A few examples follow :
— Interior and Transportation have conducted a comprehensive

examination of ways to cope with major oil pollution incidents

such as that associated with the Torrey Canyon disaster.
— State and Commerce are attempting to develop new markets for

U.S. marine products abroad, including review of export control

policies.
— NASA, Navy, Interior, and ESSA are collectively examining the

feasibility of satellite observations for marine science.
— The Navy has made available the Transit Satellite Navigation

System for use by other agencies and non-Federal interests.

14

National Goals

-The Department of Transportation (Coast Guard and Federal Avia-
tion Agency) is developing a national plan of navigation aids
for civilian shipping.

Areas of Increased Emphasis for Fiscal Year 1969

An extensive evaluation of marine science activities of the Federal Govern-
ment was conducted by the Council in the Fall of 1967, with staff assistance
from Council Committees, the National Security Council, the Office of
Science and Technology, and non-Governmental consultants. The Govern-
ment-wide program was examined by purpose as well as by agency. As a
consequence, the following initiatives in the marine sciences (funded as
shown in Table I. 2) have been approved by the President for special
emphasis in FY 1969; each is discussed in detail in subsequent chapters.

We plan to:

1. Accelerate our eflForts to Expand International Cooperation in Ocean
Exploration — to encourage all countries (a) to develop their marine science
opportunities through cooperative exploration of the oceans and their living
and mineral resources; and (b) to develop new patterns of collaboration
in the peaceful uses of the oceans that will contribute to sound inter-
national policy decisions on marine resource questions. A small planning
staff will be established, initially funded by the Marine Sciences Council, to
coordinate U.S. exploration activities, including our participation in inter-
national endeavors.

2. Intensify the Food-jrom-the-Sea initiative in the War on Hunger — by
undertaking market surveys and feasibility studies for Fish Protein Con-
centrate (FPC) in three countries abroad, and by accelerating development
of new technologies for producing low cost FPC.

3. Foster Rational Development of the Coastal Zone — by strengthening
research, development, and systems studies of pollution, economic develop-
ment, and conflicting uses of the Coastal Zone. Federal-Regional-State-local
cooperation will be intensified, including use of existing statutory instruments
such as River Basin Commissions. A special project to study problems of the
Great Lakes area will be initiated by the Council.

4. Prepare for new programs for Port Development and Redevelopment
with preliminary work for a comprehensive planning study — to incorporate
new technology in a national port system that will serve ocean shipping of
the future, characterized by deep draft vessels, containerization, express
and feeder services, and other technical innovations. Attention will be given
to relations between harbors and urban renewal and to regional inter-
relationships including mutual support between harbors.

15

Marine Science Affairs

Table 1.2 — New Initiatives and Areas of Increased Emphasis FY 1969

New initiatives and programs for
increased emphasis

Financing agency

President's

budget

FY 1969

(millions)

1.
?

International Ocean Exploration

Food-From-the-Sea .- __ _

Marine Sciences Council

Agency for International
Development

.2

Development of the Coastal Zone

Port Development and Redevelopment..
Safety of Life and Property. . .

3.0

Interior.

3.6

3,

Interior _.

3.8

Defense.. .

3.0

4

Defense

0. 1

5

Transportation . .

2. 2

Sea Grant Programs

Interior _

1.8

6

Nationzd Science Foun-
dation

Marine Applications of New Technol-
ogy:

(a) Ocean Observation from Space.

(b) Ocean Buoy Development

Program.

( c) Strengthen NODC

Deep Ocean Technology ..

6. 0

7.

NASA..

1.6

Interior. _

(t. 5)

Commerce ._

'. 5

Defense .

1.3

a

Transportation

Multiagency

Defense _.

5.3

"0.3

7.4

9.
10.

11.

Arctic and Subpolar Research Ship <*. .

International Regional Cooperation

Marine Research and Technology:

(a) Basic Research Growth

(b) A Study of an Instrumenta-

tion Facility

(c) Study of Acoustic Frequency

Allocation. .

Transportation

Several Agencies

Defense .

14.5
c5. 1

National Science Founda-
tion

Marine Sciences Council

Transportation

Commerce

Interior

c3. 5

e

/

12.

Mapping of the Continental Shelf

Total ....

13.6
2.4

79.2

<• The initiatives or areas of increased emphasis reported herein are agency program totals rather than
increments unless noted otherwise. FY 1968 initiatives were reported as increments last year.

' Included in the $1.6 million above.

' Increment for increased emphasis.

'' In addition, the Council will initiate studies concerning arctic research needs.

• Funds are included as part of other programs and are not reported here because the amounts for
marine science cannot be accurately calculated at this time.

' Less than $50,000.

» Estimated; exact amount to be determined later.

16

National Goals

5. Institute new measures to insure Safety of Life and Property along our
coasts in light of intensified coastal traffic — by (a) implementation of basic
recommendations of the Presidential study of oil pollution by contingency
plans, research, and new legislation; (b) improved ship navigation systems;
(c) establishment of additional safety standards for offshore structures and
designation of sea lanes; and (d) establishment of safe procedures and
rescue services for civilian submersibles and underwater activities.

6. Increase Sea Grant Program investments — for (a) training specialized
manpower, particularly ocean engineers and technicians, that will be urgently
needed for technological development of marine resources in the 1970's;
(b) meeting regional maritime concerns by establishing research and train-
ing centers — in State and private universities, community colleges, and
technical schools; and (c) disseminating research results to industry and
the public.

7. Foster Marine Applications of New Technology of benefit to science
and industry — by (a) use of spacecraft already programmed for obseivations
of sea ice, currents, temperature patterns, and surface waves; (b) develop-
ment of buoy technology to collect oceanographic and meteorological data
as a basis for later decisions on a world-wide network; and (c) introduction
of automatic data processing capabilities at the National Oceanographic
Data Center to improve services available to government and non-govern-
ment users.

8. Intensify work in Deep Ocean Technology — to provide a reservoir of
advanced engineering knowledge upon which the Navy can draw to meet
requirements of future military systems. The same reservoir of technology
may contribute to industrial engineering activity and development of deep
sea resources.

9. Intensify Arctic and Subpolar Research programs — to strengthen U.S.
capabilities in these regions of strategic and economic significance. The
Council renewed last year's proposal to construct an already authorized
Coast Guard ship for both oceanographic research and ice patrol duties,
and will initiate studies concerning research needs in the Arctic.

10. Encourage International Regional Cooperation in marine science
and technology and resource exploration and development. Special emphasis
will be put on use of many bilateral and multi-lateral channels to promote
regional stability and cohesiveness and to counter concerns about the grow-
ing disparity between U.S. technology and the relative capabilities of
other nations.

11. Strengthen the Nation's base of Marine Research and Technology —
by (a) support of educational institutions to accommodate the rising student
enrollments in oceanography; (b) planning for national facilities for testing,
standardization, and calibration of oceanographic instruments to meet in-
creasing demands for such services; and (c) developing standardized under-

17

Marine Science Affairs

water communications to keep pace with increasing underwater research
activities.

12. Continue last year's initiative of Mapping of the Continental Shelf.
Improved reconnaissance-scale mapping will assist in identifying new min-
eral, oil, and gas deposits and will contribute to timely private investment
in resource development.

The estimated Government-wide cost of these priority programs for
FY 1969 is about $79 million.

The Fiscal Year 1969 Program

»

The total FY 1969 Federal program, military and civilian, totals $516.2
million, up about 15 percent over FY 1968 and about 17 percent over FY
1967. (See Appendix, Table A- 1. ) ^
The increase for FY 69 over FY 68 funding results primarily from :
— increased support of priority developments in ocean engineering

by the Navy
— a replacement Coast Guard ship equipped for subpolar research
— a new buoy development program by the Coast Guard
— an increase in mapping, charting, and geodesy for military

requirements
— research and development related to coastal pollution from ship cargo
spillage.
All of the Federal activities identified within the scope of marine science,
engineering, technology, or resources development are detailed by major
purpose in Table 1.3 and by department and independent agency in Table
1.4. Figure 1 graphically shows where the Federal marine science and
technology funds are spent. Details by Federal organization, major purpose,
and function are given in Appendix A.

* The scope of programs has been modified slightly to reflect more accurately the
coverage intended by the Marine Sciences Act. Some programs are omitted in this
year's report which are marine in nature but are not considered to be marine science,
such as acquisitions of marine lands and fishing vessel subsidies. To obtain figures
comparable to those in last year's report, the following amounts should be deducted
from the totals in Tables 1.3 and 1.4: FY 67— $38 million, FY 68— $8 million, and
FY 69— $7 million.

18

National Goals

Figure I— The Marine Science and Technology Dollar

(in percent)

Nationa
ata Ci

Ocean Engineering 0.5

General Purpose International Cooperation

and Collaboration

Ocean Exploration,

Mapping. Charting

and Geodesy

Military Security

Oceanographic
Research

Fishery Development
and Seafood Technology

Transportation

Nonliving „ ... Development
Resources ""''" of the

Coastal Zone

19

287-921 O — 68-

Table 1.3 — Total Federal Marine Science Program by Major Purpose

(In millions of dollars)

1 . International Cooperation and Collaboration .

2. Military Security

3. Fishery Development and Seafood Technology

4. Transportation

5. Development of the Coastal Zone *"

6. Health

7. Non-living Resources

8 . Oceanographic Research '

9. Manpower and Education

10. Environmental Observation, Prediction, and

Services

1 1 . Ocean Exploration, Mapping, Charting, and

Geodesy

12. General Purpose Ocean Engineering

13. National Data Centers

Total

Estimated
FY 1967

7. 1

161.8

38. 1

11.9

21.4

6.6

7.2
61.5

4.0

24.4

77.4

14.8

1.8

438.0

Estimated
FY 1968

7.6

136.9

41.2

15.2

28.7

5.2

8. 1
78.4

7.2

24. 5

74.5

18.2

2.0

447.7

President's
budget
FY 1969

8.2

150. 1

42. 7

15.4

28.6

6.0

9.8
99.7

7.9

26.5

92. 1

26.8

2.4

516.2

"In this and all subsequent tables, details may not add to totals due to rounding.
'Includes Shore Development, Pollution Management, Recreation.
" Research beneficial to more than one of the headings above.

Table 1.4 — Total Federal Marine Science Program by Department and

Agency

(In millions of dollars)

Estimated
FY 1967

Estimated
FY 1968

President's
budget
FY 1969

Department of Defense

Department of the Interior

Nation al Science Foundation

Department of Commerce

Department of Transportation

Atomic Energy Commission

Department of Health, Education, and Welfare..
Department of State

Agency for International Development.

Smithsonian Institution

National Aeronautics and Space Administration. .

TOTAL AGENCY PROGRAMS

National Council on Marine Resources and En-
gineering Development

Commission on Marine Science, Engineering, and
Resources

277.7

64. 1

24.8

35.3

8.3

3

7

1

0
6
1

438.0
(0.9)
(0.2)

256.9

73.5

38.3

38.4

10.7

12. 7

6.4

5.0

2.6

1.6

1.6

447.7
(0.9)
(0.4)

297.7

75.5

41.0

38. 1

33. 1

11.8

7.5

5.2

3.0

1.7

1.6

516.2

(1-2)
(0.2)

20

'Seas but join the regions they divide." — ^Alexander pope

Chapter II

EXPANDING INTERNATIONAL
COOPERATION AND UNDERSTANDING

The oceans from earliest times have been bonds of commerce and culture.
Historic relationships are changing, however, accelerated by advances in
maritime technology that enable nations to conduct activities farther from
home and in deeper water, and to exploit previously inaccessible resources.

As various national interests in ocean activities converge, international
agreements and cooperation will be increasingly needed to reduce conflict
and rivalry and to advance world order, understanding, and economic de-
velopment at home and abroad. The United States has accordingly intensi-
fied its efforts to promote international cooperation to attain our major
foreign policy goal of establishing a stable and lasting peace.

A multi-national approach to the peaceful uses of the sea is not only
desirable but necessary because of the inherently international character of
scientific study of the sea and the common property aspect of deep ocean
resources. The very size, complexity, and variability of the marine environ-
ment emphasize the importance of collaboration.

As a basis for harmonious international marine exploration and resource
development, certain premises underlie our policies and programs:

Our knowledge of the seas and their resources is exceedingly limited;
the necessary scientific investigations are so vast that international
collaboration is essential if knowledge of this environment is to
increase within a meaningful period.

21

Marine Science Affairs

Excellence, experience, and capabilities in marine science and tech-
nology are shared by many nations in addition to the United States,
and cooperation in a number of areas can be mutually beneficial.
In the search for new food resources, the full potential of the seas has

not been fully realized.
While very little is known today of the richness and distribution of
seabed resources, these resources will eventually be sought to meet
a growing demand for energy and minerals.
Technology is rapidly becoming available to permit accelerated marine

exploration and resource exploitation.
Development of ocean resources requires major capital investments
which in turn require some protection of rights for development
and exploitation.
Uncertainties in the interpretation and application of existing interna-
tional law may result in conflicts of interest between nations, par-
ticularly with regard to the width of territorial seas, rights of innocent
passage, and the exploitation of ocean resources.
Underlying any legal regime is the need to preserve the traditional
freedoms of the seas to permit their peaceful use by all nations.
Our international activities in the marine sciences are thus characterized
by:

— encouragement of increased cooperation among ocean scientists of

all nations and broadened dissemination of scientific results;
— support of the activities of the many bodies of the United Nations
system and other international organizations engaged in oceanic
activities and of eflforts to improve the international organizational
structure ;
— collaboration with other nations in developing and using new marine

technologies within a framework of mutual benefit ;
— making available marine technology and other assistance to com-
plement the eflforts of developing countries in strengthening their
capabilities to use the ocean and its resources as a pathway to
economic progress, recognizing that aid burdens must be shared
by other nations and international organizations;
— strengthening of international programs and projects which foster
cooperation among neighboring nations to meet common interests
and problems;
— pursuit of a strengthened code of international law which will pre-
serve the traditional freedoms of the seas, insure that nations have
equitable opportunities to participate in the development of the
wealth of the ocean, and anticipate and prevent potential conflicts
arising out of expanding maritime interests;

22

International Cooperation

-development of international legal, financial, and political arrange-
ments to promote investment in marine development and facilitate
a fruitful partnership between public and private interests in
marine matters.

Marine Science in the United Nations^

In the United Nations, the General Assembly, the Economic and Social
Council, and a number of specialized bodies are responsible for various
aspects of marine science affairs, as shown in Figure II. 1. In 1967, the Gen-
eral Assembly, at its twenty-second session, began consideration of jurisdic-
tion over the deep ocean seabed ^ and related questions. Fifty-eight countries
spoke in the debate and assumed a wide range of positions. Some countries
advocated that title to the seabed be vested in the United Nations. Others
called for a moratorium on unilateral exploitation of seabed resources. Most
countries seemed to feel there should be a freeze on claims of national
sovereignty to the seabed. Some maritime nations opposed any consideration
now by the Assembly.

The United States, recognizing that understanding of the factors in-
volved in exploiting these resources is incomplete and that we are far
from ready to define a precise legal regime at this time, supported careful
study of the issue by the General Assembly.

The position of the United States followed the course set by President
Lyndon B. Johnson in July 1966 when he said:

"Under no circumstances, we believe, must we ever allow the prospects of
rich harvest and mineral wealth to create a new form of colonial competi-
tion among the maritime nations. We must be careful to avoid a race to grab
and to hold the lands under the high seas. We must ensure that the deep
seas and the ocean bottoms are, and remain, the legacy of all human beings."

The United States proposed that the General Assembly establish a Com-
mittee on the Oceans which would be competent to examine all marine
questions brought before the Assembly. Such a Committee would stimulate
international cooperation in exploration of the oceans. It would assist the
General Assembly in considering questions of law and arms control and as a
first step might develop a set of principles to govern states in the exploration
and use of the seabed.

At the conclusion of debate, the General Assembly took a preliminary step

^The texts of the 1966 and 1967 General Assembly Resolutions on marine matters
are presented in Appendix E, Table E-2.

" In this chapter "seabed" refers to the ocean floor and its subsoil seaward of the
Continental Shelf as defined in the Continental Shelf Convention.

23

Marine Science Affairs

«

e

c
e
o.

OS

e
GO

(A

C

e

7
c

I

60

>o

uj a:
Qo.

>-

i^.

o

>S2

it

xi

(OUJ
05S

z

^I

Suj

=3

SE

a:

<

S

o

ENTAi
SULT-i
ATI ON

5ZN

= z^

zRz

SS2

a:<-><

(T — ai

q:S3

ujo

Zui

iu5>

~ _i

gig

UJ

1-

■icz

ZOH

<hZ

toow

-J^?

zujQ

zo<

— u.
1

zr>i-
11.0:"

<o

_o
— I 1 *
OeeZ

UJ C3
UJ O

24

International Cooperation

by adopting unanimously Resolution 2340 establishing an ad hoc Commit-
tee of thirty-five States to prepare a study on various aspects of the seabed
beyond national jurisdiction for consideration by the Assembly next fall. The
study will include an examination of (a) activities of the United Nations
and its specialized agencies related to the seabed; (b) relevant international
agreements; (c) scientific, technical, economic, legal, and other aspects of
the question; and (d) suggestions regarding practical ways of promoting
international cooperation in the exploration, conservation, and use of the
seabed and its resources.

Meanwhile, pursuant to the General Assembly Marine Resources Resolu-
tion adopted in 1966 as a result of U.S. initiatives, the Secretary General
inaugurated a survey of international marine science activities, including
consideration of improved coordination between specialized agencies. An
international group of experts, convened by the Secretary General, has been
requested to outline existing programs and to suggest steps to strengthen
international cooperation in the field. The completed report will be used by
the ad hoc Committee concerned with the seabed and will be presented to
the Assembly this fall.

The following specialized agencies and other bodies of the United Nations
undertook a variety of new cooperative programs with active participation
by the United States:

United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization
(UNESCO) and its Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission
(IOC)
World Meteorological Organization (WMO)
International Telecommunication Union (ITU)
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)
United Nations Development Program (UNDP)
Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organization (IMCO)
Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East (ECAFE)
United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF)

International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD)
Some of the programs of particular interest are:

— International oceanographic surveys will be conducted in the
Mediterranean and Caribbean Seas, the North Atlantic, and the
Southern Ocean (IOC).
— Consideration is being given to a West African marine science

center (IOC).
— Attention is being given to the legal impediments to scientific

research (IOC).
— Organizational arrangements are being developed for the planning

of an Integrated Global Ocean Station System (lOC-WMO) .
— Radio frequencies were set aside for exclusive use in the transmission
of oceanographic data (ITU) .

25

Marine Science Affairs

— The number of UN-supported assistance programs in fisheries and

maritime safety is being increased (IBRD-UNDP-FAO-IMCO) .

— International measures are under consideration to prevent disasters

involving hazardous ship cargoes such as the Torrey Canyon oil

pollution spill near the United Kingdom (IMCO) .

■ — Fire safety standards for new ship designs were adopted (IMCO) .

— Assistance is increasing to developing nations for their port and coastal

development (IBRD).
— Ships are being encouraged to participate in a voluntary weather
observation program as part of the World Weather Watch
(IMCO-WMO).
— Cooperative off-shore geophysical surveys are being expanded in

East Asia (ECAFE).

— International quality standards for fish protein concentrate are

being developed (UNICEF-WHO-FAO) .

United States contributions to the United Nations and its specialized

agencies in support of marine science activities totalled about $3.0 million in

FY 1968 and are estimated at $3.1 million in FY 1969. This does not include

the activities of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development.

Other International Bodies

A Convention is now being ratified to establish an International Hydro-
graphic Organization, encompassing the present International Hydrographic
Bureau (IHB), to improve coordinated mapping and charting. The United
States contribution to the International Hydrographic Bureau was $12,500
in FY 1968 and is estimated at the same level in FY 1969. Additional con-
tributions are made through participation in specific projects. Smaller con-
linbutions are also made to many of the other international organizations
identified in Appendix E, Table E-1, which serve as coordinating mecha-
nisms in limited areas of marine sciences.

The International Council of Scientific Unions is considering the establish-
ment of a Union of Marine Sciences, consolidating the diverse marine
activities of several Unions. In the industrial sector, considerable attention
was devoted to off-shore resources during the World Petroleum Congress.

Bilateral Cooperation

Marine capabilities to promote economic development in South Vietnam
are being strengthened by such cooperative programs with the Vietnamese

26

International Cooperation

as a major fishery development program through the FAO, a number of
port and harbor development projects, coastal and riverine hydrographic
surveys, and cooperative oceanographic surveys.

On its global scientific expedition, the Oceanographer, carrying the
personal greetings of the Vice President, called at 1 2 ports in 1 1 countries.
Fifty foreign scientists participated on portions of the voyage symbolizing
U.S. policy of encouraging cooperative use of advanced research capabilities
for mutual benefit.

Following a general policy to make technology developed with U.S. Gov-
ernment funds widely available whenever possible, a number of actions
were undertaken: At the invitation of the U.S. Government, British, Aus-
tralian, and Canadian divers entered aquanaut training in the United States
in preparation for their participation in Sealab III experiments next sum-
mer. Specialists from other nations will be invited to observe from the
surface. In another step towards increased international cooperation, the
Navy Navigation Satellite System (TRANSIT) was released this year for
civilian use, and requests for purchase of U.S. receivers from abroad will be
considered under munitions control procedures.

During the past year, arrangements were made to turn over to Italy,
Korea, Liberia, and India vessels not needed in the United States for
marine science activities.

Several Government agencies support marine science activities abroad
using excess currencies available under Public Law 480. These programs
have been very effective in promoting international scientific activities in
such countries as Israel and Tunisia.

International Fishery Arrangements^

With more nations looking to the sea for food, some conflicts between
nations fishing common stocks are inevitable. During the past year, the
United States made special efforts to protect the rights of in-shore coastal
fishermen and at the same time to give ample opportunity for high seas
fishermen to explore and develop unused fishery stocks. The United States
participated in the development of the following international fishery ar-
rangements during 1967:

— extension of agreements with the USSR concerning king crab fishing
in the Eastern Bering Sea, fishing gear conflicts off Alaska, and
fishing activities oflf the Washington-Oregon coast; and a new
agreement concerning fishing off the mid- Atlantic states;

' Fishery conventions to which the U.S. adheres as well as other international
treaties in the marine field are identified in Table E-5 of Appendix E.

27

Marine Science Affairs

— ^an agreement with Japan concerning the new U.S. contiguous fishery

zone and king crab and hahbut fishing on the high seas;
— an agreement with Mexico concerning fishing of each country in the
fishery zone of the other and related fisheiy data exchanges and
cooperative research programs;
— development of new conservation measures under the International

Convention for the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries;
■^a new program of the International North Pacific Fisheries Commis-
sion of coordinated research on ground fish resources;
— designation of the Great Lakes Fishery Commission as the coordinat-
ing agency for the alewife program in Lake Michigan;
— -conclusion of a Convention on the Conduct of Fishing Operations in
the North Atlantic.
The United States contribution to eight international fishery commis-
sions was $2.0 million in FY 1968 and is estimated at $2.1 million in FY 1969.
These commissions are responsible for research and management practices
concerning fish stocks which provide an annual catch to American fishermen
valued at more than $200 million.

Consultation With Other Nations

The President and Vice President discussed international cooperation in
the marine sciences with a number of heads of state of Latin America,
Europe, and Asia. The President's speech during the Latin American Sum-
mit Meeting at Punta del Este and the communiques following the visits to
the United States of Premier Sato of Japan and President Marcos of the
Philippines identified marine science cooperation for emphasis.* The
Council's Executive Secretary met with senior policy officials in a number
of countries to explain U.S. policies and plans and to encourage policy-level
attention abroad on new opportunities to derive benefits from ocean activities
through inter-governmental cooperation.

Federal Policy Coordination

Early in 1967, the Secretary of State, at the request of the Vice President,
established an ad hoc interagency Committee on International Policy for
the Marine Environment to develop Government-wide policies and arrange-

* The texts of the marine science portions of the speech and communiques are in-
cluded in Appendix E, Table E-6.

28

International Cooperation

ments. Several temporary panels were established to examine such matters
as scientific cooperation, the exploration and use of the mineral resources
of the seabed, underseas technology, the living resources of the oceans,
regional cooperation in Latin America and Europe, and the national security
aspects of these questions. It was this ad hoc Committee, for example, which
was the mechanism for developing a Government-wide position on the sea-
bed issue considered by the General Assembly. The ad hoc Committee has
now been converted into a standing committee.

Other inter-agency committees continue to be responsible for the develop-
ment of United States positions at inter-governmental meetings on such
specialized marine matters as the fishery activities of FAO, the fishery com-
missions, oil pollution, maritime communications, and export of technology.

To insure that new proposals for international collaborative programs
that involve several Federal agencies are thoroughly evaluated throughout
the Government, procedures have been adopted by the Council whereby
a lead agency is designated for evaluating, coordinating, and implementing
plans.

The Marine Resources and Engineering Development Act explicitly calls
upon the President, with the advice and assistance of the Marine Sciences
Council, to undertake legal studies concerned with the management, use,
development, and control of marine resources. Thus, three studies by out-
standing legal authorities were undertaken through Council contracts, with
guidance from the Legal Adviser of the Department of State, on interna-
tional law aspects of off-shore petroleum, gas, and solid minerals; ocean-
ographic research ; and fishing. These will be made available by the Council
early in 1968 to facilitate broad examination of the issues.^

' Authors of the three studies singled out the following conclusions as being of
particular interest. These have not yet been reviewed by the member agencies of
the Council, and they will be considered together with other suggested approaches:
— There should be deliberate policy decisions on the extent of the Continental
Shelf; a precise definition of its seaward boundary seems desirable. A buffer
zone might be established to. bridge the boundary between the Shelf and the
seabed with the coastal states' interests in the ocean floor given special
protection in the Zone.
— The U.S. should seek an international legal framework which promotes free-
dom of oceanographic research within waters subject to national control and
on the Continental Shelf.
— Consideration with regard to living resources might be given to establishment
of a global conservation authority which would strive to extend and improve
existing international regulation of high seas exploitation in the interest of
conservation and efficiency.

29

Marine Science Affairs

Surveys of the marine science activities of other nations, U.S. -funded
marine science programs abroad, and marine activities of international
organizations were also undertaken by the Council staff. These surveys
have highlighted the large number of different ministries involved in marine
activities in almost every nation, the variety of U.S. -sponsored cooperative
projects throughout the world, and the diversity of the activities of the
many international organizations involved in marine matters. Some of these
surveys will be released in 1968.

Strengthening International Arrangements

While the previous discussion reflects our immediate concerns, increas-
ing attention is being devoted to longer-term questions and programs,
particularly:

1 . A Legal Regime for the Deep Ocean Seabed

As inter-governmental attention focuses on the seabed, two paramount
issues arise : "What should be the seaward limit of the Continental Shelf?"
and "What resources are there beyond the Continental Shelf and who should
control them?" The work of the ad hoc Committee of the General Assembly
should contribute to a better understanding of the issues involved while
the programs for international ocean exploration described below are in-
tended to provide new insights into resource distribution.

A desirable early step in the evolution of the legal regime for the seabed
would be international accord on certain general principles. As already
enunciated by the United States, the seabed should not become a stage
for a new form of colonial rivalry and should not be subjected to claims
of national sovereignty. Rather, the seabed should be open to exploration
and use by all states without discrimination. International standards should
be set to foster orderly exploration and use of the seabed. Cooperative
scientific research of the seabed should be encouraged together with broad
dissemination of results. Activities on the seabed should be conducted with
reasonable regard for the activities of other states. Pollution and interference
with the traditional freedoms of the seas should be avoided.

2. International Ocean Exploration

Without more scientific knowledge of the distribution and extent of
ocean resources, no nation can optimally develop and utilize them. Our
lack of knowledge of the scale and location of ocean resources also hampers
the making of sound policy decisions, domestically and internationally, affect-
ing commercial, scientific, and political interests. This highlights the im-
portance of increased scientific knowledge to fuller use of the potential of
the oceans and to informed decisions concerning ocean activities.

30

International Cooperation

The United States is thus encouraging the international development of
long-range plans for intensified cooperative exploration of the oceans. The
past cooperative programs developed by scientists of many nations have
already provided many valuable insights of benefit to these nations, and such
a long-range program might include new efforts related to geological
mapping of the continental margins and deep ocean floor and biological
surveys to assess fishery stocks.

All nations are invited to participate in this world-wide endeavor. If other
nations join in such an enterprise, existing ocean exploration activities of
international organizations will provide an excellent point of departure.

Internal planning for ocean exploration activities of the United States,
including participation in international endeavors, is described in
Chapter VIII.

3. Evolving Fishery Arrangements

The following considerations necessitate further development of fishery
arrangements that harmonize broad national goals, conservation needs, and
domestic economic concerns :

— There has been a recent increase of foreign fleets fishing in U.S.
coastal waters for species which have long been taken by our coastal
fishermen. Conflicts often arise because these fleets of large vessels
pre-empt the fishing grounds or because the catch by the larger
distant water vessels reduces the amount available for United
States fishermen.
— The United States fishing industry is lagging behind the industries

of other nations.
— International fishery arrangements are increasingly influencing the

economic aspects of fishing activities.
— United States distant water fishermen working intensively off the
coasts of other countries occasionally raise fears that the local re-
sources are being depleted.
— There is increasing overlap in the geographic areas of concern

to the fishery commissions.
— Some nations are sending fishing fleets to areas covered by inter-
national fishery conventions to which they do not adhere.
— Finally, the world hunger situation requires further development of
the food resources of the oceans.
To strengthen the international legal framework for fishing in the near
term, all nations should be encouraged to adhere to the Geneva Convention
on Fishing and Conservation of the Living Resources of the High Seas ; "^
the complex interrelationships among the many fishing conventions and

" Table E-3 of Appendix E lists those countries which adhere to the Geneva
Conventions on the Law of the Sea.

31

Marine Science Affairs

among the conventions and the world hunger problem must be better under-
stood; and more attention should be given to the economic as well as the
conservation aspects of specific international fishery agreements.

4. International Marine Preserves

As man's influence on the natural marine environment increases, there is
an urgent need to preserve major types of unmodified ocean habitats for re-
search and education in the marine sciences. Such areas can serve as eco-
logical baselines to provide a basis for comparison in future investigations of
the oceans. Therefore, international consideration should be given to the
establishment of international marine wilderness preserves. For example,
characteristic marine features such as a deep ocean trench, a group of sea
mounts, and an uninhabited coral atoll might be set aside exclusively for
research and education.

5. Ocean Acres

The concept of international ocean acres, i.e. limited ocean areas desig-
nated for intensive research over a period of many years, was also endorsed
by the Council. Ocean acres might be established in the vicinity of marine
preserves or could be established independent of preserves such as the areas
in the North Atlantic identified by several nations as of particular interest in
connection with the projects of the Intergovernmental Oceanographic
Commission.

6. Cooperation on a Regional Basis

Marine science and technology offer many opportunities for regional
cooperation which can strengthen scientific and economic capabilities and
promote regional cohesiveness and stability. Therefore, the United States is
emphasizing regional cooperation through more deliberate . use of many
bilateral and multi-lateral channels.

In carrying out the policy enunciated by the President at Punta del Este to
support regional marine science and technology activities, the United States
is considering projects related to:

— development of the Plate River Basin;

— regional marine science centers of excellence ;

— U.S. support of marine research and education in Latin America;

— cooperative Caribbean research activities.
With regard to Europe, regional marine programs can contribute to
strengthening Atlantic alliances, furthering the economic integration of
Western Europe, and quickening progress in East-West relations. The
United States has discussed in the Organization for Economic Cooperation
and Development the possibility of cooperative work in various aspects of
marine science aflFairs and continues to support the activities of the NATO
Subcommittee on Oceanography. Also the United States will shortly rejoin
the International Council for the Exploration of the Seas.

32

International Cooperation

7. Collaboration in Oceanographic Research

During the past year cooperation with the Soviet Union and other coun-
tries has increased in oceanography and fishery research. Specifically, there
have been exchange visits of oceanographers, reciprocal calls by large oceano-
graphic research vessels, and development of collaborative fishery research
projects. A useful step in improving cooperation has been the adoption of a
U.S. policy to reduce administrative delays in arranging for Soviet fishery
research ships engaged in bilateral research programs to call at U.S. ports.
As the tracks of United States oceanographic ships and ships of other nations
cross more frequently, expansion of these very modest efforts is essential to
eliminate unnecessary duplication and foster availability of data to each
other. Such collaboration can make a major contribution to international
cooperation and understanding and to effective use of the sea.

The seven above listed international activities provide innumerable op-
portunities for our marine science programs to contribute to international
understanding through (a) joint working projects, and (b) multilateral
development of legal arrangements to prevent conflicts. Indeed, the
only alternative to international cooperation in oceanic matters is anarchy
on the seas.

33

"The scale, severity, and duration of the world food problems are so great
that a massive, long-range, innovative effort unprecedented in human history
will be required to master it . . ." — the world food problem, report of

THE president's SCIENCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, MAY 196 7

Chapter III

ACCELERATING USE OF
FOOD FROM THE SEA

More effective use of the living resources of the ocean can provide better
and less expensive food, enchance economic opportunities at home and
abroad, and serve as an important weapon in the world-wide War on
Hunger. Our interest in improved utilization of these resources is thus moti-
vated by separate but related considerations.

A strengthened American fishing industry can assist the growth of our
domestic economy by contributing to :

— a wider variety of food products for many Americans ;

— inexpensive protein sources for low income families;

^more viable economies of coastal communities dependent on fishing,

including better paying jobs for American fishermen;
— reduction of the balance of payments deficit by larger U.S. exports
of fish products and by improving the competitiveness of the U.S.
fishing industry.
Furthermore, if we are to sustain world leadership on a broad front in
the understanding and efTective use of the sea, strong research and industrial
capabilities in the field of fisheries are essential.

Much is known about present and predictable ravages of malnutrition
and famine. Yet world food production has barely kept pace with a rapidly
expanding population. Protein malnutrition afflicts one-half of the world
population — one and one-half billion people. Thus, the imbalance between
protein supplies and requirements is so serious that every reasonable ap-

35

287-921 O — 68 4

Marine Science Affairs

proach is required to correct it. Accelerated development of food from the
sea offers high promise of meeting a part of the world-wide need for protein,
and thus assist in :

— reducing threats to world order which are born in areas of starvation

and despair;
— extending the humanitarian traditions that underlie our society;
— promoting collaborative efforts between nations in an endeavor of

common concern;
— strengthening economies of developing nations which are striving to
become contributors to the world economy.
The Marine Sciences Act states that the U.S. marine science program
should contribute to rehabilitation of our commercial fisheries and to ac-
celerated development of marine resources. The legislation also singles out
international cooperation for special emphasis.

Thus, the Government is endeavoring to strengthen on-going efforts to
assist the domestic fishing industry in improving its position in world fishery
production through the application of modern science and technology
and by economic measures. Also, the United States has embarked on a new,
long-range program to exploit the oceans more fully as a source of food
to help feed the undernourished people of the world. To that end, our
programs follow the broad strategy of the War on Hunger.

State of the Fishing Industry

Since 1956, the United States has dropped from second to sixth place
among the fishing nations of the world. While Peru, Japan, Mainland
China, the USSR, and recently Norway have increased their landings
sharply, the catch of American fishermen has decreased slightly during the
last 10 years. (See Figure III. 1.)

The current demand in the United States for all types of fishery products
is equivalent to 65 pounds of fish per capita per year, one of the highest
rates in the world. The proportion of this demand met by imports has been
increasing and in 1966 amounted to about 65 percent of the aquatic products
used by the United States. These imports were valued at more than $720
million. (See Figure III. 2.)

Estimates indicate that the world fishery catch can be greatly increased
with presently available techniques. These estimates range from at least a
doubling of the catch to a possible increase by a factor of five or more.
Of the known species of potential economic value off our coasts, only a few
are currently being commercially exploited. Nevertheless, the domestic fish-
ing industry has not expanded, and the rich, latent living resources in nearby

36

Food from the Sea

Figure lll-l- World Catch of Seafoods
by Leading Countries, 1956-1966

Billions of Pounds
20

19.3

15.6

11.8

6.2
5.5

J 1

1956 57 58 59 60 'SI '62 '63 '64

NOTE: Live Weigh) Basis.

SOURCE: Yearbook of Fishery Stolistics— Food and Agricullurol Organization
of the United Nations; Bureau of Commercial Fisheries; Misc.

'65 '66

37

Marine Science Affairs

Figure III-2- U.S. Market for Fishery Products

Billions of Pounds (Live Weight)

40

30

^.^^^''

25
20

V^<

t;^^^

15

10

/^

^-

^ IM

PORTED

b

DO

VIESTIC CAl

rcH

1950

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

Dept. of Inte

international waters are increasingly being harvested by vessels of Asian
and European origin.

Numerous interrelated factors bear on this lack of growth of the U.S.
fishing industry, and the decline in our international competitive position.
Institutional constraints have been cited as a principal cause. Laws, customs,
regulations — international and local — may limit the catch of a fisherman or
group of fishermen. The restrictions include limitations on the area to be
fished, fishing season, type of gear, boats, or the fishing techniques. Regula-
tions may thus be imposed to conserve a sustainable supply of fish stocks; to
mediate conflicting user interests, such as between sport and commercial fish-
ing; to insure use of fishing vessels built in the United States; or to insure
that individual American fisheimen are not at a disadvantage in competing
with larger American fishing organizations.

Unfortunately, these regulations sometimes result in serious constraints
on the economic efficiency of fishing activities. These constraints contribute
to the fragmentation of the industry into small units. A small fishing opera-
tion like any small business finds it hard to accumulate sufficient capital
to adopt advanced methods and equipment. The fishing industry has not .
benefited from advantages of large-scale operations and has not developed
capabilities to exploit stocks in distant waters except for tuna and shrimp.
Some parts of the United States fishing industry increasingly look to invest-
ment opportunities abroad where institutional arrangements are considered
less burdensome.

38

Food from the Sea

With some exceptions, the industry is also fragmented into catching,
processing, transporting, and marketing interests rather than providing an
integrated fish catching-to-consumption system. Modern marketing tech-
niques are not generally evident. At present the market demand for food
fish is largely for species which have been fished for a number of years and
which are limited in supply.

Finally, advances in domestic production have been inhibited by in-
adequate knowledge of fish stock distribution, abundance, and behavior.
Consequently, there may be artificial limitations on the species being
caught, the areas being fished, and the fishing methods being used. Some
resources near the U.S. coast may still be greatly underexploited.

Federal Programs To Assist the Fishing Industry

The Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, cooperating with other Federal
agencies and State, academic, and industrial organizations, conducts a
variety of programs to foster the economic growth and diversification of
U.S. fisheries. The requested appropriation for the FY 1969 fishery develop-
ment and seafood technology programs of the Bureau totals $42.7 million.
These funds provide for a continuation of the following major programs :

1. Resource development and management: These programs account for
about 63 percent of the funds requested and are designed to gather data
to predict abundance and distribution of fish stocks, provide the under-
standing needed to maintain the harvest at a level of optimum sustainable
yield, and obtain information for international negotiations on high seas
fishery resources. Among achievements of this program during 1967 were:

— improved prediction of abundance and distribution for skipjack,
bluefin, and albacore tuna in the Pacific, and groundfish and sea
scallops in the North Atlantic ; development of a prediction model
for obtaining maximum yield from the Tortugas, Florida, pink
shrimp fishery;

— initiation of assessment studies of brown shrimp in the Gulf of
Mexico;

— development of lobster and menhaden tagging techniques;

• — development of sonar equipment for monitoring salmon migration
in Alaskan streams in cooperation with the State;

— continuation of pesticide monitoring along the East Coast and the
Gulf of Mexico estuaries;

— completion of two phases of the fishways at Willamette Falls in the
Columbia River system;

39

Marine Science Affairs

— successful testing of experimental drifting buoys designed to obtain

ocean data at distances up to 400 miles;
— development of spacecraft oceanography for analyzing biologically

significant conditions of the ocean;
— coordination of large-scale international investigations of tuna in

the Eastern Tropical Pacific.

2. Processing and marketing: Research directed to converting raw fish
into marketable products accounts for about 20 percent of the FY 1969
budget, including the initiative to expand efforts to develop Fish Protein
Concentrate (FPC) described below. During 1967 the following develop-
ments were noteworthy:

— assistance in expanding commercial use of Spanish mackerel, soft
clams, mullet, and catfish;

— assistance in developing East Coast markets for fish products from
the Pacific Northwest by bringing together processors, airline repre-
sentatives, and buyers;

— approval by the Food and Drug Administration of FPC obtained
from hake for human consumption;

— technical assistance to AID in selecting countries to participate in
overseas FPC programs;

— development of several new fish products;

— development of irradiation techniques aboard ships to increase the
shelf life of fresh fish.

3. Advanced technology: The program for the development of new fishing
technology is designed to help industry locate fish concentrations more
quickly and catch fish more efficiently through new harvesting methods,
fishing tactics, and locating techniques. This program accounts for about
10 percent of the FY 1969 budget request.

Achievements during 1967 included:

— development of methods for estimating the size of surface fish schools
by aerial photography;

— successful testing of a prototype electrical trawl for harvesting alewives
in the Great Lakes;

— development of mechanized seining and conveyer equipment to re-
duce the time and labor involved in harvesting farm pond fish ;

— improvement of midwater trawls and precision depth telemetry sys-
tems for harvesting Pacific hake ;

— introduction of improved pot gear and preferential bait to expand
commercial fishing for crab off southeast Alaska.

4. Economic research: Basic economic research and analyses are con-
ducted to aid improvement in economic efficiencies of the commercial fish-
ing industry. This involves all aspects of the fishing industry — management,
harvesting, processing, transporting, and marketing. This program accounts
for about 4 percent of the requested FY 1969 program. Activities during

40

Food from the Sea

1967 included advice to local fishermen in planning and forming fishery
cooperatives and coordination of economic research programs at universities
on the East Coast.

5. International activities: Major changes are taking place in long-estab-
lished patterns of world fishing. Also, there is a growing interest by the devel-
oping countries in expanding fishing capabilities. Details of some of the most
significant international fishing programs for which the Bureau has provided
the scientific data and technical personnel are described in Chapter II. This
type of activity accounts for about 3 percent of the Bureau's FY 1969 budget
request.

In addition to these marine science and technology programs, the Bureau
of Commercial Fisheries is also responsible for the implementation of three
financial assistance programs which are intended to offset, in part, the high
costs of ship construction and operation to American fishermen compared
to the costs to some foreign competitors. These programs are:
— loans for fishing vessels and gear;
— fishing vessel mortgage and loan insurance ;
— fishing vessel construction differential subsidies.

The Environmental Science Services Administration, Atomic Energy Com-
mission, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, National Science
Foundation, and Navy also contribute to better understanding of the poten-
tial of the living resources of the oceans. These programs and their FY 1969
budget implications are discussed in other chapters. Of particular interest
to the fishing industry are the successful eflForts of the Atomic Energy Com-
mission, in conjunction with the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, in the
development of irradiation techniques for fish preservation.

Using Food from the Sea in the War on Hunger

Marine resource development has long been a part of AID programs.
Technical assistance has been provided to Korea, for example, for surveys
on salmon, oysters, and trout production, and the FY 1968 program calls for
further market feasibility studies and technical assistance. The Korean Re-
construction Bank, with loan funds provided by AID, will lend $3 million
to Korean fishing cooperatives for the purchase of modern equipment in-
cluding refrigerator ships and deep sea trawlers. In South Vietnam, AID,
in cooperation with the Food and Agriculture Organization, is helping to
explore unused fish resources near the mouth of the Mekong River. The
program also includes training of Vietnamese in modern fishing technology,
production and distribution of fingerlings, construction of fish ponds, dis-

41

Marine Science Affairs

tribution on credit of fishing boats and gear, and construction of fish landing
facilities, ice plants, and processing facilities.

In 1967 the United States embarked on a new Food-from-the-Sea program
with initial objectives projected over a five-year period as shown in Figure
III. 3 to:

— develop commercial processes for producing FPC ; ^

— -improve the fish catching, landing, and processing capabilities of
three protein-deficient countries;

— develop markets for FPC in at least one protein-deficient country;

— establish a viable commercial FPC system in at least one protein-
deficient country;

— encourage other nations and private interests to establish commercial
fishing industries in the developing countries.
In carrying out the responsibility as assigned last year as lead agency for
the program, AID has established a Food-from-the-Sea Service in its Office
of the War on Hunger, and the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries is accelerat-
ing necessary technological development.

Spearheading this drive to exploit fish resources as a major low-cost item
of high protein nourishment for large masses of people are the accelerated
efforts of the United States in the development of FPC. Two approaches are
involved: assistance to developing countries in exploring possibilities for
indigenous FPC production, and the use of FPC produced in the United
States in world-wide food aid programs.

Preliminary surveys of the opportunities for developing FPC capabilities
have been conducted in a number of Latin American, Asian, and African
nations. As a result of these surveys, Chile has been selected for more inten-
sive study to determine whether and in what manner FPC-fortified foods
can be marketed commercially. It is anticipated that a country will also soon
be selected in Africa and in Asia for similar studies designed to stimulate the
market for FPC. These studies will employ modern marketing techniques
and will be carried out under contract with private industry. The feasibility
studies should provide the basis for determining the potential of FPC, and
it is anticipated that the United States will encourage the establishment of an
FPC demonstration plant in at least one of these countries as the next step.
The studies will also furnish the data and incentives necessary for large-scale
investment in FPC industries by the private sector.

During FY 1968, AID plans to purchase about $1 million of domes-

' Whole hake and shnilar abundant sp>ecies can be converted into a nutritious and
wholesome protein concentrate (FPC) that is tasteless and odorless. FPC is bacterio-
logically and biochemically safe and stable without refrigeration or other special
process. Its protein is easily digestible. It can be easily stored and transported and
can be readily added to a variety of foods commercially consumed in the developing
nations. Ten grams will provide adequate animal protein to meet the daily require-
ments of one child, at an estimated daily cost of less than one cent.

42

Food from the Sea

e

IB

w

c
e

E
«

Q

(S

a>
01

E

e

I

■o
e
e
Ik

(8

o

'^PH

a>

o

CO

1

m

GO
05

<-J <C o. °- -^

I

t> -f= Q-

-3 -o E

^ O »- O QJ p

o) LL. Q- o c:i —

09 .....

^ .— 1 CS) ro '^ i^

J2 a E

lZ Q IC

" E .-^ E

cri o — ■

t_ Q_ U-

43

Marine Science Affairs

tically produced FPC to enrich wheat or a combination of grains provided by
the Commodity Credit Corporation for distribution as specially formulated
foods in aid's world-wide food programs, primarily for children, pregnant
women, and nursing mothers.

AID will initiate a study of the training needs of marine science specialists
of the developing nations, including the desirability of establishing an inter-
national training center in the United States.

The development of AID's Food-from-the-Sea program has elicited wide-
spread interest in cooperating countries. U.S. industry has shown a great deal
of interest in both the production and marketing of domestically produced
FPC and in the possibility of construction and operation of FPC plants
abroad if AID-sponsored feasibility studies indicate commercial viability.

The Council's Committee on Food from the Sea is concerned with policy
guidance and general recommendations for the broad, long-range program
to harvest the oceans in every reasonable way as a source of food.

Accelerated Development of Fish Protein Concentrate

In view of the promise of fish protein concentrate as an inexpensive source
of protein, engineering development of FPC processing will be accelerated
during FY 1969. It is proposed to increase the Bureau of Commercial Fish-
eries' funds from $1.6 million in FY 1968 to $3.6 million in FY 1969.

FY 1969 efforts will include further refinement of the process for ex-
tracting FPC from hake-like species — the process already approved by the
Food and Drug Administration. Work to develop processing methods and
techniques for extracting FPC from other fish species, particularly oily fish
species which are available near protein-deficient nations, will be started.
The FPC program in the United States will continue as oudined in Figure
III.3.

Supporting Studies

To assist in the development of Government policies to strengthen the
domestic fishing industries and the contributions of Food-from-the-Sea to the
War on Hunger, the Marine Sciences Council has supported two studies
under contract with non-Governmental specialists.

The purpose of the first study was to ascertain whether a systems analysis
approach, which has proven valuable in many industries, would be useful

44

Food-from-the-Sea

in planning Federal fisheiy management and resource development pro-
grams. A methodology for analyzing optimum fishing systems was developed.
Using data provided by the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, the activities
of Boston-based trawlers engaged in exploiting the George's Bank haddock
fishery were analyzed as a case study. The investigators concluded that a
systems analysis approach can be useful in analyzing the effectiveness of
Federal programs — such as subsidy programs in the fishing industry.

The other study surveyed the practice in many countries of aquaculture — •
the rearing of aquatic organisms under controlled conditions. Scientific and
economic factors were evaluated. The authors concluded that aquaculture,
and particularly broader development of pond culture, can make a very
significant contribution to the War on Hunger. The United States, by virtue
of its accomplishments in fields such as ecology, genetics, chemistry, and
engineering, can contribute to the development of new and improved
techniques in aquaculture. The domestic economy might also benefit from
aquaculture through increasing production of high quality food items now
considered luxury items because of limited supplies.

The studies are now under review by the concerned agencies, and they
will be made available to the public in early 1968.

Looking Ahead

In view of the limited economic viability of the U.S. fishing industry,
many recent advances in ocean science and technology are not being as
eflfectively applied by the United States to enhance production of fisher-
ies as by other leading fishing nations. While the programs of the Bureau of
Commercial Fisheries described above provide assistance of considerable
importance to industry, they cannot in themselves reverse the trend in our
declining competitive position in world fisheries.

Of highest priority should be a new concerted effort of the Federal Gov-
ernment, the States, and industry to encourage the evolution of a legal,
administrative, and financial framework which harmonizes economic effi-
ciency, conservation needs, and local interests. Given the broad range of
overlapping and often conflicting domestic laws and interests, together with
the complicating impact of international arrangements, a sharp departure
from the limited efforts of the past may be required if there is to be a reha-
bilitation of the domestic fisheries.

Concurrent with this effort, there will be technological opportunities to
strengthen the capabilities of the industry through automation and mech-
anization on shipboard and on shore; development of new products and
new processing, preservation, storage, and marketing practices; and in-

45

creased knowledge about the nature of fish stocks. Also, aquaculture may
offer new keys to enhanced production in the United States.

While FPC offers much promise in strengthening one link of the fish-
catching-to-consumption system in the United States and in the develop-
ing nations, attention must be devoted to all aspects of the system — partic-
ularly market development and harvesting and distribution methods.

The initial goal of the FPC demonstration program is to provide adequate
quantities of this food additive by 1971 to meet the animal-protein needs —
ten grams per person per day — of at least one million people. Devel-
opment of the program will, of course, depend on a variety of factors in-
cluding the success of international marketing programs, industrial
contributions to the program, and the pace of technological developments.
It has been estimated that if the initial program is successful, a capability
could be established by 1975 to provide protein supplement from existing
fishing stocks to 7-10 million people. Then, with a self-sustaining industrial
base established by 1980, FPC could meet animal-protein needs of over
200 million — using only a small percentage of the projected world fish catch.

The urgency of the problem is clear. The developing nations contain two-
thirds of the world's population, and population doubles in most of these
nations in from 18 to 27 years. The Food-from-the-Sea program can make
an important contribution to meeting their protein needs.

46

"The ocean is the earth's greatest storehouse of minerals. . . . Our search for
mineral wealth often leads us back to the seas." — rachel l. carson

Chapter IV

ENCOURAGING DEVELOPMENT OF
NON-LIVING RESOURCES

Ores, minerals, and fossil fuels are basic sources of the energy, construc-
tion materials, metals, chemicals, and fertilizers required by any advanced
industrial economy. The United States thus needs continuous access to an
adequate, dependable, and economic supply of raw materials to meet de-
mands of an expanding population with a rising standard of living.

Federal policies on mineral resources are designed to contribute to eco-
nomic development and national security by assisting the Nation in:

— developing adequate and dependable supplies of needed mineral raw

materials;
— acquiring mineral supplies at lowest costs consistent with the satisfac-
tion of other national objectives ;
— emphasizing domestic supplies of mineral resources to assist in main-
taining a favorable balance of payments ;
— providing a climate for American industry to produce efficiently,
under competitive conditions, the minerals required for the do-
mestic economy and foreign trade ;
— conserving the Nation's mineral resources by using them wisely and

efficiently;
— preserving the quality of the environment while obtaining needed
minerals.
By 1980, the U.S. consumption of non-fuel minerals is expected to double,
and that of petroleum products is expected to increase by about 50 percent

47

Marine Science Affairs

from today's base. The United States currently imports 21 percent of its
minerals and 13.5 percent of its petroleum; the percentage is considerably
higher for certain strategic metals such as manganese. The world-wide de-
mand for minerals also will increase because of industrialization and rising
levels of consumption. Such projections create incentives for geological ex-
ploration for new reserves and for technological advances to permit use of
lower grade sources or substitute materials.

Significance of Offshore Production

Federal policies on solid mineral resources and fossil fuels have tradition-
ally been based on the assumption that the supply would come very largely
from land sources. In recent years, however, the grade of minerals from land
sources has decreased and production costs have risen. These trends have
motivated industry, with the aid of new technology, to turn to the sea for
oil, gas, and sulfur, and to begin to look seaward for new sources of aggre-
gates and other materials. This quest, for the time being, is largely pursued
in the relatively shallow waters of the Continental Shelf, which approxi-
mates 860,000 square miles, one-third of our present land area.

Although little of the U.S. Continental Shelf has been systematically
surveyed to determine the presence, distribution, and richness of seabed de-
posits, this Nation's economy is already benefitting significantly from its
resources; this new frontier now provides almost 9 percent of the dollar value
of U.S. petroleum production, significant amounts of sulfur, and contributes
to national production of other minerals as well. Table IV. 1 shows the value
of U.S. offshore mineral production. Table IV.2 summarizes recent marine
mining activities. Figure IV. 1 shows some of the current exploratory drilling
around the world.

The value of all minerals produced from Federal and State off-shore
waters in the past seven years exceeds $6 billion. The value of petroleum
production through 1967 from the Outer Continental Shelf lands (under
Federal jurisdiction) has totalled about $4 billion, and if State lands are
included, over $5 billion. Since the first Federal off-shore lease sale in 1954,
1,276 oil and gas leases have been sold resulting in a total bonus income of
almost $2 billion. Federal royalties from production of oil, gas, and sulfur
from the Outer Continental Shelf have totalled more than $700 million
through 1967, and the Federal Government now receives more than $12
million per month in royalties.^

^ The Outer Continental Shelf is that portion of the Shelf beyond three miles
from the coast, except along the Gulf coasts of Florida and Texas, where it is defined
as beyond three marine leagues.

48

Non-Living Resources

Table IV.l — ^ Value of Mineral Production from Oceans Bordering the

United States, 1960 66

[Millions of dollars]

Marine Mineral Production bv Source

Year

Magnesium

metal and

compounds,

salt and

bromine '

From wells;
Petroleum,
natural gas,
and sulfur 2

Sand and
gravel, zir-
con, feldspar,
cement rock
and lime-
stone 3

Combined

1960

$69.0
73.0
89. 1
84.6
94.5
102.6
117.0

$423. 6
496.6
620.7
730.8
820.3
933.3
1, 177.7

$46.8
46.2
44.3
42.5
43.6
51.4
49.2

$539. 4

1961

615.8

1962

754. 1

1963.. _-

857.9

1964 - - .--..-.

958.4

1965

1,087.3

1966

1, 343. 9

7-year total . _

629.8

5, 203. 0

324.0

6, 156.8

' Sea water.

■ Ocean subfloors.

3 Beaches and seafloors.

Source: Bureau of Mines, Department of the Interior.

The petroleum industry's continued confidence in the potential of off-
shore production was demonstrated in the June 1967 Federal lease sale off
Louisiana which resulted in $510 million in bonuses bid for 150 tracts.
Many tracts were in water depths of more than 300 feet ; thus the active bid-
ding indicates that industry expects to have technology for operations in
deeper water relatively soon.

The Shelf is thus a logical focus for a new era of systematic surveys. The
growing world-wide demand for resources, the unexplored areas of the
Continental Shelf with geological continuity from adjacent land areas which
have yielded great mineral wealth, and scattered positive indications that
resources are there, all direct attention to learning more about non-living
resources under the sea, as on the Continent itself. See Figure IV.l. De-
lineation of the distribution and quantity of resources, together with ad-
vances in technology to reduce the disparity in costs between on-shore and
off-shore extraction operations, will in large measure determine the pace
of developing the Shelf. Other factors — legal, economic, and political — will
also influence its development in competition with other sources of min-
erals or their substitutes.

Mineral and fuel resources from land sources are developed almost entirely
through private investment and initiative. Private industry is expected to
continue to take a similar role on the Continental Shelf.

A major issue thus is presented: How should Federal policies and ac-
tivities appropriately evolve to enhance and accelerate sound development
by private industry of marine resources on public off-shore lands? Should

49

Marine Science Affairs

Table IV.2 — Recent Marine Mining Activities

Location

Africa

Red Sea

Southwest Africa

Union of South Africa. .

Asia

Borneo

India

Indonesia

Japan

Malaysia

Papua and New Guinea
Philippines

Thailand

Europe

Iceland

Great Britain

North America

Bahamas

Canada (B.C.)

Caribbean Sea

Mexico

Pacific Ocean

U.S.A.:

Alaska

Blake Plateau

California

California

Louisiana

New England

North Carolina

Oceania
Australia

New Zealand

Solomon Islands

Tasmania

Activity '

Exploration

Dredging

Exploration

Exploration

Exploration

Dredging

Dredging

Exploration

Exploration

Exploration

Dredging

Dredging

Exploration

Dredging

Exploration

Exploration

Exploration

Exploration

Exploration

Exploration

Dredging

Exploration (in-
active)
Mining (Frasch)

Dredging

Exploration

Exploration

Exploration

Exploration

Exploration

Depth (feet) 2

6, 000 ±
600-

(?)

600-

(?)
150-

30-
600-
600-
600-

150-

150±
600-

150?

12, 000 ±
200-
600-

12,000+

200-
600-2, 400

30 ±
600 ±

60 ±
300-
600-

600-

600-
600-
600-

Interest

Sulfide muds.

Diamonds.

Phosphate.

Tin.

Phosphate.
Tin.

Iron sands.
Tin.

Iron sands.
Iron; gold;
titanium.
Tin.

Shell sands.
Tin.

Aragonite.
Manganese nodules.

(?).

Phosphate sands.

Manganese nodules.

Gold.

Manganese ;
phosphate.
Shells.
Phosphate.

Sulfur.

Sand.

Phosphate sands.

Phosphate; heavy

metals.
Heavy metals.
Tin.
Heavy metals.

1 Dredging operations generally include exploration activity. Does not include mines originating on land
and drifted out under the sea floor.

2 Less than is represented by — ; more than is represented by +; approximately is represented by ±.

Source: Department of the Interior.

50

Non-Living Resources

51

287-921 O — 68-

Marine Science Affairs

the Federal Government support reconnaissance mapping, research and de-
velopment, and other forms of assistance? What levels of these different
activities will, in the next few years, be in the national interest?

Federal Marine Minerals Programs

The Federal program in marine minerals is intended to promote the
development of a domestic mineral extraction industry, and to that end
the Federal Government plays several distinct roles: It serves as mediator
between public and private interests, and it is a source of incentives, economic
assistance, and services to industry, as outlined in Chapter XIII.
Facilitating services include :

— mapping and charting;

— weather and ocean prediction;

— measures to protect safety of life and property;

— geological surveys to identify potential resources;

— mining research to develop techniques to evaluate potential
resources ;

— instrumentation development.
Federal programs specifically directed at the development of non-living
resources from the marine environment include the marine minerals pro-
grams of the Geological Survey and the Bureau of Mines, marine water re-
source studies of the Geological Survey and the Office of Saline Water, and
the resource management functions of the Bureau of Land Management
with technical assistance from the Geological Survey.- As shown in Figure
IV.2, these programs amount to $9.8 million requested for FY 1969, com-
pared with $8.1 million appropriated for FY 1968. Environmental measure-
ments and chartirig by Environmental Science Services Administration and
Navy described in Chapter VIII also contribute significantly to marine
minerals development.

Apart from oil, gas, and sulfur, marine mineral deposits of possible eco-
nomic importance include placer accumulations of the heavy metals (gold,
silver, and platinum) , iron, titanium, chromium, and tin, and accumulations
of phosphorite, glauconite, manganese nodules, and sand and gravel, among
others. Marine mineral technology is at such an early stage of development,
however, that the resource potential of the seabed has yet to be meaning-
fully defined. Current efforts of the Geological Survey and the Bureau of
Mines are thus directed primarily toward identifying the minerals available
from the marine environment, in economic as well as geologic terms.

"The Office of Saline Water programs of development and demonstration of
desalting methods are not included herein.

52

Non-Living Resources

Figure IV-2— Federal Investment in Marine Science
for Development of Non-Living Resources

Millions of Dollars

'67 '68 '69
Total

Geologic
Investigations

'67 '68 '69

Fresh Water

Source

Studies

53

Marine Science Affairs

1. The Geological Survey's marine program is directed to an analysis of
the seabed and underlying material on the Continental Shelf and Slope for
the purposes of:

(1) appraising the undeveloped mineral, water, and energy resources

potential on and beneath the seafloor;

(2) studying marine geological processes to develop new insights about

the natural occurrence of resources both on land and on the
ocean floor;

(3) evaluating geological and engineering hazards related to seafloor

and slope stability;

(4) supplying geological data essential to the management of marine

mineral resources and wise land-use planning ;

(5) contributing fundamental data on the history and origin of the

continental margins and the deep ocean basins.
To accomplish those objectives, the Survey has planned a scientific pro-
gram for:

(a) providing maps of the Continental Shelf area at a reconnaissance

scale (1:1,000,000), utilizing information from all cooperating
agencies, from private institutions, and from private industry
as available;

(b) providing maps of significant areas of the Continental Shelf at an

intermediate scale (1:250,000), incorporating measurements
made by all cooperating agencies ;

(c) preparation of detailed maps (1:62,500) and analysis of selected

areas of high economic potential to be explored in the future

on the basis of findings from ( a ) and ( b ) .

Data from many sources will be analyzed for geological implications. In

addition, plans are being drawn to work in deep sea areas, initially for

measurements and mapping of areas ofiF Hawaii and island territories, after

priority needs under (a) and (b) are met.

The Geological Survey currently supports research in-house, at univer-
sities, and at oceanographic institutions, through service contracts with in-
dustry, and by cooperative programs with other Federal agencies. Among
recent accomplishments of these programs are :

— Reconnaissance investigations of the submerged Atlantic Continental
Margin from Nova Scotia to Florida indicated oil deposits on the
Continental Shelf and Slope, manganese and phosphate deposits
on the Blake Plateau, and sand and gravel off New Jersey and
New York.
— On the Continental Shelf of the Bering Sea, the petroleum potential
was found to be greater than previously thought, with the discovery
there of several large basins.
— In southern Alaska, a study was completed on the effects of submarine

54

Non-Living Resources

slides and of their locally generated waves resulting from the Alas-
kan earthquake in 1964.

— On the Continental Shelf of northern California and southern Ore-
gon, acoustical, sub-bottom profiling delineated major faults and
late Tertiary sediments. Systematic magnetometer surveys have lo-
cated concentrations of heavy minerals (some of gold) and of near-
shore ancient sedimentary rocks (a common locale of petroleum
accumulations).

— In the Gulf of Mexico, the dynamics of formation and sedimentary
healing rates of numerous w^ashover scars inflicted on the Padre
Island National Seashore by hurricane Beulah were determined.

— Acoustical profiling in San Francisco Bay defined the geometry of
the sediments in the central part of the Bay and located several
hitherto unknown faults, increasing knowledge of the earthquake
hazards to urban development of the Bay area.

2. The Bureau of Mines conducts continuing studies of the United States
position with respect to consumption, domestic production, and reserves
of more than 80 mineral commodities. The Bureau of Mines also ex-
amines the economics of minerals production and acquisition from marine
and alternative sources. The marine program of the Bureau is designed to
assist in the development of technology for the extraction and beneficiation
of marine minerals; and the development of equipment and techniques for
sampling and delineation of marine mineral deposits. The Bureau is also
concerned with identifying the new technology required for economic recov-
ery of materials from the sea. The program, finally, is intended to develop the
basis for sound advice on Federal policy concerning ocean mineral leasing
and regulation of ocean mining operations.

The Bureau of Mines works in cooperation with private, educational, and
Government organizations to improve economic marine mineral production.
The cooperative program is designed to provide an opportunity for com-
panies to develop experience in the marine minerals field, crystallize their
interests, and determine probable opportunities for their own commercial
ventures in the sea through :

— collecting, assembling, and analyzing oceanographic data pertinent

to marine mining ;
— evaluating and improving techniques for marine mineral sampling
and deposit delineation, including participation in research cruises
on the Pacific Coast ;
— collecting, assembling, and analyzing performance and cost data on
dredging and other technology applicable to marine mining.

3. The heavy metals program of the Bureau of Mines and the Geological
Survey, with supporting survey operations provided by the Environmental
Science Services Administration and Navy, is directed to stimulating the

55

Marine Science Affairs

domestic production of heavy metals that are in short supply, including
gold, silver, platinum metals, mercury, tin, bismuth, antimony, and tantalum.
The initial emphasis is on gold, a resource for which the demand is un-
usually acute. Apart from Government purchases, industrial demand for
gold in 1966 in the United States was over three times the domestic output.
Projected requirements over the next few decades, considering industrial
uses only, indicate a widening gap between demand and domestic supply.

The area off the southern Seward Peninsula near Nome, Alaska, was
sampled for undersea placer deposits during the summer of 1967. The test
samples contained low but repeated finds of gold in every drill hole, but due
to unknown costs of mining offshore in this area, the commercial significance
is uncertain.

4. Development of water resources is a major activity of the Geological
Survey. It investigates offshore fresh water sources and interaction of fresh
and salt water in estuaries. Particular attention has been given to the Atlan-
tic Continental Shelf, off Florida, where fresh water was identified in off-
shore drill holes. Although desalting technology has not been included within
the scope of the marine science program, the oceans are an increasingly at-
tractive source of fresh water in some coastal areas. Also, corrosion-reduction
technologies developed for desalting programs have broad applications to
marine engineering.

Resource Management

The Federal program for exploration, leasing, and development of oil, gas,
sulfur, and other minerals of the submerged lands of the Outer Continental
Shelf was first authorized by the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act of
August 7, 1953. The Act authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to approve
geological and geophysical explorations in the OCS and to grant oil and gas
and other mineral leases for further exploration and development of these
deposits. Regulation of leasing is administered by the Bureau of Land Man-
agement, and the supervision of drilling and production is a function of the
Geological Survey.

The Bureau of Land Management prepares leasing maps, recommends
lease sales, holds lease sales, issues leases, and approves assignments of lease
interests. The Bureau also issues rights-of-way for pipelines and other needed
facilities and furnishes technical information for securing final determi-
nations of boundaries between Federal and State jurisdictions. The Bureau's
leases contain standard provisions for conservation practices and for pro-
tection of aquatic and environmental resources, and any special stipu-

56

Non-Living Resources

lations that may be necessary for particular situations in consideration
of all resource values.

The possible need for improved licensing procedures for minerals other
than oil, gas, and sulfur which will protect the heavy exploratory invest-
ments required to delineate such minerals is under consideration. This
project, together \vith increased emphasis on evaluation of OCS resources to
guide the timing and extent of oflferings of tracts for lease bids, will be under-
taken by an expanded analytical staff in the Bureau of Land Management.

The Geological Survey's program related to leasing policies includes con-
sideration of : ( 1 ) the conservation of mineral resources, ( 2 ) the protection
of aquatic life and other natural resources of the marine environment, (3)
the safety of life and property, and (4) the protection of the public interest
by adequate royalty accounting to insure against potential losses in rental
and royalty revenues.

The Bureau of Land Management, Geological Survey, and Bureau of
Commercial Fisheries recently entered into a Memorandum of Agreement
outlining procedures to insure that mineral exploration and development
under Department of Interior licenses or permits will be compatible with
preservation of marine living resources.

Possible coastal pollution from off-shore industrial activity and safety of
these operations are discussed in chapters V and XIII.

Future Development of the Continental Shelf

Despite severe shortages of particular mineral commodities from time to
time, supply has historically kept pace with demand. Except for short-term
fluctuations, the price of mineral commodities relative to the general price
level has not changed. This significant achievement is the result of industrial
enterprise and continued advances in the techniques of mineral exploration,
production, processing, and utilization.

On land, the lead time from inception of exploration through discovery
and development to the beginning of commercial production averages about
15 years. This assumes the existence of regional geological knowledge which
generally is lacking offshore. To assist in evaluation of marine mineral re-
sources, the Marine Sciences Council sponsored a contract study of the eco-
nomic potential of material resources of the U.S. Continental Shelf and
Slope. The report is scheduled for completion in early 1968. On the basis of
existing data about markets and extraction practices, it was found that at
least two decades — perhaps more, depending on the rate of exploration and
the development of off-shore technology — probably will elapse before the
United States can expect significant production of materials other than oil,
gas, and sulfur from the Continental Shelf.

57

Marine Science Affairs

As to oil and gas, there is almost universal agreement that exploration
and production offshore will continue to increase to the extent that, by the
year 2000, perhaps 25 percent of the world-wide demand will be met by
marine sources.

Further, it has been predicted that, over the course of the next 10 years,
the oil industry will invest more than $25 billion in off-shore exploration,
in 100 different countries. If to this were added the expenditures for off-
shore leases and production facilities, annual outlays could well double.
This compares with an annual investment now of some $1 billion, on the
shelves of all continents. Another $1 billion is invested in off-shore drilling
equipment at work around the world. Just 11 years ago the count of off-
shore mobile rigs was only 25; last year it had reached 150. We can look
forward to comparable growth in the rig fleet in the years ahead.

These projections emphasize the importance of prompt reconnaissance
surveys of the Shelf — as a guide to both resource development and to policy
formulation. Knowing what is there is a necessary prerequisite to other
decisions, public and private, national and international. The Marine
Sciences Council has to this end identified as an important next step the
completion of geological, geophysical, and bathymetric mapping of the
Continental Shelves of the United States at reconnaissance scale.

During FY 1969, resource appraisal activities of the Geological Survey
are budgeted at $2.4 million. Bathymetric mapping and other studies of
ESS A, which contribute to resource mapping, are budgeted at nearly $13.6
million, and substantial contributions will be made by the Navy. The pro-
gram also will include participation by universities, research institutions,
and industry as well as the Federal Government. The activity has four
major aspects:

— production of bathymetric maps of selected areas on a scale of

1:250,000 as a basis for all engineering activity on the Shelf;
— completion of geological and geophysical reconnaissance of the
Shelf and Slopes, analysis, and publication of technical studies;
— delineation of the seaward extension of state and national bound-
aries;
— reduction of time and cost of Shelf surveys through new technology,
including automation.
Other marine science needs for eventual development of mineral re-
sources from the marine environment include:

— studies on physical, chemical, and biological oceanography of the

water-seafloor system of sedimentation;
— engineering studies of off-shore mining systems;

— chemical understanding of the form of ores recovered from the
marine environment and chemical and mechanical engineering
of beneficiation processes.

58

Non-Living Resources

Increased emphasis is being placed by Bureau of Mines on analyses
of the demand for and supply of individual minerals and the techno-
economics of production from different sources. The experience and judg-
ment of the petroleum and mining industries are being utilized through
consultations with policy and technical representatives.

The discussion of non-living resources has concentrated almost exclusively
on their extraction from the Continental Shelf in relatively shallow water.
How about the deep sea? Any off-shore development, as an extension of
land-based activities, depends critically on relative costs. Marine sources
will be exploited when the costs are comparable to those on land. Thus,
the richness and distribution of the resources and the costs of technology
for their exploration and extraction will pace such development. Geological
information about the deep ocean seabed is relatively sparse and, in general,
the industrial cost for operations in deep water is high. It seems likely,
therefore, that the seaward extension of marine mineral development will
be a gradual movement from shallow coastal waters to deep waters.
Industry might be quickly attracted to the deep sea, however, if rich
deposits of a mineral in high demand such as nickel and copper are dis-
covered in the deep sea, or if there are technological breakthroughs.

Coupled to the economic considerations is the importance of a legal
framework to encourage large capital investments for which returns may be
long deferred. The promise of return from the deep seabed will thus
depend significantly on identification and assessment of seabed resources,
ready availability of technology from all possible sources including the
military, and a stable international code of law.

Many of these objectives can be achieved only by cooperative activities
with other nations, as discussed earlier.

59

"What is the use of a house if you haven't got a tolerable planet to put

it on?" HENRY DAVID THOREAU

Chapter V

ENHANCING BENEFITS
FROM THE COASTAL ZONE

The marine environment is usually thought of in terms of the visible
sweep of vast ocean, of large gulfs, and of broad bays. The part of that
environment which is most accessible, and which man uses most intensively,
is the Coastal Zone^ — the margin where land and water meet and interact.

The Zone includes a broad variety of physical features — ^estuaries, lagoons,
wetlands, shoreline beaches of varying widths, cliffs, peninsulas, bays, coastal
islands, and off-shore waters on the edges of the seas. The Coastal Zone is
also characterized by dynamic interaction of wind, tides, currents, waves,
storms — and land; and it supports a rich variety of flora and fauna. The
great natural beauty of the shore holds fascination for everyone. Yet this
Coastal Zone has values for man other than curiosity and pleasure.

Thirty states, with more than 75 percent of the Nation's population, are
on the coasts of the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans, the Gulf of Mexico, or the
Great Lakes. More than 45 per cent of our urban population lives
directly along the coast, and nine of the 16 largest metropolitan areas are
in the Coastal Zone. This population continues to grow and to concentrate —
along the East, West, and Gulf Coasts, and the Great Lakes. All of the mega-
lopoli now projected for the year 2000 are in the Coastal Zone.

Shipbuilding, maritime commerce, and the fishing industry could have
developed only in the Coastal Zone. The seaward thrust for off-shore oil,
gas, and minerals, and our naval strength must be based there. Many

61

Marine Science Affairs

industries have found it advantageous to locate there because of proximity
to ocean transport, labor and product markets.

With a burgeoning population that increasingly finds time and money for
water-related recreation, the American people have increasingly sought the
aesthetic benefits of the Coastal Zone — its temperate climate and oppor-
tunities for swimming, sport fishing, and boating. Tens of millions live
or vacation at coastal resorts, retirement homes, and beach cottages. Millions
regularly head for beaches on weekends. Many others find business oppor-
tunities there.

Rational Uses of the Coastal Zone

Thus we seek to use the Coastal Zone m its natural form far more inten-
sively. We also seek to modify it to suit our purposes ever more effectively.
As municipalities look increasingly seaward for new habitable areas, or
perhaps ofi'shore airports, careful planning of urban and ocean activities
becomes essential.

Development of filled-in marshland along estuaries may affect nursery
grounds of commercial fish species. Those who dredge and fill along the
coasts, or develop harbors, must anticipate changes in shoreline circulation
patterns. Sanitation problems associated with ducks, gulls, and other marine
birds near populated areas become important. Waste disposal must be
related to the assimilation limits of nearby waters.

This area of inshore waters is ecologically fragile and complex in its natural
state. It is nevertheless subject to ever more intense pressures for varied
uses which may both conflict among themselves and degrade the natural
environment.

The scope, diversity, and significance of problems that arise in the Coastal
Zone are so broad that practically all institutions of our society have become
involved in its management — private individuals who own shoreland, indus-
trial interests, local and State Governments, and the Federal Government.

Only rarely have lands and waters of the Coastal Zone been subjected
to planned and controlled development. Further, the planning which has
been done has not always resulted in effective allocation of resource uses
among competitors. As a consequence, the trend in some places has been
toward single-purpose uses, determined by immediate economic advantages
to individuals, firms, and local governments. Industrial development; trans-
portation and commerce; oil, gas, and mineral production; private water-

62

The Coastal Zone

front housing; public recreation; and nature preservation; among others,
have all pre-empted Coastal Zone areas without consideration either of
harmonious relationships between users or optimum use of a scarce resource
itself.

In the early stages of a shoreline's development, single actions may have
relatively little impact. But in time, the resource base for certain uses is
dissipated. Unplanned expansion of private ownership and development
has reduced public access to beaches. The physical destruction of estuarine
habitats by dredging and filling have decreased a region's fishing potential;
and the pollution of estuarine and coastal waters by cities and industries has
begun to destroy much of their usefulness for water supply, fish and wild-
life, and recreation.

What we seek are opportunities for multiple, compatible uses of the in-
shore waters and for maintaining options for future uses not foreclosed by
degradation of the resource — first, by identifying alternative uses and
multiple compatible uses, and then by encouraging the development of
efTective mechanisms for rational choices among incompatible uses. Science
and technology become the tools to assist in accomplishing explicit goals,
predicting possible inadvertent adverse effects, reducing construction costs
so as to add to the range of choices, and in evaluating costs and benefits to
facilitate choices.

Because of the diversity of Coastal Zone activities in which the Federal
Government has a responsibility, almost every member and observer agency
of the Marine Sciences Council is directly concerned with the development
of the Coastal Zone. Table V.l summarizes those aspects of the Federal
marine science programs which have been classified in this report as ac-
tivities of the Coastal Zone — coastal engineering, water quality, health,
conservation, and recreation. Many other parts of the program discussed in
other chapters of the report also indirectly relate to Coastal Zone activities.

As shown in Figure V. 1, Federal funding for these purposes amounted to
$21.4 million in FY 1967, and will reach $28.7 million in FY 1968. Appro-
priation requests for FY 1969 are $28.6 million. Conservation and Recrea-
tion is the major cost category and is the one in which the major part of
the FY 1968 increase occurred: $20.2 million in FY 1968 as compared
with $15.4 million in FY 1967, primarily for developing marine areas for
recreation and for conversation of marine locales, gamefish, and wildlife.
Another important increase in Federal responsibility, largely stemming from
new legislation of 1965-66, has been in water quality management. Some of
the most difficult water pollution problems are those in the Coastal Zone —
the Great Lakes, estuaries, and other near-shore waters. For water quality
management in the marine environment, expenditures in FY 1967 were $4.5
million; funding for FY 1968 is estimated at $7.0 million, and the appro-
priations requested for FY 1969 to $8.7 million.

63

Marine Science Affairs

Figure V-1— Federal Outlays for Marine Science
and Technology, Use of the Coastal Zone

Millions of Dollars
30

Conservation and
Recreation

Water
Quality

'67 '68 '69

Coastal
Engineering

NOTE: Activities in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare relating to health and
Marine pollution were budgeted at: FY 1967, $0.9 million; FY 1968, $1.1 million; and
FY 1969, $1.1 million. These amounts ore not included in the above totals; they are
shown in Appendix Table A-1 under major purpose "Health".

64

The Coastal Zone

Coastal Engineering

Erosion is a common and often severe fonn of degradation of the coasts,
caused by the action of tides, currents, and hurricane-induced storm surges.
Vast areas of valuable land have been lost through erosion, and the land
washed away often deposits silt in navigation channels. Erosion may
introduce pollutants into the water, and the material deposited may suffocate
marine life.

Shore stabilization and protection, carried out by the Army Corps of
Engineers, is well established as a Federal function. However, projects are
authorized and carried out one at a time in response to local requests, and
a longer range approach to setting priorities for such public Coastal Zone
works may be needed.

Dredging is essential to waterborne commerce but can damage environ-
mental quality — disturbing the habitat of marine or marsh life. The Corps
of Engineers has long had the authority, under the River and Harbor Act
of 1899, to deny pennits to non-Federal interests for dredging, filling, and
excavation in navigable waters if the results would interfere with naviga-
tion. Recently, this authority has been interpreted to cover all activities
inimical to the public interest. The Secretaries of the Army and the Interior
concluded an agreement in 1967 whereby the Department of the Interior
will be consulted by the Corps of Engineers when issuance of a permit to
dredge or fill in estuaries or other navigable waters is pending. Such co-
ordination permits assessment of fish, wildlife, recreation and pollution
problems associated with the proposed dredging.

The Department of the Interior and the Corps of Engineers also have
an agreement covering the disposal of material dredged from Federal
navigation projects in the Great Lakes area, which is designed to reduce
risks of water pollution damage.

Research and engineering studies focused on the requirements for Corps
of Engineers construction projects are carried on at the Coastal Engineering
Research Center and by contract. Some of the major recent accomplish-
ments include :

— inventory of offshore sand deposits suitable for beach use. Sub-
surface profiling by sonic techniques and coring of the sub-bottom
in 15 to 70 feet of ^vater was completed for selected offshore areas
of Florida, New Jersey and California,
—study of improvement of coastal inlets by dredging. Dredging of a
deposition basin was completed in the throat of Carolina Beach
Inlet, North Carolina; a surveillance program is being carried out
to determine the effects the basin will have on the natural channel
depths over the ocean bar.

65

Marine Science Affairs

— study of sand movement in the littoral zone by use of radioisotopes.
A field trial in California waters was completed using Xenon-133
as a tracer. A detector vehicle with recording system was designed,
fabricated, and field tested.
— prediction of currents parallel to the shore. A study was published
on both available data and prediction of current velocity from
wave and beach characteristics.
In addition, prediction of tides, currents, storms, and storm surges in
relation to coastal engineering, are carried out by ESSA. Related research
on soil mechanics is also being conducted by the Naval Civil Engineering
Laboratory.

Water Quality

Water quality is one of the crucial determinants of the different uses of a
coastal area. Moreover, the higher the pollution, the fewer the choices
between uses: Reducing pollution may increase options. For particular uses,
minimum standards must be maintained. The Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, as amended, calls for the enhancement of the quality and
value of the Nation's water resources and for the prevention, control, and
abatement of pollution. The provisions of the Act apply to the coastal and
interstate waters of estuaries, rivers, and lakes.

The Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, which administers
the Act, conducts technical studies, engages in comprehensive planning,
provides technical services, and participates in enforcement when necessary
(at present in 16 estuaries and the Great Lakes) . Its comprehensive studies
cover the Great Lakes and most coastal areas. The Water Quality Act of
1965 provides for establishment of water quality standards for interstate and
coastal waters. The States have submitted proposed standards to the Secre-
tary of the Interior. Primary responsibility for enforcement of the standards,
which vary with the nature of the area and the use of the water, rests with
the States. If the States fail to act, however, the Federal Government may
bring suit against polluters.

The Clean Water Restoration Act of 1966 provided for grants, which
may be made by the Secretary of the Interior to States, municipalities, or
inter-Gk)vernmental agencies, for assistance in developing projects to demon-
strate advanced methods of waste treatment, and purification and discharge
control. The Act also provided for a comprehensive study of estuaries, in-
cluding (a) the effects of pollution on various uses of these areas of salt
water-fresh water interface, and (b) the effects of population and economic
development on water quality. The study began last year and is being con-

66

The Coastal Zone

ducted on a regional basis by the Secretary of the Interior through the Office
of Estuarine Studies, in cooperation with other agencies. The report to the
Congress, now scheduled for November 1969, will contain analyses and
recommendations relating to estuaries.

The Clean Water Restoration Act called for a study of the nature and
extent of pollution from vessels, including disposal of garbage and sewage in
navigable waters, and methods of control. The report, "Waste from Water-
craft," included numerous recommendations. These are embodied in bills
now before Congress to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act by
setting standards for the discharge of various wastes from watercraft, by
providing for the enforcement of these standards, and for certification of
devices to control waste discharge.

Additional recent accomplishments from marine science activities related
to water quality include the following :

— Interior is investigating and assessing the problems of the disposal
of raw sewage, kludge, and polluted spoil in coastal waters, par-
ticularly those of the Great Lakes and the Northeast. To support
this activity the research vessel Clean Water was purchased
to assay water quality.
— In cooperation with several States under the aegis of the Marine
Fisheries Commission, Interior is compiling an atlas of estuaries,
needed for development and preservation of these areas.

Health

The principal activities of the Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare which relate to health aspects of the water quality of the Coastal
Zone are concerned with insuring the healthfulness of shellfish and other
fish for human consumption, use of the Coastal Zone for recreational
and occupational purposes, and use as a disposal site for solid wastes.
These activities include (a) conducting and supporting research, develop-
ment, field investigations, demonstrations, and pilot operations; (b) provid-
ing financial and other assistance to State and local programs; and (c) man-
power training. Particular emphasis is given to assisting the States in
developing their shellfish sanitation programs.

Marine health science facilities serving the coastal areas are now operating
in Alabama, Rhode Island, and Washington. Additional construction is
underway or planned in the latter two States. These laboratories provide a
multi-disciplinary approach to many of the public health problems associ-
ated with exploitation of the estuaries and with the production of shellfish
and other marine foods from the Continental Shelf. Better understanding of

67

287-921 O — 68-^ 6

Marine Science Affairs

the biological and oceanographic factors influencing the public health qual-
ity of the marine environment should emerge from these programs.

In 1967, the Water Supply and Sea Resources program of the Public
Health Service developed monitoring networks for heavy metals, marine
toxins, and other organic pollutants afTecting shellfish.

Conservation and Recreation

The National Park Service system now includes 20 areas with significant
marine resources — 11 national parks and monuments devoted to resource
protection and nine national seashores and lakeshores for both protection
and recreation. Land acquisition and management is an especially important
tool for reserving Coastal Zone space.

The Federal responsibility for conservation of marine locales, game, fish,
and wildlife is carried out by the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife,
Department of the Interior. This involves technical advisory work with
other Federal agencies and licensees as well as direct programs of preserva-
tion and enhancement of marine areas. Surveys and classifications of estu-
arine areas are underway in Florida and New York to facilitate prompt re-
view of dredging and other permit applications which might affect marine
resources.

The National Wildlife Refuge System includes 42 estuarine refuges, con-
taining 18 million acres devoted to management programs for waterfowl
and other wildlife, and particularly preservation of endangered species.
Approximately 16,567 acres are scheduled for early acquisition for estuarine
refuges under the accelerated Wetlands Acquisition Program.

Reflecting public concern over increasing estuarine damage. Congress is
considering legislation designed to inventory estuaries and their charac-
teristics and to protect some coastal areas by establishing procedures for
Federal and State acquisition or management of selected estuarine areas and
"marine sanctuaries." Also, the Federal agencies have taken administrative
actions designed to protect threatened marine species.

The Bureau of Outdoor Recreation plays a central role in promoting
Federal-State cooperation and coordination in planning the acquisition and
development of both existing and proposed new areas in the Coastal Zone
devoted to public recreational use. A Nationwide Outdoor Recreation Plan
is being prepared by the Bureau for submission to the President and to
Congress in 1968. The Plan will provide a framework for Federal, State, and
local and private outdoor recreation programs, including those directed
to marine recreation.

68

The Coastal Zone

The President has directed the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a sur-
vey through the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation of the recreation potential of
islands ofT the coastline and on inland waterways of the country, and to sug-
gest principles and guidelines for the conservation of these significant re-
sources. This study is scheduled for completion by late 1968.

The Bureau administers the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of
1965. Appropriations from the Fund finance the land acquisition program
of the National Park Service and help finance the land acquisition programs
of the Forest Service and the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. A
portion of the funds allocated to each of these agencies has been used to ac-
quire land for public recreation within the Coastal Zone. All States have
prepared comprehensive Statewide Outdoor Recreation Plans, many of
which include provisions for meeting marine-related recreation needs and the
preservation of significant coastal areas. Based upon these plans, the Bureau
has assisted over 2,000 State and local outdoor recreation projects.

Many of the shallow estuaries and bays of our Coastal Zone are not used
by commercial shipping and, consequently, have never been covered by
hydrographic surveys for nautical charting. The increasing use of these
shallow water areas by recreational boating and the contemplated conserva-
tion activities indicate that these areas should be surveyed and charted.
ESSA has initiated a program of surveys and the publication of small craft
navigational charts especially suitable for the boating public.

The design for the National Fisheries Center and Aquarium, to be lo-
cated in Washington, D.C., was approved in 1967 by the Commission of
Fine Arts and the National Capital Planning Commission. Detailed design
is underway, and construction is expected to begin in Fiscal Year 1969.

Case Studies: Chesapeake Bay and Seattle Harbor

Last year, the Marine Sciences Council considered that the multiple use
problems of bays, estuaries, and the Great Lakes required urgent atten-
tion, especially to identify more cFearly the potential role of science and
technology in assisting in the amelioration of conflicts.

As a first step, the Council supported as a major initiative a case study of
the Chesapeake Bay. Simultaneously, it decided to focus multi-disciplinary
research activities around a laboratory already authorized for the Corps of
Engineers for hydraulic and ecological studies that will employ a three-
dimensional model of the Bay on a horizontal scale of 1 : 1,000. In view of the
large and complex nature of the Bay, the model should aid development of a
mathematical framework to predict effects of various measures on

69

Marine Science Affairs

the Bay, thus amplifying empirical measurements made in the past. Also,
the model will improve and extend understanding of the physical character-
istics of the Bay, the ecology of the environment, and the effects of
man's activities on marine organisms. Of particular interest will be under-
standing of the capacity of the Potomac estuary and subestuaries to absorb
pollutants. Studies using such a model cost relatively little compared to large-
scale field tests.

Two analytical studies were conducted on contract by the Marine Sciences
Council to gain new insights into the implications of Federal policies to
enhance optimal use of the Coastal Zone. Results are currently being re-
viewed and will be made public in 1968. The first study, on the Chesapeake
Bay area, directly complements the FY 1968 initiative adopted by the Coun-
cil. The second study was of the Seattle Harbor area. Each study has cata-
logued the present use and ownership of waterfront property and considered
in some depth financial, legal, and administrative tools available for rational
land use planning. Both studies noted a lack of coordinated land use
planning at any level — among State agencies and between State and local
agencies and the Federal Government — and the need for a data bank con-
cerning the marine environment that affects land use.

The first study also confirmed that because the Chesapeake Bay is used
for such a variety of purposes, it is inevitably beset by conflict. For example,
because of pollution the Maryland State Health Department has closed
some of the oyster beds; public beaches in the Baltimore area must be
closed frequently to bathers, also because of pollution ; the demand increases
for more waterfront land in Baltimore to be devoted to port functions and
conflicts with the great need for waterfront recreation; over 11,000 acres
of Chesapeake wetlands were irreversibly lost during eleven years (1955-
1966), largely due to dredging and filling; and shellfish production has
sharply declined, now only 30 percent what it was fifty years ago.

Some of the conflicts on the Chesapeake have been satisfactorily resolved
by State and local actions, taken in many cases pursuant to Federal legisla-
tion and with Federal sharing of costs. Actions have included adoption of
water quality criteria as required by the Federal Clean Water Restoration
Act; land planning with development of necessary sewage treatment facilities
under the Section 701 program of the Department of Housing and Urban
Development; community financing of public works including sewage col-
lection and treatment plants with grant and loan assistance under various
Federal programs; proposed acqviisition of land on the coastline for public
parks, with partial assistance from the Land and Water Conservation Fund ;
and a pledge by the Maryland Assembly to protect the wetlands.

In addition to these studies, regional economic development studies have
been made by the Office of Regional Economic Development of the Depart-
ment of Commerce pertaining to the Continental Shelf of New England.

70

The Coastal Zone

The same office also has undertaken a study of the interrelationships of
Continental Shelf Resources and regional economic development.

Increased Emphasis

In view of the many benefits and the threats associated with the Coastal
Zone, the Marine Sciences Council again selected the Coastal Zone area for
priority attention during FY 1969. While this multi-agency effort will build
on the initiative of FY 1968 described above, the geographical range of
activities will be broadened beyond consideration of the Chesapeake Bay.

During the past year, the Council established an inter-agency Committee
on the Multiple Uses of the Coastal Zone to consider this category of issues
for the Council. In addition to a continuation and strengthening of the
individual agency programs, increased emphasis will be given to the
following endeavors:

1 . An improved study and planning capability for dealing with problems
of the Coastal Zone on a multi-disciplinary, multi-agency basis will be de-
veloped within the Committee. Information and plans will be exchanged
on:

— environmental data needed for policy decisions concerning the

Coastal Zone;
— establishment of ecological baselines along the coasts;
— requirements for monitoring Coastal Zone phenomena;
— human and ecological factors in establishing quality standards;
— scientific and engineering requirements to abate coastal degradation.
Data available from State activities will be used.

2. A long-term multi-agency plan of research on the Chesapeake Bay will
be formulated, continuing and broadening the FY 1968 initiative. A com-
prehensive research facilities plan will be developed concurrently with the
design of the Corps of Engineers hydraulic model.

3. The need will be examined for programs in partnership with the States
to deal with problems along coastal reaches on the Continental Shelf and
the Great Lakes. A pilot program of study of the research needs related to
the Great Lakes will be undertaken by the Council in collaboration with the
Great Lakes Basin Commission, bordering States, and other inter-govern-
mental authorities considering all uses of the Lakes.

4. Needs for a national estuarine study will be examined to assess the
magnitude of estuarine use problems and remedies.

71

Marine Science Affairs

Federal-State Cooperation

We have noted the uniqueness of marine science affairs of the Coastal
Zone — resulting from intense, varied human uses super-imposed on an
intricate, delicate ecology, and involving an array of governmental entities
to manage the Zone. This severe administrative fragmentation, as well as
the confrontation between different interests, suggests the need for unifying
concepts by which we can deal with these problems.

To isolate local problems and help remedy them, heavy emphasis is antici-
pated on Federal-State collaboration.

Two considerations may serve as guidelines to future collaboration. The
first is that problems vary from one locality to another and involve such
finely detailed relationships that some governmental authority lower than
Federal must be involved. The second is that mechanisms must be sought
to facilitate transfer of study and research to action — both to reduce delay
and insure authenticity of interpretation of studies.

Much can be accomplished in promoting optimal use of the Coastal Zone
by increased emphasis on existing capabilities and on the use of existing
authorities. In some cases, however, new authorities may be needed to attain
the needed emphasis on the Coastal Zone. For example, the River Basin
Commissions ^ will, as part of comprehensive basin planning, consider steps
needed in the estuarine Coastal Zone. However, additional administrative
actions or a Commission similar in make-up to the River Basin Commissions
may be needed to carry out such measures along the coast between estuaries,
and extending out to include related activities on the Continental Shelf.

In order to maximize the benefits from the Coastal Zone, additional ac-
tions need to be examined with the two-fold purpose of developing:

— ^increased public awareness of the nature and importance of the

Coastal Zone ; and
— an integrated program of science, technology, and public administra-
tion to develop more profound understanding of the coastal
regions, to sharpen our awareness of biological interdependence,
and to plan and implement measures and mechanisms for carrying
out a policy which will open new opportunities on the one hand,
and preserve that which is best in the environment on the other.
It is now also apparent that while the Federal involvement in the uses
of the Coastal Zone has been growing, an institutional framework for man-
agement of specific segments of the Coastal Zone as regional entities may be
needed if we are to realize the maximum social benefits from this vital
natural resource.

^ Established by Water Resources Planning Act, PL 89-80.

72

"/ hold to be fundamental that . . . our citizens shall be safe in freely travers-
ing the ocean, that the transportation of our produce, in our own vessels, to
the markets of our own choice, and the return to us of the articles we want
for OUT own uses, shall be unmolested." — thomas jefferson

Chapter VI

FACILITATING TRANSPORT AND TRADE

About 90 percent of United States foreign trade of $56 billion per year
moves by water. Although commercial air transportation between continents
has become significant since World War II, it still represents less than 10
percent of total cargo traffic and its cost (per ton mile) is 40 times that of
ocean shipping.^

The future of the United States in international trade depends on many
factors and on their interactions, some subject to influence by Federal policy
and program decisions.

As the nations of the world become industrialized, the near-monopMDly of
the United States in the world market for many manufactured products is
disappearing. At the same time, the world market for both goods and services
\vill expand as increasing industrial production creates new mass purchasing
power. The net consequence for this Nation could be growing opportunities
in foreign trade if American enterprise identifies and capitalizes on com-
parative advantages.

Some predictions of the total foreign trade picture are optimistic, reflect-
ing the possibility of a doubling of trade every 20 years.- Assuming that

^ The cost per ton-mile of comparable cargo (i.e., general cargo in break bulk
shipping) is 18-19^ for air transport and about ^2 0 for sea transport.

■* U.S. Department of Commerce, Maritime Administration projections, based on
the assumption that foreign trade bears a fixed percentage relationship to the Gross
National Product show about 1 200 million long tons in the year 2000 as against about
300 in 1963.

73

Marine Science Affairs

the trend continues, and that the share of water carriers in U.S. trade
continues, the absolute volume of cargo tonnage arriving and departing
from United States ports could increase several-fold during the balance of
the century.

Such future potential must be considered however, in the light of three
present realities: U.S. foreign trade is increasing; ^ the ratio of exports to
imports has recently decreased ; * and the p>ortion of our foreign trade carried
by United States flag vessels is decreasing rapidly/'

How fast this increase in trade will occur and how much of it will travel
in United States vessels, will depend considerably upon the policy of the
Federal Government with respect to ocean transportation. Such policies will
certainly recognize that foreign trade has an important impact on the na-
tional economy and that the cost of shipping is a significant factor in market
competition. Transportation of foreign trade cargoes by U.S. flag carriers
contributes to establishing and maintaining a more substantial "maritime
presence." This latter consideration is intangible and difficult to evaluate.
Moreover, the national defense role of our ports and our merchant marine
is significant and undergoes continuing critical review in relation to chang-
ing strategic concepts. New concepts and configurations, with particular
reference to perfonnance characteristics of rapid loading and discharge and
vessel speed underway, have military reserve utility added to their worth for
commercial service.

On economic grounds, international trade is increasingly competitive.
Both suppliers (shippers) and markets (consignees) are ever more alert
to opportunities for cost-savings, time-savings, and service advantages which
may yield indirect savings or product preference.

Marine science and technology can and should help in realizing all of
these opportunities, particularly in achieving greater flexibility and adapta-
bility in the transport system as a whole and ultimately in enhancing the
competitive position of the United States in world trade. Trends toward
specialized ocean transportation services are based on economies which
depend heavily on technological innovation. Understanding the system and
orienting marine science activities toward system improvements will become
increasingly important.

^ Total water-borne U.S. foreign cargo trade almost trebled between 1950 and
1966 ; Source : Statistical Abstract of the United States.

* Ratio of exports to imports (in tonnage terms) decreased from 1.55 to 1.42 be-
tween 1950 and 1966; Source, ibid.

^ The percentage of total U.S. water-born foreign cargo trade carried by U.S. flag
vessels decreased from 39.3 to 7.3 percent between 1950 and 1966; Source: ibid.

74

Transport and Trade

The Ocean Transportation System

To determine where research and development may have greatest payoff,
it is helpful to consider United States foreign trade cargo movement as a sys-
tem of components including physical facilities, manpower, energy, institu-
tional arrangements and policy.

The complete transport system includes five links, of which the three mid-
dle ones make up the ocean transport system :

— U.S. land carriers — and domestic water carriers — serving U.S. ports;
— U.S. ports with their cargo-handling equipment, storage facilities,

piers, and channels;
— the ocean carriers, U.S. and foreign flag, is scheduled "liner" services

and in specialized and "tramp" services;
— the foreign ports ;

— connecting transportation networks abroad.
The characteristics of the components making up the ocean transportation
system are substantially influenced by a number of supporting activities,
including :

— shipbuilding;

— weather and mapping services;
— navigational aids and nautical charting;
— channel dredging;
— -search and rescue ;
— foreign freight forwarding ;
— flow and control of cargo containers.
The ocean transportation system, as it serves U.S. foreign trade, is affected
by a number of institutional controls or other influences, including notably:
— Federal Maritime Commission regulations;
— labor agreements and practices ;
— customs regulations and operations ;

— rate tariffs and rules of conferences (carrier associations) ;
— rules of the road and other navigational controls;
— other safety-at-sea provisions;
— pollution abatement regulations ;
The ocean transport system, its technical components, and their operation
and control are linked and influenced by a framework of such Federal
actions as :

- — subsidies to support construction in U.S. shipyards of vessels for
operation under U.S. flag on essential foreign trade routes, in-
tended to make the capital cost of vessels to the U.S. operators
roughly equal to those of foreign flag carriers building abroad;
— subsidies to U.S. flag carriers contracting to operate on sp>ecified
foreign trade routes, intended to equalize certain major operating

75

Marine Science Affairs

costs as compared with foreign flag carriers crewing with foreign
nationals, who are free to buy subsistence and suppHes, mainte-
nance and repairs, and insurance at best advantage in the world-
wide markets;
— federal channel and harbor development;

— cargo preference provisions reserving to U.S. carriers all domestic

water traffic (cabotage) and certain foreign traffic in which the

Federal Government has direct interest;

— research and development in transportation systems and equipment.

The performance of the system can be evaluated by its costs and products.

Costs include expenses of manpower, motive power, capital plant, loss and

damage to cargo, loss and damage to vessels, life and other property, and

public expenditures associated with ocean transport. Products relate to loads

carried, distances traversed, time elapsed, and rates charged.

System Performance: National Significance

The cost incurred by actual movements of cargo is the most significant
yardstick of performance. The cost of transportation for a shipment of
$30,000 of medical supplies from Chicago, Illinois, to Nancy, France, was
analyzed by the Maritime Administration as an illustration of relative op-
portunities for savings by stages in the overseas shipment. The breakdown of
the $2,386 transport cost by stages was :

U.S. domestic 14%

U.S. port 36%

Ocean shipping 25%

European port 18%

European domestic 7%

Thus, about 60% of the total delivery cost accrues in the U.S. port and
ocean shipping stages.

Principal opportunities for cost reduction in the U.S. maritime transporta-
tion system through the application of marine science and technology appear
to be:

Ocean Shipping

• Reduction in capital costs of ships

• Reduction in operating costs

• Reduction in maritime accidents of all kinds (including oil spillage)

• Increased speed of ships

• Improvements in aids to navigation

• Improvements in navigational charting

76

Transport and Trade

United States Ports

• Reduction in costs of channel dredging and maintenance

• Reduction in costs of cargo handling

• Increased speed of cargo handling

• Reduction in pilferage

• Reduction in space requirements for terminal facilities

To the extent these opportunities may be realized, the resulting benefits
are:

— improved service to shippers (frequency, speed, convenience of

routing) ;
— increased contribution to commerce by inducements to traffic that

would not otherwise occur;
— ^increased U.S. maritime presence and reduction in the U.S. balance
of payments deficit by larger U.S. flag participation in our foreign
trade ;
— better articulation of port functions with other urban activities re-
sulting in improved economic effectiveness in the use of port space
and in enhanced habitability around the port areas.
In addition to potential contributions to the merchant marine, research
and development for improved ship design may contribute to domestic fash-
ing, development of non-living resources, and ocean exploration. A very large
proportion of the cost for scientific expeditions and military or commercial
ventures at sea goes for vessel construction and operations so that any
advances in merchant vessel economy and performance pay multiple
dividends.

The technological characteristics of maritime transport are changing,
and they interact with the institutional framework in such matters, for ex-
ample, as ship automation. Research and development directed toward
the above opportunities should increase the range of options open, define
trade-oflfs with respect to both dollar and social costs, and assist in the most
appropriate ordering of decisions.

As noted above, port terminals are a critical element of the system. Thus,
consideration of maritime commerce encompasses the other needs for water-
front property occupied by ports (usually in the heart of large cities) and
maritime development related to urban development and renewal.

Federal Activities in Maritime Transportation Development

The Federal Government provides essential research, planning and safety
services and support systems to facilitate private maritime transportation.
To put these activities in perspective, some $40 billion in water-borne U.S.
foreign trade is supported by a group of Federal activities costing about

77

Marine Science Affairs

$800 million annually.*^ Less than two percent of that amount is directly
expended on Federal research and development activities as discussed in
this chapter to improve and support the transport system."

Agencies with principal responsibilities in maritime transportation re-
search and development are the Department of Transportation, the Mari-
time Administration (Department of Commerce), Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration (Department of Interior) , and the Army Corps of
Engineers. Their science and technology activities encompass in general :
— system-wide research and planning (Office of the Secretary of

Transportation) ;
— navigational aids and other safety measures (Coast Guard) ;
— technology for shipbuilding, vessel design and operations, and cargo

handling (Maritime Administration) ;
— research and technical development on control and cleanup of pollu-
tion from oil and other hazardous cargoes (Coast Guard and
FWPCA) ;
— research and engineering in support of channel and harbor develop-
ment (Army Corps of Engineers) .
Federal marine science expenditures in the ocean transportation area for
FY 1969 are budgeted at $15.4 million. Funding data by general categories
are presented in Figure VI. 1, and details by specific categories are given in
Table A.l of Appendix A under Transportation, and in selected line items
under Development and Conservation of the Coastal Zone in the same table.

Planning and Research

The Department of Transportation has basic planning and research re-
sponsibilities with respect to the total domestic and international transporta-
ion systems. The larger-scale inter-modal and multi-modal issues of policy,
facilitation, and systems analysis are evaluated in the Office of the Secretary.
Sub-systems and services, particularly those concerned with a single mode
of transportation, are planned, designed, and operated by major branches
within the Department. By such planning, sea transport is considered within
the broad framework of a transportation system that includes truck, plane,
rail, pipeline, and other modes.

' Including (FY 1967) : $327 million for Maritime Administration; $177 million for
channel and harbor development; $240 million for Customs Bureau; selected activi-
ties of the Coast Guard ; and other miscellaneous Federal support to shipping.

^ Not included is an appropriate allocation of Navy research and development ex-
penditures as applied to ship design (not included in the marine science program)
and related nautical charting and safety activities of Navy and ESSA mentioned
elsewhere.

78

Transport and Trade

Figure VI-1— Federal Marine Science
Funding for Ocean Transportation

Millions of Dollars
18

FY

'67 '68 '69
Total

'67 '68 '69

Research Plan-
ning; Navigation
Aids: Other Safety'

'67 '68 '69

Vessel & Port
Technology'

'67 '68 '69

Pollution
Control'

'67 '68 '69

Channel & Har-
bor Development
Research ^

' Limited to R&D and scientific services; excludes funding for capital
works or maritime subsidies, operations end routine services.
Pollution control item here does not include funds of the
Department of the Interior (FWPCA) for pollution control. These
funds ore included as o port of "Water Quality Enhancement "
under Development and Conservation of the Coastal Zone in
Appendix A financial tables. These omount to $1.8 million in FY
1969, an estimated $1.1 million in FY 1968, and 0 in FY 1967.

'- Limited to R&D, feasibility studies, and Great Lakes doto
collection ond analysis; excludes funding for expenditures on
design, construction, or operation and mointenonce octivities.

79

Marine Science Affairs

Navigation and Safety Aids

The Coast Guard has primary responsibility for safety of shipping — a
requisite to efficient and effective operation of the total maritime transport
system. The safety problem is underscored by the fact that in 1966, United
States registered vessels operating throughout the world and foreign vessels
operating in United States waters suffered more than 2400 collisions and
other serious casualties.

Accurate all-weather navigation is necessary for shipping to avoid colli-
sions with rocks, other vessels, and fixed structures, and is also a prerequisite
to rational ship routing to avoid adverse weather and operate most economi-
cally. New technology is making a major contribution to this function (see
Figure VI.2).

Long-Range Navigation (LORAN-A and C) stations, by which a ship
may determine its position in the open sea more accurately than before, now
service the major shipping lanes. As a result of recent Navy declassification
and reductions in costs of commercial receivers, the TRANSIT satellite navi-
gation system (with a precision of about one-tenth of a mile) holds further
promise for ocean safety. This position-fixing equipment is independent of
the vagaries of electrical atmospheric or cloud interference.

The Coast Guard is also modernizing and automating navigation aids
such as lighthouses through the use of remote telemetry systems.

>>

COAST GUARD

*^W£. ss-v

Figure VI.2. The mainstays of the Coast Guard, its patrol ships, illustrate operational
innovations in maritime science and technology. The U.S.C.G. HAMILTON,
for example, employs two turbine engines which enable it to attain speeds in excess
of 20 knots. {U.S. Coast Guard photograph.)

80

Transport and Trade

Meteorological satellites that provide weather information for ship routing
may before long permit the sensing and direct transmission of data on
weather fronts.*

The safety of small craft at sea is jeopardized by drift, as the tides, cur-
rents, and winds combine to move vessels in unintended directions. Informa-
tion developed by the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, the Navy, and other
Federal and non-Federal agencies, has been used by the Coast Guard in pre-
paring drift tables, which are being continually refined as further experi-
ments are conducted.

Another important safety measure is the establishment of sea lanes de-
signed like divided highways to reduce the incidence of collision in areas of
heavy traffic. The Federal Government, assisted by the maritime industry,
has established such lanes at the approaches to New York Harbor and Dela-
ware Bay and has approved sea lanes for the approaches to San Francisco
Bay. Studies are in progress for the Chesapeake Bay area and are proposed
for Cook Inlet, Alaska. An analogous action in the Gulf of Mexico — under-
taken by the Corps of Engineers, ESSA, and Coast Guard in cooperation
with the shipping industry and the offshore mineral industry' — has led to
establishment and charting of "fairways" leading to the principal ports of the
Gulf in which the erection of structures is not permitted.

The Coast Guard now has programs in 55 ports for control of movement
of vessels within navigable waters, ranging from requiring notice of arrival
to escorting vessels which pose high hazards (for example, those transporting
explosives).

Technology for Maritime Cost Reduction

Based on the analysis of the shipping system outlined earlier, current pro-
grams for the application of new vessel and cargo handling technology are
focused on two general problems: first, improvements of the port-ship sys-
tem will result in greater efficiency of cargo handling operations, provide the
opportunity for reduced port facility space requirements, and make possible
shorter turn-around times; second, improvements in ship design will pro-

^ Five agencies are cooperating in developing design specifications for a naviga-
tional and traffic control satellite system with the principal goal of relatively simple,
low cost aircraft and shipboard transp>onder installations. The agencies are the Na-
tional Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Departments of Commerce,
Defense, Transportation and Interior. NASA will be conducting engineering tests of
two separate satellite position location experiments in 1968, i.e., the Interrogation,
Recording, and Location System (IRLS) on Nimbus B. and the Omega Position
Location Experiment (OPLE) on the ATS satellite. The latter system operates in
conjunction with the Navy's OMEGA stations.

81

Marine Science Affairs

duce greater efficiency and effectiveness in ship operation, and perhaps
lower capital costs for ocean-going ships.

To these ends, the Maritime Administration has prepared three pre-
liminary model simulations for evaluating ocean transport vehicles, studying
the optimization of barge-feeder systems, and analyzing the financing of ships
and shipping. Research directed to construction of sophisticated models for
analyzing shipping demands and competing supply systems is planned.

The development and use of containerization is perhaps the single most
important trend in international transport — affecting interchanges between
transport modes and efficiency of carriage by each mode. By using container
vessels, shipping lines can significantly reduce the number of port calls and
time spent in port. A single automated tenninal occupying a small space
can take the place of large facilities which use substantial amounts of valu-
able waterfront land, if rapid transfer to carriers or to in-transit storage
away from the waterfront can be provided. Most U.S. ports are not yet
adapted to serve container traffic efficiently, as is the port shown in Figure
VI.3.

Research and development on containerization has been proceeding for
some time, through both private and Government efforts. The results have
proved sufficiently promising to bring into service 40 United States flag con-
tainer ships to date. Moreover, about 100 container ships are now under con-
struction or on order, world-wide. These developments have occurred in
spite of the fact that the full potential benefits of containerization have not
yet been achieved.

Figure VI.3. First of the 30 leading U.S. ports to be highly automated to handle
container traffic efficiently was Port Elizabeth, New Jersey. Most authorities call
the development and use of containerization the single most important trend in
international transport. {Photo courtesy of Traffic Service Corporation.)

82

Transport and Trade

Research and development on experimental advanced craft has led to the
development and testing of both hydrofoils and surface effects ships (SES) .
The experience over the last 15 years indicates a limited range of missions,
such as fast patrol boats, for which hydrofoils are suitable. Hydrofoils and
SES craft are being used in some situations in regular commercial service
in Europe, but economically feasible applications of either of these advanced
vehicles have not yet been clearly identified and demonstrated in the United
States on any substantial scale.

Studies of shipboard operations at sea have focused on ship control, ship
maintenance, and ship propulsion. The ship control study considers various
engineering and human factors in all ship movements. The possibility of
manpower reductions — from the standpoint of operating effectiveness — of
the order of 50 percent has been demonstrated, based on the technical
feasibility of automated aids to engine room controls. Cost reduction in ship
maintenance is being approached through improved and simplified designs
of components. Reductions in fuel costs are being sought through improve-
ments in hull forms (such as the bulbous bow) , propeller designs, and power
plant efficiency. Other technical developments include computer programs
to introduce detailed consideration of ship motions into feasibility studies
and preliminary designs, leading to construction of ships that can sustain
higher speeds in rough seas; and a control-and-design manual to permit
better consideration of ship maneuverability in design, a factor which is
increasingly important as merchant ships grow larger.

The N. S. Savannah has demonstrated the technical feasibility of nu-
clear powered merchant vessels, including operating reliability, over-all oper-
ational capability, and versatility. The Savannah continues in operation,
by charter to a commercial ojjerator, demonstrating operating characteristics
in scheduled commercial service. The Maritime Administration has under-
taken additional studies of high-speed, nuclear-powered merchant ships,
taking into account future nuclear core developments, potential cost of
nuclear refueling, and characteristics of particular applications — such as a
long distance service by a high-speed containership.

Oil Pollution Control

The transport of large quantities of oil by ship has long posed substantial
potential dangers. Legislation on oil pollution has existed in the United
States for several years, and the problem has been under careful technical
surveillance by the Federal Government. Widespread recognition of the
severity of damage that could result from oil spills came only after the tanker
ToRREY Canyon went aground off the United Kingdom in March, 1967. The

83

287-921 O — 68 7

Marine Science Affairs

disaster prompted widespread discussion and stimulated international atten-
tion to:

— the desirability of positive traffic control, especially near shore, of

tankers and ships with hazardous cargoes;
— stricter enforcement of restrictions against routine dumping of bilge-
water after cleaning tanks ;
— cooperative measures to contain or control accidental spills and those
resulting from dumping.

At the direction of the President, during mid- 1967, the Secretaries of the
Interior and Transportation conducted a study of oil pollution and its
effects, present capabilities for preventing spills and controlling or correcting
damage, and steps that might be taken to avoid the consequences of oil
pollution. As an adjunct to the Presidential study, the Coast Guard inspected
four tanker hulls, sunk on the U.S. Continental Shelf during World War II,
for the possible existence of residual oil.

The Coast Guard, Army Corps of Engineers, and Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Administration jointly sponsored a state-of-the-art review on
prevention of oil pollution and mitigation of its effects. Areas for further
research and development were identified. The National Academy of Sci-
ences, under a Coast Guard sponsored study, developed a comprehensive
hazard evaluation system for bulk cargoes, which was used by a joint
industry-Coast Guard task group in drafting new regulations for barge
transportation of bulk liquids and liquified gases.

The Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organization (IMCO)
has held several recent meetings to discuss problems connected with trans]X)rt
of large quantities of oil, and in particular the reduction of hazards posed
by the vessels. Safety of navigation, oil pollution, design of ships carrying
noxious cargoes, and legal aspects have been considered. Amendments to
the International Convention on Prevention of Pollution of the Seas by Oil
and the Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea will be considered at
IMCO meetings in the fall "of 1968.

Channel and Harbor Research

The Corps of Engineers has primary responsibility for construction, main-
tenance, and protection of channels and harbors, and supports relevant re-
search in such areas as water movement, shoaling, stability of breakwaters
and jetties, silting of ship channels, harbor surges, wave causes and charac-
teristics of ocean surface waves, wave refraction, propagation and effects of
seismic waves, and acquisition of basic data on waves and currents and sedi-
ment movement.^

° There are now 500 commercial harbors with depths up to 45 feet, approximately
250 small-craft harbors, and 23,000 miles of inland and intra-coastal waterways.

84

Transport and Trade

The Corps has 56 coastal channel and harbor improvement projects
currently underway, for which the total Federal costs are estimated to be
$870 million." Congress has authorized (but not funded) another 70 proj-
ects/^ to cost an estimated $780 million.

Even with these planned improvements, however, many existing chan-
nels will not be adequate to accommodate the deeper-draft tankers and dry
bulk vessels now operating. These newer vessels and further technological
advances that can be expected will necessitate new or improved channel
and harbor facilities. In some cases these can be effected by deeper dredging
of existing channels. In others, however, dredging to greater depths is im-
practical. For example, substantial costs are associated with cutting through
rock at fairly shallow depths. Also, dredging can result in salt-water intrusion
or damage to fish and wildlife. The need for such dredging may be reduced
by selective development of ports on a regional system basis, or by construc-
tion of ofF-shore terminal facilities.

New Initiatives

In view of the importance of maritime activities to the economy and to
international leadership in marine science and technology, the Marine Sci-
ences Council selected three areas for priority attention during FY 1969
and made specific recommendations concerning:

— development of a national plan for navigation ;

— programs for preventing and ameliorating the effects of accidents

involving oil and other hazardous substances;

— planning for a broad approach to port development and

redevelopment.

1. Navigational Aids and Other Supporting Research. A national plan

for navigation is being developed by the Department of Transportation

(Coast Guard and Federal Aviation Agency). The plan will consider the

development and operation of aids to navigation to serve the current and

future needs of aviation and maritime commerce. Navigation satellites and

advanced ground-based systems will be considered. The plan will identify

areas of Federal responsibility for navigation services, and the technology —

current and projected — to carry out these responsibilities. It will then specify

^" Major individual projects are in New York Harbor, the Delaware River, the
Mississippi River at the Gulf outlet, the Sacramento River, and connecting channels
in the Great Lakes.

" Total includes several non-coastal projects on navigable rivers.

85

Marine Science Affairs

the systems to be operated by the Federal agencies, and indicate needed
research and development efforts to meet future navigation service require-
ments. Charting needs will also be considered.

2. Research and Action for Pollution Avoidance and Abatement. The
joint study of the Departments of Transportation and Interior on
oil pollution has outlined a national program to deal with the hazards of oil
spills from ocean-going transportation. The study recommendations encom-
pass policies, procedures, and programs intended to prevent disasters from
hazardous cargoes and to mitigate the damage ensuing if a disaster occurs.
Major regulatory proposals of the Joint Report include responsibility
on the discharger for cleanup of spilled oil and other hazardous cargoes,
and authority for the Federal Government to clean up if dischargers fail to do
so, and to secure reimbursement of costs from dischargers.

The Joint Report also recommends U.S. efforts for strengthening interna-
tional conventions and commitments: establishment and use of sea lanes;
controls on discharges into United States-Canada boundary waters; and fea-
sibility studies of shore guidance systems for ships carrying hazardous cargoes
into harbor areas.

The planning, regulation, international negotiation, and enforcement
actions needed to deal effectively with oil pollution from ocean transporta-
tion are based very substantially on science and technology.

Fundamental scientific questions requiring attention concern oil-water

mixing, ways of absorbing oil, the microbiology of degrading oils, harmful

effects on marine and shore life, and effective methods of cleaning beaches.

Applied research and development topics identified by the Joint Report

as requiring attention include:

— techniques for improved containment control, treatment of spills,

and recovery of pollutants;
— techniques for delivery of equipment to handle spills;
— techniques for protection and rescue of flora and fauna ;
— detection, surveillancfe, and dispersal prediction techniques;
— oil-water separation;
— vessel design and construction principles ;

— devices and equipment for shore protection and cleanup and for
disposal of spill^materials collected.
The proposed research and development represents a long-term program.
Lead times for some essential lines of inquiry extend to several years, which
places special urgency on an early beginning.

Budget requests of the Departments of Transportation and Interior in
FY 1969 of about $3.3 million ^^ will permit initiating such projects.

"This is the sum of $1.5 milHon for the Department of Transportation and $1.8
million for the Department of the Interior. The latter amount is included as a part of
"Water Quality Enhancement" under Development and Conservation of the Coastal
Zone in Appendix A financial tables.

86

Transport and Trade

3. Harbor and Port Development. A multi-agency research effort has
been initiated to study requirements of a national system of ports with par-
ticular attention to regional aspects. As a first step, preliminary planning
and establishment of multi-agency working arrangements are being empha-
sized during FY 1968, and initial fact-finding is to be conducted in FY 1969
at a $100,000 level of effort by the Corps of Engineers. It should also yield
requirements for engineering development which will contribute to port
efficiency in the short run, as well as to the design of ports for the future. The
The Department of Transportation and the Corps of Engineers have primary
concern in this research program in its broadest aspects. The Maritime Ad-
ministration will contribute technical engineering knowledge in cargo han-
dling, shipping requirements, and related areas. Other Departments will
participate in projecting shipping loads. The Department of Housing and
Urban Development \v'ill consider relations betwen port development and
urban expansion and redevelopment.

This multi-agency effort will include a study of port needs and the costs
and impact of the kind of improvements that modern shipping technology
indicates as potentially desirable.

As currently envisioned, the study will include analyses of trends in com-
modity movements and fleet composition, and implications by region of
projected traffic movement and vessel size ; requirements for port and related
facilities to accommodate prospective traffic effectively; alternative techno-
logical means for accommodating future transport systems; and appro-
priate financial participation by non-Federal entities, including States and
local subdivisions.

Port authorities and other State-local interests will be asked to participate
in advisory capacities as well as to provide basic information.

87

"// this should be necessary, I know of apparatus for use at sea for attack and
for defense." — Leonardo da vinci

Chapter VII

STRENGTHENING MILITARY PROGRAMS
FOR NATIONAL SECURITY

Since the strength of our Nation springs from many sources — economic,
social, and scientific, as well as military — nearly every element of the ma-
rine science program supports national security. This chapter is concerned
with programs unique to the needs of the Department of Defense. All mili-
tary marine science programs are designed primarily to provide ocean-
related scientific knowledge and engineering technology upon which to base
policies, decisions, development, and operations for military security. Mili-
tary efforts which make substantial contributions to other national needs and
goals, and which must be described with them to give a coherent picture
of applicable Federal effort, are set forth as an integral part of other chapters
of this report.

Within the Department of Defense, the Navy has the primary responsi-
bility to provide the sea-based forces to defend the United States. The sea-
based forces provide a capability for :

— stategic deterrence by deployment of Polaris submarines;

— anti-submarine operations if freedom of the seas is threatened from
below;

— support of amphibious operations, mine warfare, and limited
ground action ;

— surveillance of the oceans to detect and track potentially aggressive
forces ;

— operations to conduct and protect essential shipping.

89

Marine Science Affairs

To perform these roles, the Navy must expand knowledge and under-
standing of the sea and its characteristics; provide the ability to examine
even the most remote depths of the sea; construct and improve ships, struc-
tures, and equipment which will perform in the marine environment; and
transport men and material quickly wherever they are needed. In other
words, the Navy seeks to have the capability and knowledge of the three-
dimensional marine environment — ^to operate as needed anywhere, in any
weather, and at any depth.

The present strength of the Navy is measured by quality as much as
quantity — and, in this regard, the superior military characteristics of every
class of ship reflects successful integration of modern science and technology.
The Navy recognized this ingredient before World War II and de-
veloped thereafter a strong tie to the academic and industrial world both
to communicate Navy interests and to extract the best technology the
country offers. It is significant that well over half the Federal marine sciences
program is currently sponsored by the Navy.

Knowledge gained from military programs is, to the extent permitted
by security considerations, made available in unclassified form for general
use. For example, the Navy's program in mapping, charting, and geodesy
produces data and charts for geodetics and world-wide shipping activity.
Its programs of ship design and materials development, the most compre-
hensive in the Nation, provide knowledge for private shipbuilding and Fed-
eral maritime agencies such as the Coast Guard, the Environmental Science
Services Administration, and the Maritime Administration. Navy develop-
ments in navigation, which range from submerged acoustic position-keeping
to locating position on the Earth's surface by means of satellites, have been
released for scientific and commercial use. The programs of the Advanced
Research Projects Agency, directed toward detection of submerged nuclear
explosions in any part of the world, provide knowledge of the Earth's crust
and energy transmission characteristics which specifically apply to earth-
quake studies and volcanology.

The Fiscal Year 1969 Budget

Funds proposed for the marine science components of the military pro-
grams for national security for FY 1969 amount to $150.1 million, about
34 percent of the total marine science budget.^ This represents an 1 1 percent

^ All Navy programs are required for national security, but those that have non-
military uses as well are classified in the tables under other headings such as Research
and Mapping, Charting, and Geodesy to show the total Federal effort.

90

Military Programs

increase over FY 1968, reflecting primarily increased support of fleet opera-
tions and priority developments in military ocean engineering. Program ele-
ments and funds proposed are :

—surveying the properties of the ocean and ocean bottom,

Navy $29.4 M

■ — marine science and technology in support of weapon systems.

Navy 37.7 M

— development of undersea search, rescue, recovery, and man-
in-the-sea capability. (Deep Submergence Systems Project

and closely related efforts) Navy 81.5 M

— test and calibration facility for instrumentation. Navy 1.3 M

- — marine science in support of safeguards for limited test ban
treaties (VELA-UNIFORM program), Advanced Re-
search Projects Agency 0.2 M

Surveys for Defense Systems

The purpose of these surveys is to obtain comprehensive oceanographic
and acoustical information about ocean areas of the world in which our
naval forces may operate. The surveys provide both fleet support and
essential environmental data for design of future systems. Aided by the
Coast Guard, private contractors, and ships of opportunity, and benefitting
from the recent commissioning of two modern, automated survey ships
of its own, the Navy is making substantial progress toward coverage
of the areas of highest priority. In FY 1967, for example, the Navy collected:
- — over 100,000 miles of seismic sub-bottom profiles and ship-towed

magnetic data;
— 860 Nansen casts for submerged water analysis ;
— hundreds of bottom photographs, geological cores, biological and

radiological samples, and current measurements; and
— many thousands of measurernents of propagation of acoustic energy
over a wide spectrum of frequencies.
While the above oceanographic surveys are intended for military use,
others which are closely allied to them are available for civilian use. These
include the mapping, charting, and geodetic efforts which are set forth in
Chapter VIII. These latter surveys resulted in shipboard collections of
approximately a quarter-million track miles of precise bathymetric, mag-
netic, and gravity data, and the airborne collection of an additional one-
quarter of a million miles of geo-magnetic data.

91

Marine Science Affairs

The USNS Silas Bent became fully operational in FY 1967 and was
joined by her sister ship, the Elisha Kane^ in FY 1968. In addition to
being the first Navy oceanographic survey ships to have highly automated
data processing equipment on board, they have greatly improved sensors,
winches, and handling gear.

Marine Science and Teclinology

Marine science and technology in support of specific weapon systems is
budgeted at $37.7 million for FY 1969. Most of this money will support
studies of the characteristics and behavior of sound energy in the ocean.
The primary objective is to advance the Navy capability to detect, identify,
seek, and destroy hostile submarine forces, but the knowledge gained serves
the converse purpose of helping to conceal Polaris submarines and, thus,
preserving the invulnerability of the Fleet Ballistic Missile System. Certain
of these studies can only be carried out satisfactorily in instrumented and
controlled open-sea laboratories, such as the recently commissioned Atlantic
Undersea Test and Evaluation Center (AUTEC) and the Ocean Engineer-
ing Range at San Clemente Island ofT California.

As part of this program, the Navy has developed the capability for rapid
processing, storage, and retrieval of data on ocean conditions for anti-
submarine warfare (ASW) applications. These data also have immediate
operational applications as a part of the Navy environmental prediction
services, described in Chapter VIII. Combining these data with improved
mathematical models of the ocean and atmosphere, it is now possible
to produce routine analyses and forecasts of important oceanographic param-
eters (e.g., ocean temperatures and surface wave conditions), for large
ocean areas. It is also possible to provide more detailed spot analyses for
special areas upon request from fleet units in the area. Temperature and
sound velocity versus depth and geographical location are routinely pre-
dicted for the northern hemisphere oceans, and many thousands of special
acoustic propagation predictions are provided for ASW purposes. To the
extent possible, this information is made available in unclassified form for
fisheries, shipping, and other non-defense use. For example, the Departments
of the Interior and Navy have executed an exchange agreement to study
the use of advanced acoustic technology in the location of marine animals
and the prediction of the distribution of marketable fish, as well as acoustic
false targets of military importance.

92

Military Programs

Undersea Search, Rescue, Recovery, and Man-in-the-Sea

This program of advanced ocean technology is intended to improve
the Navy's deep ocean operational capability for rescue, search, salvage,
exploration, and diving operations. This need, first highlighted by the loss
of the Thresher in 1963, was required for search and salvage by the Navy
in 21 operations in 1967, primarily for aircraft.

For FY 1969, $81.5 million are proposed primarily for the Deep Sub-
mergence Systems Project (DSSP), with specific mission requirements for:
- — submarine location, escape, and rescue;
— object location and small object recovery;
— ^large object salvage ;
— "man-in-the-sea" ;

— the nuclear powered, deep-ocean research and engineering vehicle-
NR-1.
The Submarine Location, Escape, and Rescue Program will develop
the capability for :

— ships to locate a submerged, disabled submarine ;
— personnel escape from disabled submarines at depths to 600 feet;
— rescue parties to extricate personnel from sunken submarines in any
weather, using Deep Submergence Rescue Vehicles (DSRV),
small submarines, which can either be transported by air or car-
ried submerged on the deck of a "mother" submarine.
A contract for the first DSRV was let in FY 1966, and for the second
in FY 1968. The first unit is expected to become operational in 1970. The
long-range plan calls for world-wide capability with three rescue units
consisting of two DSRV's and one surface support ship (ASR). This full
rescue force, including modifications to the units of the submarine force,
is scheduled to be available by 1975. A contract for the first two Catamaran-
type ASR's was placed in August 1967, using shipbuilding funds from FY
1967 and 1968. (SeeFigure VII.l.)

The Small Object Location and Recovery Project will enable the Navy
to locate and recover small objects at depths down to 20,000 feet
in conjunction with the overall salvage mission of the Navy. The Deep
Submergence Search Vehicles (DSSV), unmanned search and recovery
devices, and support ships will not be completed before 1974. Development
of advanced sensors and power plants, and design of the DSSV will com-
mence in 1968; programs leading to construction of the first DSSV will
commence in 1969.

The Large Object Salvage System Project will provide a system capable
of recovering large objects, including intact submarine hulls, from depths

93

Marine Science Affairs

^twssKBu

iP*^B^^/>i

Uy

2

^^

r^*

<^\

-^amf^*^'

Figure VII. 1. Essential to the Submarine Search and Rescue System is the Auxiliary
Submarine Rescue {ASR) vessel, shown here in prototype. The system will consist
of three rescue units, each including one ASR and two Deep Submergence Rescue
Vessels (DSRV). The first unit will become operational in 1970. Three units will
comprise {with necessary submarine modifications) a world-wide rescue capability.
{U.S. Navy photo.)

down to 850 feet. Two salvage units are scheduled for completion in 1974.
Each consists of a Salvage Operational Control Ship, and two lift ships,
plus associated equipment. The system anticipates use of human divers to
aid in salvage operations. The prototype Mark II Deep Dive System,
which includes a Deck Decompression Chamber (DDC) and a Personnel
Transfer Capsule ( PTC ) is under construction at Mare Island Naval Ship-
yard; it should be completed in time for the SEALAB III experiment this
summer. (See Figure VII. 2.) Planned activity for FY 1969 includes award-
ing a contract for a second Mark II Deep Diver System (a DDC and a
PTC) plus development of tools and aids for divers.

Tfie Man-in-the-Sea Project, closely tied to Large Object Salvage System,
will extend man's capacity to live and perform useful work to greater
depths — 850 feet by 1972. Two open sea experiments of long-duration
bottom living have been conducted (up to 45 days) . A third, Sealab III, is
planned for a depth of 600 feet (with excursions to 750 feet) in the summer
of 1968.

Both private industry and the Navy are developing the equipment and
technique by which divers can work in the sea longer, at greater depths, with
better tools and more safety. The goals of accomplishing useful work by

94

Military Programs

Figure VII. 2. The Personnel Transfer Chamber (PTC), an elevator-like diving
station for saturated divers, provides transportation between the ocean surface and
the ocean bottom. The PTC is being developed by the U.S. Navy in support of a new
system for the salvage of large objects to depths of 850 feet. It is expected that
the system will be capable of raising objects, including sunken aircraft and disabled
ships, weighing up to 1 ,000 tons deadweight. The PTC and its related equipment
are being used this year in support of Man-in-the-Sea experiments in the SEALAB
III series. (U.S. Navy photograph.)

increasing diver capability, communications, and visibility at 600 feet — then
850 feet and eventually at least 1,000 feet — were brought nearer during
the past year by such developments as :

— commencing construction of the prototype Navy Mark II Deep Dive

System, designed for 850 feet ;
— developing a carbon dioxide absorbent device with ten times the

capacity of existing equipment ;
— developing a new microphone for divers that is unaffected by pres-
sure at 600 feet and a micro-miniaturized sonar with high resolu-
tion that mounts on a diver's "helmet" and helps him "see" in
murky water.

95

Marine Science Affairs

In FY 1969, the Sealab III results will be evaluated and development of
aquanaut equipment will continue. This man-in-the-sea capability should
have commercial application as oil, gas, and mineral extraction move into
deeper water on the Shelf and operations are conducted submerged.

The Deep Ocean Engineering Vehicle Project will provide a research
submersible (NR-1 ) which combines the long endurance of a nuclear power
plant with the control and instrumentation developed for the DSRV rescue
submersible. This submersible will also provide the technical basis for future
development of nuclear-powered, oceanographic research submersibles
to operate at even greater range and depth. Congress authorized the
construction of NR-1 in the FY 1965 shipbuilding program. It is under
construction at Groton, Connecticut, and should be commissioned in 1968.

Complementing this program for Undersea Search, Rescue, Recovery,
and Man-in-the-Sea is a Deep Submergence Biomedical Program to im-
prove decompression schedules for deep diving, diver nutrition, and study of
physiological and psychological factors affecting divers. A swimmer-support
program is closely integrated with the above efforts.

Construction of Oceanographic Ships

The Navy oceanographic fleet (including ships being used by private
institutions) consists of 15 research and 16 survey ships. Thirteen new ships
have been authorized in previous years and are under construction, including
building contracts awarded in FY 1967 and early FY 1968 for:

— Two new AGOR-14 class research ships which incorporate cycloidal
propellers for use by Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution and
Scripps Institution of Oceanography and two others of the same
class for use by Navy laboratories ;
— two new catamaran Submarine Rescue Vehicles (ASR's) which
combine the support capabilities for the new rescue submersibles
and for operating the Navy's advanced diving systems. (Because
these ships have a much broader utilization potential than sup-
port of rescue submersibles and divers, the cost of the first proto-
type ship was included in the marine sciences program. ) ;
— one medium oceanographic and one coastal hydrographic survey

ship to replace the aging USNS Maury and USNS Tanner;
— two improved ALviN-type submersibles with operating depths of
6,500 feet.
A contract for a catamaran-design AGOR is scheduled to be let later in
FY 1968, but no starts are funded in the FY 1969 budget. The ship con-
struction program is summarized in Table VII. 1.

96

Military Programs

Table VI 1.1 — Ships for Navy Oceanographic Program

Program

FY 1968 status operational
ships

Ship construc-
tion program

New
construction

Conversions

Under
construction

Oceanographic research ships :

Navy Laboratories

4
3

1
7

4

Institutions

3

Sub-total ._ _ _ _

15

7

Surveying ships:
Oceanographic

2

2
12

1

Mapping, Charting & Geodesy

5

Sub-total

16

6

Grand total_

31

13

Project VELA-UNIFORM

To improve our ability to detect, locate and identify underground and
underwater nuclear explosions, the Advanced Research Projects Agency
(ARPA) has for a number of years conducted a program called VELA-
UNIFORM. Some of ARPA's significant marine science efforts during
FY 1967 and 1968 included :

— seismic refraction measurements in the Aleutian Island region to
investigate velocity anomalies in the earth's crust and upper
mantle ;
— an ocean bottom seismograph experiment in international waters off
the Kurile Islands to study propagation characteristics of seismic
waves from earthquakes ;
— deployment and recovery of 27 untethered 30-day ocean-bottom seis-
mic recording units (ten are located in water more than 15,000
feet deep) . A system design was developed for an untethered
ocean-bottom seismograph (enclosed in a glass-pressure vessel)
capable of 120-day continuous recording in water as deep as
30,000 feet;

97

Marine Science Affairs

— an unmanned, ocean-bottom geophysical station at a depth of 12,600

feet. The station is located 80 miles off the coast of California

and is linked by cable to the mainland. It is the first seismograph

installation to provide continuous records from the ocean floor.

In FY 1969, ARPA intends to complete the field testing of a 250-ton

capacity, towed vehicle designed for the safe handling of large charges at

sea.

New Facilities

The Atlantic Underwater Test and Evaluation Center (AUTEC), in
the Bahamas, was commissioned in 1967 and will be completely operational
in 1970. The FLIP, a stable, acoustic platform which can extend 250 feet
below the surface, was modified to improve laboratory and living space. A
pressure vessel ten feet long and six feet in diameter for use at 5500 p.s.i. was
commissioned at the Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory, and a new labora-
tory for research on structures was put in operation at the Ship Research
and Development Center at Carderock, Maryland.

Facilities scheduled to become operational in FY 1969 include the Ocean
Engineering Facility at San Clemente Island, California, which provides an
ocean environment test range with wide capabilities for use by both govern-
ment and non-government engineers, and the deep ocean pressure testing
complex at the Navy Ship Research and Development Center, Annapolis,
Maryland. The FY 1969 program also includes funds for a deep ocean
engineering simulator at the Mine Defense Laboratory, Panama City,
Florida.

Tlie Future

Our Nation's goal is lasting peace, and we seek it by every means, includ-
ing a strong Navy. A strong Navy reduces the danger of armed conflict, links
us with our allies, deters potential adversaries, and strengthens our ability to
contain limited conflicts. Assured lifelines of seaborne traffic are essential to
the military and economic strength of the U.S. and our allies. We have no
monopoly, however, on naval forces or technology. Our present advantage
in nuclear propulsion and underwater technology is a key to maintaining
superiority in naval strength, by quality as much as by numbers. Technology

Military Programs

also provides wider options to meet future contingencies at appropriate levels
of response. The roots of naval technology must be continuously reexamined,
existing systems refined, and new concepts developed in order to maintain
our sea-based defense forces essential for national security.

99

287-921 O — 68 8

"Aside from its importance to many branches of science, a knowledge of the
oceans has a practical value for mankind. The intelligent development of
our fishing industries, the laying of ocean cables, the proper construction
of harbor works, oceanic commerce and navigation, as well as long range
weather forecasting, are all dependent on our understanding of oceanic con-
ditions." THE LAST CRUISE OF THE CARNEGIE, 1928-1929

Chapter VIII

UNDERSTANDING AND SURVEYING
THE OCEAN ENVIRONMENT

If use of the ocean's resources is to increase significantly in this century, in
the recovery of major fishery and mineral resources, for example, and if
knowledge is to be gained to enable accurate forecasts of such weather
phenomena as droughts, floods, storms, and hurricanes, then greater effort
must be made to explore, measure and map the seas.

We include within this chapter two different sets of observations of the
marine environment : those that lead to maps and data files, and those needed
for prediction of environmental variables that change rapidly with time.

As to environmental predictions, better knowledge of air-sea interaction
processes should lead to more precise and longer range forecasts of weather
and storms, waves, ice, tsunamis,^ tides, coastal surf and currents, storm
surges, and ocean temperatures. These will :

— benefit national defense and expanding marine industrial activities;
— reduce the destruction of life and property in the Coastal Zone;
— lead to improvements in design and safety of coastal and off-shore
facilities, including harbors, sea walls, breakwaters, and oil drilling
platforms ;
— enhance industrial, commercial, agricultural, and other land
activities, such as building construction, air and sea transportation,
and recreation, that are directly affected by weather and coastal
oceanic conditions;

^ Seismic sea waves.

101

Marine Science Affairs

— facilitate better planning of water conservation measures for crops

and management of municipal water supplies ;
— improve flood warnings to allow advance application of necessary

control measures;
— improve routing services for maritime shipping to avoid hazardous
seas and storms, minimize cargo damage, and economize on op-
erational costs;
— increase the operational efficiency of U.S. commercial fisheries.
The identification and assessment of ocean resources and features through
systematic exploration will :

— aid transportation and commerce, and foster safe navigation;

— encourage development of fuel and mineral supplies off-shore ;

- — improve effectiveness of our commercial fisheries;

— provide basic knowledge for consideration of international legal

questions related to ocean resources ;
— aid in establishing Federal-State development and regulatory
policies.
Both environmental observations and exploration should contribute an-
swers to major questions of science.

Today, nearly all scientific observations of the seas are made by ships ; and
ships, complemented by submersibles, will continue to be primary vehicles
for geographical exploration of ocean resources and deep sea features. But
as spacecraft and buoys are deployed, their measurements will comple-
ment ship observations, especially in investigations of the dynamic properties
of the seas that change rapidly and are required for environmental predic-
tion. Ocean exploration is thus expected not only to increase in momentum
but also to change in technological content and breadth.

Ocean Observations and Predictions

About five percent of the Federal effort in marine sciences is devoted to
observations related to understanding and predicting the ocean environment,
largely dealing with time-dependent variables. The Navy, Envirorunental
Science Services Administration (ESSA), Coast Guard, National Aero-
nautics and Space Administration (NASA) , and Atomic Energy Commission
(AEC) fund these activities as shown in Table VIII. 1.

102

Surveying the Environment

A broad range of marine forecasting services for defense forces has been
developed by the Navy in response to world-wide national security require-
ments. These include :

— sea surface and water column temperature, salinity, and sound veloc-
ity prediction for antisubmarine warfare ;
— sea ice observation and forecasting for fleet operations and seaborne

logistics;
— sea state prediction for fleet operations and spacecraft recovery at

sea and for Coast Guard activities on the Great Lakes ;
— nearshore environmental prediction, including beach breaker and

surf forecasts, for mine warfare and amphibious operations;
— high seas and coastal marine weather forecasts to support fleet
operations.

Table VIII. 1— Funding for Ocean Observation and Prediction

(In millions of dollars)

Agency

Estimated,
FY 1968

President's
Budget,
FY 1969

Department of Defense :

Navy

Army

Depairtment of Commerce :

ESSA

Department of Transportation :

Coast Guard

National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Atomic Energy Commission

Total

10.4
0.3

6. 1

5.5

1.3*

.9

11.0*
0.3

6.3*

6.8
1.3*
.8

24.5

26.5

•ESSA budgets an additional $8.2 million to support upper air sounding programs, hurricane reconnais-
sance research, and operational satellite programs that also contribute to goals described in this Chapter-
Navy budgets an additional $8.9 million for sunilar.efforts not reported as part of the Marine Sciences Pro-
gram. In addition, NASA is funding $5.3 million and $10.2 million in FY 1968 and FY 1969, respectively,
for remote sensor surveying aircraft that may acquire oceanographic data. Further, NASA is funding
approxunately $2 million in FY 1968 and FY 1969 for remote sensor research and development. These studies
are designed to lead to research and development of the Earth Resources Survey Program which includes
the Earth Resources Technology Satellite (ERTS).

For civilian use, environmental prediction services operated by ESSA
include :

— high seas, coastal, and Great Lakes marine weather forecasts;
— tropical storm, hurricane, and storm surge warnings and forecasts;

103

Marine Science Affairs

— tide and tidal current predictions;

— breaker and surf forecasts for the beaches of southern California ;

— tsunami warnings.

ESSA is establishing an estuarine flushing and non-tidal prediction serv-
ice which provides monthly advisory bulletins on variations in renewal rates
for the rivers and harbors of large urban communities, with initial efforts in
the Penobscot Bay area in New England. The service is intended for use by
municipal and port authorities, water and sanitation departments. Fed-
eral Water Pollution Control Administration, Atomic Energy Commission,
Public Health Service, and Fish and Wildlife Service. It will assist agencies
in industrial effluent discharge control, industrial and potable water intake
regulation, determination of sewage and industrial waste treatment require-
ments, recreation planning, and protection of public health and fisheries.

An advanced forecasting model simulating the effects of exchange of
heat and momentum between the oceans and atmosphere is now employed
at the ESSA National Meteorological Center. This has resulted in improve-
ment in forty-eight hour forecasts of continental and marine weather
conditions.

Diverse ocean observation and prediction programs in polar, subpolar, and
other regions are supported by the Coast Guard, employing ships, aircraft,
towers, and buoys. Ships and aircraft of the International Ice Patrol and ice
breakers make ice and ocean current observations for the protection of North
Atlantic shipping. Ships enroute to and from ocean stations and on station
make physical measurements to monitor the changing nature of major ocean
currents. Ships from a number of agencies also participate in international
studies, such as the cooperative study of the Kuroshio current and the
oceanographic and fisheries investigation of the Eastern Tropical Pacific.

NASA, as part of its Earth Resources Survey Program, supports a space-
craft oceanography project to assess and develop the application of space
research and technology to marine sciences. During 1967, two NASA air-
craft equipped with radiometers, scatterometers, spectrometers and cameras
flew 14 missions to determine the response and effectiveness of these instru-
ments in remotely sensing sea ice, land-water boundaries, sea state, school-
ing fish, fresh-salt water interfaces, and sedimentation patterns. Thermal
contrasts at the boundaries of several major ocean currents were identified
by high resolution infrared radiometry in the NIMBUS spacecraft. Video
photographs of the Pacific Ocean obtained by Applications Technology
Satellite 1 illustrated the relationship between cloud patterns and major
ocean currents and upwelling zones characteristic of high fisheries pro-
duction. (See Figure VIII.l) .

The Atomic Energy Commission supports a program directed toward
developing accurate prediction models for assessing the potential hazards
of long-period water waves that might result from large yield detonations

104

Surveying the Environment

at or near the ocean surface. It is expected that major goals in the program
will be achieved in FY 1969 and that funding can thus be reduced in FY
1970 and beyond.

W^*""

m

SAUDI ARAB1

Franc h 1
JT 'Somo lila nd 1 j

Wm I o p I a I

1 A

i.

i

.SI

7

o

0

1

1

^

1

o

o

o
to

^^^H

f ah "-Mc-.. ' ( ■

%

^J^H

^^M

H

L ^1

■ ■>'■

4

I^H

^^^H

i)

%

I^^H

1

1

L

t

i

1

WVU.^

J

■

Figure VIII. 1. A corner of East Africa and the Arabian Peninsula looked like this to
Astronauts Conrad and Gordon during the GEMINI XI flight on September 14,
1966. This is the season when the water level of the Red Sea (left) recovers from
the great loss by evaporation during the summer months. The warm {32 degrees
Centigrade) , highly saline {39-40 parts per thousand) waters begin to pour into
the western Gulf of Aden. As the Red Sea water is denser than that of the surface
layers, the new water sinks to a depth of about 200 meters. The eddy system outlined
in the photo above {right center) is the surface flow and turbulence caused by this
displacement. Such current systems may contain significant concentrations of fish.
{Photograph by NASA; analysis by Bureau of Commercial Fisheries.)

105

Marine Science Affairs

Mapping, Charting, and Geodesy

In this section, those features of the oceans are deaU with which vary slowly
with time so as to permit preparation of maps. Just as maps have been
indispensable in the development of our land resources, maps are also
the foundation for understanding and use of the oceans. Yet the oceans are
largely unexplored beyond the gross shape and structure of the sea floor,
and maps for science, economic development, and national defense are often
inadequate. Needs are multiplying for a wide variety of maps — of biological
stocks, mineral resources, and physical and geophysical characteristics of the
sea and seabed.

Mapping requires accurate navigation and geodetic control. In recent
years, successful development of electronic aids, especially several series of
Loran systems, has led to greater precision in positioning. The Transit navi-
gational satellite system discussed in Chapter VI has been released for
civilian use and will provide more precise control for oceanwide surveys.

Current Exploration

Mapping, charting, and geodesy account for roughly 18 percent of the
marine science funding as shown in Table VIII. 2. Over 30 ships in the
Federal oceanographic fleet are engaged in ocean surveying activities. The
cost of operating these ships in FY 1968 totaled $34.4 million; this represents
about 37 percent of the ocean exploration budget. Several agencies conduct
mission-oriented oceanographic surveys, but the Navy and ESSA support
most of this effort and provide most of the widely used general purpose
maps and charts.

Table VI 1 1.2 — Ocean Exploration — Mapping, Charting, and Geodesy

(In millions of dollars)

Agency

Estimated,
FY 1968

President's
Budget,
FY 1969

Department of Defense __ -

56.2

18.0

.3

72.3

Department of Commerce . _ _ _ _

19.5

NASA

.3

Total

74.5

92. I

106

Surveying the Environment

Recent ocean surveys have mapped:
— bathymetric and geophysical characteristics of 1,500,000 square miles

of the North Central Pacific between the Hawaiian and Aleutian

Islands as part of the SEAMAP program (ESSA) ;
■ — precise bathymetric, geophysical, and oceanographic data over

260,000 track miles (Navy) ;
— the hydrography and currents of coastal and riverine areas of South

Vietnam (Navy) ;
— seasonal physical, chemical and biological productivity factors of the

Eastern Tropical Pacific (Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, Coast

Guard, Navy, ESSA) ;
— geophysical and acoustical properties of over 7,000,000 square miles

of ocean areas (Navy) ;
— geological and geophysical characteristics of the U.S. continental

Shelf and Slope (Geological Survey) ;
— the geomagnetic field in many parts of the world by aircraft (Navy) ;
— ^the hydrography of all coastal waters of the United States and Alaska

and estuarine circulation patterns of critical harbors (ESSA) ; and
— navigational hazards in the Great Lakes (Corps of Engineers).

New Emphasis on Technological Developments

The magnitude of the task of observing and mapping such a large fraction
of the Earth's surface by conventional surface ships has motivated ap-
plications of modem technology — both to increase efficiency of measure-
ments from shipboard and to supplant or supplement ships as sensor plat-
forms. For example, the Navy is developing a high-speed coastal charting
system. New emphasis also is being placed this year on potential use of space-
craft and buoys and the balanced combination of systems utilizing all
techniques.

Ocean buoys are effective in making many kinds of ocean observations.
A recent study, funded jointly by Federal agencies, concluded that systems
of data buoys with wide geographical coverage are technically feasible
and the most cost-effective means of satisfying a large number of govern-
ment-wide operational and research requirements for marine meteorological
and oceanographic data. The study analyzed and categorized four sets of
requirements for marine data :

a. global (deep ocean, large scale — 300 to 500 mile grid) ;

b. coastal North America (within 400 miles of North America, medium

scale — 50 to 200 mile grid) ;

107

Marine Science Affairs

c. Great Lakes and estuaries (territorial U.S. waters, small scale — 10

to 50 mile grid) ;

d. research requirements (all areas, various scales from large to very

small scale grid ) .
The study showed that a substantial saving is possible if buoy systems are
designed and operated to serve the national requirements for data acquisition
as opposed to single agency requirements.

The Marine Sciences Council reviewed this study and concluded that a
National Data Buoy System had sufficient promise to warrant initial devel-
opment of prototypes. The Coast Guard was assigned lead-agency responsi-
bility for further research, development, testing and evaluation to advance
data buoy technology, and to develop and evaluate system requirements
and capability preparatory to a future decision to establish a National Data
Buoy System.

The Department of Transportation is requesting $5 million for these pro-
grams in FY 1969. An additional $250,000 is being reprogrammed for fur-
ther study of technical approaches and plans in FY 1968.

The possibility of observing important characteristics of the oceans from
high-flying aircraft and spacecraft has been investigated by Federal agen-
cies and other organizations for a number of years. Several experimental
areas appear especially promising : "

— sea-state and sea level measurement ;
— thermal measurements of the sea surface ;
— location and "mapping" of surface ocean currents;
— sea ice measurement and location and classification of icebergs ;
— river discharge and delta studies ;

— delineation of shorelines, shoals and sea bottom contours, and elim-
ination of "doubtful shoals" in the high seas;
— detection and measurements of biota;
— sea slope measurements;

— observation of air-sea interaction phenomena;
— detection of upwelling zones.
The Marine Sciences Council supported a contract study to evaluate the
future potential of satellites for ocean observations. The study report, which
will soon be released, projects the technological state-of-the-art for observa-
tions of sea surface temperature, sea ice, and wave height for the next five
years, analyzes requirements and related costs, and describes benefits that
could be achieved.

In October 1967, the Council issued a report, United States Activities in
Spacecraft Oceanography, prepared by NASA and the Naval Oceanographic
Office, assisted by other interested agencies. This report presented new in-
formation about the potential of satellite observation to assist scientists and

Funds for these developments are reported in Table A-1 of the Appendix under
"General Purpose Ocean Engineering."

108

Surveying the Environment

engineers in planning for possible participation in future programs.

Inherent in the advancement of space oceanography capabilities to benefit
many agencies is the need for closer coordination of related programs. The
Council accordingly recommended that NASA assume lead agency respon-
sibility for coordination of sensor technology, techniques for space oceanog-
raphy and testing of new developments.

It also endorsed FY 1969 initiatives by (a) ESSA, to employ an advanced
camera system and high resolution scanning radiometer, piggyback, in the
TIROS M and advanced TIROS operational satellites for mapping sea and
lake ice and surface temperatures, locating major currents, and estimating
the state of the sea; and (b) the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, to expand
studies of the usefulness of satellite radiometric data and photographs in
locating high density fisheries.

Planning Ahead

The need for intensified ocean exploration has been highlighted by de-
liberations of the General Assembly of the United Nations on questions
related to jurisdiction over the deep ocean floor and its resources. A broad
base of understanding about the oceans and their resources can contribute to
informed judgments on legal issues of both national and international
importance.

A comprehensive national program for ocean exploration was recom-
mended in 1959 by the National Academy of Sciences' Committee on
Oceanography. The Committee called for ocean-wide surveys : "Not only for
research, but in order to exploit and use the oceans, we need detailed
knowledge which can be obtained only through -ystematic surveys in three
dimensions. . . It is essential that these surveys be conducted on an ocean-
wide, ocean-deep basis as quickly as possible. Our knowledge is now limited
largely to waters 100 miles from shore and even here is inadequate for present
and future needs." The recommendation was reinforced by the Committee's
1966 report which urged that "the program be carried out in a systematic
and expeditious manner."

As yet, only a limited program of ocean-wide mapping has been incor-
porated in agency plans. Moreover, despite coojjerative exchanges of data
and of scientists between agencies, Government-wide planning for ocean
exploration and mapping and ocean observation and prediction on a con-
tinuous basis has not been achieved.

The Marine Sciences Council is beginning to remedy this deficiency.

Recognizing the need for long-range planning to implement Federal
agency missions in these areas and to support policies and objectives of the

109

Marine Science Affairs

marine sciences legislation, the Council assigned to its Committee on Ocean
Exploration and Environmental Services responsibility to begin to develop
comprehensive Federal plans in 1 968. To supplement agency staffs, both for
planning purposes and for the United States' portion of international explora-
tion, a small staff will be funded initially by the Marine Sciences Council.

Planning will consider both environmental prediction and exploration.
National needs will be considered for observation and prediction services
related to marine weather, sea state, tides and currents, including estuarine
and coastal effects, state of the upper water column and thermocline, migra-
tion of principal current boundaries, tsunamis, and sea and lake ice. The
plan will consider ways to fulfill these needs by defining goals, milestones,
priorities, supporting air-sea interaction studies, technical facilities, and in-
strumentation, and the optimum combination of oceanographic ships, ocean
buoys, aircraft, and spacecraft re:juired in a national effort.

The special role of ships of opportunity will be considered. Over 2,000
merchant ships, American and foreign, including over 900 United States
flag ships, and over 800 United States Navy ships, make certain kinds of
marine meteorological and oceanographic observations. Limited biological
observations have also been made by ships of opporunity. The plan will con-
sider obtaining more complete data from a selected number of these ships
to complement data obtained from other sources.

The kinds of projects being considered for the program are :

— delineation of the migration and movement patterns of major com-
mercial fish stocks ;
— fishery exploration in currently unexploited areas ;
— acquisition of data relating fish distribution to environmental factors

as a basis for providing fishery prediction services ;
— preparation of small-scale topographic, geological, magnetic, and
gravity maps of the Continental shelf and slope to identify poten-
tial mineral and fuel resource areas ;
— preparation of geophysical and topographic maps of selected areas of

the deep ocean floor;
— coring and drilling surveys of the continental margin and deep ocean

floor in selected areas ;
— facilitating data exchanges (following the objectives outlined in

Chapter IX) ;
— determination of the origin and dynamics of ocean current systems;
— investigations of heat exchange and transport, air-sea interaction, and

air mass modification ;
— studies of storm genesis, propagation, and waves.
Planning will be accomplished in close consultation with the National
Academies of Science and of Engineering, and other scientific and industrial

110

Surveying the Environment

interests so as to complement and reinforce private research and engineering
in the marine environment in the seventies.

Planning for ocean exploration will include programs for United
States participation in international ocean exploration activities discussed
in Chapter II. Through this international effort, nations can join in co-
operative studies of the seas and their resources, with the derived knowledge
shared fully among them. A technically sound program should attract broad
participation within a framework of world-ocean surveys, regional surveys,
and related problem-oriented research studies. Only a few nations have
sufficient technical resources to conduct ocean-wide surveys, but many
nations could participate in regional or local projects utilizing surveying
technologies developed in other sectors of the program.

Ill

"When you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in
numbers, you know something about it." — lord kelvin

Chapter IX

INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

Advances in marine science and technology depend critically upon the
effective flow of information — from data collectors to data consumers. If we
are to understand the complex nature of the marine environment and if
understanding is to foster achievement of practical objectives, information
must both be generated and made available to meet a wide variety of user
needs.

Previously, oceanographic data were collected primarily by the same
scientists and engineers who used the data. Now, with broader ocean-related
activities and with data acquisition more complex and costly, the data
commodity must be shared among a larger number of participants. More
efficient recording, archival, processing and distribution systems are needed
to provide information services not only for the oceanographic com-
munity, but beyond it to a larger community of state and industrial users,
and public and private interests concerned with maritime policy, economic
development, and legal principles for effective use of the sea.

Apart from the increases in size and complexity of the data community,
increases in data traffic and changes in the character of data impose new
problems in data management. The advent of synoptic measurement sys-
tems and the evolution of requirements to monitor the marine environment
sharply increase the sheer quantity of information to handle. As the entire
marine science enterprise has grown, increasingly careful consideration has
been given to means to minimize cost and possible waste of human
resources.

113

Marine Science Affairs

The complexity of data management can be illustrated by the variety of
observable quantities and the diversity of their sources and end-uses.

Data are obtained from the world oceans, coastal waters, estuaries, and
Great Lakes by :

— research and survey ships, off-shore platforms, submersibles, and

divers;
— ships of opportunity in the merchant marine, Navy, Coast Guard and

commercial fisheries;
— spacecraft, aircraft, and buoys.
Data may be real-time or archival ; may be presented in the form of maps,
documents, visual displays, analogue or digital records; and may consist
of sea water, biological or geological samples.

Data involve more than 100 kinds of physical, geophysical, and chemical
variables. Thousands of geological samples must be stored ; more than one-
half million species of biota must be classified; and great quantities of
marine meteorological data must be processed.
In turn, data are used by :

— marine scientists and teachers;
— meteorologists and seismologists;
— naval planners and operators;
— commercial fishermen;

— producers of off-shore oil, gas, and minerals ;

— regulatory authorities concerned with off-shore activities and en-
vironmental quality of the Coastal Zone.
Beginning some eight years ago, several Federal data centers were estab-
lished to meet the demand for management of oceanographic data. These
centers involve complex inter-connected functions of acquisition, standard-
ization and tests for accuracy, storage, retrieval, analysis, and synthesis that
must be performed to make data readily and economically accessible to
specialized users.

The newly established data facilities almost immediately became inade-
quate as the result of insufficient national data bases, incompatible data
formats for eflficient exchange, delays in filing, archaic processing and com-
munication methods, and lack of critical evaluation. An increasingly serious
problem for the future is how to manage an even larger volume and diversity
of marine data which are certain to result from intensified activities and new
technologies. Data generation will increase rapidly with the expanding de-
ployment of ocean buoys, modern ships with integrated sensors, spacecraft,
and ships of opportunity. Effective data services that afford prompt and
reliable dissemination should be developed to match the speed and sophis-
tication of data acquisition if the benefits of new technology are to be

114

Information Management

realized. Such services must be planned not only for the present but for
the next ten years.

Recognizing that data management support is deficient, the Marine
Sciences Council initiated in 1967 a major contract study on marine infor-
mation problems. While final results of the study will not be available until
early 1969, preliminary findings suggest steps necessary to improve existing
marine data centers, and some corrective measures are being taken now.

Data Center Operations

Four marine data centers are currently operated by the Federal Govern-
ment. The proposed FY 1969 budgets for these centers are shown in
Table IX. 1.

Table IX.l— FY 1969 Data Center Budgets

Activity

FY 1968

FY 1969

National Oceanographic Data Center

$1,495,800

* 100, 000

164, 000

192,000

$1, 778, 260

National Weather Records Center _

*130, 000

Great Lakes Data Center

167, 000

Smithsonian Oceanographic Sorting Center _ __ __:.

272,000

TOTAL

1,951,800

2, 347, 260

♦Supplemented by funds transferred from other agencies for reimbursable projects: FY 1968, $977,000 ;
FY 1969, $1,165,000.

National Oceanographic Data Center

The National Oceanographic Data Center (NODC), located in Wash-
ington, D.C., was established by the Navy in 1960 and has been supported
by multi-agency funding since that time. It provides oceanographic data
from both foreign and domestic sources to United States and foreign organi-
zations and institutions concerned with marine science and technology and
ocean-related affairs. The Center receives, compiles, processes,and preserves
oceanographic data; establishes procedures for insuring the accuracy and
general quality of the data; prepares data summaries and tabulations; pre-
pares and makes available indices of its holdings and other information
necessary for requesting data or services; and performs data processing
services at cost.

115

287-921 O — 68-

Marine Science Affairs

Some specific accomplishments during FY 1967 were:

— Information requests involving less than one day of effort and
handled without charge increased from 1260 to 1603 from the
following sources: Educational and Research Institutions (19%) ;
Foreign (4%); General Public (34%); Government Agencies
(21%); and Industry (22%).

- — Information requests requiring more efTort and handled on a reim-
burseable basis increased from 85 to 127.

— Processing costs were decreased from $2.60 to $0.50 for a data unit of
one thousand cards.

— Marine science data were acquired from 65 Federal and non-Federal
organizations and from 31 foreign countries, increasing the size of
holdings to the levels shown in Table IX. 2, as of July 1, 1967. The
table also shows the high concentration of physical data.

Table IX.2— NODC Data File

Observations

Bathythermograph Data:

Digitized

Analogue

Ocean ographic Station Data.

Geology

Biology

Surface Currents

515,000

800, 000

375, 000

18, 000

8,000

2, 500, 000

Based on Council evaluation, steps will be taken in FY 1969 to strengthen
NODC and thus more evenly match its capabilities with requirements for
prompt and more complete data services. In addition to continuing acces-
.sion and service operations, NODC plans to :

— acquire and put in operation a modern computer facility;
— add new areas such as ocean engineering, subsurface current ob-
servations, ice measurements, bottom photographs, and data ac-
quired from spacecraft;
— review major current research and survey efforts from the viewpoint

of useful supporting services;
— reduce the backlog of high-quality, unprocessed data;
— increase advisory services;
— improve coordination with other centers.
The Navy's Fleet Numerical Weather Facility at Monterey, California, is
the hub of the Naval Environmental Data Network and the center for an
environmental computer program. For rapid data exchange, a data link is
being established between NODC and Monterey.

116

Information Management

National Weather Records Center

The National Weather Records Center, located at Asheville, North Caro-
lina, is operated by the Environmental Data Service of the Environmental
Science Services Administration. The Center is the major library for marine
meteorological data, including sea surface temperature and ocean wave
data, forwarded from 2,500 merchant ships and a much smaller number of
fixed stations, such as ocean station vessels and lightships. This provides a
broad base of marine climatological punched cards for exchange with mem-
bers of the World Meteorological Organization. In addition, the Center
summarizes marine meteorological data on a reimbursable basis for use in
Marine Climate Atlases prepared by the Navy, in Coast Pilot publications
issued by the Coast and Geodetic Survey, and in Sailing Directions issued
by the Naval Oceanographic Office. A communications system for data
exchange is planned to link the National Weather Records Center with the
National Oceanographic Data Center.

New programs will be initiated at the Center in FY 1969 to convert
marine meteorological data to an internationally approved format prepara-
tory to developing an international Marine Atlas for the World Meteorologi-
cal Organization and to perform an analytical study of sea surface tempera-
ture data.

Great Lakes Data Center

The Great Lakes Data Center, operating under the Corps of Engi-
neers in Detroit, Michigan, was established in 1963 to provide services
to the Great Lakes Study Group — those agencies in Canada and the
United States engaged in basic and applied research and engineering inves-
tigations related to the development and utilization of Great Lakes water
resources. The Center is a branch of the United States Lake Survey, which
has been involved in data collection on the Great Lakes since 1841.

Serious environmental problems affect the Great Lakes and adjacent land
areas. Recognizing the need to utilize most efficiently the environmental data
that have been obtained from the area, responsible agencies have developed
a program directed toward processing, storage, retrieval, and dissemination
of:

— hydraulic and hydrologic data (water level) ;

— oceanographic data (physical, chemical and biological) ;

- — hydrometeorological data (precipitation) ;

— hydrographic data (depth).

117

Marine Science Affairs

Data provided by the Great Lakes Center assist in regulating the levels
and overflow of Lakes Superior and Ontario and the flow over Niagara
Falls, in accordance with United States-Canadian agreements; and determin-
ing the division of water for hydroelectric power between the United States
and Canada. Such data are also used extensively for research studies on
fisheries, pollution, shore processes, currents, and ice formation, and move-
ment.

Smithsonian Oceanograpiiic Sorting Center

The Smithsonian Oceanographic Sorting Center (SOSC) was established
in 1963 to process biological and geological specimens for scientists through-
out the world. The Center receives samples of marine algae, plankton,
invertebrates, and vertebrates from oceanographic expeditions and biological
field stations, sorts the samples into taxonomic groups, and forwards them to
more than 250 systematic specialists — about 200 in the United States and the
remainder in twenty-six foreign countries. Also, SOSC temporarily stores sea
floor rock and sediment samples, makes preliminary analyses, and arranges
for their assignment to competent investigators for study. Major sources of
biological and geological collections received by the SOSC have been the In-
ternational Indian Ocean Expedition, United States Antarctic research pro-
gram. International Cooperative Investigation of the Tropical Atlantic, and
Guinean Trawling Survey. Fifty-one sources have supplied 35,000 samples,
including 6,000,000 specimens, for identification and study; 8,000 have been
sorted.

The SOSC lacks resources to handle the incoming flow of materials, as
evidenced by the fact that only one in four samples received has been proc-
essed and forwarded for scientific study. It is planned to identify priorities
more clearly to determine what changes are necessary to achieve greater
effectiveness in the Center's operation.

Data Management Study

The Marine Sciences Council initiated last year a comprehensive data
management study jointly funded by participating agencies.

The study is proceeding in two phases to identify and evaluate the require-
ments for information and data management to support all aspects of na-

118

Information Management

tional marine resource and engineering development activities, as projected
for the next ten years. The first phase was designed to:

— review and analyze the findings of related studies of data manage-
ment, such as the feasibility study on a national buoy system ;
— assess customer requirements for marine data;
— survey the relevant literature on storage, retrieval, and reduction of

marine data;
— collate the plans of selected agencies for the development of improved

oceanographic data handling capabilities;
— develop a detailed plan for the second phase.
An interagency advisory group and a panel of consultants — representing
Government and industry — were established to evaluate both Federal and
non-Federal requirements and to monitor the study.

The first phase determining the specific scope and structure of the study
is now complete. Interviews by the contractor study team were held with
representatives of 28 Federal agencies and departments and with representa-
tives of the scientific, educational, and industrial community throughout
the country.

The nature of future data requirements to be considered in developing
recommendations for a national marine data program were found to be :
— broader geographical coverage;
— increased synoptic data collection ;

— greater use of instruments which record several parameters concur-
rently;
— increased integration of marine and meteorological data collection

and analysis;
— stronger emphasis on multi-agency and multi-national cooperative

survey programs ;
— greater use of expendable instruments to facilitate shipboard

measurements ;
— increased volumes and diversity of data collected;
— greater need for standards and quality control to facilitate multi-
organizational collection and exchange of data;
— steps to handle perishable data resulting from an increase in synoptic

data use; and
— recognized need for space-time correlation, not only for marine data
but combinations of marine and meteorological data.
The study will proceed in 1968 into its second phase, to identify and fore-
cast data requirements ; to delineate a national data program, with a transi-
tion plan to attain coordination of existing marine data and information
service functions; and to determine cost estimates for the principal com-
ponents and competitive alternatives. The study will include recommenda-
tions on data management improvement for the Federal agencies and

119

related data centers, including priorities. An inventory of marine informa-
tion services will be developed to :

— define existing data sources (prime producers and data centers) ;

— describe their holdings, services, data availability, and cost;

— describe the procedures for obtaining data and other services from
these sources.

Preparing for the Future

The complex problems associated with the flow of marine sciences data
from acquisition to end-product are being approached by planning for data
handling over the next ten years. If not resolved, problems of poor service,
slow response time, and higher costs than necessary will intensify in the
future. The data study to be completed early in 1969 will indicate how data
functions and activities might logically evolve on a national scale to achieve
progress in providing the kinds and quality of services needed by all sectors
of the marine science afTairs community.

120

"Basic research is the cornerstone on which the successful use of the sea must

rest.' JOHN F. KENNEDY

Chapter X

SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH

Realization of the potential benefits of the sea discussed throughout the
report depends on a strong core of scientific research. Yesterday's studies to
increase understanding of the ocean have made possible explicit achieve-
ments today. In recent years we have seen dramatic examples of the direct
payoff of research reflected in such endeavors as our naval capabilities,
weather prediction services, and off-shore oil production. While all of the
benefits in the 1970's and 1980's which will result from current research
programs are not predictable, the demands on the marine environment are
certain to grow. We have learned from experience in many other fields that
we will be able to respond to those demands only if a vigorous base of
science is maintained.

That the successful attainment of marine science goals depends on classical
scientific and engineering fields is portrayed in Table X.l. Also shown are
examples of gaps in present knowledge. The Table subdivides each purpose
into smaller tasks for accomplishment and shows that many areas of marine
sciences have application to more than one purpose. Physical oceanography,
for example, has relevance to all the purposes. While the Table is not in-
intended to be comprehensive, it provides a broad framework for relating
research programs to explicit needs ; it may thus serve as a qualitative guide
to research content discussed in other chapters. The Table does not, of course,
reflect the institutional vehicles essential for the successful transfer of scientific
discoveries to practical needs. But the contributions of science derived mainly
from university research are important equally to Government and to
industry.

121

Marine Science Affairs

"o

s

Qui

g

.„

w

fi

C

V

H

1

CO

S9

e

S9

is
V

c

O

O

"0

u

v>

a

3
O
u

C
o
u

C

^

=a

V

ll

>>

o

+2

^

c

13

2 <->
on

C T3
O

§1
(XV
X T3

O

O

8^

C/3 Z

= C

« lU (U

o - o S

C T3 l-i

CA -r^ ^

t) « — 00

.5 u
t, C -a

U V u

^ CO M

1 1 8
<3 ..2

c x: E
u — B

*^ Ui 3

^ s

^^ en H

T5 a

« rt ».
X b PQ

ti H

o
o
e

£
«

•o
c
a

a>
u

e
£

o

c

(0

S
I

o ii
HO

>^ii CO

IM S .

o ° i^

n! nj --3

^ 3 S

boU3
C V
.- o

3 O

O
'•V

13U

Ql,

«

s ii s^.y CO .y

rt j2 "o w ^ w

y, -a c :3 c

-^ «j o bcT; bo h

crcl j3 rt ii rt w

< - v S S £ JH

'^ tso - o
■C o ii

O -^w

CO

w ^ u "O

(T3 t) ,. (^

o 1- 1- 3 .^ O

<0<c«ffiU

a
«

CO f

u bo
bo O
rt c
o «
i S

on ■< <^
U U

^ - £
" § «

O "C

0.0

9)

bo

■^

u
O

< S

122

Scientiflc Research

u g c o)

is ^ e s

o y 3 o

S5 T) a ti)

Sj 2 3 t)

Ji S « -a
g .2^

o rt u
•^ > .0

bo

C

o

3 a 3 n

I- .-a -tt a

M •? T <^

t-i >^ >"* ^

3
8 S

^ 2

T3 2 g

■$ ys "H.

•^ c S
^- 2°

u '«: bo

tJ <« «

i^ J

o h

<ii V i;

• - 4-»

^ bC

C cQ C
t) — < o

S boT.
sec
i! ^ o

.S

<3 -5
3 c

•si

8

CO o

1) (4

13 e

— *> o '^ 'S

o 0, cl.3 5

m O O 13 g

>2 ^ ^ i^; ^

<%i o

S

8 -B

bed tc
« >

111

c .a «

3

*« S
° §

o

is
u

bpS, -5

If
i

.2 «

It's

V U O

J3 S o «

o .

a —

.0

•§

09

4

I

123

Marine Science Affairs

tt

3
C

e
e
o

IB

e
(9

n

c
e

(0

Z

M

e
c

XI

c

«
w

c

.S
'5

«

c
'C

a

S

3

'S

E 13

3 V

a, >

c s

«r '^
lis

to g

ii ^ ^ i- 6 u

•»-• 4> >> W S TO

c

n

£ S Q

■t; ■'-' O en

? o o "a

>1 5

M O 3
■&0 H -P.

gtafc

b I- sh
P ,o ,o

a ^ o o

CL, CO

<

> >

V V

^QQ ►S ^

rg.

1) pj
•« -s

O

TO .^

TO 4>

> 2-a

o "5 ^

fe (U u

pC C/1

fe

c

o 2
c ^

bo >« 3
c -c ^

c Sb;3

<-> "3 O

M C

!« « «

w ??

2 o -
"' "13 -3

O
V to

o 3

10 2

„ TO (J

QJ QJ ' — ! ffH

I r:

I CO C

1.2 S

\S 2
11

r-^ ^

C V

C u

c I

co" >"

t) bp

4J O

a o

55 — CM
>.

Oh

V 3

£ o c

>.J3
be o
O O

o S

nS rt •■- -w

C3

U

C ■"

W cri W

CM CO ■* iH "

C

>x

o

be

a

O

n

o

cl

t-H

a

c 2 S
•2 !3.2

n

H

(1.

124

Scientific Research

a.
a

&

a
o

3

2*

JS

o

S " "
.2^1-

'm ■Jj tJ

0L, ^ pa

" 60

c So

(^ be

o

' 2 ° 2

bo O «j

«^ ^"^

I ts "^ fee
6 8 "„«

t^ be
M u o _c

^ CO

■a a

C n

.2
c ^

'3 o

IT

•550000

s2

c -o —
■^.2 2
§

•*3 O

3 «

'S g?o

.2 V -a

T3 C «J

- V >

4> J. I"
O . - W

3 2-0

< fn ►^

o o

a c

Q ^

>. o 2 °

CO 4J «

.2 .2 ^ .>, .-

•« "^ '-g « ^

g .2 ^ u 13

&• bo H "r "r

° o

a

o

c

w !3 M _9
li ^ *i -^

„ bo be

CO U

bo

o o

V V

00

c o fe

?5 C W

So"
:e-20

c« Ph -t;

JC

a

u
bO
O

c

J3

a

U.S

o o

C 2 _

— • CM

^■c

cu

O 'bb-S

.2 ^ bo'=^

— o c
.2=C;3

pa ^

- 2 " !a

"!^ 2 5S

c4 CO tj>' H

•5 3 0"'

" s 3 ^

_ O o o

■(3 <« »- o

u b Pm U3

0

«

sr

0 **

z

riei

0
z

(II

1

XI V

0

^

o.s

z

>:!§

0

Bi

f-

■j3 «

C t-

«i:

S 3

-o S3

2

>- s

^

c

V o

5i 3

2 D.

2 o

U to

•a u

c 5

2 «

125

Marine Science Affairs

«

3
C

V

c
e
o

10

e
O

M
C

e

>>

DO

e
o
c

£

«

H

c

IB
»

C
«

'5

(A

«

C

(0

■

X

z

(0

-4i y;

.ago
^-3 o
.2 o ^

^ CO .22

T3 « 2
■^ '*^ w

^ -o ■«
iH :^ 2
_ "o S

(3 o .«

° "H

13

C

I-

o

"O tn I-

a a, o

X « X

bo

a
n

J3

c ^

•2 B

s e

13 .2 J2

S c >

-c 'fi «

2 u ^

V

(15 _a;

bo
.id

t, bp
h C

.s ■«

^:si2
:2^^

- ^.y

^'^ s

"C . . .

« — CM CO

J3

<u

>«

J3 -

!^

CL ^

!3
a,

p3 a
0 I-

u

0 -2

Q

sl

•g-

c >-

2<2
■■S C

3 13.2

u

(N

o .2
2^ gl3

bo 5

3 (U c
U r-' .52

bp G

^ "2

u o

boss
C o

c „
'tib ^
e .S
«^
1 g

"2 e i

>- S fi

iJ 2 fr

^ ^ ^

4:: f R

m — CM

a X,
2^ o

rr M j-c

Oh
CM

'-0 ,S

-2 «
o <^

w -a
S v

o .2

< 2

"O S

iJ o

I

lU

V

h

b

126

Scientific Research

S a

B S

V

V

.2 C

-ft "S

II

^§11

ca rt c« O

&^ o-a

§ " ^ 2

O -3 O. be
■So

13 o u So
"^ . . .

^ — < <N CO
u
O

127

Marine Science Affairs

«

e
O

«

c
e

M

O

e
e

£

I-

•a
c
n
«

c
»

'5

(A

0)

B

«

10

a

•g

a

V

U

♦^

s-a

c

*-»

o

a

rt

>s

J3 T)

Si

a

«

M

•§

0

>

^

c -a

V

a

a

a

o
0

"o

O

1

a

C

(Tt

CJ

y

.y

a

d ,.

be Oi cu u

o

o

O 3

V

m

>

V

> 'S

Id
o

QQ

T)

C

P3

o

>.

8

J3

■4irf

1.

CJ

C

w

T3

C

a

E^

fi

o

c3

o

fcb bo

r>\

o,q

o

u

^

^■^

CO

S?o

W "m

o

IJ^

1

a c

c« O
/^ bo (-

T3
C W

1 1

3 ..

■^5

be JJ

«.5

to

*i c

o !3

U)

D,

_o

rt

w

3

6

o
o

« S3 y=

g o B) >- :=
u "S 'S ti .H

^ o SP
c 0; o

2 o "o

:5 S'

ra u 4_i
u CJ VI

o ^-^

b-
rt w

bo 3

■^ 'S "H

" b 2

'm 13 -C

y3

.a t;

u bo

Oh "!

s e

C
.O "=
'm >^

O. rt
bo

-a

< ►ii

C 3

lU

E e

3 rt XI o

»-( 4j ^
'E C/D C/3

3

° I

bO '.
c «

D 75

128

Scientific Researcli

S

I;

t! 2 ^

u O be
O

3 ^ i S S

« C n 2 U -C

129

Marine Science Affairs

Current Research Capabilities

Our investments over the past seven years have resulted in the accelerated
development of marine scientific and technical manpower, ships, and facili-
ties. The quality of our research fleet and shore facilities is unsurpassed. Our
small but growing corps of highly trained specialists provides a strong cre-
ative base of talent (see Chapter XI) .

The Federal Government has accepted responsibility to make sure that
academic research has grown in proportion to needs and opportunities,
public and private. Federal funding for oceanographic research is shown
in Figure X.l.

In addition to the research contributions of the universities, there have
been many substantial contributions from Government laboratories and
from industry. There are more than 90 Federal, 40 State, 90 academic, and
25 private laboratories involved in some aspect of oceanographic research.^
These are listed in Appendix F. However, most of the basic research is
carried out at 12 of our leading institutions.- Research has been conducted
both by multidisciplinary teams and by the oceanographer, physicist, chemist,
biologist, or geologist working alone. The Federal Government has drawn
on scientific results of completed research and on the scientists in planning
research programs. Close communication between the Federal Government
and the universities has been a particularly important factor in the success of
science.

The Government's oceanographic research fleet currently includes 35
vessels with 32 additional survey vessels also collecting data related to basic
research efforts. Most of these ships are well equipped with modem instru-
mentation, and the capabilities of some of our newer ships such as the
Oceanographer and Silas Bent are unsurpassed. However, a few of these
vessels were built in the 1940s and are becoming more expensive to maintain
and operate and need to be replaced.

Universities operate about 40 other research ships, most of which are
supported by Government funds; States and commercial organizations
operate and charter others.

Recent technological advancements are rapidly providing many new tools
to complement the capabilities of our research fleet. Manned deep sub-
mersibles like the Alvin, shown in Figure XII. 2 in chapter XII, are justi-
fying the vision of their early advocates and are being used increasingly as
scientists fully explore their potential. U.S. -built submersibles made over
300 research dives in 1967 as compared to 140 in 1965 and 230 in 1966.
Towed unmanned vehicles are making it possible to examine the deep ocean

^ With annual budgets of more than $50,000 devoted to ocean investigations.

" Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
and following universities: Oregon State, Washington, Texas A&M, California
(Lajolla), Columbia, Rhode Island, Johns Hopkins, Hawaii, Miami (Florida), and
New York.

130

Scientific Research

Figure X-1— Funding for Oceanographic Research
CShowing Federal Sources of Non-Mission Related Research)

Millions of Dollars'
150

Mission - Related Research

CH

Basic and Applied Research
Beneficial to Several National Goals

100

TRANSPORTATION

SMITHSONIAN

COMMERCE

AEC

1967

I. Excludes Coast Guord Re

in new detail, and sophisticated instrument packages, capable of freefall and
recovery, are collecting information long needed by the oceanographer. Buoy
technology has advanced to the point w here experiments requiring long time-
series observations are being planned. Meteorological satellites now provide

131

287-921 O — 68-

-10

Marine Science Affairs

new insights into weather processes over the sea, and Gemini photography
demonstrated the potential of space observation of ocean phenomena. Ad-
ditionally, advanced laboratory models — physical and mathematical — pro-
vide important new analytical tools.

Federal Funding of Research and Facilities

Research ship operating costs are shown in Table X.2. The total Federal
support of basic and applied research, including work performed in uni-
versities, industry or the Government is shown in Table X.3. Research pro-
posed for the next fiscal year is about $14 million greater and the research
ship operating costs about $3 million greater than the appropriations for
FY 1968.

Many of these programs have been discussed in other Chapters, par-
ticularly those supporting specific missions. The Navy, primarily through the
Office of Naval Research, supports marine science research at almost 100
universities and colleges and private laboratories and a dozen Navy labora-
tories. Investigations cover broad programs in ocean and sea floor dynamics;
marine chemistry, geology, and biology; air-sea interactions; physics of
sound in the sea; Arctic environment; radioactivity; research instrument
development; human regulatory mechanisms related to diving; earth physics;
corrosion; and related fields.

The Department of Defense THEMIS program to develop new academic
centers of excellence includes six projects ^ in marine sciences that were
initiated in 1967. The total funding of $2.92 million, which represents
approximately 43% of all THEMIS funds allocated to the Navy during
FY 67, provides these institutions with two full years of support which
is step-funded over a three- year period. The additional FY 1968 and FY 1969
ocean science and technology expenditures under Project THEMIS are
expected to amount to $4.5 million and $6.0 million, respectively, based on
the same percentage allocation of total Navy THEMIS resources.

The National Science Foundation has increasingly supported marine re-
search, facilities, and education at universities and oceanographic institu-
tions. The NSF program :

— funds for ship construction and conversion;

— supports the construction of laboratory buildings, docking facilities,
and other shore installations;

' State University of New York at Buffzilo — Environmental Physiology; University
of Massachusetts — Deep Sea Submersibles ; University of Notre Dame — Military
Vehicle Technology; Arizona State University — Human Performance in Unusual
Environments; Oregon State University — Use of On-line Computer for Environ-
mental Research; Florida State University — Fluid Dynamics Center.

132

Scientific Research

— supports basic research grants ;

— assumes responsibility for an appreciable part of the ship operating
costs at educational institutions ;

— provides management for the United States Antarctic Oceanographic
Research program;

— funds a special program of deep ocean sediment coring in depths of
water to 20,000 feet; and

— supports special studies, fellowships, and conferences.
While the size of the research programs of other agencies are not as large
as the Navy and NSF programs, they too contribute both to meeting the
needs of individual agencies and to a strengthened national research
base. Among the many programs included in the multi-goal research
category are research on air-sea interaction (ESSA) , radionuclide investiga-
tions (AEC), activities related to phenomena of currents (Coast Guard),
and analyses of marine biological and geological specimens (Smithsonian) .
The Council's Committee on Marine Research, Education, and Facilities
was established to assist the Council on questions of oceanographic re-
search and engineering, vessels and facilities, and manpower and specialized
education, including the Sea Grant Program. Advice is also obtained from
the National Academies of Science and of Engineering. In addition, a Sep-
tember 1967 report prepared by the Council of Oceanographic Laboratory
Directors* (COLD) for the Marine Sciences Council on the role of
academic institutions in the development of marine resources and technology
has provided valuable insights concerning Federal policies in support of
research.

Table X.2 — Research Ship Operating Costs by Agency

(In millions of dollars)

Estimated,
FY 1967

Estimated,
FY 1968

President's
budget,
FY 1969

1. DOD:

a) Dept. of Navy _

5.4
0

1.9
.2
. 1

8. 1
.3

1.2

7.2
0

2.8
.2
.3

9. 1
.3

1.2

8.3

2. Commerce:

a) ESSA

0

3. Interior:

a) Bureau of Commercial Fisheries

b) Geological Survey. _ _ .

2.8
.2

c) Bureau of Mines

.4

4. NSF

10.7

5. AEC

.3

7. Transportation:

a) Coast Guard-

1.2

17.2

21. 1

23.9

The COLD institutions are listed in XI, Figure XI. 4.

133

Marine Science Affairs

Table X.3 — Research by Agency (Excluding Ship Operating Costs)

(In millions of dollars)

Estimated,
FY 1967

Estimated,
FY 1968

President's
budget,
FY 1969

1. DOD:

a) Dept. of Navy

Themis

b) Dept. of Army

c) ARPA

2. Commerce:

a) ESSA

b) Maritime Administration

3. Interior:

a) Bureau of Commercial Fisheries

b) Geological Survey

c) Office of Saline Water

d) Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife.

e) Bureau of Mines

f) Federal Water Pollution Control Admin

4. NSF

5. AEC

6. HEW:

a) Public Health Service

b) Food and Drug Administration

c) Office of Education

7. Transportation:

a) Coast Guard

8. Smithsonian -

9. NASA

Subtotal

Research Ship Operation Costs

Total

20.3
2.9
3.2
1.8

2.6
2.4

10. 1

2.8

.6

1.4

.2

1.8

14.5

4.8

3.6

.3

1. 1

.5

1.3

. 1

76.3
17.2

21.2

4.5

3.4

.7

3.5
5.6

10.8

3. 1

.9

1.7

. 1

2.9

24. 1

5. 1

4.0

.4

1.2

.5
1.3
1.6

96.6
21. 1

23.7

6.0

3.9

0

4.5
2.9

11.0
3.0
1.0
2.5
.2
3.7

28.0

5. 1

4.2

.6

1.5

6. 1
1.4
1.6

110.9
23.9

93.5

117.7

134.8

134

Scientific Research

Oceanology Highlights

In 1967, the number of oceanographic cruises of U.S. ships increased by
14 percent over 1966 and by 40 percent over 1965.^ The following
areas of investigations exemplify the breadth of research conducted during
several of these cruises in 1967:

— climatic changes caused by variations in the Earth's orbital parameters ;

— chemical processes involved in the formation of manganese nodules on
the ocean floor;

— mechanisms of ocean layer mixing of gases ;

— naturally occuring insecticides in a tropical estuary ;

— a new fracture zone in the Atlantic postulated on the basis of earthquake
epicenters ;

— relationship of upwelling oflF the Indian coast to the onset of the
monsoon.

The number of national and international meetings in the marine sciences
increased by 68 percent in 1967 over 1965,*^ and there was also a significant
increase in the number of articles related to marine sciences published in
some 1700 scientific and engineering journals.^

One of the most exciting scientific advances in 1967 in the field of
marine geology and geophysics was deduction from empirical evidence of
ocean floor spreading. Basically, this concept states that rock within the
earth's mantle flows very slowly over millions of years and rises under the mid-
ocean ridges to continually form new oceanic crustal rock. The plastically
flowing rock then spreads very slowly along the seabed away from the crest of
the mid-ocean ridges in both directions dragging the newly formed crust of
rock along. Finally, the rock circulates downward at continental margins.

Recently, new data have been brought to bear on the validity of the con-
cept. Evidence has come from measurements of the earth's magnetic field of
the mid-ocean ridges and from first motion studies of earthquakes associated
with the fracture zone that offset the ridge axes. Results have shown that
the relative motion across the fracture zone is just that expected from the
ocean floor spreading hypothesis. Ocean scientists are providing evidence
that the solid earth is unstable and in a sense flows; marine geology and
geophysics likely will tell us the rate of motion.

''ICO publications 16, 22, and 27; Oceanographic Ship Operating Schedules FY
1965, 1966, and 1967.

* International Marine Sciences, UNESCO and FAO, published in 1965, 1966, 1967.

'Based on a review of listings in Oceanic Index, Mission Bay Research Institute,
Lajolla, California.

135

Marine Science Affairs

New Research Programs

/. A New Emphasis on Arctic Research.

The scientific and strategic importance of the Arctic region has long been
recognized. Now as shipping and air travel increase in the polar latitudes, and
the Arctic becomes a more attractive potential source of oil, minerals, and
seafood, Arctic research is taking on added significance.

In recognition of this importance, the development of capabilities to con-
duct oceanographic research in polar and sub-polar areas was selected by the
Marine Sciences Council as an area deserving priority attention during FY
1 969. Last year the Council recommended that a replacement Coast Guard
sliip authorized for the International Ice Patrol be especially designed and
equipped so that oceanographic research in the high latitudes could be ex-
panded. However, funds were not appropriated for the ship in FY 1968 and
the Council has recommended that $14.5 million be provided in FY 1969.
During the past year construction began on a new research facility for the
Navy Arctic Research Laboratory at Point Barrow, Alaska. The FY 1969
budget contains $2 million to improve this facility.

In addition, the Council requested its Committee on Marine Research,
Education, and Facilities to undertake a study of Federal research activities
in the Arctic and future needs.

2. Marine Pharmacology.

In the last few years the sea has become the source of a number of sub-
stances used in medicine, and there has been growing attention to marine
sources of pharmaceuticals. The value of biochemical studies of marine
plants and animals is indicated by certain antiviral, antimicrobal, and an
array of pharmacological effects found in toxins and chemicals recovered
from marine sources. The future value of these sources for medicinal pur-
poses is almost entirely unknown; research is just beginning.

During 1967 an ad hoc Committee on Marine Pharmacology and Toxi-
cology was established by the Marine Sciences Council as a basis for stimulat-
ing the development of a more broadly based marine pharmacology
program.

3. Air-Sea Interaction.

The Federal Council for Science and Technology has assigned the re-
sponsibility for developing a Federal Program for Air-Sea Interaction Re-
search to the Department of Commerce. This task was accomplished in
1967 in consultation with all interested agencies. As part of the program, a
Barbados Oceanographic Meteorological Experiment — BOMEX — will be
conducted from May to July 1969 in the area east of Barbados with funding

136

Scientific Research

and participation by seven Federal agencies.* A pilot investigation will be
executed on and near Barbados by ESSA and Florida State University from
June to August 1968.

Continuing Importance of Basic Research

The Federal Government has played a major role in the support of basic
research generally and marine research specifically. It has endeavored to
strengthen the research base, through intensified academic science, con-
structing modern ships and laboratories, and supporting education and
training to insure a continuing influx of talented people into the field. The
base of scientific competence must now be further developed. The smaller
laboratories, as well as the larger well-established centers, must be
strengthened and contributions from a wide range of individual scientists
must be encouraged.

The Marine Resources and Engineering Development Act has given new
focus to the benefits to be derived from application of scientific discovery
that adds significance to the research itself. Continued excellence is essential
to effectively use the sea. The Marine Sciences Council has accordingly
selected basic research as deserving special attention, with emphasis on
research conducted at academic institutions.

' Departments of Commerce, Defense, Interior and Transportation and the Atomic
Energy Commission, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and National
Science Foundation.

137

"In our research-oriented, innovative society we have an unprecedented
opportunity to encourage all our citizens to be creative, each in his own way.
Science and technology can hasten the achievement of this goal if we deploy
and use our creative talent wisely." — committee on utilization of scien-
tific AND engineering MANPOWER OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES

Chapter XI

MANPOWER: EDUCATION,
TRAINING, AND FACILITIES

Skilled manpower is essential for a nation to advance in science and tech-
nology.

Availability of manpower^ — in terms of quality as much as quantity — be-
comes all the more critical in the field of marine sciences and technology
because at this stage of development, it is skill-oriented rather than capital-
oriented. Except in the military and petroleum areas, technological develop-
ments have not yet occurred that warrant large investments for production
and operations. Compared with many other fields, there is a higher con-
centration of activity in research than development. New achievements are
paced in large measure by individual talents.

In recent years, the Federal Government has assumed a major responsi-
bility— as a matter of national policy — for the support of training and
education through a wide range of fellowships, training grants, research and
institutional programs. This Federal policy ha„ significantly strengthened
the marine sciences.

Graduate enrollments and the number of degrees granted annually in
the field of oceanography have increased substantially during recent years
as suggested by Table XI. 1, a gratifying product of investments in ocean-
ography that began to increase in the early 1960's. Support for education
of marine science technicians and ocean engineers, however, has appeared
to lag behind corresponding support for other fields. The importance of

139

Marine Science Affairs

technicians may have previously been underestimated with the consequence
that the present shortage of supply may impede effective utilization of
leadership-level scientists.

Table XI.1 — Oceanograpiiic Degrees Granted, 1960-1967, at C.O.L.D.*

Institutions

Academic year ending

Full time

graduate

student

enrollment

Degrees granted

M.S.

PhD

1960

92

105

126

188

221

»520

>800

J 980

9
14
22
22
41
35
N.A.
299

6

1961

9

1962

12

1963

8

1964

9

1965

25

1966

N.A.

1967

2 60

* Council of Laboratory Directors Report, September 1967. These Directors represent the following in-
stitutions: Institute of Marine Sciences, University of Miami (Florida); Department of Oceanography,
Oregon State University; Department of Oceanography, University of Washington; Department of Ocean-
ography, Texas A&M University; Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California (LaJolla) ;
Lamont Geological Observatory of Columbia University; Woods Hole Oceanographlc Institution; Graduate
School of Oceanography, University of Rhode Island; Department of Oceanography, The Johns Hopkins
University; Institute of Geophysics, University of Hawaii.

> Estimated.

2 Minimum; M.S. in Oceanographlc Sciences only; PhD. in Oceanography only.

140

Manpower and Education

£

a
i>

M

e
e
n
«

O

a

«

c
e

>i
o

a

E

ui

CO c^ in o

in t>.

CM

f^

CT) CO CO (£)

00 CM

00

o

to (N (M ID

«— <

CD

Ol

•S »N

^

o

'^

CM —

■'i'

H

•* 00 r^ — '

(>• CO

in

3

01 CM CO CO

O eo

00

o>

CO CM t^ —

CM

c

m t^ lo CO

CM 1

t^

u

CO

—« CO in CO

CM >

^^

o

'^

CO —

(O

C

s

O — 00 •*

<£> ■*

CO

efl

CO t^ CM —

CM

CM

s

O)

-

■*

I • SP

O) o — o^

to CO

00

*f5^

£

CO CM CM O

CO

CM

en

O CM CM

in

i|g

s

■*! O — ' —

a-) CM

t^

00 CO O —

m

■7 t."3

2

Cv* CM —

<£)

1

<:D

Tf CM O CM

CO CM

CO

fc! c:

— CO ■* CO

eo

O

si

as

to —

Oi

CO o

fee

s

lO tJ< •* CO

a> —

to

CM CO

r>.

o

O

o

fe

'*< -* U3 CO

CM CO

t>.

2

CM CM to

^^

CO

2 '[11)

o

CO — i —

<£>

s

i^ CM t^ in

in —

t^

■<1< CO eo

CM

a

o

5

in t1« r^ CO

— ' 00

00

00 o eo

CO

m<j

o>

CM

» CO

't^*^

S 0

.-"3

•* CM t^ —

— to

few

t^ r^ — '

r^

"

1

£

to m to o

— —

<J>

— CO in to

00 —

in

§•

a>

eo in

o

S-i

1

®

S

■*■ CD O t^

r^ Tj<

1.^

CO ^ CM —

■<*' —

CO

S

Oi

— CO

to

o

1 I 1 1

Ui

a>

t».

o

!i3 i i

1 U 1 1
I O 1 ,

^

o

Ihj >^ ;

<S '

rt

13 '^l^

O

H

H

« « > D

"SSI'S

flH W U) M

§•5

:z:o

•< » c

o

S

i2

'"'

o

^

fe

J3

?5

u

■"

(4

A

:>.

.a

0

o

2

u

01

9

J3

x:

fe

s

o

^

o

1

a

O

s

s

1

a

a

o

o

•z

55

03

1^

U

X3

fe

■a

r)

r/3

o

■a

n

z

^

t)

03

t~

^5 g.

fe 3

^ U)

c .2

— ' "^ S

« 5

141

Marine Science Affairs

Table XI.3— Ocean Science Curricula, 1962-1968

Category of Curriculum and Degrees Offered

Numbers of Institutions where
Curricula Offered

1962-63 1

1967-68 2

Oceanography :

baccalaureate _ _ _

1
10
10

0
7
6

5
15
13

4
11
10

0
0
0

2
3
2

1

7

masters.- __ -

15

doctorate _

17

Marine Sciences:

baccalaureate.

1

masters .

9

doctorate _

9

Biological Sciences (with marine option):

baccalaureate.. ...... _.

1?

masters ._ . . ..

??

doctorate _ _ . - .

16

Earth/Physical Sciences (with marine option):

baccalaureate __. _.

9

masters . ..

19

doctorate _

18

Ocean Engineering:

baccalaureate ..

2

masters

7

doctorate .

3

Applied Fisheries:

baccalaureate . .

2

3

doctorate

2

Taxonomy-Systematics :

diploma .

1

Technical School:

Certificate or Diploma ._ ..

3

' Data from ICO Pamphlet No. 6, June 1962, "University Curricula in Oceanography."

3 Data from ICO Pamphlet No. 30, Aug. 1967, "University Curricula in the Marine Sciences.'

142

Manpower and Education

Table XI.4 — Institutions Offering Marine Sciences-Engineering-Tech-
nician Training, 1962-1967*

(Degrees held by teaching staffs in parentheses)

Degrees offered

Number of schools having Marine Curricula

School Year 1962-63

School Year 1967-68

Oceanography _ .
Marine Sciences

10

(132 PhD)
(14 MS)
(6BS)
(36 PhD)

(5 MS)

Ocean Engineering.

(Applied) Fisheries

Life/Earth Sciences

(with marine orientation).

Taxonomy Systematics

Technology

3
20

(est 25 PhD)
(86 PhD)

. (8 MS)

Total number of schools reporting.

35

21

11

3
32

63

(270 PhD)
(20 MS)
(5BS)
(95 PhD)
(21 MS)
(2BS)
(58 PhD)
(24 MS)
(8BS)
(31 PhD)
(217 PhD)
(8 MS)

(1 PhD)

(6 MS)
(6BS)

♦Based on data provided to ICO and reported in ICO Pamphlet No. 6, June 1962 and Pamphlet No.
30 Aug. 1967.

Manpower Currently Available

In 1963 and in 1967 the National Science Foundation supported sur-
veys of personnel engaged in oceanographic activities. The results, reported
by work specialty and by employer, are presented in Table XI. 2. The data
indicate a doubling of the total number of specialists in the field during the
four years although this difference is probably due to broader coverage of
engineers in the second survey. The survey also indicates that only about 60
percent of the specialists in the field in 1963 remained in the field, which
further emphasizes the large recent influx of new participants.

143

Marine Science Affairs

Educational Opportunities

A survey of marine science curricula was completed during 1967 by the
Council's Committee on Marine Research, Education, and Facilities. Some
of the findings presented in Tables XI. 3 and XI.4 indicate that the demand
for ocean scientists and engineers has resulted in the establishment of new
curricula and new departments at colleges and universities interested in the
field for some years as well as entry of new schools. More schools are offering
baccalaureate degrees in marine specialties, and some schools now offer ocean
technician training. The fastest growth has been in ocean engineering.
None of the institutions surveyed five years ago offered courses in ocean
engineering while today two offer a bachelor's degree, seven a master's de-
gree, and three a doctorate.

Few students can independently afford the training necessary to attain a
high level of competence in marine science. The following Governmental
programs of student assistance find application in the marine sciences :

— National Defense Graduate Fellowship Program, National Defense
Student Loan Program, the Guaranteed Loan Program (graduate
and undergraduate) , and the Educational Opportunity Grants Pro-
gram (undergraduate) administered by the Office of Education
of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare ;
— ^grants to elementary and secondary school systems for developing
innovative programs under the Elementary and Secondary Educa-
tion Act of 1965 administered by the Office of Education of the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare;
— graduate fellowships by the Department of the Interior's Bureau of

Commercial Fisheries (about 20 per year) ;
— stipends from the Smithsonian Institution for post-doctoral studies

and summer research training ;
— fellowships, traineeships, faculty research training, and support of
course and curriculum improvement by the National Science
Foundation.
Support for marine sciences under these programs has been estimated as
follows :

(In millions of dollars)

FY 1967

FY 1968

FY 1969

Department of Health, Education and Welfare

Department of the Interior.

1. 1

.2

(*)
1.6

1.2
.2

(*)
1.7

1.5
.2

Smithsonian Institution

National Science Foundation.

1.9

•Less than $50,000.

144

Manpower and Education

The Department of Commerce, Defense, and Transportation support
graduate training and education for their employees to aid in career de-
velopment. For example, the Navy operates its own post-graduate school at
Monterey, California, and the Coast Guard operates an eight-week ocean-
ographic technician school. The programs cost :

(In millions of dollars)

FY 1967

FY 1968

FY 1969

Department of Commerce

Department of Defense

Department of Transportation

. 1
.9
. 1

. 1

1.3

. 1

Additionally, the National Science Foundation supports about 300 post-
graduate marine science students as research assistants on grants, the
Office of Naval Research about 200, and the Atomic Energy Com-
mission approximately 50. One benefit of this education-research arrange-
ment is that the student, by participating directly in the research, is afforded
an opportunity to obtain first-hand sea-going experience, although this ar-
rangement may prolong the time to obtain a degree. It is estimated that about
one-half of the graduate students in marine science obtain some assistance
through these programs, and most graduate students engage in part-time
teaching or work as research assistants.

In addition to Federal sources of support, there are a number of assistance
programs sponsored by the States and by industry, but these are small
by comparison.

Initiation of tiie Sea Grant Program

Recognizing the importance of manpower, engineering research, and
institutional development to future growth in marine sciences, the Congress
in 1966 passed the National Sea Grant College and Program Act (Public
Law 89-688) . The Act, signed into law on October 15, 1966, charges the
National Science Foundation with initiating, developing, and supporting
the programs authorized by the Sea Grant Act. It requires the Marine
Sciences Council to advise the Foundation with respect to the policies, pro-
cedures, and operations of the Foundation in carrying out its functions.

The Sea Grant Program has three explicit objectives :

■ — to accelerate training and education of specialized manpower,
especially ocean engineers and technicians, required by industry

145

Marine Science Affairs

and government which are not being developed through programs ;

— to initiate and support applied research, in predevelopment stages,

particularly related to recovery and utilization of marine resources ;

— to disseminate knowledge and information about marine resource

development to all interested and concerned sectors of the nation.

The Sea Grant Program includes two categories of support — Institutional
and Project.

Institutional-type Sea Grant Programs are intended to strengthen marine
science programs of colleges and universities engaging in multi-faceted
activities that embrace education, research, and advisory services. Institu-
tions are selected on such factors as ability to perform special studies of dif-
fering marine ecologies or resource problems, or for specialized experience
in other fields. Institutions thus have an opportunity to concentrate research
on problem areas of greatest regional interest and concern. Following a trial
period, an institution may be designated a Sea Grant College.

The Sea Grant College provision is intended in the first instance to en-
large the base of funding but it should be especially valuable in providing
longer term, broader based support to academic institutions than is gen-
erally possible through the project grant system. It should also encourage
inter-disciplinary approaches to broad 'problems and enhance communi-
cation between classical disciplines so often isolated within a university.

Under the second type of support. Sea Grant Projects are intended to
advance scientific, engineering, and technological know-how, especially
at the stage where scientific discovery first blends into a possible social ap-
plication, but also where practical economic benefits are still uncertain.
This mechanism also provides a means for responding to varied and chang-
ing research needs of the Federal Government and is of particular im-
portance in complementing programs of agencies not having broad extra-
mural programs, or supporting research on topics that cross missions of
various agencies and fail to gain the interest of any one. In the future, the
Government may express such interest through announcements by the
National Science Foundation, to invite attention and participation of the
non-Federal research, study and industrial community to meet these needs.

Support in this category will encompass more than research projects. The
legislation intended support for symposia and conferences, for the develop-
ment of innovative educational curricula and for new programs needed for
training of critical or specialized technological skills.

Thus, the Sea Grant legislation provides for grants and contracts to pub-
lic or private institutions of higher education, institutes, or laboratories —
for education, applied research and information transfer aimed at marine
resource development. Matching funds equal to one half the Federal grant

146

Manpower and Education

or contract, i.e., one-third of the total, must be obtained from sources other
than the Federal Government. Federal funds may not be used for construc-
tion or rental of facilities. Participants in any one State may not receive more
than 15 percent of the total appropriation to the Foundation for the Sea
Grant program in any fiscal year.

The Sea Grant program is being carried out at universities, but with the
expectation that the Federal and State Governments, the academic institu-
tions, and industry will examine common problems and pool diversified
resources, facilities, and specialized talents for their solution. The program
augments rather than replaces existing programs of support and should
provide a cohesiveness among these on-going efforts.

To implement the legislation, the National Science Foundation estab-
lished a new Office of Sea Grant Programs. The Foundation has also es-
tablished an advisory body for each of the two types of awards to review
proposals and make recommendations.

The following Sea Grant Project awards have been made:

American Association of Junior Colleges: "Planning for American

Junior College Involvement in the Training of Marine Technicians."

California Institute of Technology: "Restoration, Propagation, and

Management of Marine Algae."
Francis T. Nicholls State College, Thibadoux, Louisiana: "Shrimp
Production in Louisiana Salt-Marsh Impoundments under Existing
and Managed Conditions."
Massachusetts Institute of Technology: "Development of New Subjects

for an Ocean Engineering Graduate Program at MIT."
University of Miami (Florida) : "Development of Techniques for
the Mass Culture of Economically Important Pink Shrimp and
Pompano."
Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton: "Establishment of a Coopera-
tive Ocean Engineering Education Program."
On February 21,1 968, the National Science Foundation announced insti-
tutional awards to the following institutions :
University of Rhode Island, Kingston
Oregon State University, Corvallis
University of Washington, Seattle
The response to this new program — from State governments, academic
institutions, business, and industry — has been enthusiastic, and the Sea
Grant program has been selected by the Marine Sciences Council as a
program deserving continued priority emphasis during FY 1969.

In FY 1968, $4 million is designated to carry out provisions of the Act.
The budget requested for FY 1969 is $6 million.

147

287-921 O — 68 11

Investing in Manpower

Only now are we receiving the dividends of the accelerated educational
and training programs of the early 1960's. Today's program must respond
to the challenge of the 1970's.

The entire marine science program is dependent on an expanding base
of highly skilled and innovative specialists. Ocean scientists and engineers
comprise this core, but there is a growing need for specialists in many other
disciplines to turn their energies and intellect to the sea — from economics,
law, business, public administration, and foreign afTairs.

The supply of teachers holding doctorates or masters degrees, and
interested in teaching in the marine field, is not keeping pace with the'
demand. In fact, perhaps half of the new doctorates may be needed in educa-
tional institutions to keep pace with enrollments. At the same time, qualified
students are applying faster than they can be accommodated.

While the burden of specialized marine science education has rested
primarily with a very small number of educational and research institutions,
as the field grows it will increasingly depend upon a broader base of
universities and colleges for its scientists, engineers, and technicians.

The Sea Grant program offers a new approach to meeting national needs
for technical manpower. It should benefit the Nation as a whole, and it will
be of particular benefit in responding to the needs of States and communities
to use marine resources for strengthening local economies, conserving limited
coastal resources, and improving the quality of the environment.

148

"Technological — or engineering — needs of many environmental science
programs are so extensive that the line between marine science and ocean
engineering must be largely abolished in practice if not in theory, if many
important projects are to proceed effectively." — effective use of the sea;

REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT'S SCIENCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, 1966

Chapter XII

ENGINEERING IN THE OCEAN

One of the most significant aspects of marine science affairs today is the
changing emphasis from what was largely scientific study of the sea to its
more effective use. The agent for the critical transfer of scientific results to
practical application is ocean engineering.

Ocean engineering is a key to the development of the ocean's resources,
to maritime transportation, to defense, and to enhanced use of shores and
harbors to meet society's expanding needs.

Ocean engineering fulfills two important functions : it provides a bridge
from scientific discoveries to utilization of the oceans, and it provides new,
more powerful instruments and tools to observe and measure ocean
phenomena. Also, as work in the oceans becomes more complex, the engi-
neering techniques of systems analysis will increasingly be used.

The process of converting scientific knowledge to economic and social
needs is not well understood, whatever the technical field may be, and in
the civil applications of marine science and engineering there is the added
requirement for "consensus" among the many participants. Ocean engineer-
ing— a relative newcomer in the technical world — must meet this extra chal-
lenge if it is to mature concurrently with expanding marine requirements.

149

Marine Science Affairs

General Purpose Engineering in Fiscal Year 1969

General purpose ocean engineering is a term adopted for engineering
research and development that can be applied to a variety of purposes.
Applications often span the missions of two or more Gk)vernment agencies.

About 5% of the Federal marine science budget, divided into major
categories as follows, is proposed for these programs in FY 1969 :

(In millions of dollars)

TYPE OF ACTIVITY

Ocean Engineering (Navy)

Ocean Buoy Development Program (Coast Guard)
Nuclear Power (AEC)

Estimated,
FY 1967

8.2

.3

6.3

Estimated,
FY 1968

10

7
. 1
7.4

Estimated,
FY 1969*

14.9
5.3*
6.6

♦Included in the funding for other categories is approximately $5 million for instrumentation.
•*This program is discussed in chapter VIII.

Ocean Engineering Programs of the Navy

The Navy ocean engineering program includes studies, hardware de-
velopment, and prototype installations for military underwater tasks. The
primary effort is the Deep Ocean Technology Project to develop technical
options and to assist the Navy to assess more precisely the technical feasibilit)'
and requirements for future undersea warfare systems. The areas being
studied in relation to their potential deep ocean use include :

— manned and unmanned submersible vehicles ;

— fixed and mobile bottom structures ;

— engineering properties of the sea floor;

— metals and non-metallic materials ;

— submersible motors, electrical components and propulsion devices;

— equipment, instruments, and tools;

— life support systems ;

— long-endurance power sources.
Two major, long-range projects were selected by the Navy as initial
goals — an advanced deep ocean submersible and an experimental, one-
atmosphere, bottom habitat.^

^ Both projects are designed as "test beds" — not for operational use, to test a wide
variety of components and equipments.

150

Ocean Engineering

During the past year, long-standing Navy programs of material develop-
ment reached fruition in four areas:

— heat-treatable steel with a yield strength of 130,000 to 140,000 p.s.i.
was approved for use on Deep Submergence Rescue Vehicles and
other manned submersible hulls (previously approved limit was

100,000 p.s.i.);
— laboratory tests proved that one alloy of titanium can be used in
salt water without cracking due to stress corrosion (earlier there
were indications that alloys of this material with a high strength to
low density ratio could not be used in salt water) ;
— alloys of nickel and copper with considerably increased strength were

developed for use in submarine piping systems ;
— non-destructive test methods and criteria were developed for evaluat-
ing low-density syntactic foams which are used to supplement the
buoyancy of underwater vehicles.
Additional milestones in FY 1968 include modifications of the Navy's
Cable-controlled Underwater Recovery Vehicle (CURV II) for enhanced
reliability to depths of 2,500 feet and starting construction of CURV III for
an operating depth of 7,000 feet.

Advancements were reported in the technology for designing, construct-
ing, and operating fixed and semi-fixed habitats in which men can live and
work deep in the ocean at atmospheric pressure. Such structures, which may
be either on or in the sea bottom, have potential application for military
missions and also for civilian tasks of permanent or semi-permanent nature
such as mining. In FY 1969, this program will emphasize investigation of:
— hollow concrete cylinders for pressure-resisting structures at great

depths ;
— behavior and nature of sea floor sediments ;
— corrosion and biological fouling ;

— surveying techniques for precise determination of relative location of
bottom and surface points.

Power for Underwater Tasks

Perhaps the most critical, unmet need of underwater technology is for
inexpensive power sources with longer endurance. Today nearly all under-
water missions, except for military nuclear submarines, are limited by the
low capacities of available batteries. Advances are thus being sought to
increase the energy available per pound, per cubic foot, and per dollar of

151

Marine Science Affairs

invested cost by several hundred percent. Figure XII. 1 shows the competi-
tive merits of difTerent kinds of chemical and nuclear pov^^er sources. The
merits of fuel cells is thus suggested as deserving greater emphasis, and the
Navy plans such developments.

The Atomic Energy Commission program is directed toward the develop-
ment of nuclear power sources from 0.1 watt to 100 kilowatts for buoys,

Power Level (KW)
10

Mission Duration (Days)

Figure XII. 1. Ranges of applicability of underwater power sources are shown here.
For short-duration missions {less than 30 days) non-nuclear power sources, such
as batteries, fuel cells, and diesel engines, provide the best combinations of weight,
volume, power, and energy capacity, in the ranges shown by the numbers. As the
planned mission duration increases beyond 30 days, nuclear power becomes more
suitable, with reactors providing better overall characteristics above 10 KW, and
radioisotope-powered sources below 10 KW.

152

Ocean Engineering

deep ocean instrumentation, vehicles, habitats, and underwater machinery.
The initial emphasis and funding have been focused on design and develop-
ment of first-generation isotope power devices in the power range from
5-60 watts. The objective of this initial efTort has been to demonstrate the
feasibility of developing isotope power sources capable of long-term, unat-
tended operation in the marine environment without compromise of health
or safety requirements. This effort, successfully completed in 1966, has es-
tablished a reservoir of technology from which successive generations of
power systems are being developed. New demands for higher power, from
20 kilowatts up to several hundred kilowatts, are creating an incentive for
the development of reactor systems at these power levels. However, due to
the long lead time required for the development and qualification of nuclear
power systems (isotope and reactor) , it is likely that improved batteries, fuel
cells, and possibly chemically dynamic engines will fill the short-term ocean
engineering applications.

New Initiatives

The programs described thus far consist chiefly of general purpose engi-
neering which will provide a base for the technological utilization of the
ocean and its resources. Repeating the emphasis of last year on Deep Ocean
Technology, the Council has recommended an increase for the Navy (from
$3.5 million in FY 1968 to $7.4 million in FY 1969) for long-range studies
and prototype development of key ocean engineering comp)onents.

In addition, four areas involving advancing technological capabilities have
also been selected by the Marine Sciences Council for special emphasis during
FY 1969. The funding levels for their engineering components are summa-
rized in the table below. While the FY 69 expenditures for these programs
are small, these initial planning steps are essential beginnings for programs of
national importance.

New Areas Selected by Marine Sciences Council for Priority Attention

[millions of dollars]

FY 1969

Safety within the Sea — Department of Transportation .3

Study of an Instrumentation FaciHty — Marine Sciences Council ''

Continental Shelf Safety — Department of Transportation .2

Study of Frequency Allocation — Department of Transportation .03

" Funds are included as part of other programs and are not reported here because
the amounts for marine science cannot be accurately predicted at this time.

153

Marine Science Affairs

Safety of Manned Civilian Submersibies

Man can go deeper into the ocean, for longer periods, and do more stren-
uous work at almost all depths with the protection and powered assistance of
a small submersible. The United States leads the world in building and using
these new tools of research and industry. More than 1,000 dives have been
made for research and exploration since 1964. During the past 18 months.
Navy laboratories chartered several "vehicle years" of deep submersible
service from private industry, while the Navy-owned Alvin was operated
full-time by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (See Figure XII. 2) .

To insure that the growing activities of civilian submersibies are conducted
safely, an integrated system of regulation is now considered necessary, includ-
ing inspection of undersea vessels and structures, licensing of operators and
development of a capability to rescue personnel and submersibies in distress.
A new Council initiative "Safety within the Sea" calls for an extension of

Figure XII. 2. The United States leads the world in building and using small sub-
mersibies for research and other missions under the sea. Over 1,000 dives have
been performed for research and exploration since 1964. The U.S. Navy's Alvin
is operated by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution for research and recov-
ery. Two new Alvins are being built to operate at depths of 6,500 feet. (U.S.
Navy photograph.)

154

Ocean Engineering

existing maritime safety programs to nonmilitary submersibles and includes :
Technical aspects

Technical review and approved of designs and submersibles
Inspection during construction of equipment
Qualification standards and operator licensing
Casualty investigation
Operating limitations
Search and rescue capability
Operational control regulations
International coordination.
This initiative will not only increase safety but should help to lower con-
struction and insurance costs. Consideration is being given to legislation to
authorize the Coast Guard to carry out these duties.

Instrumentation and Communication

Modern science and engineering depend critically on a wide variety of
sophisticated instrumentation. Measurements in the ocean are more difficult
than on land due to the adverse effects of the environment on reliability of
instruments. Thus, one of the goals of ocean engineering is to develop better
instruments, tools, and communication and navigation equipment. Impor-
tant advances by the Department of Defense during the past year illustrate
a variety of accomplishments :

— a wide angle (115°) lens for photographic search of large bottom

areas,
— a multi-sensor "Fully Instrumented Submersible Housing" (FISH)

for accurate mapping of bottom micro-structure,
— techniques and instrumentation for detecting sand transport by means

of isotope tracers,
— miniaturized acoustic and inertial navigation systems for small
submersibles.
To avoid the problem of wave-induced motion inherent in surface buoys,
the COSMOS Underwater Stable Platform was developed by the Coast
and Geodetic Survey (ESSA) to measure tides, currents and variations in
magnetic field intensity. The principle of the COSMOS Platform has po-
tential for a variety of applications that require minimum-excursion moor-
ings for ships or large buoys. In 1966 an experimental platform was deployed
off California, 1 10 feet below the surface in 4,500 feet of water. It was tied to
the bottom by three mooring cables, arranged to be neutrally buoyant and

155

Marine Science Affairs

straight by attaching floats along the cable length. The equipment has per-
formed well and evaluation is continuing, along with developments to
achieve meteorological measurements and to permit telemetry of data.

In FY 1969, Navy, Corps of Engineers, ESSA, Bureau of Commercial
Fisheries, the Coast Guard, and other agencies propose to continue their
instrumentation development programs at a level of about $5 million.

Two areas were selected by the Marine Sciences Council for emphasis in
FY 1969: a "Study of Frequency Allocation" and a "Study of National In-
strumentation Facility." The first study, to be carried out by the Coast Guard
in cooperation with other interested agencies, will consider the need for stand-
ardized underwater acoustic frequencies for non-military use to increase
safety, convenience, and compatibility of new equipment. This will include
distress signals and general underwater communication. The second study,
to be undertaken by the Council's Committee on Marine Research, Educa-
tion and Facilities, in conjunction with the National Academy of Engineering,
will compile and analyze the functions, scope of activity, and organizational
guidelines for a national oceanographic instrumentation center, considering
possible utilization of the existing Navy Oceanographic Instrumentation
Center.

Safety on the Continental Shelf

Technological advances of the past few decades and foreseeable advances
indicate that extensive and varied activities will be conducted on the Con-
tinental Shelf. These include extraction of oil and gas, mineral mining,
fishing, transportation, pollution control, recreation, scientific and industrial
exploration. There may eventually be a need to develop mooring systems
for large floating airports, floating harbors or mobile breakwaters. There
may be new types of fixed underwater structures and installations, observa-
tories and laboratories, drilling and mining complexes, storage for liquid
or bulk materials, pumping and compressor stations, and processing and
power generating plants. For these and similar purposes, we need improved
yet economical materials; increased knowledge of the properties and me-
chanical behavior of sea floor sediments, wind and waves; and proven
techniques for such tasks as drilling, coring, pile driving, tunneling, pipe
laying, dredging, island building and waste disposal.

Conflicts between the various coastal pursuits will increase along with
the amount of activity, with resultant hazard to life and property. Many
of these pursuits are beyond the purview of or are only vaguely covered by
existing safety legislation. A FY 1969 initiative, "Continental Shelf Safety,"

156

Ocean Engineering

was adopted by the Council to consider problems of off-shore safety and
their amelioration. The Coast Guard was recommended as the lead agency
for:

— establishment of design standards and certification procedures for
Continental Shelf structures and devices to reduce the likelihood of
collapsing structures, bursting oil containers, or other structural
accidents ;
— elimination of wrecks, debris, pollutants, and litter on the Continental
Shelf which may be a hazard to life or property or an interference
to useful activity ;
— a study of means to minimize conflicts among the various activities
including: shipping, transfer of liquid or gases in pipelines, fishing,
recreation, drilling, pumping, and storing materials underwater or
at the surface.

Engineering for Non-Military Objectives

Private industry can and will undertake marine technology development
on its own initiative where the ratio of returns to investment compares
favorably in amount and timeliness to alternative ventures on land. Between
these private efforts and Government military programs are areas in which
the Federal Government may have to sponsor additional research and de-
velopment in order to meet some of the objectives of the Marine Sciences
Act. Exploration of the ocean, prediction and control of environmental
conditions, major modifications of coasts and harbors, and fuller exploration
of both food and minerals from the sea are cases where Federal investments
in technology may be warranted.

A contract study for the Council was conducted to identify technological
needs not being met by either Government or industry. These were found to
be power sources and transmission, cable systems, fishing boats and equip-
ment, submerged navigation and communication, near bottom instrumenta-
tion and open ocean handling and transfer systems.

Additional scientific information seems especially needed in:
— coastal and oceanic hydrodynamics;
— underwater soil mechanics ;
— marine biology research for fisheries technology ;
— exploration for mining the ocean bottoms.
Two unresolved policy issues have also been identified for study :

How can the Government support multi-purpose marine technology,
serving several public interests, yet below a threshold of budget justifi-
cation for any single agency?

157

How should marine technology required for industrial development

be supported when advances of the activity are in the public interest

but the returns on investment are too long deferred or are otherwise

less attractive than alternate ventures available to private capital?

These two questions illustrate the institutional considerations for ocean

engineering to help satisfy the requirements for future maritime endeavors.

158

"Tangible objects and ideas circulate throughout the Union freely. Nothing
checks the spirit of enterprise. The Government invites the aid of all who
have talents or knowledge to serve it." — alexis de tocqueville

Chapter XIII

PARTNERSHIP WITH
NON-FEDERAL INSTITUTIONS

While this report has dealt primarily with Federal policies and programs
to study and use the seas, coastal zones, and Great Lakes, many non-Federal
institutions play a distinct and important role in marine science affairs.
The Federal role itself is shared with other bodies, and Federal goals can-
not be achieved without cooperation. Man's use of the sea and shoreline
is clearly multi-institutional as well as multi-purpose.

American private enterprise invests substantial sums in development of
coastal areas, in transportation, in the exploration and extraction of off-shore
oil and gas, and in fishing.

The States have rights and responsibilities as to in-shore waters and off-
shore activities.

The universities and private research laboratories are key sources of
basic knowledge and manpower needed by all participants.

The full development of this Nation's ocean enterprise involves cooper-
ative activity by industry, regional authorities. State and local governments
and the academic community.

159

Marine Science Affairs

Industry

Industrial investments in ocean enterprises and resources considerably
exceed the approximately $500 million annually invested in the marine sci-
ences by the Federal Government.

The value of oil and gas extracted off the United States coast now runs
over a billion dollars a year, and is increasing at a rate of around 20 percent
per year. Total new investment in offshore oil and gas leases has averaged
over $235 million a year since 1960, and in 1967 approached $600 million
on Federally administered land. Shipping, a traditional field of private
enterprise, generated one and one half billion dollars in revenues, and
profits totalling $150 million, for American flag shipping companies in
1966.

Also involved are other industries with substantial investments and
revenues :

— high technology industries concerned with precision instruments,
equipment and vehicles — primarily aerospace and electronic com-
panies ;
— industries producing economic wealth — other than shipping and
fossil fuel extraction — ship and boat building, fisheries, and fish
processing and marketing; magnesium and bromine extraction
from sea water; and extraction of sulfur and other minerals from
the seabed;
— construction and service industries such as those involved in shore-
line and harbor rebuilding and dredging ;
— companies that provide oceanographic services and conduct special-
ized oceanographic ship operations;
— coastal activities that include recreation and associated small busi-
nesses.
Industry is expected to increase its involvement substantially even as the
Federal Government accelerates its own efforts. In fact, this parallel growth
is one major difference between the marine sciences and outer space
activities.

A substantial fraction of Federal funds for marine science and technology
is spent through contracts with industry. As opportunities arise, Federal
contracting for research and development helps build and maintain a base
of engineering competence that can be applied broadly to future ocean
developments.

We adopt as a basic premise that those activities in the past traditionally
conducted in the private sector will be continued. Nevertheless, it is also
recognized that, in those cases where risks are high or profits long deferred,
the public interest may be served by Federal programs. At the same time,
Government support of marine science and technology may have industrial

160

Non-Federal Institutions

merit and applications that would render the United States competitive in
the international market, or make offshore sources of resources competitive
with sources on land.

The Federal Government has a variety of programs of general assistance
to business which are applicable to marine industr)', and some of direct
assistance. Examples of Government programs to encourage development
of ocean resources through industrial participation are summarized below:

A. Government Sponsorship of Research and Development:

1. Research.

2. Advanced engineering.

3. Technology transfer.

B. Financial Measures :

1 . Sharing of research or capital facilities costs.

2. Government stockpiling of strategic materials.

3. Special encouragement programs such as Economic Develop-

ment Administration projects, small business loans, land
grants, foreign aid, loan guarantees, and reinsurance.

4. Special tax provisions such as the investment credit.

C. Laws and Regulations:

1. Laws of ownership, patents, and property rights.

2. Leasing regulations and administration.

3. Anti-trust laws and administration.

4. Public utility regulations.

5. Quasi-public-private corporations (e.g., COMSAT) .

6. Production allowables or quotas.

7. Setting of national and international standards on equipment

design, component design, etc.

D. Social Overheads and Other Social Measures:

1. Development of human resources through education assistance

programs such as Sea Grant College Program, research grants
to universities, etc.

2. Provision of forecasts, statistical and other information services.

3. Ports, harbors, and waterway development and navigation aids.

4. Police protection, la^y enforcement, and rescue services.

5. Coastal Zone development such as recreation preserves and pol-

lution management.

6. Environmental prediction, oceanographic data, and mapping

and navigation services.

7. Catastrophe assistance.

8. Public health services.

9. War-on-Poverty, depressed area, and urban redevelopment pro-

grams, etc., in maritime regions.

161

Marine Science Affairs

E. International Measures:

1. Projects of international cooperation in research and data

gathering.

2. Developing foreign markets for equipment manufacturers.

3. Assistance to U.S. business firms to develop overseas ocean

resources to serve foreign or U.S. markets.
During the next year, the Council and Commission will review the Nation's
goals in the marine environment to consider whether special assistance is war-
ranted and which of these various instruments may best serve the Nation's
needs.

State, Local and Regional interests

Most coastal States are already assessing problems of the Coastal Zone
and many are concerned about the future economic importance of the marine
environment. Marine areas of direct concern to States include :
— Continental Shelf resources within the States' jurisdiction;
— regulation of fisheries ;
— control of pollution and bays and estuaries, and regulation of land

and water use ;
— coastal recreation as a source of wealth from the Sea;
— ocean resources development generally, for such States as Alaska and

Hawaii ;
— funding of State research and educational facilities.
Several States are considering unified approaches to programs and policies,
by new legislative and administrative actions. Governors' advisory com-
mittes, inter-state groups, regional organizations, or citizens' groups have
been established to deal with marine science aflfairs in California, Georgia,
Massachusetts, Texas, Washington, Florida, New York, Hawaii, Virginia,
the Great Lakes region, the Maine-New Hampshire area, and in other States
and regions. Many of these committees and commissions reflect the same con-
cern at a local level that led to the establishment of the Marine Sciences
Council and Commission.

Federal and State Governments share many interests and responsibilities,
especially relating to the Coastal Zone and the Federal Government intends
to use existing Federal-State mechanisms for cooperative endeavors wherever
possible. Information on State activities and capabilities now being collected
by the Commission will be utilized by the Council for planning future pro-
grams in cooperation with the States and regional associations.

Similarly, many local goverments have pressing needs such as pollution
management, waterfront renewal, and recreation — particularly in the large

162

Non-Federal Institutions

metropolitan areas. Local community colleges can be participants in the
Sea Grant Act. The role of local communities is expanding as the Nation
becomes increasingly concerned with the problems of the cities.

Many of these problems and many metropolitan areas transcend state
lines. Many shoreline or beach problems require a regional approach. Thus
cooperation with regional mechanisms also must be studied because, in many
instances, they may constitute the most appropriate device for considering
marine science problems and providing the institutional mechanisms for
solutions.

Within the past several years, a number of new professional societies or
committees interested in marine science affairs have been established that
aid in the traditional democratic processes of communication and national
decision making. Specialized interest in marine science activities has led to
the appointment of study or action committees in other professional and in-
dustrial associations. Several of their studies such as those by the National
Security Industrial Association and by the State of California have been
made available to the Marine Sciences Council and have been of great value
in evaluating merits of alternative Federal policies.

Recent Financial Analyses

The future growth of marine programs will be heavily dependent on the
availability of risk capital. Several investment and advisory firms recently
have issued reports analyzing investment potential in oceanography. Many
major diversified firms are committing funds to ocean projects, although
]3ublished articles say that few have yet made substantial profits. These re-
p)orts generally agree that the technological and systems approaches of aero-
space are, to a large extent, applicable to oceanography.

Conclusion

Many Federal policies and programs can be carried out only in connection
with States, industry, the academic community, and other institutions. The
Council plans to identify areas where Federal assistance can be a catalyst.
This assistance may take the form of legal measures, financial aids or sup-
port, or changes in Federal policies.

163

287-921 O — 68 12

Chapter XIV

THE NATION AND THE SEA:
QUESTIONS FOR THE FUTURE

Each of the preceding chapters describes a category of Federal activities
which is related to the sea and which contributes to the attainment of the
goals and aspirations of the Nation. For each of the categories, we have
endeavored to focus the technical understanding we have today of the marine
environment to produce sought-for benefits, then to formulate public policies
and action programs to stimulate and guide many separate ocean activities.
Each set of objectives thus depends on

— innovative engineering to transform scientific discovery to solutions
of practical needs, efTectively and economically ;

■ — an institutional framework for public and private policies which will
respond flexibly and promptly to new needs and opportunities.
The programs and appropriations reflect our planned endeavors during
FY 1969. Individually, these programs support the missions of one or
more Federal agencies; collectively, they respond to the needs of our entire
society — a dynamic society with an expanding economy and a growing pop-
ulation. Many programs are continuations of past activities of proven bene-
fit. Some emphasize new directions to take immediate advantage of op-
portunities for attaining reasonably certain results in the near term. Others
stress planning of bold new programs which will keep pace with the chang-
ing character of science, technology, and society.

165

Marine Science Affairs

These programs reflect the best judgment that we can exercise today,
based on foreseeable technological developments and on estimates of
benefits and costs in a perspective of national priorities. While the course
for the next 18 months — until the end of FY 1969 — is reasonably clear,
our attention now turns to an appraisal of marine sciences over the longer
term, and to the broader perspective. We must now examine the more
fundamental question: "What portion of the Nation's energy and wealth
should be devoted to ocean endeavors, and how?" Precise quantitative
answers may elude us, and our best estimate today will be slightly altered
tomorrow. Nevertheless, the sea has served us and will continue to serve
us, and our task is to inquire about the role of the oceans in contributing to
the world of the future.

Five premises underpin any such projections :

First, science and technology that have been key ingredients of recent
marine enterprises will continue and even increase in importance.

Second, the Federal Government — the primary sponsor of research and
exploration — will continue to provide national leadership and financial sup-
port where necessary.

Third, exploitation of marine resources, as with resources on land, will
be undertaken by competitive private enterprise.

Fourth, geographically localized problems in management of the marine
environment of inshore waters will require local solutions.

Fifth, gains from the ocean will be increasingly sought by other nations
throughout the world.

These premises suggest that continued progress to extract ever-increasing
benefits from the seas must continue to be generated by vigorous scientific
research and exploration, by creative marine technology, and by evolving
associated institutions, both public and private.

Marine science and technology are recognized predominantly as "means"
rather than "ends." So indeed are the institutions that become the vehicles
for action. Analysis of the future in marine sciences must therefore be cast
in the context of even broader considerations — of fundamental national
goals.

The need to enumerate such goals and appraise our progress becomes all
the more compelling in a field as complex and differentiated as marine
sciences.

Rapid progress can be made only by a society whose segments agree
on major common purposes, and after they have reached agreement by a
process of consensus.

To establish the future direction and pace of a truly national — and not
just Federal — marine science program, we must examine and re-examine the

166

The Nation and the Sea

same key questions about both ends and means that were posed in the
earlier chapters as a basis for contemporary decisions :

( 1 ) How may increased utiUzation of the sea contribute to world order

and peace?

(2) To what extent will world demand for resources require accel-

erated recovery of the living and nonliving resources of the
sea, and how soon? How may marine resources contribute to
the economies of developed and especially to developing
nations?

(3) To what extent and in what ways do U.S. naval forces, maritime

shipping, domestic fisheries, and oceanic research and explora-
tion contribute to this Nation's broadest purposes and policies —
toward national security, toward creation of wealth, and toward
the economic and social well-being of all peoples?

(4) What leadership role should the Federal Government play in the

development of marine resources and in their conservation,
nationally and internationally?

( 5 ) How may the Coastal Zone contribute best to our economic growth

and to the joys of living? How can we develop rational plans
for the optimal use and conservation of the coastal environ-
ment and its resources, to control pollution and erosion, and to
choose among multiple and often conflicting uses through wise
cooperative management?

(6) To what extent are future maritime developments dependent on

intensified marine research, exploration, and engineering? What
are the priority areas for oceanographic research and explora-
tion? Who should undertake these activities and at what pace?

( 7 ) What changes or innovations in national and international institu-

tions and legal regimes are needed to foster public and private
investments?

(8) What are the appropriate Federal, State, and local roles, and what

is the optimum combination of public and private activities in
developing resources and in managing the marine environment?

(9) How can we improve the present. Federal structure to assure

requisite leadership, meaningful priorities, and effective partici-
pation with science and industry?

These questions underlie the Nation's historical involvement in maritime
affairs. They have been asked — and answered — in different ways at different
stages of development of this Nation, and of the world itself. But yesterday's
answers do not satisfy tomorrow's emerging needs and opportunities.

167

Problems induced by advanced technology will probably require solutions
by technology. The implications may demand a change in our uncertainty
about the imf)ortance of the sea.

The Marine Sciences Council is thus endeavoring to understand the stake
that this Nation — and the world — has in the sea and to evolve a forward-
looking and durable backdrop of policy — a possible strategy for use of the
oceans.

In the months to come, the advisory Commission on Marine Science, Re-
sources, and Engineering will conclude its independent analysis of these
issues and report to the President, via the Council, and to the Congress on
an adequate national program to meet present and future needs, including
recommendations as to Federal organization. These questions and their ap-
praisal furnish the agenda for study and for action during the forthcoming
year.

168

APPENDICES

A. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MARINE SCIENCE PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR

1969

Table A-1 Total Federal Program by Major Purpose and Organiza-
tion (with detail by program)

Table A-2 Total Federal Program by Department and Agency (with
detail by Bureau or major subdivision)

Table A-3 Total Federal Program by Function and Agency (with
detail by agency)

Table A— 4 Special Analyses — Continental Shelf; Great Lakes; and
Estuaries

Table A-5 Excess Foreign Currency Program

B. FEDERAL LEGISLATION RELATED TO THE MARINE SCIENCES

C. COMMITTEES OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL ON MARINE RE-

SOURCES AND ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT

D. CONTRACTS AWARDED BY THE NATIONAL COUNCIL ON MARINE

RESOURCES AND ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT

E. ACTIVITIES OF INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND OTHER

NATIONS

Table E-1 Selected International Organizations Active in the Marine

Sciences
Table E-2 United Nations Resolutions
Table E-3 Nations which have Ratified, Acceded To, or Consider

Themselves Bound by the Geneva Conventions on the

Law of the Sea
Table E-4 Breadth of Territorial Seas and Fishing Jurisdiction

Claimed by Members of the United Nations
Table E-5 Selected International Treaties in Marine Affairs to which

the U.S. Adheres
Table E-6 Excerpts of Marine Science Interest from International

Summit-Level Declarations and Speeches

F. LABORATORIES AND INSTITUTIONS ENGAGED IN MARINE SCIENCE

RESEARCH

G. SHIPS

Graph G-1 Estimated Growth of the Oceanographic Fleets of the

United States and the Soviet Union, 1963-70
Graph G-2 Merchant Fleets of Selected Nations, 1962-67
Graph G-3 Estimated Growth of the High Seas Fishing Fleets of
Selected Nations, 1958-67

169

Marine Science Affairs

H. ECONOMIC AND INDUSTRIAL STATISTICS

Transportation and Trade

Table H-1 Volume of Cargo Handled in Waterborne Commerce at
Thirty Selected U.S. Ocean Ports, 1955 and 1965

Table H-2 Coastal Channel and Harbor New Work Projects Cur-
rently Underway
Offshore Petroleum

Table H-3 U.S. Oil and Gas Drilling Activity and Production, Total
and Offshore, 1958-66

Table H-4 Estimated Value of Offshore Production of Crude Oil and
Gas From Submerged Lands off California and Lou-
isiana, 1960-66

Table H-5 Industrial Expenditures on Offshore Oil and Gas Leases
by State and Recipient Governments, 1954-66

Table H-6 Rents, Royalties, and Bonuses on Outer Continental Shelf
Lands, 1967

Table H-7 Petroleum Potential of Continental Shelves of the World

Ocean Industry

Table H-8 Employment in Selected Ocean-Related Industries in
Coastal States and in those Bordering the Great Lakes,
1966
Table H-9 Reporting Units (Selected Ocean-Related Industries) in
Coastal States and in those Bordering the Great Lakes,
1966
Table H-10 Taxable Payrolls Reported to the Social Security Admin-
istration by Establishments in Selected Ocean-Related
Industries in Coastal States and those Bordering the
Great Lakes, First Quarter, 1966

Fisheries

Table H-1 1 World Catch of Fish, Shellfish, etc. by Leading Countries,

in various years, 1954-66
Table H-1 2 Disposition of World Fish Catch, various years, 1938-65
Table H-1 3 U.S. Catch of Fish, Shellfish, etc., in various years,

1940-66
Table H-14 U.S. Imports and Exports of Fishery Products, 1950-66
Table H-15 U.S. Fishery Employment, Craft, and Establishments,

various years, 1930-65
Table H-16 U.S. Fishing Fleet of 1965 by Period of Construction
Table H-1 7 Disposition of U.S. Fish Catch, 1958 and 1961-65

170

Appendices

APPENDIX A

Table A-1 — Total Federal Marine Science Program by Major Purpose and
Organization CWith Detail by Program)

(Millions of dollars)

Federal Marine Science Program by Major Purpose

Estimated
FY 1967

Estimated
FY 1968

President's
budget
FY 1969

1 . Internationad Cooperation and Collaboration. .

2. National Security

3. Fishery Development and Seafood Technology.

4. Transportation

5. Development of the Coastal Zone "

6. Health

7. Non-living Resources

8. Oceanographic Research *"

9 . Education

10. Environmental Observation & Prediction &

Services

1 1 . Ocean Exploration, Mapping, Charting and

Geodesy

12. General Purpose Ocean Engineering Develop-

ment

1 3 . National Data Centers

7. 1

161.8

38. 1

11.9

21.4

6.6

7.2
61.5

4.0

24.4

77.4

14.8
1.8

7.6

136.9

41.2

15.2

28.7

5.2

8. 1
78.4

7.2

24.5

74.5

18.2
2.0

8.2

150. 1

42. 7

15.4

28.6

6.0

9.8
99.7

7.9

26.5

92. 1

26.8
2.4

Total.

438.0

447.7

516.2

» Includes Shore Development, Pollution Management, Recreation.
'' Research beneficial to more than one of the headings above.

Detail of Major Purpose by Orgainization

(MUUons of dollars)

Esti-
mated
FY 1967

Esti-
mated
FY 1968

Presi-
dent's
budget
FY 1969

1. International Cooperation and Collaboration

7. 1

7.6

8.2

(a) State Department

( 1 ) Contributions to international or-

ganizations for marine science pro-
gram activities

(2) International fisheries commissions

(U.S. share)

(5.1)

3.0
2. 1

2.0

(5.0)

3.0
2.0

2.6

(5.2)

3. 1
2. 1

(b) Agency for International Development:

( 1 ) Marine food resources for develop-
ing nations.- . ..

3.0

2. National Security » ...

161.8

136.9

150. 1

See footnote at end of table.

171

Marine Science Affairs

Detail of Major Purpose by Organization — Continued

(Millions of dollars)

Esti-
mated
FY 1967

Esti-
mated
FY 1968

Presi-
dent's
budget
FY 1969

2. National Security — Continued
(a) Department of Defense :

(1) Problem oriented surveys for de-
fense systems

23.2

32.0

50.6
0.8

52.6
2.6

19.3

31.2

65.5
1.3

18.7
0.8

29.4

(2) Marine science and technology in

support of specific defense systems..

(3) Undersea search, rescue, recovery,

and man-in-the-sea

(4) Navy Instrumentation Center.

(5) Capital investment for ship con-

struction

37.7

81.5
1.3

0

(6) Marine science in support of "Safe-
guards" for the limited nuclear
test ban treaty of 1963..

0.2

3. Fishery Development and Sea Food Technology

38. 1

41.2

42.7

(a) Department of the Interior:

(1) Fishery resources assessment, devel-

opment and management

(2) Technical and economic assistance

to the commercial fishing industry .

( 3 ) Fish protein concentrate

28.4

9. 1
.6

30.3

9.3
1.6

29.5

9.6
3.6

4. Transportation

11.9

15.2

15.4

(a) Department of Commerce

(7.9)

0.2
1.3
2. 1
0.7
3.6
(2.5)
2.5
(1.5)
0.3
0.6
0.3
0.3
0

(10.4)

1.6
2.4
2.0
0.8
3.6
(2.9)
2.9
(1.9)
0.6
0.7
0.3
0.3
0

(7.6)

( 1 ) Reduction of shipbuilding and port

costs

0

(2) Reduction of ship operating costs

(3) Advanced ships and systems

(4) Ship design

1.2

bl.7

0.9

(5) N.S. Savannah

3.8

(b) Department of Defense

(3.0)

(1) Channel and Harbor Development..
( c ) Department of Transportation

3.0

(4.8)

( 1 ) Search and rescue

0.6

(2) Aids to navigation

0.9

( 3 ) Merchant marine safety

1.0

(4) International ice patrol ..

0.4

(5) Pollution detection and control

1.9

See footnotes at end of table.

172

Appendices

Detail of Major Purpose by Organization — Continued
(Millions of dollars)

Esti-
mated
FY 1967

Esti-
mated
FY 1968

Presi-
dent's
budget
FY 1969

5. Development and Conservation of the Coastal Zone. _

21.4

28.7

28.6

(a) Shore stabilization and protection

(1.5)

1.5
(4.5)

0.4

4. 1

(15.4)

1.2

0.2
8.3
5.6
0. 1

(1.5)

1.5

(7.0)

1.7

5.3
(20.2)

1.5

0.3
9.6
8.5
0.3

(1.7)

1.7
(8.7)

2.4

6.3
(18.2)

1. 7

( 1 ) Department of Defense :

(a) Beach erosion control and hurri-
cane storm surge protection

(b) Marine pollution mamagement

(1) Department of Defense:

(a) Pollution and flushing of bays,
estuaries and the Great Lakes.

(2) Department of the Interior:

(a) Water quality enhancement

(c) Recreation and conservation . .

(1) Department of Defense :

(a) Recreation beaches and small
craft harbors

(2) Department of the Interior:

(a) Planning for acquisition of ma-

rine based recreational areas. _

(b) Development of marine areas for

recreation

0.3
8. 8

(c) Conservation of marine locales,
gamefish and wildlife

7. 1

(3) Department of Transportation:

(a) Search and rescue

0. 3

6. Health

6.6

5.2

6. 0

(a) Department of Health, Education, and Wel-
fare:
(1) Nutritionail and health aspects of
marine foods

1.0

0.5

2. 1

0.9
2. 1

1.2

0.5

2.4

1. 1
0.0

1. 3

(2) Marine bacterial toxins and phar-
maceuticals

0 7

(3) Use of marine life in biomedical re-
search _ .___

2 5

(4) Health problems related to marine
pollution

1. 1

(5) Capital investment

0.4

See footnotes at end of table.

173

Marine Science Affairs

Detail of Major Purpose by Organization — Continued

(Millions of dollars)

Esti-
mated
FY 1967

Esti-
mated
FY 1968

Presi-
dent's
budget
FY 1969

7. Non-Living Resources

7.2

8. 1

9.8

(a) Department of the Interior :

( 1 ) Geologic investigations and resources
appraisal

2.2
1.4

2.9

0.7

2.6
1.4

3.4

0.7

2.4

(2) Mining research

1.6

(3) Marine sources and interrelationships
for supply of fresh water

4. 1

(4) Leasing and management of mineral
resources _

1.7

8. Oceanographic Research

61.5

78.4

99. 7

(a) Department of Defense

28.6
2.3

23. 1
1.9
1.3
4.3

32.9
3.5

33.6
2.7
1.3
4.4

38.0

(b) Department of Commerce

4.2

(c) National Science Foundation

36.0

(d) Department of Transportation _.

15.7

(e) Smithsonian Institution

1.4

(f ) Atomic Energy Commission .

4.4

9. Education _ ._

4.0

7.2

7.9

(a) Department of Defense

0.9
0.1
0.2
1.6

1.1
0.1

1.2
0. 1
0.2
4.4

1.2
0.1

1.3

(b) Department of Commerce

0. 1

(c) Depcirtment of the Interior

0.2

(d) National Science Foundation __

4.7

(e) Department of Health, Education, and Wel-
fare

1.5

(f ) Department of Transportation

0. 1

10. Environmental Observation and Prediction zmd
Services

24.4

24.5

26.5

(a) Department of Defense

11.7
7.5
0.7
4.4

0.1

10.7
6.1
0.9
5.5

1.3

11.3

(b) Depjirtment of Commerce

6.3

(c) Atomic Energy Commission

0.8

(d) Department of Transportation

6.8

(e) National Aeronautics and Space Adminis-
tration _

1.3

See footnotes at end of table.

174

Appendices

Detail of Major Purpose by Organization — Continued
(Millions of dollars)

Esti-
mated
FY 1967

Esti-
mated
FY 1968

Presi-
dent's
budget
FY 1969

1 1 . Ocean Exploration, Mapping, Charting, and Geodesy.

77.4

74.5

92. 1

(a) Department of Defense

60.2
17.2

0.0

56.2
18.0

0.3

72.3

(b) Department of Commerce.

19.5

(c) National Aeronautics and Space Adminis-
tration - -

0.3

12. General Purpose Ocean Engineering Development

14.8

18.2

26.8

(a) Deep ocean technology :

( 1 ) Department of Defense

8.2

6.3
0.3

10.7
7.4
0.1

14.9

(b) Nuclear power:

( 1 ) Atomic Energy Commission

(c) Data buoy systems:

( 1 ) Department of Transportation

6.6
5.3

13. National Data Centers . .

1.8

2.0

2.4

(a) National Oceanographic Data Center

(b) Smithsonian Oceanographic Sorting Center. .

(c) Great Lakes Data Center _

1.4
0.3
0. 1
0.0

1.5
0.3
0.2
0. 1

1.8
0.3
0.2

(d) National Weather Records Center

0. 1

" All Department of Defense funds except those pertaining to the civil works of the Army (Corps of
Engineers) directly relate to National Security although they may appear in categofies which relate to
other national goals.

' In addition. Navy provides 1.4 million in matching funds for the Surface Effects Ship Program.

175

Marine Science Affairs

Table A-2 — Total Federal Program by Department and Agency

(Millions of dollars)

Estimated
FY 1967

Estimated
FY 1968

President's
budget
FY 1969

Department of Defense

Department of the Interior

National Science Foundation

Department of Commerce

Department of Transportation

Atomic Energy Commission

Department of Health, Education, and Welfare...

Department of State

Agency for International Development

Smithsonian Institution

National Aeronautics and Space Administration . .

TOTAL AGENCY PROGRAMS

NATIONAL COUNCIL ON MARINE RESOURCES AND EN-
GINEERING DEVELOPMENT

COMMISSION ON MARINE SCIENCE, ENGINEERING, AND
RESOURCES

277.7

64. 1
24.8
35.3

8.
11.

7.

5.

2.

1.6
. 1

438.0
(0.9)
(0.2)

256.9

73.5

38.3

38.4

10.7

12.7

6.4

5.0

2.6

1.6

1.6

447.7
(0.9)
(0.4)

297.7

75.5

41.0

38. 1

33. 1

11.8

7.5

5.2

3.0

1.7

1.6

516.2
(1.2)
(0.2)

Table A-3 — Total Federal Program by Function and Agency

(Millions of dollars)

Estimated
FY 1967

Estimate
FY 1968

President's
budget
FY 1969

1 . Research and Development

209.8

249.5

281.6

(a) Research (basic and applied)

93.5
116.3

117.7
131.8

134.8

(b) Development of new^ equipment and
technology _ . . _

146.8

2. Investment _ __

103.8

71.8

85.9

(a) Ships __

68.9

18.4

14.5

2.0

22.5

29.6

15.2

4.5

16.9

(b) Major equipment

48.3

(c) Shore facilities ..

17.7

(d) Other

3.0

3. Operations .-. .

124.4

126.4

148.7

(a) Surveys . .

103.6

19.6

1.2

101.6

23.3

1.5

121.4

( b ) Services

(c) Other operations ..

25.7
1.6

TOTAL

438.0

447.7

516.2

176

Appendices

Detail by Function and Agency — Continued
(Millions of dollars)

Estimated
FY 1967

Estimated
FY 1968

President's
budget
FY 1969

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Total

1 . Department of Defense

(a) Department of the Navy

( 1 ) Research

Regxilar program

(Research ship operating costs)

Institutional development program. _

(2) Development of new equipment and

technology

(Ship operating costs)

(b) Department of the Army

( 1 ) Research

(2) Development of new equipment and

technology

(c) Advanced Resecirch Projects Agency

( 1 ) Research

(2) Development of new equipment and

technology

2. Department of Commerce

(a) Environmental Science Services Administra-

tion.

( 1 ) Research

(2) Development of new equipment and

technology.

(b) Maritime Administration

( 1 ) Research

(2) Development of new equipment and

technology.

3. Department of the Interior 1

(a) Bureau of Commercial Fisheries

( 1 ) Research

(Research ship operating costs)

(2) Development of new equipment and

technology.

(b) Geological Survey

( 1 ) Research

(2) (Research ship operation cost)

See footnotes at end of table.

209.8

249.5

120.6

137.6

(111.4)
28.6
(25. 7)

((5.4))
(2.9)

82.8
(7.2)
(6.6)
3.2

3.4

(2.6)

1.8

0.8

11.6

(3.9)

2.6
1.3

(7.7)
2.4
5.3

29.4

(18.7)

12.0

(1.9)

6.7

(3.0)
3.0
(0.2)

(128.4)

32.9

(28. 4)

((7.2))

(4.5)

95.5
(7.9)
(8.4)
3.4

5.0
(0.8)

0. I

15.7

(5.3)

3.5
1.7

(10.4)
5.6
4.8

34.0

(21.0)

13.6

(2.8)

7.4

(3.3)

3.3

(0.2)

281.6

152.8

(142. 9)

38.0

(32.0)

((8. 3))

(6.0)

104.9
(10.0)
(9.7)
3.9

5.9
(0.2)
0

0.2

13.7

(6.1)

'4.5
1.6

(7.6)
2.9
4.7

39.0

(25.6)

13.8

(2.8)

9.8

(3.2)
3.2
(0.2)

177

Marine Science Affairs

Detail by Function and Agency — Continued
(Millions of dollars)

Estimated
FY 1967

Estimated
FY 1968

President's
budget
FY 1969

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT COUtinUCd

3. Department of the Interior — Continued

(c) Office of Saline Water

( 1 ) Research

(2) Development of new equipment and

technology

(d) Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife

( 1 ) Research

(2) Development of new equipment and

technology

(e) Bureau of Mines

( 1 ) Research

(Research ship operating costs)

(2) Development of new equipment and

technology

(f) Federal Water Pollution Control Adminis-

tration

(1) Research

4. National Science Foundation

( 1 ) Research

(Research ship operating costs)

5. Atomic Energy Commission

( 1 ) Research

(Research ship operating costs)

(2) Development of new equipment and

technology

6. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare

(a) U.S. Public Health Service

( 1 ) Research

(2) Development of new equipment and

technology

(b) Food and Drug Administration

( 1 ) Research

(c) Office of Education

( 1 ) Research

See footnotes at end of table.

(2.1)
0.6

1.5

(3.1)
1.4

1.7

(0.7)
0.3
(0.1)

0.4

1.8

22.6

'»22. 6
(8.1)

11.3

5. 1
(0.3)

6.2

4.7

(2.5)
0.9

1.6 2.1

(3.3) (4.2)

1.7 2. 5

1.6

(1.0)
0.4
(0.3)

0.6

2.9

33.2

'»33. 2
(9.1)

12.7

5.4
(0.3)

7.3

5.8

(3.6)
3.6

(4.1)
4.0

0

(0.3)
.3

(1.1)
1. 1

0. 1

(0.4)

.4

(1.2)

1.2

178

Appendices

Detail by Function and Agency — Continued
(Millions of dollars)

Estimated
FY 1967

Estimated
FY 1968

President's
budget
FY 1969

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT — Continued
7. Department of Transportation

2.8

2.7

11.0

(a) U.S. Coast Guard:

( 1 ) Research

1.7

(1.2)

1. 1

1.7

(1.2)

1.0

7.3

(Research ship operating costs)

(2) Development of new equipment and
•technology

(1.2)
3.7

8 Smithsonian Institution

1.3

1.3

1.4

( 1 ) Research

1.3

1.3

1.4

9. State Department _ _

5.1

5.0

5.2

( 1 ) Development . __

5. 1

5.0

5.2

10. National Aeronautics and Space Administration

0. 1

1.6

1.6

(1) Research _.

0.1

1.6

1.6

INVESTMENT

Total --- -- - ---

103.8

71.8

85.9

1. Department of Defense _. '

82.0

46.6

56.0

(a) Department of the Navy -.

(81.9)

62.5

16.4

3.0

(»)

(46.3)

18.7

25.9

1.7

0.3

(55.7)

(1) Ships (new construction of surface
ships) -

0

(2) Major equipment

45.6

(3) Shore facilities .

10. 1

(b) Department of the Army:

( 1 ) Shore facilities

0.3

2. Department of Commerce _

3. 1

1.9

1.2

(a) Environmental Science Services Administra-
tion _ _ _ _

(2.9)
1.5
0.0
1.4

(0.2)
0.2

(1.9)
0.0
0.2
1.7

(0.0)
0.0

(0.9)

(1) Ships-. - --.

0.0

(2) Shore facilities _

0.0

(3) Major equipment-

0.9

(b) Maritime Administration - -_

(0.0)

( 1 ) Shore facilities

0.0

See footnotes at end of table.

179

287-921 O— 68

-13

Marine Science Affairs

Detail by Function and Agency — Continued
(Millions of dollars)

Estimated
FY 1967

Estimated
FY 1968

President's
budget
FY 1969

INVESTMENT — Continued

3. Department of the Interior .

(a) Bureau of Commercial Fisheries

(1) Ships

(2) Shore facilities

(3) Major equipment

(b) Geological Survey

( 1 ) Shore facilities

(2) Major equipment

(c) Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife

( 1 ) Shore facilities

(d) Bureau of Mines

(1) Ships

(2) Shore facilities

(3) Major equipment

(e) Federal Water Pollution Control Administra-

tion

(1) Ships

(2) Shore facilities

(3) Major equipment

(f ) Bureau of Outdoor Recreation

(1) Shore facilities

(2) Other

(g) National Park Service

( 1 ) Shore facilities

4. National Science Foundation.

(1) Ships

(2) Shore facilities

5. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

(a) U.S. Public Health Service.
( 1 ) Shore facilities

6. Depzirtment of Transportation -

(a) U.S. Coast Guard

(1) Ships

(2) Major equipment.

See footnotes at end of table.

11.8

(4.9)
3.5
1.4
0.0

(0.3)
0. 1
0.2

(0.5)
0.5

(0.7)
0.5
0. 1
0. 1

(0.2)
0.0
0.0
0.2
(4.4)
4.4
0.0
(0.8)
0.8

2.0

0.2
1.8

2. 1

(2.1)
2. 1

0.8

(0.8)
0.7
0. 1

12.7

(3.3)
1.6
1.7
0.0

(0.4)
0.2
0.2

(0.8)
0.8

(0.4)
0.2
0. 1
0. 1

(0.2)
0.0
0.2
0.0

(6.9)
5.0
1.9

(0.7)
0.7

4.8

0.5
4.3

0.0

(0.0)
0.0

3.2

(3.2)
1.5
1.7

180

Appendices

Deteiil by Function and Agency — Continued
(Millions of dollars)

Estimated
FY 1967

Estimated
FY 1968

President's
budget
FY 1969

INVESTMENT — continucd

7. Agency for International Development

(1) Other

OPERATIONS

Total

1. Department of Defense

(a) Department of the Navy

( 1 ) Surveys

(Survey ship operating costs)

(2) Services

(3) Other

(b) Department of the Army

( 1 ) Services

2. Department of Commerce

(a) Environmental Science Services Administra-
tion

( 1 ) Surveys

(Survey ship operating costs)

(2) Services

3. Department of the Interior

(a) Bureau of Commercial Fisheries

(1) Surveys

(Survey ship operating costs)

(2) Services

(Service ship operating costs)

(b) Geological Survey

(1) Services

(c) Bureau of Sport Fisheries arid Wildlife

( 1 ) Survey

(2) Services .

(3) Other

(d) Federal Water Pollution Control Adminis-

tration

(1 ) Surveys

(2) Services

See footnotes at end of table.

2.0

2.0

124.4

75.1

(74.9)
71.2
(20.8)
2.8
0.9
(0.1)
0. 1

20.6

(20.6)

20.3

(6.6)

0.3

22.9

(14. 5)
6.0

(1.2)
8.5

(0.3)

(0.6)
0.6

(3.0)
0.4
2.3
0.3

(1.8)
1.0
0.8

2.6

2.6

126.4

72.7

(72.5)

68. 1

(23.8)

3.2

1.2

(0.2)

0.2

20.8

(20.8)

20.5

(6.6)

0.3

26.8

(16.8)
7.1

(1.4)
9.7

(0.3)

(0.7)
0.7

(3.5)
0.4
2.8
0.3

(1.9)
0.8
1.1

3.0

3.0

148.7

88.9

(88.7)

83.7

(25. 4)

3.7

1.3

(0.2)

0.2

23.5

(23.5)
23.1
(8.0)
0.4

29.1

(17.3)
7.4

(1.4)
9.9

(0.3)

(1.3)
1.3

(3.7)
0.5
2.9
0.3

(2.4)
0.8
1.6

181

Marine Science Affairs

Detail by Function and Agency — Continued
(Millions of dollars)

Estimated
FY 1967

Estimated
FY 1968

President's
budget
FY 1969

OPERATIONS — continued

3. Department of the Interior — Continued
(e) Bureau of Land Management

(0.1)

0. 1
(2.9)

2.9

(0.1)

0. 1
(3.8)

3.8

(0.4)
0.4

(1) Services _ - _

(f) National Park Services

(4.0)
4.0

(1) Services. _ _ _ __

4. National Science Foundation _ _

0.2

0.3

0.3

(1) Services

0.2

0.3

0.3

5. Atomic Energy Commission:

(1) Services ..- ...

(")

i")

(*)

6. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare :

(a) U.S. Public Health Service.

0.6

0.7

0. 7

( 1 ) Surveys

(»)
0.6

(0
0.7

(")

(2) Services.

0. 7

7. Department of Transportation :

4.7

4.8

5.9

(a) U.S. Coast Guard

(4.7)
4.7
(3.1)

(4.7)
4.7

(3.7)
0. 1

(5.9)
5.8

( 1 ) Surveys

(Survey ship operating costs)

(2) Services ..

(4.7)
0. 1

8 . Smithsonian Institution

0.3

0.3

0.3

(1) Services

0.3

0.3

0.3

" Includes Sea Grant Support.
» Less than $60,000.

182

Appendices

Table A-4 — Special Analyses: Continental Shelf, Great Lakes; Estuaries

Continental Shelf

(In Millions of dollars)

Estimated
FY 1967

Estimated
FY 1968

President's
budget
FY 1969

Smithsonian Institution

Department of Commerce

Atomic Energy Commission

Department of Transportation

National Science Foundation

Department of the Interior

1 . Bureau of Commercial Fisheries

2. Geological Survey

3. Bureau of Sport Fisheries

4. Bureau of Mines

5. Bureau of Land Management. _

6. Office of Saline Water

7. National Park Service

Department of Defense

1 . Department of the Army

2. Department of the Navy

Total

0. 1

15.3

2.0

0.5

0.5

29.8

(21.0)

(2.8)

(2.0)

(1.2)

(0.1)

(0.1)

(2.6)

12.8

(2.5)

(10.3)

0. 1

15.0

2.0

0.5

0.5

34.6

(22.5)

(3.2)

(2.1)

(2.5)

(0.1)

(1.1)

(3.1)

16.0

(3.1)

(12.8)

61.0

68.7

0. 1

17.8

2.0

1.9

1.0

37. 1

(23.4)

(3.7)

(2.2)

(2.5)

(0.4)

(1.3)

(3.6)

16. 1

(3.7)

(12.3)

76.0

I These tables are designed to provide an indication of the level of effort in these areas.

183

Marine Science Affairs

Great Lakes

(In Millions of dollars)

Estimated
FY 1967

Estimated
FY 1968

President's
budget
FY 1969

Department of Commerce

Department of Transportation

State Department

National Science Foundation

Department of the Interior

1 . Bureau of Commerical Fisheries

2. Bureau of Sport Fisheries

3. National Park Service

4. Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
Department of Defense

1 . Department of the Army

2. Department of the Navy

Total

0. 1
0.0
1.0
.2
3.3
(1.5)
(0.3)

(")
(1.5)
2.5
(2.4)
(0.1)

7. 1

0. 1

0.0

1.0

.2

2.9

(1.8)

(0.3)

(0.1)

(0.7)

3.6

(3.5)

(0.1)

0. 1
0. 1

1. 1

.7
3.2
(2.0)
(0.3)
(0.2)
(0.7)
4.5
(4.4)
(0.1)

9.7

"Less than $50,000.

184

Appendices

Estuaries
(In MiUions of dollars)

Estimated
FY 1967

Estimated
FY 1968

President' I
budget
FY 1969

Smithsonian Institution

Department of Commerce

Atomic Energy Commission

Department of Transportation

National Science Foundation

Department of Health, Education, and Welfare ''

Department of the Interior

1 . Bureau of Commercial Fisheries

2. Geological Survey

3. Bureau of Sport Fisheries

4. Federal Water Pollution Control Administration

5. Office of Saline Water

6. National Park Service

Department of Defense

1. Department of the Army

2. Department of the Navy

Total

(»)
2.
0.

(-)
0.
3.

19.

(8.5)

(1.1)
(4.3)
(3.8)
(0.8)
(1.4)
3.9
(1.9)
(2.1)

26.6

(")
0.
0.

(")
0.

1.

23.

6
3

6
4
4

(9.3)
(1.2)
(5.1)
(5.0)
(1.0)
(1.8)
4.5
(2.2)
(2.2)

29.4

(")
0.6
0.3

(")
1.7
1.9

25.2
(9.6)
(1.2)
(5.3)
(6.1)
(1.0)
(2.0)
4.9
(2.1)
(2.8)

32.7

« Less than $50, 000.

•■ Includes $2.1 million in construction in FY 1967 and !

1.4 million in FY 1969.

Table A-5 — Excess Foreign Currency Programs Summary

(In Millions of dollars)

Estimated
FY 1967

Estimated
FY 1968

President's
budget
FY 1969

1 . Fishery development and seafood technology :

(a) Department of the Interior:

( 1 ) Fishery resources assessment, develop-
ment, and management

2. Oceanographic research:

(a) Department of Commerce (Environmental
Science Services Administration) .

0.3

(-)
0.2

0.2

0.2

(-)
0.4

0.4

0.2

(")

(b) Smithsonian Institution:

( 1 ) Specimen Research _ _ _

1.3

3. Data Centers:

(a) Smithsonian Institution:

( 1 ) Service Operations ._

0.5

' Less than $50,000.

185

Marine Science Affairs

APPENDIX B

Federal Legislation Related to the Marine Sciences

(Enacted by the 89th and 90th Congresses)

Public Law 89-72 (July 9, 1965) — Federal Water Projects Recreation Act which
provided uniform policies with respect to recreation and fish and wildlife benefits
and costs of federal multi-purpose water resources projects.

Public Law 89-80 (July 21, 1965) — Water Resources Planning Act which provided
for coordinated planning of water and related land resources, through the establish-
ment of a water resources council and river basin commissions, and provided funds
to the states to increase state participation in such planning.

Public Law 89-99 (July 30, 1965) — Exempted oceanographic research vessels from
application of certain inspection laws.

Public Law 89-234 (October 2, 1965)— Water Quality Act of 1965 established the
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, provided grants for research and
development, increased grants for construction of sewage treatment works, and
required establishment of water quality criteria.

Public Law 89-298 (October 27, 1965) — Rivers and Harbors Act provided for study
of water utilization and control of Chesapeake Bay and construction of a large
scale model for this purpose.

Public Law 89-302 (October 30, 1965) — Authorized use by the Secretary of Interior
of land at La JoUa, California, donated by the University of California, for a
marine biological laboratory.

Public Law 89-454 (June 17, 1966) — Marine Resources and Engineering Develop-
ment Act of 1966 established a national policy to advance marine sciences and
created a cabinet level council and advisory commission.

Public Law 89-658 (October 14, 1966) — Established a contiguous fishing zone be-
yond the territorial sea of the United States.

Public Law 89-670 (October 15, 1966) — Provided for a Department of Transporta-
tion which includes the Coast Guard.

Public Law 89-688 (October 15, 1966) — National Sea Grant College and Programs
Act of 1966 for authorized grants to institutions to operate programs of applied
research, training and education, and information dissemination.

Public Law 89-701 (November 2, 1966) — Authorized practicable and economic
means for the production of fish-protein concentrate.

Public Law 89-753 (November 3, 1966)— Clean Water Restoration Act of 1966 pro-
vided for Federal assistance to and cooperation with groups developing water
quality control and pollution abatement programs and authorized a national
estuarine pollution study.

Public Law 90-18 (May 19, 1967) — Provided for the participation of the Depart-
ment of the Interior in the construction and operation of a large prototype desalting
plant in southern California.

Public Law 90-30 (June 24, 1967) — Authorized appropriations for the saline water
conversion program, to expand the program, and for other purposes.

Public Law 90-137 (November 14, 1967) — Amended the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961 to authorize, among others, a program to demonstrate the potential and en-
courage the use of fish and other protein concentrates as a practical means of
reducing nutritional deficiencies in less developed countries and areas. The President
was urged to use at least $2,500,000 of the total funds authorized by the Act for this
particular program.

Public Law 90-205 (December 15, 1967)— Amended the Act of October 4, 1961,
relating to the acquisition of wetlands for conservation of migratory waterfowl.

186

Appendices

APPENDIX B— Federal Legislation Related to the Marine Sciences
(Continued)

to extend for an additional eight years the period during which funds may be
appropriated under that Act, and for other purposes.
Public Law 90-242 (January 2, 1968) — Amended the Marine Resources and Engi-
neering Development Act of 1966 to extend the time for the Commission to render
its report to January 9, 1969 and authorize the Council until June 30, 1969.

Sources: Federal Legislation for Oceanography (revised 1967), Library of Con-
gress; Congressional Record; Digest of Public General Bills and Resolutions, Library
of Congress.

187

Marine Science Affairs

-3 S5 «

* ^

^ a

.S fC

C .H

U >

c -5

n bo

O

z
u

<

3

e
</>
a»
OS

0)

C
'Z

(0

c
o

o

C
3

e
o

c

<^ s

<-> -S ^

tn *-' ~
O t« C

< B "
c ii s

D o §3
o w «

(fl

.s ^

I- 2 >

o -M C/3

<

be

^_t

3

a

ffi

cfl

«

.2

O

o

t-l

O '^

< 13 2

'S c

•2

a, o

J- i;

<2 hS
2 t2

•- bo

4^ C "5 ^

o <; Rj fl

> lU U fH

On u ■"

^ i/3 [i(

« ^ Q b

!«

j:

u

O 1/3

pq

u

V

w

Tl

^

C

«3

D

u

i2 j= C

i" rt q

bo >r
■C .>; ■

V «

S '^

Sh

flj .Si

in 7S

2 S

bp "*

T3 O
U u

is ^

CUrh
tn >^

5 ^3

a.S
S "^

rt 3

c .2 y

St3 «

fl V a

o .- y

•is 3 S

> cr 5

C w bo

nj 1-1 n!

u to S

C I" 5

" tfS c3

'*-' ^ ^

O *3 C

O CT3

•2-^ bB

« u nj

" s

o >^ B"

•iJ o 2

ex 3 C

.2 « S

eg +-•

-d 'T? -y ^ Yi c
IT o

a.

-a c
c 9
« ?9

c

0)

6

a

n

a

o

lU

^

lU

tJ

>

■V

-a 8

u a V

•S-? o
■" fi j-

"^ S i3 OQ '

b S ™ t>

nl O C -M

i- C 03

U fll ■♦-' ,

I- u " "

c

o 'Z

-rl ^ fcC '43

nj G O

O 03

CO .|_i

C

Is

«3 Q,

C 03 O

^ fi .2

•S -^ -5

c '

O! >N

bo fS

c ^

^ fi

03 r<

O g

C "*

O ^

•^3 03

frt ■<-!

I « 2 o

o T) 53

o ^

^ fi

■3 j3 f^ ?

2 >

O 03

■s -fi

O

-^
„ <^
fi _

.2 V

t! fi
^ fi
^ t^

13.2

-■ 03 O

G -C u *^

-2 o -^

13 fi i3 .2
';;5 is -^

•2 i3 -g §-

S ^« 8

u, >s on

^;2.H W>

'^ ° 'S '.a
•n cu-c^

i^ C 13 ■"■

bO o S 4J~

.2 'S . 2 S
o • 'S «

y^ fi e

c B

O o

o .!i<2

>

c

03

'-' -a
O g

o

U

w

w o <u tJ (5 ''-' u

1) o

fiU

o

V

Xi

<M

o

d

V

o

<o

U

fi .S
«^ fi

V e fi

Sa>

a o c

£L U

o

188

Appendices

APPENDIX D

Contracts Awarded by the National Council on IVIarine Resources
and Engineering Development

Subject

Contractor

Amount

To collect and evaluate economic

Surveys & Research Corp., 1030

$6, 400

and industrial statistics on Marine

15th St. NW., Washington,

Resources and Engineering Develop-

D.C. 20005.

ment.

A study of areas of legal conflict of

William L. Griffin, 1725 DeSales

4,200

immediate concern.

St. NW., Washington, D.C.
20036.

Report of achievements and problems

Robert G. Snider, 112 West

6,000

of the International Indian Ocean

Foster Ave., State College, Pa.

Expedition and recommendations

for the improvement of future ex-

peditions.

A study of the internationsd legal

William T. Burke, Ohio State

7, 100

problems involved in the scientific

University, 1659 North High

exploration and investigation of the

St., Columbus, Ohio 43210.

marine environment and its re-

sources.

A study of the international legal

Louis Henkin, Columbia Uni-

10, 000

problems involved in the manage-

versity School of Law, 435

ment, use, development, recovery.

West 116th St., New York,

and control of the mineral resources

N.Y. 10027.

of the marine environment.

A study of international legal prob-

Paul W. Dodyk, Columbia Uni-

7, 425

lems concerning living resources of

versity School of Law, 435

the sea.

West 116th St., New York,
N.Y. 10027.

A seminar on the liability aspects of

American Trial Lawyers Associa-

1,000

activities in the marine environment.

tion, Kraindler & Kraindler,
99 Park Ave., New York, N.Y.
10016.

A study of legal problems arising out

Albert Garretson, New York

20, 000

of the management, use, develop-

University School of Law, New

ment, recovery, and control of the

York, N.Y.

marine resources along the coasts of

the United States.

A study of legal problems arising out

Board of Regents of the University

20, 000

of the management, use, develop-

of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis.

ment, and recovery of natural re-

sources of the Great Lakes Area of

the United States.

A study of requirements for and

System Development Corp.,

75, 000

management of marine data

Santa Monica, Calif.

systems.

Nonmilitary needs for underwater

Southwest Research Institute, San

63,000

technology.

Antonio, Tex.

189

Marine Science Affairs

Contracts Awarded by the National Council on Marine Resources
and Engineering Development — Continued

Subject

Contractor

Amount

A study of the utility of systems

Litton Industries, Transportation

89,

373

analysis for a U.S. fishery.

Systems, Marine Technology,
Inc., Beverly Hills, Calif. Sub-
contractor— Litton Industries
Mellonics Division, Sunnyvale,
Calif.

Potential of aquaculture for providing

American Institute of Biological

30,

756

food from the sea.

Science, 3900 Wisconsin Ave.,
Washington, D.C.

The potential of observation of the

General Electric Missiles & Space

59,

433

oceans from spacecraft.

Division, Valley Forge, Pa.

Multiple use of the waters and coasts

Trident Engineering Associates,

27,

254

of the Chesapeake Bay.

Annapolis, Md.

Competing demands for land and

Management & Economics Re-

35,

235

water use in the Greater Seattle

search, Inc., Palo Alto, Calif.

Harbor.

Economic potential of selected re-

Economic Associates, Inc., 1150

55,

000

sources of the U.S. Continentzd

Connecticut Ave. NW., Wash-

Shelf and Slope.

ington, D.C.

The relation of government programs

National Planning Association,

75, 057

to private investment enterprise in

1606 New Hampshire Ave.

marine resources and engineering

NW., Washington, D.C.

development (a cooperative study

with the National Science

Foundation).

190

Appendices

APPENDIX E

Table E-1 — Selected International Organizations Active in the Marine

Sciences

United Nations
General

General Assembly
Economic and Social Council
U.N. Development Program
U.N. Children's Fund
International Atomic Energy Agency
Protein Advisory Group
International Court of Justice
InternationcJ Law Commission
U.N. Conference on Trade and Development
Specialized Agencies

Food and Agriculture Organization

UNESCO — Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission
Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organization
World Meteorological Organization
World Health Organization
International Civil Aviation Organization
International Telecommunication Union
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development
Intergovernmental Organizations '

International Hydrographic Bureau

International Council for the Exploration of the Sea

Permanent International Association of Navigation Congresses

North Atlantic Treaty Organization

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

International Commission for the Scientific Exploration of the Mediterranean

Sea
Central Treaty Organization
South Pacific Commission
Indo-Pacific Fisheries Council
Colombo Plan Council for Technical Cooperation in South and Southeast

Asia
Organization of American States
Inter-American Development Bank
Pan American Health Organization
Pan American Institute of Geography and History
Nongovernmental Organizations

International Council of Scientific Unions

International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics

International Association for the Physical Sciences of the Ocean

International Union of Geological Sciences
Commission on Marine Geology

International Geographical Union

International Union of Biological Sciences

International Association of Biological Oceanography

Special Committee for the International Biological Program

Scientific Committee on Oceanic Research

Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research

International Geophysical Committee
See footnotes at end of table.

191

Marine Science Affairs

Table E-1 — Selected International Organizations Active in tlie Marine

Sciences — Continued

Nongovernmental Organizations — Continued

International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources

Pacific Science Association

Federation of Astronomical and Geophysical Services

Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level
Scientific Committee on Water Research

Mediterranean Association of Marine Biology and Oceanography
Association of Island Marine Laboratories of the Caribbean
Inter-American Geodetic Society
Union of International Engineering Organizations

Pan American Congress of Naval Engineering and Maritime Transport
International Ship Structure Congress
International Institute of Welding
International Cable Protection Committee
International Association of Lighthouse Authorities
International Association of Ports and Harbors
International Lifeboat Conference
International Commission on Illumination
International Maritime Radio Association
International Radio Consultative Committee
International Chamber of Commerce
International Chamber of Shipping
International Union of Marine Insurance
International Maritime Committee
International Gas Union

Permanent Council of World Petroleum Congress
Offshore Exploration Congress
World Underwater Federation

1 Fishery commissions are identified in Table E-5
Source : Department of State

Table E-2 — United Nations Resolutions

A. Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly (on the report of the Second Com-
mittee—a/6533)

2172 (XXI) Resources of the Sea

The General Assembly,

Recognizing the need for a greater knowledge of the oceans and of the opportunities
available for the utilization of their resources, living and mineral,

Realizing that the effective exploitation and development of these resources can
raise the economic level of peoples throughout the world, and in particular of the develop-
ing countries,

Taking into account with appreciation the activities in the field of resources of the sea
at present being undertaken by the United Nations, the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization and, in particular, its Inter-governmental Oceano-
graphic Commission, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
and, in particular, its Committee on Fisheries, the World Meteorological Organization,
the Advisory Committee on the Application of Science and Technology to Development,
other intergovernmental organizations concerned, various governments, universities,
scientific and technological institutions, and other interested organizations,

192

Appendices

Table E-2 — United Nations Resolutions — Continued

Considering the need to maximize international cooperative efforts for the further
development of marine science and technology and to avoid duplication or overlapping
of efforts in this field :

1. Endorses Economic and Social Council resolution 1112 (XL) of 7 March 1966
requesting the Secretary-General to make a survey of the present state of knowledge
of the resources of the sea beyond the Continental Shelf, excluding fish, and of the
techniques for exploiting these resources ;

2. Requests the Secretary-General — in cooperation with the United Nations Educa-
tional, Scientific and Cultural Organization and, in particular, its Inter-governmental
Oceanographic Commission, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations and, in particular, its Committee on Fisheries, the World Meteorological
Organization, other intergovernmental organizations concerned, and the governments
of interested member states, and utilizing, inter alia, such voluntary services as may be
offered- — to undertake, in addition to the survey requested by the Economic and Social
Council, a comprehensive survey of activities in marine science and technology, including
that relating to mineral resources development, undertaken by members of the United
Nations family of organizations, various member states and intergovernmental organi-
zations concerned, as well as by universities, scientific and technological institutes, and
other interested organizations ;

3. Requests the Secretary-General, in cooperation with the United Nations Educa-
tional, Scientific and Cultural Organization and, in particular, its Inter-governmental
Oceanographic Commission and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations and, in particular, its Committee on Fisheries, and in the light of the above-
mentioned comprehensive survey to formulate proposals for:

(a) Ensuring the most effective arrangements for an expanded program of
international cooperation to assist in a better understanding of the marine environment
through science and in the exploitation and development of marine resources, with due
regard to the conservation offish stocks;

{b) Initiating and strengthening marine education and training programs,
bearing in mind the close interrelationship between marine and other sciences ;

4. Requests the Secretary-General to set up a small group of experts to be selected,
as far as possible, from the specialized agencies and intergovernmental organizations
concerned, to assist him in the preparation of the comprehensive survey called for in
paragraph 2 above and in the formulation of the proposals referred to in paragraph 3
above ;

5. Requests that the survey and proposals prepared by the Secretary-General be
submitted to the Advisory Committee on the Application of Science and Technology
to Development for its comments;

6. Requests the Secretary-General to submit his survey and proposals, together
with the comments of the Advisory Committee, to the General Assembly at its twenty-
third session, through the Economic and Social Council.

1485th plenary meeting,
6 December 1966.

193

Marine Science Affairs

Table E-2 — United Nations Resolutions — Continued

B. Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly (on the report of the First Com-
mittee—a/6964 )

2340 (XXII)

Examination of the Question of the Reservation Exclusively for Peaceful
Purposes of the Sea-Bed and the Ocean Floor, and the Subsoil Thereof,
Underlying the High Seas Beyond the Limits of Present National
Jurisdiction, and the Uses of Their Resources in the Interests of Mankind

The General Assembly,

Having considered the item "Examination of the question of the reservation ex-
clusively for peaceful purposes of the seabed and the ocean floor, and the subsoil thereof,
underlying the high seas beyond the limits of present national jurisdiction, and the uses
of their resources in the interests of mankind",

Noting that developing technology is making the seabed and the ocean floor, and
the subsoil thereof, accessible and exploitable for scientific, economic, military and
other purposes,

Recognizing the common interest of mankind in the seabed and the ocean floor
which constitute the inajor portion of the area of this planet,

Recognizing further that the exploration and use of the seabed and the ocean floor,
and the subsoil thereof, as contemplated in the title of the item, should be conducted
in accordance with the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations,
in the interest of maintaining international peace and security and for the benefit of
all mankind,

Mindful of the provisions and practice of the law of the sea relating to this question.

Mindful also of the importance of preserving the seabed and the ocean floor,
and the subsoil thereof, as contemplated in the title of the item, from actions and uses
which might be detrimental to the common interests of mankind.

Desiring to foster greater international cooperation and coordination in the further
peaceful exploration and use of the seabed and the ocean floor, and the subsoil thereof,
as contemplated in the title of the item.

Recalling the past and continuing valuable work on questions relating to this
matter carried out by the competent organs of the United Nations, the specialized
agencies, the International Atomic Energy Agency and other intergovernmental orga-
nizations.

Recalling further that surveys are being prepared by the Secretary-General in
response to General Assembly resolution 2172 (XXI) of 6 December 1966 and Economic
and Social Council resolution 1112 (XL) of 7 March 1966,

1. Decides to establish an ad hoc Committee to study the peaceful uses of the
seabed and the ocean floor beyond the limits of national jurisdiction composed of
Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Ceylon, Chile,
Czechoslovakia, Ecuador, El Salvador, France, Iceland, India, Italy, Japan, Kenya,
Liberia, Libya, Malta, Norway, Pakistan, Peru, Poland, Rumania, Senegal, Somalia,
Thailand, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Arab Republic, the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the United Republic of
Tanzania, the United States of America, and Yugoslavia, to study the scope and various
aspects of this item ;

194

Appendices

Table E-2 — United Nations Resolutions — Continued

2. Requests the ad hoc Committee, in cooperation with the Secretary-General, to
prepare, for consideration by the General Assembly at its twenty-third session, a study
which would include:

(a) a survey of the past and present activities of the United Nations, the special-
ized agencies, the International Atomic Energy Agency and other inter-
governmental bodies with regard to the seabed and the ocean floor, and
of existing international agreements concerning these areas ;

(b) an account of the scientific, technical, economic, legal, and other aspects
of this item;

(c) an indication regarding practical means to promote international coopera-
tion in the exploration, conservation and use of the seabed and the ocean
floor, and the subsoil thereof, as contemplated in the title of the item, and
of their resources, having regard to the views expressed and suggestions
put forward by Member States during the consideration of this item at the
twenty-second session of the General Assembly ;

3. /Jegw^jfj the Secretary-General :

(a) to transmit the text of this resolution to the Governments of all Member
States in order to seek their views on the subject ;

(b) to transmit to the ad hoc Committee the records of the First Committee
relating to the discussion of this item;

(c) to render all appropriate assistance to the ad hoc Committee, including
the submission thereto of the results of the studies being undertaken in
pursuance of General Assembly resolution 2172 (XXI) and Economic and
Social Council resolution 1112 (XL) and such documentation pertinent
to this item as may be provided by the United Nations Educational, Scien-
tific and Cultural Organization and its Inter-governmental Oceanographic
Commission, the Inter-governmental Maritime Consultative Organization,
the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the World
Meteorological Organization, the World Health Organization, the Inter-
national Atomic Energy Agency and other intergovernmental bodies;

4. Invites the specialized agencies, the International Atomic Energy Agency, and
other intergovernmental bodies to cooperate fully with the ad hoc Committee in the
implementation of this resolution.

1639th plenary meeting,
18 December 1967.

Table E-3— Nations Which Have Ratified, Acceded to, or Consider
Themselves Bound by the Geneva Conventions on the Law off the
Sea^

Convention

on the

high seas

Convention

on the

Continental

Shelf

Convention on
the territorial
sea and con-
tiguous zone

Convention on

fishing and
conservation of
living resources
of the high seas

Afghanistan

X

XI

X

X'

XI

X

Albania

X
X
X
X
X

Australia

X

X 1

XI
X

X

Bulgaria

Byelorussia

Cambodia .-

X

See footnotes at end of table.

195

287-921 O — 68-

-14

Marine Science Affairs

Table E-3 — Nations Wliich Have Ratified, Acceded to, or Consider
Themselves Bound by tlie Geneva Conventions on tiie Law of the
Sea ^ — Continued

Convention

on the

high seas

Convention

on the

Continental

Shelf

Convention on
the territorial
sea and con-
tiguous zone

Convention on

fishing and
conservation of
living resources
of the high seas

Central African Republic

X

Colombia ._ .

X

X

X

X

X

XI

X

X

X

Czechoslovakia ._..

XI

X 1

Denmark

Dominican Republic- __ ._

X
X

X
X

X

Finland _ _ _.

X

France

Guatemala

X

X

X 1

X 1

X

X

X

X

X

X

Haiti. ._

X

X 1

X

Hungary. . _____

Indonesia ___

Israel _ __ _ _

X

X
X
X

XI
X
X
X

XI

Italy -

Jamaica .

X
X
X
X
X
X

X

Madagascar _

X

Malawi

X

Malaya. __

X

Malta

Mexico

X 1

X

X

X

Nepal

Netherlands

X
X

X

X

New Zealand

Nigeria

X

XI

X

XI

X

X

X

X

X

Poland-. _

X
X
X
X

Portugal

X
X .
X
X
X

X

Rumania

Senegal

X

Sierra Leone

X

South Africa

X
X
X

X

Switzerland

X
X
X

XI

X'

X'

X

X

X

X

X
X
X

XI
XI
XI
X

X

X

Uganda

X
X
X
X
X

X

U.S.S.R

X'

United States _

x»

Upper Volta . __

X

Venezuela _ _ .

XI
XI

XI
X

X

Yugoslavia . _

X

' With a reservation or declaration.

2 Based on information available to the Department of State as of Dec. 8, 1967.

196

Appendices

Table E-4 — Breadth of Territorial Seas and Fishing Jurisdiction Claimed
by Members of the United Nations

Country

Territorial sea

Fishing limits

Other

Albania

10 miles

12 miles

12 miles

Algeria

Argentina

200 miles

Australia

3 miles

Barbados

Belgium . ._

3 miles

6 miles

12 miles

12 miles •_..
12 miles

Brazil .

Bulgaria. ...

Burma .

do

Cambodia

5 miles

18 miles. _

12 miles

Continental Shelf to 50 meters

Cameroun

including sovereignty over
superjacent waters.

Canada

3 miles

6 miles

12 miles

Ceylon.

Claims right to establish con-
servation zones within 100
nautical miles of the
territorial sea.

Chile

50 kilom-
eters.
3 miles _ _ _

200 miles...

China - .

Colombia

6 miles

12 miles

Congo (Brazzaville)

Congo (L6opoldville)

Costa Rica

3 miles

Cuba -

3 miles

Cyprus -

12 miles.- .

Dahomey

3 miles

do

12 miles

do»

Denmark

Greenland

do

Faroe Islands

do

Dominican Republic

Ecuador _

6 miles

6-mile contiguous zone
including fishing.

200 miles .

El Salvador

200 miles...

Ethiopia

12 miles

Federal Republic of

Germany.
Finland

3 miles

4 miles

12 miles 1...

France

3 miles

3 miles

12 miles

Gabon. _. .._.._

Gambia. .

3 miles

Ghana

12 miles

Undefined protective areas
may be proclaimed seaward
of territorial sea, and up to
100 miles seaward of terri-
torial sea may be proclaimed
fishing conservation zone.

See footnote at end of table.

197

Marine Science Affairs

Table E-4 — Breadtii of Territorial Seas and Fishing Jurisdiction Claimed
by Members of the United Nations— Continued

Country

Territorial sea

Fishing limits

Other

Greece.

6 miles

Guatemala

12 miles

Guinea

130 miles

Guyana .....

Haiti . .. _ - _.

6 miles

Honduras _

12 miles

Iceland

.--do-

12 miles

100 miles- --

India. ,

---do

Indonesia. .

.--do --

Archipelago theory.

Iran _

...do.--

Iraq _ _

...do...

Ireland

3 miles

6 miles

12 miles J---

Israel.. . _. ..

Italy

.- do .-

12 miles'...

Ivory Coast.

3 miles ._ .

Jamaica .

12 miles..

Tapan . .

3 miles.

Jordan.. _ .

Kenya.. _ _.

3 miles

Korea

20 to 200
miles.

Continental Shelf including
sovereignty over superjacent
waters.

Kuwait .

12 miles

Lebanon

6 miles

Liberia

12 miles. .

Libya.

...do

Malagasy Republic

do

Malaysia

3 miles .

Maldive Islands ._

6 miles

Malta..

3 miles

Mauritania . . . .

12 miles

9 miles

3 miles

12 miles

...do

...do

Mexico .

Morocco

Muscat and Oman.

Exception — 6 miles for Strait
of Gibraltar.

Netherlands

New Zealand

Nicaragua

3 miles

..-do

..-do

12 miles !--_

...do

200 miles--.

Continental Shelf including
sovereignty over superjacent
waters.

Nigeria

12 miles

Norway

4 miles

12 miles

See footnote at end of table.

198

Appendices

Table E-4 — Breadth of Territorial Seas and Fishing Jurisdiction Claimed
by Members of the United Nations — Continued

Country

Territorial sea

Fishing limits

Othe-

Pakistan

12 miles

Plus right to establish 100-

mile conservation zones.

Continental Shelf — includ-

ing sovereignty over super-

jacent waters.

Panama

200 miles

Peru._

do

200 miles...

Philippines

Archipelago
theory.

Waters within straight lines

joining appropriate points

of outermost islands of the

archipelago are considered

internal waters; waters be-

tween these baselines and

the limits described in the

Treaty of Paris, Dec. 10,

1898, the United States-

Spain Treaty of Nov. 7,

1900, and U.S.-U.K.

Treaty of Jan. 2, 1930, are

considered to be the

territorial sea.

Poland _ .. .

■^ milfs

Portugal

6 miles

12 miles '...

Romania _ _ - _

12 miles

Saudi Arabia

12 miles .-

Senegal

6 miles

Sierra Leone

12 miles

Singapore -

Somali Republic - -

South Africa

6 miles

.. do

12 miles

doi_-_

Spain ._

do

Sudan .

12 miles ..

Sweden.- __ _

4 miles

12 miles

12 miles 1...

Syria

Plus 6 miles necessary super-

vision zone.

Tanzania - ._

do

Thailand... . .

do

Togo . .

do

"■

Trinidad and Tobago

Tunisia.

3 miles _ _

6 miles

12 miles

Territorial sea follows the 50-

meter isobath for part of the

coast (maximum 65 miles).

See footnote at end of table.

199

Marine Science Affairs

Table E-4 — Breadtii of Territorial Seas and Fishing Jurisdiction Claimed
by Members of the United Nations — Continued

Country

Territorial sea

Fishing limits

Other

Turkey

6 miles

12 miles

do

Ukrainian S.S.R.

U.S.S.R

do

United Arab Republic

do

United Kingdom

Colonies. .

3 miles

do

12 miles K..

United States of
America -

do

12 miles

12 miles

Urueuav - -- -

6 miles

12 miles

Venezuela

Vietnam _

20 kilo-
meters.

Yemen _ _

12 miles

Yugoslavia

10 miles

1 Parties to the European Fisheries Convention which provides for the right to establish 3 miles exclusive
Ashing zone seaward of 3-mile territorial sea plus additional 6-mile fishing zone restricted to the convention
nations.

Source: Information available to the National
Engineering Development as of January 1, 1968.

Council on Marine Resources and

Table E-5 — Selected International Treaties in Marine Affairs To Which
the United States Adheres

I. FISHERY COMMISSIONS
Great Lakes Fishery Commission
Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission
North Pacific Fur Seal Commission
International North Pacific Fisheries Commission
International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission
International Pacific Halibut Commission
International Commission for Northwest Atlantic Fisheries
International Whaling Commission

II. MULTILATERAL MARITIME TREATIES
Convention for Safety of Life at Sea
Convention on Preventing Collisions at Sea
Convention for Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil
International Load Line Convention
Convention on Assistance and Salvage at Sea
Convention on Bills of Lading
Convention on Facilitation of International Maritime Traffic

Source: Department of State

200

Appendices

Table E-6— Excerpts of Marine Affairs Interest From International
Summit-Level Declarations and Speeches

I. Joint Statement from President Johnson of the U.S. and President Marcos of the
Philippines, Washington, D.G. (September 15, 1966)
President Marcos set forth his vision of the Philippines future. He described the
many frontiers that mankind faces — in space and in the ocean depths, * * *
The considerable economic loss suffered annually in the Far East from typhoons
was discussed by the two Presidents, who agreed that the regional initiatives
undertaken by ECAFE and WMO to improve technical capabilities for typhoon
damage control deserved full support. President Johnson offered the services of a
United States meteorological team to develop a joint program of typhoon damage
control in the Philippine area in concert with regional planning, and President
Marcos agreed to the desirability of such a program* * *

Finally, the two Presidents noted the cooperative programs already started between
the Philippine National Science Development Board and the U.S. National
Academy of Sciences, and agreed that these programs should be expanded so the
private and public researclj efforts can be applied to the advance of knowledge
about growing food on the land and in the sea in the tropics. The two Presidents
noted the expanded efforts now underway by the U.S. Government in the field of
oceanography, in which it was agreed that the Philippines would participate
fully* * *

II. Joint Communiqu6 from President Johnson of the U.S. and Prime Minister Sato
of Japan, Washington, D.G. (November 15, 1967)

The President and the Prime Minister, aware of the increasing importance of the
oceans as a source of food for the world's growing population and as a source of
minerals, have agreed to seek ways of greatly expanding United States-Japan
cooperation in research and in development of technology for the utilization of
mineral resources through the United States-Japan Conference on Development
and Utilization of Natural Resources. For this purpose they have agreed that as
part of the United States-Japan natural resources program, there should be pre-
pared a report and recommendations of the two Governments looking to coopera-
tion between the two countries in this field.

III. Address by President Johnson at the Inter-American Summit, Punta del Este,
Uruguay (April 13, 1967)
'<* * * \Yc are prepared to join with the Latin American nations in: * * * De-
veloping a regional program of marine science and technology. * ♦ * We are also
prepared to set up in Latin America a demonstration center in the field of fish
protein concentrate. We believe that this essential ingredient of a balanced diet
can be provided at a much lower cost than in the past. * * *"

201

Marine Science Affairs

APPENDIX F

Laboratories and Institutions i Engaged in Marine Science Research

Alabama :

Federal Gulf Coast Marine Health Sciences Laboratory (PHS)

(Dauphin Island)
Southeastern Fish Cultural Laboratory (BSF & W) (Marion)

State Alabama Fish and Game Commission (Dauphin Island)

Academic Alabama Marine Resources Laboratory (Dauphin Island)

University of Alabama (University)
Private Southern Research Institute (Birmingham)

Alaska:

Federal Biological Laboratory (BCF) (Auke Bay)

Exploratory Fishing and Gear Research Base (BCF) (Juneau)
Naval Arctic Research Laboratory (Point Barrow)

State Alaska Department of Fisheries (Juneau)

Alaska Department of Fish and Game (Kodiak)

Academic University of Alaska (College)

California:

Federal Biological Field Station (BCF) (Tiburon)

Biological Laboratory (BCF) (Stanford; La Jolla; Sabine

Island ; San Diego)
California Cooperative Fisheries Investigations (BCF) (La

Jolla)
California Current Research Laboratory (BCF) (La Jolla)
Fishery Oceanography Center (BCF) (Terminal Island)
Ichthyological Field Station (BCF) (Stanford)
Inter- American Tropical Tuna Commission (International)

(La Jolla)
Marine Minerals Technology Center (BuMines) (Tiburon)
Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory (Port Hueneme)
Naval Command Control Communications Center Lab-
oratory (San Diego)
Naval Missile Center (Point Mugu)
Naval Postgraduate School (Monterey)
Naval Radiological Defense Laboratory (San Francisco)
Naval Undersea Warfare Center (Pasadena ; San Diego)
Tiburon Marine Laboratory (BSF & W) (Tiburon)
Tuna Research Laboratory (BCF) (La Jolla)

State Marineland of the Pacific (Portuguese Bend)

San Diego Museum of Natural History (San Diego)
State Department of Fish and Game (San Pedro; Pacific
Grove; Menlo Park; Eureka)

Academic Bodega Marine Laboratory (University of California)

(Bodega Head)
Bolinas Marine Station (College of Marin) (Bolinas)
See footnote at end of table.

202

Appendices

Laboratories and institutions' Engaged in Marine Science Research — Con.

California — Continued

Academic California Institute of Technology (Pasadena)

California State College at Long Beach (Long Beach)
Catalina Marine Biological Laboratory (Santa Catalina

Island).
Humboldt State College (Areata)
Mendocino Biological Field Station (Pacific Union College)

(Albion)
Moss Landing Marine Laboratories (Moss Landing)
Pomona College (Claremont)
San Diego State College (San Diego)
San Jose State College (San Jose)
Santa Barbara Marine Station (University of California)

(Santa Barbara)
Scripps Institution of Oceanography (La Jolla)
Stanford University (Stanford; Pacific Grove)
University of California (San Diego ; La Jolla ; Berkeley)
University of the Pacific (Dillon Beach)
University of Southern California (Los Angeles)

Private Aquatic Research Institute (Stockton)

Beaudette Foundation (Moss Landing)
California Academy of Sciences (San Francisco)
Kerckhoff Marine Laboratory (Corona del Mar)
Mission Bay Research Foundation (La Jolla)
Stanford Research Institute (Palo Alto)

Connecticut:

Federal Biological Laboratory (BCF) (Milford)

Navy Underwater Sound Laboratory (New London).

Academic University of Bridgeport (Bridgeport)

University of Connecticut (Storrs)

Yale University (Bingham Oceanographic Laboratory) (New
Haven)

Delav^tare :

Academic University of Delaware (Newark)

Private Bayside Laboratory ( Lewes Ferry )

District of Columbia:

Federal Biological Field Station (BCF)

Ichthyological Laboratories (BCF)
National Oceanographic Data Center
Smithsonian Oceanographic Sorting Center
Smithsonian Museum of Natural History
Army Coastal Engineering Research Center
Coast Guard Oceanographic Unit (DOT)
Naval Research Laboratory

Academic Catholic University of America

Department of Agriculture Graduate School
See footnote at end of table.

203

Marine Science Affairs

Laboratories and Institutions' Engaged in Marine Science Research — Con.

Florida :

Federal Biological Laboratory (BCF) (Gulf Breeze)

Biological Station (BCF) (St. Petersburg Beach)

Eastern Gulf Marine Laboratory (BSF &W) (Panama City)

Exploratory Fishing and Gear Research Station (BCF)

(Miami; Panama City)
Atlantic Oceanographic Laboratories (ESSA) (Miami)
National Hurricane Research Laboratory (ESSA) (Miami)
Sea Air Interaction Laboratory (ESSA) (Miami)
Tropical Atlantic Biological Laboratory (BCF) (Miami)
Naval Research Laboratory (Underwater Sound Reference

Division) (Orlando)
Naval R&D Center (ex-Mine Defense Laboratory) (Panama
City)

State Florida State Board of Conservation ( St. Petersburg )

Academic Florida Atlantic University (Boca Raton)

Florida Institute of Oceanology (Melbourne)
Florida Presbyterian College (St. Petersburg)
Florida State University (Tallahassee)
Nova University (Fort Lauderdale)
University of Florida (Gainesville; Cedar Key)
University of Miami (Miami)
University of South Florida (Tampa)
University of West Florida (Pensacola)

Private Battelle Memorial Institute (Daytona Beach)

Mote Marine Laboratory (Cape Haze Laboratory) (Sarasota)

Georgia :

Federal Biological Laboratory (BCF ) ( Brunswick )

South Atlantic Exploratory Fishing and Gear Research
Station (BCF) (St. Simons Island)
Academic University of Georgia Marine Institute (Sapelo Island)

Hawaii :

Federal Biological Laboratory (BCF) (Honolulu)

Joint Tsunanii Research Effort (ESSA) (Honolulu)

State Division of Fish and Game ( Honolulu )

Academic University of Hawaii (Honolulu)

Private Oceanic I nstitute ( Oahu )

Illinois:

Academic Illinois State University (De Kalb)

Northwestern University (Evanston)
University of Chicago (Chicago)
University of Illinois (Urbana)

Indiana :

Academic University of Notre Dame (Notre Dame)

See footnote at end of table.

204

Appendices

Laboratories and Institutions' Engaged in Marine Science Research — Con.

Louisiana :

Federal Technical Laboratories (BCF) (New Orleans)

State Grand Terre Island Laboratory (New Orleans)

Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Commission (Grand
Chenier)

Academic Louisiana State University (Baton Rouge)

University of Southwestern Louisiana (Lafayette)

Maine

Federal Biological Laboratory (BCF) (Boothbay Harbor)

State Department of Inland Fisheries and Game (Bangor)

Department of Sea and Shore Fisheries (Boothbay Harbor)
Academic University of Maine Marine Station (Walpole)

Maryland:

Federal Biological Laboratory (BCF) (Oxford)

Coast and Geodetic Survey (ESSA) (Rockville)

Naval Oceanographic Office (Suitland)

Naval Ordnance Laboratory (Silver Spring)

Naval R&D Center (ex-David Taylor Model Basin)

(Carderock) .
Naval R&D Center (ex-Naval Marine Engineering
Laboratory) (Annapolis)

Academic Chesapeake Bay Institute (Johns Hopkins University)

(Baltimore).
Chesapeake Biological Laboratory (University of Maryland)
(Solomons) .
Massachusetts :

Federal Biological Laboratory (BCF) (Woods Hole)

Exploratory Fishing and Gear Research Base (BCF) (Glouces-
ter).
International Ice Patrol (U.S. Coast Guard) (Woods Hole)

State Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game (Boston)

Academic Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Cambridge)

Museum of Comparative Zoology (Harvard University)

(Cambridge) .
Northeastern University (Boston)

Southern Mass. Technological Institution (Cambridge)
Tufts University (Medford)
University of Massachusetts (Amherst)

Private William F. Clapp Laboratory (Duxbury)

Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (Woods Hole)
Michigan :

Federal Biological Laboratory (BCF) (Ann Arbor)

Exploratory Fishing and Gear Research Laboratory (BCF)

(Ann Arbor).
Great Lakes Research Group (ESSA) (Detroit)
Lake Survey (Army Corps of Engineers) (Detroit)

State Department of Conservation (Lansing)

Academic Michigan State University (East Lansing)

University of Michigan (Ann Arbor)
See footnote at end of table.

205

Marine Science Affairs

Laboratories and Institutions^ Engaged in Marine Science Researcli— Con.

Minnesota :

Federal Great Lakes Water Laboratory (FWPCA) (Duluth)

State State Department of Conservation (St. Paul)

Academic University of Minnesota (Minneapolis)

Mississippi:

Federal Exploratory Fishing and Gear Research Base (BCF) (Pasca-

goula) .
Waterways Experiment Station (Corps of Engineers) (Vicks-
burg).
Academic Gulf Coast Research Laboratory (Ocean Springs)

New Hampshire:

State Fish and Game Department (Concord)

Academic University of New Hampshire (Durham)

Nev^ Jersey:

Federal Sandy Hook Marine Laboratory (BSF & W) (Highlands)

State Division of Fish and Game (Trenton)

New Jersey Oyster Research Laboratories (New Brunswick;
Bivalve; Monmouth Beach; Cape May Courthouse)

Academic Princeton University (Princeton)

Rutgers — The State University (New Brunswick)
Stevens Institute of Technology (Hoboken)
New York:

Federal Naval Applied Science Laboratory (Brooklyn)

Academic City University of New York (New York City)

Cornell University (Ithaca)

Hudson Laboratories (Columbia University) (Dobbs Ferry)

Lamont Geological Observatory (Columbia University)

(Palisades)
Long Island University (Brookville, Long Island)
New York University (Bronx)
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (Troy)
Southampton College (NYU) (Southampton)
State University of New York (Buffalo)
Webb Institute of Naval Architecture (Glen Cove)

Private American Museum of Natural History (New York City)

Institute of Oceanography and Marine Biology (Oyster Bay,

Long Island).
New York Zoological Society (Brooklyn)
North Carolina:

Federal Biological Laboratory (BCF) (Beaufort)

Radiobiological Laboratory (BCF) (Beaufort)

State Department of Water Resources (Raleigh)

Academic Duke University (Beaufort ; Durham)

North Carolina State University (Raleigh)
University of North Carolina (Morehead City)
Ohio:

Academic Ohio State University (Columbus)

Private Battelle Memorial Institute (Columbus)

See footnote at end of table.

206

Appendices

Laboratories and institutions^ Engaged in Marine Science Research — Con.

Oregon :

Federal . Water Pollution Control Laboratory (FWPCA) (Corvallis)

State Oregon Fish Commission Laboratories (Clackamas; Astoria;

Newport; Charleston; Oaikridge).

Academic Oregon State University (Corvallis; Newport)

University of Oregon (Charleston; Portland)
Pennsylvania :

Federal Naval Air Development Center (Johnsville)

Naval Air Engineering Center (Philadelphia)

Academic Lehigh University (Bethlehem)

Pennsylvania State University (University Park)
University of Pittsburgh (Pittsburgh)
Private Philadelphia Academy of Sciences (Philadelphia)

Rhode Island:

Federal Narragansett Marine Gamefish Laboratory (BSF & W)

(Kingston)
Northeast Marine Health Sciences Laboratory (PHS)

(Kingston)
Naval Underwater Weapons Research and Engineering

Station (Newport)
Academic University of Rhode Island (Kingston)

South Carolina:

State Bears Bluff Laboratories (Wadmalaw Island)

Academic College of Charleston (Charleston)

Private Fort Johnson Marine Biological Laboratory (Charleston)

Texas:

Federal Biological Laboratory (BCF) (Galveston)

State Texas Fish and Game Commission (Austin)

Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (Rockport)
Academic Texas A&M University (Galveston; College Station)

University of Texas (Port Aransas)

University of Houston (Houston)
Private Southwest Research Institute (San Antonio)

Virginia :

Federal Land-Sea Interaction Laboratory (ESSA) (Norfolk)

Norfolk Ship Base (Navy) (Norfolk)
Naval Weapons Laboratory (Yorktown)

State Eastern Shore Laboratory (Wachapreague)

Academic College of William and Mary (Williamsburg)

Old Dominion College (Norfolk)

Virginia Institute of Marine Science (Gloucester Point)
See footnote at end of table.

207

Marine Science Affairs

Laboratories and Institutions^ Engaged in iVIarine Science Researcii — Con.

Washington :

Federal Biological Laboratory (BCF) (Seattle)

Exploratory Fishing and Gear Research Base (BCF) (Seattle)
International Pacific Halibut Commission (Seattle)
Joint Oceanographic Research Group (ESSA) (Seattle)
Marine Mammal Biological Laboratory (BCF) (Seattle)
Northwest Research Laboratory (FWPCA) (Richland)
Pacific Oceanographic Laboratories (ESSA) (Seattle)
Salmon Culture Laboratory (BSF & W) (Longview)
Northwest Marine Health Sciences Laboratory (PHS)(Gig
Harbor)

State Department of Fisheries Research Laboratories (Olympia;

Brinnon; Aberdeen; Vancouver; Seattle; Ocean Park)

Academic Seattle Pacific College (Seattle)

University of Washington (Seattle)
Walla Walla College (Anacortes)
Western Washington State College (Bellingham)
Private Battelle-Northwest (Pacific Northwest Laboratory) (Rich-
land)
Wisconsin :

Academic University of Wisconsin (Madison)

Other U.S.:

Federal Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (Canal Zone)

Academic University of Puerto Rico (Mayaguez)

Foreign :

Federal Atlantic Underwater Test and Evaluation Center (AUTEC)

(Bahamas)
Navy Underwater Sound Laboratory Research Detachment
(Tudor Hill, Bermuda)

State Vermillion Sea Field Station (Baja California)

Academic Lamont Geophysical Field Station (Columbia University)

(St. David's, Bermuda)
Marine Laboratory (Puerto Penasco, Mexico)

Private Bermuda Biological Station (St. George's West, Bermuda)

Lerner Marine Laboratory (Bimini, BWI)

1 Industrial research centers have been excluded.

Source: Hydrospace Buyers' Guide, Data Publications; Oceanography Information Sources, National
Academy of Sciences; Information Resources in the United States— Water, Library of Congress; National
Referral Center, Library of Congress; Committee on Marine Research, Education, and Facilities; miscel-
laneous.

208

Appendices

APPENDIX G

G-1- Estimated Growth of the Oceanographic' Fleets
of the United States and the Soviet Union

FLEET SIZE

Number of Vessels
200

SOVIET UNION

UNITED STATES

1963

1964

1965

1966

1967

PROJECTED

1970

TONNAGE (DISPLACED)

Displaced Tonnage (Thousands of Tons)
350

1963

' Includes fishery reseorch vessels, as well as oceanographic ships, that

spend significant time nnaking oceanographic collections.
" Excludes Coast Guard vessels except for the International Ice Patrol

vessels.
NOTE: Soviet totals, unlike those for the U.S., do not include ship

decommissionings and other losses from the fleet and therefore
may be slightly higher than actual.
Sources: Notional Oceonographic Data Center; Committee on Marine
Research, Education and Facilities,- Miscellaneous.

209

Marine Science Affairs

G-2- Merchant Fleets of the World

FLEET SIZE

Number of Vessels
2,500

2,000

1,500

DEADWEIGHT TONNAGE

Number of Vessels
40

1961 (Dec.)

1964 (Dec.)

1967 (June)

1961 (Dec.)

1964 (Dec.)

1967 (June)

' Oceongoing steam and motor ships of 1000 gross tons or more. Excludes
ships operoting exclusively on inland waterways ond special ships such
as chonnel ships, icebreakers, military ships, etc.

" Only privately-owned U.S. ships are included. U.S. government ships,
excluding the reserve fleet, rose from 64 vessels in 1961 to 201 vessels
in 1967 but this largely reflects activation of reserve ships for war duty.

Sources: Merchant Fleets of the World, 1961, 1964, 1 967, Maritime Admin-
istration, U.S. Deportment of Commerce

210

Appendices

G-3— Estimated Growth in Tonnage of the
High Seas Fishing Fleets' of Selected Nations

Tons (Millions of GRTsi

6U

5,0

3.0

SOVIET UNION

1958 1S59

1962

1963

1964 1965

1966

1967

' Ships larger than 5 net tons operoting in the open seas and major inland

seas such as the Caspion and Black Seos and the Greot Lokes.
NOTE; Tonnoge scale changes for Japon and Soviet Union.
Sources: Bureau of Commercial Fisheries; Bulletin of Fishery Statistics,

No. 1 4, Food and Agricultural Orgonization of the United Nations,
1966; Embassy of Peru; Miscelloneous.

211

287-921 O— 68 15

Marine Science Affairs

APPENDIX H

Table H-1 — Volume of Cargo Handled in Waterborne Commerce at
Thirty Selected U.S. Ocean Ports, 1955 and 1965

Port

New York, N.Y

New Orleans, La

Houston, Tex

Philadelphia, Pa

Duluth, Minn.; Superior, Wis

Chicago, 111

Toledo, Ohio

Baltimore, Md

Norfolk, Va

Detroit, Mich

Baton Rouge, La

Beaumont, Tex

Port Arthur, Tex

Cleveland, Ohio

Mobile, Ala

Los Angeles, Calif

Corpus Christi, Tex

Boston, Mass

Tampa, Fla

Indiana Harbor, Ind

Portland, Maine

Paulsboro, N.J

Texas City, Tex

Buffalo, N.Y

Marcus Hook, Pa

Portland, Oreg

Richmond, Calif

Seattle, Wash

Lake Charles, La

Newport News, Va

Ranking Total Tons '

1

4

5

3

2

7

9

6

8

10

20

12

13

14

23

18

21

19

30

15

25

27

24

11

17

28

26

29

22

16

148, 849
47, 083

47, 038

48, 493
68, 312
38, 969
35, 725
45, 824
35, 930
26, 498
16, 490
22, 863
21,578
20, 427
15,083
19, 264
15, 574

19, 052
10, 656

20, 675
14,219

13, 151
14,310
22, 962

19, 882
12, 593

14, 032
12,481

15, 395

20, 616

Ranking Total Tons '

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

153
88

59

47

46

45,

45,

44.

40

32

31

31

25

21

21

21

20.

19

19

18

18

1

1

17

17

16

15

14.

14

14.

,855
,877
,832
,735
, 177
,973
,016
,267
,017
,262
,659
,566
,414
,960
,837
,000
,283
,855
,829
,567
,463
1,460
;, 155
,849
,457
,726
,450
,748
,470
,235

> In thousands of tons of 2,000 pounds.

Source: Waterborne Commerce of the United States, 1955, 1965, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

212

Appendices

Table H-2 — Coastal Channel and Harbor New Work Projects > (Underway

as off December 1967) ^

Location

Project

Total Federal

cost (millions

of dollars)

Atlantic Coast.

New Hampshire.
Massachusetts

Rhode Island.
New York

New Jersey.
Delaware. -.

Maryland

Virginia

North Carolina.

Georgia .
Florida..

Gulf Coast.

Florida.

Alabama .

Mississippi.
Louisiana. -

Texas.

Portsmouth Harbor and Piscatagua River

Boston Harbor

Plymouth Harbor

Provincetown Harbor

Wey mouth-Fore and Town River

Providence River and Harbor

Flushing Bay and Creek

Lake Montauk Harbor

Little Neck Bay

New York Harbor Anchorages

Delaware River, Philadelphia to sea

Newark Bay, Hackensack, and Passaic River . .
IWW Delaware River to Chesapeake Bay,
C & D Canal.

Baltimore Harbor and channels

Hampton Roads

AIWW Masonboro Inlet

Wilmington Harbor, 38- and 40-foot channels .

Savannah Harbor, 40-foot project

Savannah Harbor, sediment basin

Canaveral Harbor

Jacksonville Harbor

Apalachicola River Channel

East Pass Channel

Gulf County Canal

Ponce DeLeon Inlet

Bayou LaBatre

Perdido Pass Channel

Biloxi Harbor

Bayou LaFourche and LaFourche Jump.

Freshwater Bayou

Mississippi River, Baton Rouge to Gulf. .

Mississippi River, Gulf outlet

GI WW— Chocolate Bayou

Sabine-Neches Waterway

Wallisville Reservoir

(334. 2)

4.3

2.6

1.9

2.8

14.9

17.0

2. 1

0.9

2.0

45.7

29.0

15.8

100.0

22.9
29.9
2.8
6.0
8.7
7.4
8.7

(241.5)

4.
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.

0.8

5.7

9.4

8.4

163.0

1.4

27.4

17.2

See footnotes at end of table.

213

Marine Science Affairs

Table H-2 — Coastal Channel and Harbor New Work Projects > (Underway
as of December 1967)^ — Continued

Location

Project

Total Federal

cost (millions

of dollars)

Pacific Coast

(113.9)

California

Dana Point Harbor

4.6

Oakland Harbor

8. 5

Oregon -

Sacramento River, deep water ship channel

San Diego River and Mission Bay

Columbia-Lower Willamette River, 40-foot

channel.
Chetco River, north jetty extension. _

41.3
12.2
23.3

1.4

Port Orford _ _ _

1. 1

Siuslaw River and Bar _

0.8

Tillamook Bay and Bar

9.7

Yaquina Bay and Bar ._

11.0

Great Lakes _ . .

(176.8)

Illinois _ _

Calumet Harbor and River, 1962 mod

Indiana Harbor . ._

10.6

Indiana

0. 1

Michigan _

Great Lakes connecting channels

Point Lookout Harbor. _ _

127.5

1.6

Ohio .

Cleveland Harbor, 1958 act ..

13.2

Lorain Harbor, 1960 and 1965 acts

17.3

Wisconsin _ _ _ _

Green Bay Harbor

Kenosha Harbor

Milwaukee Outer Harbor

5.5

0.9
0. 1

Hawaii

Honokahau Harbor

0.8

Alaska

Anchorage Harbor

5.7

Total cost (56

$872. 9

projects).

' Includes the Great Lakes. All projects are considered by the Corps of Engineers to fall within their
definition of coastal works.
2 Listed projects are all in progress. Planned projects which are not yet underway have been excluded.
Source: Corps of Engineers— U.S. Army Civil Works.

214

Appendices

Table H-3— U.S. Oil and Gas Drilling Activity and Production: Total

and Offshore 1958-66

Wells completed

Production 2

Offshore produc-
tion as percent

Oil

Gasi

Dry

Total

Oils
(million
barrels)

Gas 3

(bUlion

cubic

feet)

of total United
States

Oil

Gas'

TOTAL

1958

24, 137

25, 800
21, 186
21, 101
21, 249
20, 288
20, 620
18, 065
16, 780

292
281
340
295
322
312
393
486
584

4,779
5,029
5,258
5,664
5,848
4,751
4,855
4,724
4,377

62
88
97

114
80
71
90
65

166

18, 822

19, 265
17,574
17, 106
16, 682
16, 347
17,488
17,807
15, 227

99
117
126
133
232
307
364
424
489

47, 758
50, 094
44,018
43,871
43, 779

41, 386

42, 963
40, 374
37,881

453

486
564
542
634
690
847
975
1,239

2,449
2,548
2,575
2,622
2,676
2,753
2,805
2,848
3,043

67
93
122
136
145
168
204
228
279

1 1, 030
12,046
12,771

13, 254
13,876

14, 847
15,401
16, 039
17,491

128
207
273
318
452
564
872
1,048
1,581

1959

1960

1961

1962

1963

1964

1965

1966

OFFSHORE *' ^

1958

1959

1960

1961

1962

1963

1964

1965

1966

2.7
3.6
4.7

5. 1
5.4

6. 1
7.3
8.0
9.2

1.2
1.7
2. 1
2.4
3.3
3.8
5.7
6.5
9.0

1966 offshore as
percent of total- __

3.5

3.8

3.2

3.3

9.2

9.0

' Includes field condensate.

■ Marketed production.

2 Offshore gas production volume and percent are for Louisiana only prior to 1964.

■* Includes slant drilling from shore or piers as weU as from offshore platforms.

5 Total offshore oil production figures involve only Louisiana and California prior to 1966. During 1966,
Alaska produced 2.6 million barrels. Texas figures are not included but production totaled only 3.4 miUion
barrels from January 1960 to November 1967. Oregon and Washington have not been sites of commercial
discoveries through 1966.

' Well completion figures before 1965 are for Louisiana only. The 1965 figure also includes Alaska and
California and the 1966 entry also includes California, Alaska, and Texas.

Source: Bureau of Mines; U.S. Geological Survey; Alaska Department of Natural Resources; California
Department of Conservation; Louisiana Department of Conservation; Railroad Commission of Texas;
Battelle Memorial Institute; Oil and Gas Journal; Petroleum Production, Drilling and Leasing on the
Outer Continental Shelf, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1966.

215

Marine Science Affairs

Table H-4 — Estimated Value of Offshore Production of Crude Oil and
Gas From Submerged Lands Off California and Louisiana, 1960-66

(Millions of dollars)

Year

California

Louisiana

Combined

Crude oil and field condensate:

1960

1961

1962

1963

78.0
82.5
85.0
89.0
90.0
101.6
125.3

279.5
325. 1
400. 1
466.7
526.5
592.0
718.4

357.5
407.6
485. 1
555.7

1964

1965

616.5
693.6

1966

843.7

Total... _ ..__--

651.4

3, 308. 3

3, 959. 7

Natural gas and casinghead gas:

1960

nil

0)

1.2

5.2

12.6

13.4

14.5

69.8
85.7
114.3
139.9
159.0
192.2
276.2

69.8

1961

85.7

1962 _ - . ......

115.5

1963

1964

145. 1
171.6

1965

205.6

1966

290.7

Total

2 46.9

1, 037. 1

2 1,084.0

Combined value:

1960

78.0

82.5

86.2

94.2

102.6

115.0

139.8

349.3
410.8
514.4
606.6
685.5
784.2
994.6

427.3

1961

493.3

1962 ...... ....

600.6

1963

1964

700.8
788. 1

1965

899.2

1966

1, 134.4

Total.. .... . ...

2 698. 3

4, 345. 4

2 5, 043. 7

' Data not available.

2 Total underestimated by value of 1961 California gas production.

Source: Battelle Memorial Institute; Bureau of Mines; State of Louisiana; U.S. Geological Survey; Bay
Department of Conservation (Calif.); Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Association.

216

Appendices

Table H-5 — Industrial Expenditures on Offshore Oil and Gas Leases, by
States and Recipient Governments, 1954-66 Inclusive

(Millions of dollars)

Year

California

Louisiana

Texas

Total

State

Federal

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

13.7
.9
.7
.6

State

42.4
51.6
23.6
15.6
10.5
60.6
14.2
23.6
25.4
17.2
31. 1
30.2
67.5

Federal

State

Federal

State *

Federal *

1954

0

15. 1
10. 1
19.0
65.8
8.8
8.2
22.9
38. 1
23.5
75.9
44.7
43.3

117.6

100.9

4.0

8.0

15.0

108.4

3 278. 3

3 50.0

3 569. 8

3 70.2

3 151.9

15. 1

211.0

V /

23.6
8.8
0
0
0
0
36.4
0
.7
.4
.4
.5
35.0

42.4
66.7
33.8
34.6
76.3
69.4
30.7
54.8
71.8
49.0

115.3
83.2

119. 1

141. 2

1955 •. -_-

109. 7

1956

1957

1958

1959

1960

4.0

8.0

15.0

110.5

3 314. 7

1961

3 50.0

1962

1963

1964

3 570. 5

3 84.3

3 190. 5

1965

53.4

1966

248. 3

13-year totals

375.4

15.9

413.5

1, 700. 2

(0

105.8

847. 1

1,900. 1

• Information on bonuses, rentals, and royalties paid to the State of Texas on offshore leases out to the 3-
league line is not available. Annual amounts are believed relatively small.

■ "Total Federal" includes other payments to the Federal Government: $2,100,000 from lands off Florida
in 1959; $29,045,074 from lands off Oregon and $8,231,188 off Washington in 1965; and $1,276,302 off Oregon
and $466,260 off Washington in 1966.

3 Payments to Federal Goverrunent include amounts paid during 1960-64 inclusive for, bonuses, rentals,
and royalties from zones 2 and 3, totaling $771,200,000, which is held in escrow awaiting final decision over
these zones.

* Includes $8,300,000 to the State of Alaska, an average value over the period 1960-66, imputed to each year.

Source: Environmental Science Services Administration; Coast and Geodetic Survey; U.S. Department
of Commerce; Battelle Memorial Institute; Bureau of Land Management; Department of the Interior;
Louisiana Mineral Board; Alaska Department of Natural Resources; California State Lands Division;
and supplementary sources.

217

Marine Science Affairs

Table H-6 — Rents, Royalties, and Bonuses on Outer Continental Shelf

Lands 1 for 1967

(Millions of dollars)

Location

Rents

Bonuses

Royalties

Total

Louisiana ^

Texas

California

Oregon

Washington

4.77
0.42
0.04
1.03
0.36

568. 38
None
21. 19
None
None

38.49
2.61
None
None
None

611.64

3.03

21.23

1.03

0.36

Totals

6.62

589. 57

41. 10

637. 29

' Federal lands; figures represent money received by the Federal Government.

- Figures do not include amounts placed in escrow which were earned on disputed land still under litiga-
tion. Louisiana figures however include a transfer to the Federal General Fund of monies previously tied
up in escrow ($5,496,136 in bonuses and $527,328 in rentals), the disposition of which was resolved in 1967.

Table H-7 — Petroleum Potential of Continental Shelves of the World ^

(Areas in thousands of square miles)

Shelf
Area 2

Excellent potential s

Fair potential <

Region

Area

Percent
of total
Shelf of
region

Percent

of

world

excellent

Shelf

area

Area

Percent
of total
Shelf of
region

Percent

of

World

fair Shelf

area

Total World ....

10, 763

188

1.8

100.0

1,657

15.3

100.0

North America

2, 140
910
200

1,350
2,718
3,445

40
20
40

35
35
18

1.9

2.2

20.2

2.6
1.3
5.2

21.3
10.6
21.3

18.6

18.6

9.6

315

150

65

305
385
437

14.7
16.5
32.5

22.6
14.2
12.7

19.0

South America . _

9. 1

Middle East, Asia

East Indies Islands (Incl.
Philippines)

3.9
18.4

Iron Curtain Countries

Other Areas ^

23.2
26.4

1 Adapted from "Offshore Operations Around the World"; Weeks, Lewis G., Offshore, June 20, 1967,
Vol. 27, No. 7.

2 Areas to depth of 1000 feet of water.

3 "Excellent Potential" rating is given to areas containing or in continuity with excellent producing areas
and with like geology.

1 "Fan- Potential" rating is given an area containing or in continuity with a fair producing arei, or when
geology is similarly favorable for commercial production.
5 Includes Europe, Africa, Far East, Oceania, and Antarctica.

218

Appendices

Table H-8 — Employment in Selected Ocean-Related Industries
Coastal States and Those Bordering the Great Lakes, 1966

(Thousands of employees)

Total
employed

in
selected
indus-
tries 2

All coastal States. .

Alabama

Alaska

California

Connecticut

Delaware

Florida

Georgia

Hawaii

Illinois

Indiana

Louisiana

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts.-

Michigan

Minnesota

Mississippi

New Jersey

New York

North Carolina.

Ohio

Oregon

Rhode Island. _
South Carolina.

Texas

Virginia

Washington

Wisconsin

334. 1

3.6
1.6

43.0
1.0
0.5

20.9
4.7
2.3
4.3
0.7

37.0
6.9

20.8

15. 1
4.6
2.3
2.6

21.3

45.5
3.
7.
8.
1.
3.

35.
9.8

20.6
3.8

Fisheries

16. 1

0.4
0. 1
2.0
0. 1
NA
1.7
0.3
NA
0. 1
NA
1.2
0.3
0. 1
3.9
0.2

0. 1
0.2
0. 1
0. 1
1.6
1.2
0.8
0. 1

Manufacturing

Canned
or cured
seafood

22.0

Fresh or
frozen
pack-
aged
fish

18.6

NA
0.9
4.2
NA
NA
0.3
NA
NA
0.3
NA
0.9
1.3
NA
0.4
NA
NA
0.2
0.8
0.6
0.2
NA
0.7
NA
0.2
NA
0.5
1.4
NA

0.2
0.2
0.8

NA
NA
1.7
1.8
NA
NA
NA
0.8
0.5
1.9
3.5
NA
NA
NA
0.3
0.3
0.2
NA
0.5
NA
0.2
2.2
2.3
1. 1
NA

Ship and

boat
building

and
repairs

104.7

3 0. 1

NA

16.3

^0. 3
NA
9.7
1.5
NA
0.9
NA

' 10.9
3.
10.
2.
3.
1

3 0.

5. 1
1. 1
2.7
3.3
0.9
1.0
8.8
NA
8.7
3. 1

Water
trans-
porta-
tion •

167.2

2.3
0.4

18.4
0.6
0.5
6.0
0.8
2.2
2.5
0.7

22.5
0.5
7.6
3.7
1.0
0.4
1.8

10.6

37.4
1. 1
4.6
4. 1
0.4
1.6

22.0
4.8
8. 1
0.4

Whole-
sale

trade:
Fish
and

seafoods

14.6

0.5

NA
1.3
0. 1
NA
1.5
0.2
0. 1
0.5
NA
0.8
0.5
0.8
1.5
0.3
NA
0. 1
0.4
1.6
0.8
0.2

0.2

' Excludes employment on oceanborne vessels. ^

2 Totals less than actual figures since some items were not reported (NA).

3 Boatbuilding and repairing only.
< Shipbuilding and repairing only.

NA= Figures not available. In most instances, figures were withheld to avoid disclosure of individual
reporting units.

Notes

Employment as shown here is the reported wage and salary employees of private nonfarm employers
and certain nonprofit organizations covered under the Federal Insurance Contributions Act. The data
are as of the pay period including Mar. 12, 1966.

Entries for "all coastal States" do not necessarily equal total for the United States, since some ocean-
related industry is conducted in inland States.

Columns may not add because of rounding of figures.

Source: Country Business Patterns, 1966, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.

219

Marine Science Affairs

Table H-9— Reporting Units, Selected Ocean-Related Industries in
Coastal States and Those Bordering the Great Lakes, 1966

All coastal States _

Alabama

Alaska

California

Connecticut

Delaware

Florida

Georgia

Hawaii

Illinois

Indiana

Louisiana

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts

Michigan

Minnesota

Mississippi

New Jersey

New York

North Carolina

Ohio

Oregon

Rhode Island

South Carolina

Texas

Virginia

Washington

Wisconsin

Selected
indus-
tries,
grand
total 2

11,826

181
123

1,065

141

37

1,259

214

107

243

70

1,533
308
417
767
259
90
160
482

1,037
256
242
235
130
120

1,046
548
615
141

Selected
indus-
tries-
units
with 50
and
more
em-
ployees

1,005

22
9

100
4
3
82
18
II
22
10

110
21
54
41
17
10
15
52

100
14
26
25
7
14

101

• 52
55
10

Fish-
eries

Canned
or cured
seafoods

2,902

36

34

272

27

NA

428

68

53

11

NA

310

58

23

342

47

13

20

91

62

89

21

48

48

29

402

180

159

31

Manufacturing

303

2
48
23

NA

NA

10

3

6

4

NA

23

30

9

10

NA

NA

7

10

22

6

NA

12

NA

6

NA

9

63

NA

Fresh or
frozen
pack-
aged
fish

Shin

and

boat

buUd-

ing and

repairs

401

6
12
26

NA

NA
35
13

NA
5

NA
24
12
50
50

NA

NA

NA

8

18

13

NA
12

NA

6

20

70

21

NA

1,661

23

NA

224

34

NA

209

21

5

14

29

100

58

70

82

57

30

25

97

139

36

31

31

23

15

114

58

97

39

Water
trans-
porta-
tion 1

4, 131

68

20

326

57

34

334

42

21

143

31

877

35

148

112

103

37

78

177

493

40

141

93

31

34

334

106

175

41

Whole-
sale
trade,
fish and
seafood

1,423

24

NA
94
19

NA

161
49
11
44

NA
89
94
63

130
35

NA
15
47

203
58
23
14
21
16
75
73
45
20

1 Does not include oceangoing vessels as employing organizations.

2 Totals less than actual figures since some items have not been reported (N A) .
NA=Figurcs not available.

Notes

"All coastal States" entries do not necessarily equal total for United States, since some ocean related in.
dustry is conducted in inland States.

"Reporting units" are establishments reporting covered employment under the Federal Insurance Con-
tributions Act during first quarter of 1966.

Columns may not add because of rounding of figures.

Source: County Business Patterns, 1966, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.

220

Appendices

Table H-10— Taxable Payrolls Reported to Social Security Administration
by Establishments in Selected Ocean-Related Industries in Coastal
States and Those Bordering the Great Lakes, First Quarter, 1966

(Millions of dollars)

Total
payroll

in
selected
indus-
tries 2

Fisheries

Manufacturing

Ship-
building
and boat-
building

and
repairs

Water
trans-
porta-
tion '

Whole-

Canned
or cured
seafood

Fresh or

frozen

packaged

fish

sale

trade,

fish and

seafood

All coastal States

465.5

17.9

12.3

13.9

167.0

240.2

14.2

Alabama

Alaska

California

Connecticut _ _

3.3

2. 1
76.4

1.5

0.5

23.3

3.9

4. 1

6.9

1.3

48.9

7.6

25.2

18.0

6.8

2.6

2.2

31.8

79.6

3.2

11.6

15.9

2.5

3. 1
36.9

7.0

34.6

5.0

0.2
0. 1
3.5
0. 1

NA
1.6
0. 1

NA
0. 1

NA
1.0
0.5
0. 1
5.0
0.2
0.03
0.2
0.6
0.3
0.3
0. 1
0.2
0.3
0. 1
1.2
0. 1
1.0
0. 1

NA
1.2
4.9

NA

NA
0.2

NA

NA
0.3

NA
0.4
0.7

NA
0.4

NA

NA
0. 1
0.9
1.0
0.04

NA
0.5

NA
0. 1

NA
0. 1
1.3

NA

0.2
0.4
0.8

NA
NA

1.2

1.2
NA
NA
NA

0.3

0.4

0.8

4.0
NA
NA
NA

0.-2

0.4

0. 1
NA

0.3

NA
0.04
1.6
1.0

1. 1
NA

3 0. 1

NA

29.2

3 0.4

NA

13.4
1.8
NA
1.4
NA
* 17.9
5.0

16.0

2.9

4.4

1.9

3 0.2

15.4
8.5
1.2
4. 1
6.6
1. 1
1.2

13.8
NA

16.0
4.2

2.5
0.5

36.4
0.8
0.5
5.5
0.5
4.0
4.4
1.3

28.7
6.2
7.8
3.8
1.8
0.7
1.6

14.3

66.7
1.2

7. 1

8. 1
0.9
1.6

19.5
4.5

14.8
0.6

0.2
NA
1.6
0. 1

Delaware

Florida. . _ . _.

NA
1.4

Georgia. _ .

0.2

Hawaii

Illinois.

0. 1
0.7

Indiana

Lousiana

Maine

NA
0.4
0.4

Maryland

Massachusetts

Michigan

0.5
1.9
0.4

Minnesota

Mississippi-

NA
0. 1

New Tersey. .

0.4

New York

2.6

North Carolina

0.4

Ohio

0.3

Oregon

0.2

Rhode Island

0.2

South Carolina ..

0. 1

Texas ...

0.7

Virginia . .

0.6

Washington _ .

0.6

Wisconsin

0. 1

• Excludes payments to employees aboard bceanborne vessels.

2 Totals less than actual figures since some items were not reported (N A) .

3 Boatbuilding and repairing only.

* Shipbuilding and repairing only.
NA = Figures not available.

Notes

"All coastal States" entries do not necessarily equal total for the United States since some ocean-related
industry is conducted in inland States.

Taxable payrolls is the amount of taxable wages paid for covered (under F.I.C.A.) employment during
January-March 1966. This is generally the total wages paid for the first quarter, except for employees paid
at rates in excess of $19,200 per year.

Columns may not add because of rounding of figures.

Source: Country Business Patterns, 1966, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.

221

Marine Science Affairs

e

3

e
u

M

c

'•9

n

>«
ifi

u

SS t^ ■''

U)

.£ >2

to

s

■* to <3j CO CO in o
CT) IT) ^ — to lO irj

2

lo c^ <; o o o lo
<£) in ^ rt ifj id in

i

cv o <j3 a> in CO o
d ■* ^ oi CO iri TjJ

CM — —

S

CM CO <; CO — — o

in Ti" l5 CO CO to iri
— ' — o

to

Oi

CO — <[J O CT) ID O

in in ^ CO CM to CM
— — o

i

r^ CO <; CM ■* m in
-4 Th Iz; r^ co" <o 'j^'

s

O) r~ 00 t^ ■* CM —
r>^ CO CM id CO id t^

— — CO

i

CO o o — in ■>*< — <
TfJ CO "^ td CO id C)

_ _ 00

CM — • ai CO CM en ■*
CM CM CO in CO in CM

-^ Cr> CT> 10 CT) O CO

-^ ^ id in CO id ct!

^ ID

i

t^ m 00 CO CO in —
d c5 in in Tfi id r-^

— . ID

18

m 00 ID in o -^ m
d d iri in '^ id CO

— ID

i

t*- o '- o m "-I m

d d iri in Tf id d

— lO

MM

§

1 1 1 1 1 '^ 1
rt 1

P § S ^: ^ 1 2

- ^

o t>

12 °

222

Appendices

Table H-12— Disposition of World Fish Catch, 1938, 1948, 1953, and

1958-65

(Millions of metric tons on a live weight basis)

Total
world
catch

Total

For hun

Market-
ing
(fresh)

lan consumption

For other purposes

Freezing

Curing

Canning

Total

Reduc-
tion •

Miscella-
neous
purposes

1938

21.0

18.3

11

.0

5.7

1.5

2.7

1.7

1.0

1948

19.6

17. 1

9.7

1.0

5.0

1.4

2.5

1.5

1.0

1953

25.7

22.0

11.8

1.4

6.5

2.3

3.9

2.9

1.0

1958

32.8

27.5

14.5

2.7

7.3

3.0

5.3

4.3

1.0

1959

36.4

29. 1

15.4

3.0

7.4

3.3

7.3

6.3

1.0

1960

39.5

30.9

16.3

3.4

7.5

3.7

8.6

7.6

1.0

1961---.

43.0

32.3

16.5

4.0

7.8

4.0

10.7

9.7

1.0

1962----

46.4

33.4

16.9

4.3

8. 1

4. 1

13.0

12.0

1.0

1963---.

47.6

34.6

17.3

4.7

8.5

4. 1

13.0

12.0

1.0

1964

52.0

35.5

17.6

5. 1

8.4

4.4

16.5

15.5

1.0

1965

52.4

36. 1

17.5

5.7

8. 1

4.8

16.3

15.3

1.0

' Only whole fish destined for the manufacture of oils and meals is included. Raw material for reduction
derived from fish primarily destined for marketing fresh, freezing, curing, canning, and miscellaneous
purposes is excluded; such waste quantities aie included under the other disposition channels.

Source: Yeaibook of Fishery Statistics, 1965, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

223

287-921 0—68

Marine Science Affairs

Table H-13— U.S. Catch of Fish and Shellfish, 1940, 1945, 1950, 1955,

1960-66

(Round weight basis)

Year

Catch for
human food

Catch for
industrial
products '

Total

Average

price per

pound

1940

Million
pounds
2,674
3,167
2 3, 307
2,579
2,498
2,490
2,540
2,556
2,497
2,587
2,568

Million
pounds
1,385
1,431
1,594
2,230
2,444
2,697
2 2,814
2,291
2,044
2, 190
1,773

Million
pounds
4,059
4,598
4,901
4,809
4,942
5, 187
2 5, 354
4,847
4,541
4,777
4,341

Million

dollars
99
270
347
339
354
362
396
377
389
446
2 454

Cents
2.44

1945

5.87

1950 - - ---

7.09

1955

7.05

1960 -

7. 15

1961

6.98

1962.

7.40

1963-

7.78

1964-

8.57

1965-

9.34

19663 . _._

2 10. 47

1 Processed into meal, oil, fish solubles, homogenized condensed fish, shell products, and used as bait and
animal food.

2 Record.

3 Preliminary.

Notes.— Does not include data on the Hawaiian catch prior to 1946.

Totals are smaller than comparable year U.S. totals in table H-13 since weights of univalve and

bivalve mollusks are not included.
Source: Fisheries of the U.S., 1966, Bureau of Commercial Fisheries.

224

Appendices
Table H-14 — U.S. Imports and Exports of Fishery Products, 1950-66

(Thousands of dollars)

Edible fish

Nonedible fish

Totals

Year

Imports

Exports

Imports

Exports

Imports

Exports

Excess im-
ports over
exports

1950

158,414
158, 363
183, 121
195, 869
203, 722
208, 973
234, 699
252, 788
283, 822
314, 650
310,596
339, 318
405, 832
399, 928
433, 674
479,412
1 568, 216

18, 856
27, 072
15,511
17,084
16, 238

24, 923
22, 939
20, 549
19,440
26, 747

25, 622

19, 594
22, 470
30, 376
42, 878
49, 308

' 62, 882

39, 882

54, 094
57, 308
49,611

48, 687

49, 896
48,031
46, 487
46, 959

55, 467
52, 685
61,301
83, 975

100, 784

130,569

121,492

1152,231

8,618
8,659
6,436
10, 794
15,289
15,054
16, 564
15,403
11,564
17,495
18, 543
15, 116
13,258
26, 229
21, 326
20, 175
21,931

198,296
212,457
240, 429
245, 480
252, 409
258, 869
282, 730
299, 275
330, 781
370, 117
363,281
400, 619
489, 807
500, 712
564, 243
600, 904
1 720, 447

27, 474
35, 731
21,947
27, 878
31,527
39, 977
39, 503
35, 952
31, 004
44,242
44, 165
34,710
35, 728
56, 605
64,204
69, 483
184,813

170,822

1951

176,726

1952

218,482

1953

217,602

1954

220, 882

1955

218,892

1956

243, 227

1957

263, 323

1958

299, 777

1959 -.-

325, 875

I960 .-

319, 116

1961

365, 909

1962

454, 079

1963

1964

1965

1966

444, 107

500, 039

531,421

1 635, 634

• Record.

Source: Fishery Statistics of the U.S., 1966, Bureau of Commercial Fisheries.

225

Marine Science Affairs

Table H-IS — U.S. Fisiiery Employment, Fishing Craft, and Establish-
ments, Various Years, 1930-65

Item

1930

1940

I960

I960

1965

Persons employed, direct:

Fishermen

Shoreworkers 2

Number

119,716

78, 996

Number

124, 795

90,215

Number
161,463
102, 015

Number

130,431

93, 625

Number
128, 565
86, 865

Total

198, 712

215,010

263, 478

224, 056

215,430

Craft utilized, fishing :

Vessels (5 net tons and over)_
Motor boats _

4,374
35, 437
37, 961

5,562
31,055
35, 193

11,496
46, 067
34, 747

12,018

56, 889

8, 150

12,311
63, 828

Other boats

3,393

Total

77, 772

71,810

92,310

77, 057

79, 532

Vessels, documented for fishing :

First documentation

Redocumentation _

(0

320

0)

812
29

408
24

612
51

Total __

(')

0)

841

432

663

Fishery shore establishments : 2
Pacific Coast States. _ . _.

569
2,024

402

(0

579

2,038

438
C)

700

2,699

484
(0

515

2,898

772
22

557

Atlantic Coast and Gulf
States _ _

2,931

Great Lakes and Mississippi
River States

677

Hawaii

24

Total

2,995

3,055

3,883

4,207

4, 189

' Data not available.

2 Wholesale and Manufacturing Industry.

Source: Fishery Statistics of the U.S., 1965, Bureau of Conimercial Fisheries.

226

Appendices

Table H-16— U.S.

Fishin

g Fleel

, 1965,

By Period of Construction

Period in which
constructed

New

England

Middle
Atlantic

Chesa-
peake '

South
Atlantic

(Jult

Pacific

Great
Lakes 2

Hawaii

Total
exclu-
sive of
dupli-
cation

Before 1900

1900-1904

1905-09

3

5

2

6

14

23

68

53

64

140

160

60

40

50

11

4

14
15
20
19
18
21
33
31
40
99
109
67
56
33
1
3

21

23

20

35

28

48

57

56

110

144

268

181

263

133

8

18

5

I

7

5

22

33

57

72

126

265

144

238

109

18

18

7

12

17

10

18

47

106

66

218

270

622

774

778

554

160

24

4

8

34

140

287

189

466

177

352

672

1,058

612

367

394

52

43

0
0
1

4

1

6

19

23

69

47

139

37

28

2

1

0
0
0
0
0
0

10
4
6
4

26
4
1
2

49
65

94

1910-14

218

1915-19

359

1920-24

350

1925-29

782

1930-34

454

1935-39

905

1940-^4

1,418

1945-49

1950-54

1955-59

1960-64

1965

Unknown

2,575
1,816
1,657
1,213
247
109

Total

703

579

1,413

1, 122

3,683

4,855

377

57

12,311

' Includes sailing vessels.

2 Includes 4 vessels operated in Lake Winnebago, 2 of which were also operated in the Great Lakes.

Source: Fishery Statistics of the United States, 1965, Bureau of Commercial Fisheries.

227

Marine Science Affairs

Table H-17— Disposition of U.S. Fish Catch, 1958 and 1961-65

(Thousand of metric tons on a live weight basis)

1958

1961

1962

1963

1964

1965

Total --- -

2, 703. 4

2, 932. 1

2, 972. 9

2, 776. 9

2, 647. 2

2, 701. 2

For human consumption

1,844.3

1,819.4

1, 820. 3

1,852.9

1, 835. 7

1, 848. 9

Marketing (fresh)

Freezing

Curing

Canning

822.3

302. 1

38.6

681.3

864. 1

296.7

36.7

621.9

843.3

313.4

36.3

627.3

852.3

317.9

35.4

647.3

887.2

298.9

32.2

617.4

922.6

340.2

34.5

551.6

For other purposes, _

859. 1

1, 112.7

1, 152.6

924.0

811.5

852. 3'

Reduction (meal, oil,
etc.)

Miscellaneous purposes -
Offal for reduction

852.8
6.3
(308.4)

I, 100.9
11.8
(248. 1)

1, 143. 1
9.5
(217.7)

912.2

11.8

(213.6)

805.6
5.9
(184.6)

843.7
8.6
(206.4)

Source: Yearbook of Fishery Statistics, 1965, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

228

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1968 O — 287-921