Calendar No. 1588 86TH CONGRESS \ SENATE | REpor?T 2d Session No. 1525 MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT INSTITUTION ARCHIVES JuNE 7, 1960.—Ordered to be printed WH.O.I. DATA LIBRARY WOODS HOLE. MA. 02543 Mr. Maenuson, from the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany S. 2692] The Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, to whom was referred the bill (S. 2692) to advance the marine sciences, establish a 10-year program of oceanographic research and surveys, promote commerce and navigation, secure the national defense, expand ocean ) resources, authorize the construction of research and survey ships and facilities, assure systematic studies of effects of radioactive materials i Marine environments, enhance the general welfare and for other purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon, with amendments, and recommend that the bill as amended do pass. INTRODUCTION 5. 2692 is designed to meet a pressing need. That need is to unveil the secrets of inner space—the oceans. Oceans cover 72 percent of earth’s surface, an area nine times ereater than that of the moon. Their water volume is eight times that of the land above them. The world’s greatest mountain ranges and deepest canyons lie hidden in the oceans. They control, in large measure, our weather and climate. They are a distinctive feature of our planet and it may be no other planet in the solar system has them. They are the vast repository for wastes and sediments, organic and inorganic, of a billion years, and hold untold wealth in minerals and fossil fuels. They are the last open range from which we will be able to amplify future protein food supplies. Oceans no longer isolate nations but link them. The United States has ties, economic or military or both, with 58 other nations of the free world, physically separated from us only by the oceans, 49006—60-——1 Ge ae ie Gi GOnw ela: 2 MARINE SCIENCES AND: RESEARCH ACT which carry 99.8 percent of the exchange of raw materials and. finished products. And the oceans are neutral. An airplane flying 12 miles above the land surface of a foreign country creates an international sensation and the foreign nation responds to this distant overflight with raucous accusations of spying and aggression, the later, of course, obviously absurd. But any unfriendly country can spy on us from only 3 miles off our ocean beaches. Submarines or nosey fishing vessels of a foreign power can cruise with impunity up to the 3-mile limit of the territorial seas. Beyond that invisible boundary the waters of the oceans are ‘international. ‘This, in time of peace, is as it should be. ~Trade,-commerce, and in a large measure the economy of free ‘nations, are dependent on keeping the oceans open. ’ “Oceans are now and will continue to be the highways for most of the world’s international commerce. In 1959, free world exports totaled $102 billion; free world imports $105.8 billion. More than one-sixth of this commerce was to or from the United States, the world’s greatest market and the preeminent supplier of foreign markets. Freedom of the oceans is important to our economy and security, and the key to the free world alliance. To hold that key it is imperative that we know the oceans. In the past that knowledge was two dimensional. It sufficed to know the winds, waves, and currents at the surface, fisheries resources near the surface, and the reefs and shoals imperiling surface ships. Even within these limited requirements our knowledge frequently has been and is inadequate. Today knowledge of the oceans must be three dimensional, ex- tending from the surface to the bottom, and to the crust below the bottom. Why? Mr. Sumner Pike, former Commissioner of the Atomic Energy Commission, and a member of the Committee on Oceanography of the National Academy of Sciences, touched on the reason in his testimony at hearings on the bill before this committee. He said: * * * it has become suddenly apparent that the ocean is of the highest importance to national defense, indeed to our survival. It seems unnecessary to emphasize here the possible results of the development of nuclear submarines and guided missiles. My own personal reaction can be phrased briefly: Another nation caught us _ practically unawares upstairs; for heaven’s sake don’t let the same thing happen to us down cellar. With this problem thrust upon us, we become unhappily aware of the abysmal extent of our ignorance of the ocean in areas where knowlege both wide and accurate seems essential. To acquire this knowledge which appears so necessary requires marine research much more extensive than any this Nation has undertaken in the past or is undertaking now. Soviet Russia, which has more submarines than all the nations of the free world combined, is conducting an unprecedented ocean re- search program, one that, in fact, surpasses that of the entire free world. MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT 3 The Soviet oceanographic fleet, in numbers of ships, size, tonnage, diversity, and laboratory facilities, exceeds that of the Western nations. Her marine scientists far outnumber those of the United States, and Russia has launched a vast program to train more. The United States has Jagged in this vital scientific field, a lag that if continued could be enormously costly in time of peace; fatal in the event of war. This lag was recognized in Senate Resolution 136, adopted by the Senate of the United States on July 15, 1959. It was the sense and purport of this resolution that the lag in our Nation’s oceanographic research be overcome. S. 2692 is the legislative approach to doing just that. PuRPOSE OF THE BILL The primary purpose of the bill is to enhance the national economy, security, and welfare by increasing our knowledge of the oceans and the Great Lakes in all pertinent scientific fields. These include physics, biology, chemistry, meteorology and geology. To speed this objective, the bill is designed to approximately double, within the next 10 years, the capabilities of the United States to conduct a balanced, comprehensive program of marine research and surveys. Our capabilities in this program are dependent in large measure on— 1. A national policy of continuous and constructive scientific studies of the waters which form 13,428 miles of our 19,793-mile national boundary. 2. Education and training of additional marine scientists in numbers adequate to make these important studies. 3. Construction and operation of new and advanced research ships for scientists to work on, laboratories to work in, and tools, instruments, and equipment to work with. 4. Coordination of oceanographic and limnological. activities of the various Federal departments and agencies participating in the program. 5. International and interdepartmental exchange of oceano- eraphic data. The bill, in the interest of maximum economy and efficiency, would meet these requirements by advancing the program in realistically progressive stages over a period of years. In this way the crash characteristics of the more extensive Soviet oceanographic effort will be avoided. Neep For tHe Bitu The need for a program of expanded marine research has been evident to scientists and scientific units of a number of Government agencies for the past 6 years, and was manifest when these agencies found it necessary or expedient in advance of several international conferences to call on the National Academy of Sciences for oceano- graphic information the agencies did not possess. Examples of Federal dependence on the Academy, which is not a Government agency, were the Inter-American Conferences on Conser- vation of the Resources of the Continental Shelf and Marine Waters, held at Mexico City, Mexico, in July 1955, and at Ciudad Trujillo, Dominican Republic, in March 1956, and the International Conference LOAN NUA EOL O 0301 OObL9451 9 4 MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT on Law of the Sea, held in Geneva, Switzerland, in March and April 1958, and relating particularly to pollution of offshore waters. Attesting further to this need are three reports, two of them pre- pared by the National Academy at the request of Government agen- cies and the third prepared within the Defense Establishment by the Office of Naval Research and subsequently approved by the Chief of Naval Operations. All three reports point to a drastic need for new ships, new facilities, more marine scientists, and greatly augmented oceanographic research and surveys. S. 2692 gives legislative recognition to findings and conclusions contained in two of these reports and substantially confirmed with respect to four agencies by the third report, which was issued sub- sequent to introduction of the bill. GENESIS OF THE THREE REPORTS In 1957, several Government agencies, convinced of the need for an integrated oceanographic program, and aware that to achieve this would require an overall study conducted by an independent and completely objective scientific group, proposed that the National Academy of Sciences create a Committee on Oceanography to under- take this major project. This was done. Formal support, financial and otherwise, was given to the under- taking by the following agencies: Atomic Energy Commission. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries. National Science Foundation. Office of Naval Research, Department of the Navy. Subsequently the Coast and Geodetic Survey of the Department of Commerce, also participated in the sponsorship. Dr. Harrison Brown, professor of geochemistry at the California Institute of Technology and formerly with Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, and University of Chicago, was appointed Chairman. Eminent marine scientists from seven universities and oceanographic institutions affiliated with universities were named to the Com- mittee. New England, the Mid- and South Atlantic States, the Mid- west and Pacific coast were each represented. A former Commissioner of Atomic Energy, Mr. Sumner Pike, of Lubec, Maine, also was appointed to the Committee. All of the members of the Committee are civilians. None are employed by the Government. None were selected for membership on the Committee by any Government agency. The Committee and each of its members possessed complete freedom to make a com- prehensive study and report. Committee members are: Dr. Maurice Ewing, Lamont Geological Observatory, Columbia University, Palisades, N.Y.; Dr. Columbus O’D. Iselin, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Mass.; Dr. Fritz Koczy, Marine Laboratory of the University of Miami, Miami, Fla.; Dr. Roger Revelle, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, Calif.; Dr. Dixy Lee Ray, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash.; Dr. Gordon Riley, Bingham Oceanographic Laboratory, Yale University, MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT 5 New Haven, Conn.; Dr. Athelstan Spilhaus, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn.; Dr. Per Scholander, Scripps Institution of Oceanography; Mr. Sumner Pike, and Dr. Milner B. Schaefer, Inter- American Tropical Tuna Commission, La Jolla, Calif. Each of the members has attained scientific distinction as a physicist, marine biologist, meteorologist or marine chemist. Drs. Brown, Spilhaus, Iselin, Koczy, Riley, Ray, and Schaefer of the Committee testified before the Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee at hearings on the bill held April 20, 21, and 22 of this year. Drs. Ewing and Revelle submitted prepared statements. Testimony also was given by Dr. Allyn C. Vine, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution and Chairman of the Committee on Ocean- ography’s Panel on Engineering Needs for Ocean Exploration; Dr. Dayton E. Carritt, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md., representing the Committee’s Panel on Radioactivity in the Oceans; Dr. J. Lamar Worzel, Columbia University authority on underwater sound transmission, earthquake seismology, ocean gravities, and submarine topography, and Mr. Pike. The Committee on Oceanography held its first meeting in November 1957. During the following year it visited major oceanographic institutions in all sections of the United States, conferred with scien- tists and officials of all Government agencies having an interest in the oceans or the Great Lakes, and appointed eight panels of scientists to assist it in special studies. More than 60 scientists from private institutions and laboratories participated in these panels. In January 1959 the Committee on Oceanography released its summary report and recommendations. It has since issued eight more reports detailing studies made in separate fields. These reports have been the subject of an intensive study by the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce and inspired Com- mittee action on the program embodied in this bill. Two conclusions of the Committee on Oceanography merit quota- tion at this point. They are: 1. From the point of view of military operations there is no comparison between the urgencies of the problems of the oceans and those of outer space. The submarine armed with long-range missiles is probably the most potent weapon system threatening our security today. 2. Our oceanographic research ships are inadequate for the job which must be done. Most of the ships are old and outdated. Many are obsolete and should be replaced by ships of modern design which will be more efficient to operate and from which a greater variety of scientific observations can be made. Simultaneously with the study of overall marine scientific needs by the Committee on Oceanography, the Navy Department’s Office of Naval Research prepared a survey and projection of the marine research needs and programs financed by the Navy in universities and oceanographic laboratories or institutions affiliated with uni- versities. 6 MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT Institutions with which the Navy has contracted for such research include: Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. Scripps Institution of Oceanography. University of Miami. University of Washington. Texas Agricultural and Mechanical College. Lamont Geological Observatory of Columbia University. Hudson Laboratory of Columbia University. Chesapeake Bay Institute. Narragansett Marine Laboratory. Oregon State College. New York University. The Navy report, designated Project TENOC (10 years in oceanog- raphy), was issued on January 1, 1959, with the endorsement of Adm. Arleigh Burke, Chief of Naval Operations. The report noted that the total budget for marine research financed by the Navy in institutions during fiscal year 1959 was $7,600,000, and projected a eraduated increase in funds for research ships, laboratories, and scientific personnel for these institutions over the subsequent 10 years. Eighteen new ships were recommended, of which 4 would be large 2,000- to 3,000-ton vessels, 10 of approximately 1,200 to 1,400 tons, and the others small coastal boats. Delivery of one ship was sought in 1960, four in 1961, and four in 1962. One of the smallest ships recommended, an 80-foot boat, is now being built for Oregon State College. Contract was let last week for the first 1,350-ton ship which will require 18 to 24 months to complete. Ten new laboratory buildings and two new piers also were proposed in the report. Construction has not begun on any of these although Navy scientists consider additional laboratory space one of the most pressing needs. With reference to the ship construction program the report states: This program is considered to be necessary to provide research needed to develop the ASW (antisubmarine war- fare) capability required to combat the submarine menace. The program is expensive, but when it is considered that there has been no effort to improve research ships in this country for the last 15 years, and that we are proposing a 10-year building program, it becomes obvious that we have 25 years of shipbuilding to accomplish in 10 years. In a further paragraph indicating the magnitude of the task ahead, the report states: Since the oceans are the Navy’s primary domain and since the Navy must move ships about, on, and in the oceans, and aircraft in the air above the oceans; it goes without saying that a complete understanding of the environment, includ- ing the ocean surface, the ocean bottom and the atmosphere above, must be obtained if the Navy is to compete success- fully in a modern war. By understanding the environment we mean that the current systems in the ocean must be known from the surface to the bottom, the bottom topography must be known in detail, the temperature structure from day to day must be predicted, gravity and magnetic conditions must be known, sea and swell forecasting must be efficient, MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT 7 the formation and breakup of arctic ice must be predicted, weather conditions must be predicted, beach conditions and the land areas around these seas must be known. Further, the Navy must understand this environment in the Medi- terranean Sea, Sea of Okhotsk, Persian Gulf, Arabian Sea, Red Sea, and the Arctic Ocean. Our present understanding of these strategic areas is limited. In addition to these strategic areas, the Navy must have adequate knowledge of the broad reaches of the Atlantic and Pacific. Admiral Burke, in commending the report, added this significant comment: The numbers of oceanographers presently available in the United States are insufficient to meet the increasing military and civilian demands for their services. Sections 13 and 14 of S. 2692, adopting the proposals of the TENOC report, is designed also to meet, through scholarships, the educational and training needs. Admiral Burke supplemented this comment on June 16, 1959, with a letter to the chairman of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, in which he stated in part: The interest of the Congress in this vital area is timely since legislative assistance will be required if all the recom- mendations of the Harrison Brown Committee are to be implemented for a sustained 10-year effort. Further, with reference to education and training of marine scien- tists and the Navy’s participation in this program, present and pro- jected, the Chief of Naval Operations stated: The expansion of curriculum and enrollment at each of these institutions represents a major capital venture that can quickly become a serious fiscal loss to these research centers if Federal support vacillates from year to year. The above quotations are pertinent in the light of comments on the bill received from some of the agencies which would participate in the program authorized. The Department of Commerce was not an original sponsor of the study made by the Committee on Oceanography of the National Academy of Sciences. Nor were any of its agencies or bureaus. However, the Secretary of Commerce, Hon. Sinclair Weeks, in 1958 requested tlat the Academy appoint a committee to undertake an evaluation of the Department’s activities and responsibilities in the fields of science and technology. Contracts were entered into and a committee of scientists and engi- neers appointed. The contracts were continued under Secretary Strauss and the present Secretary, Frederick H. Mueller. The Academy Committee made its report on March 2 of this year. Four of the seven agencies studied are designated in S. 2692 as having a significant role in the projected 10-year oceanographic program. They are: Coast and Geodetic Survey. Maritime Administration. Weather Bureau. National Bureau of Standards. 8 MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT The bill would authorize appropriations for specified purposes to the Coast and Geodetic Survey, Maritime Administration, and the Weather Bureau and proposes cooperation with and by the Bureau of Standards. The Academy Committee reported separately on each agency, com- mencing with the Coast and Geodetic Survey. Commenting on the importance of this agency, the report states: The nautical charts and allied publications supplied by the Survey enable waterborne commerce, estimated in excess of $100 billion annually, to enter and depart from our coastal waters with complete confidence and assurance. * * * The Coast and Geodetic Survey, during its 152 years of service, has made splendid contributions to knowledge and to the progress of our Nation and the world. It cannot exist on past accomplishments, but must steadily move forward in the fields of science and engineering essential to its activities. Because of the fundamental nature of its activities, the Sur- vey must continue to play an important role in the destiny of the Nation and of the world. Then follows a critical analysis of the present capabilities of the Survey to fulfill its responsibilities. Excerpts: As a result of financial and staff limitations, the Survey, since World War IJ, has been forced into a production orien- tation. Its research and development activities have been severely neglected, with the danger of losses in its broad effectiveness to the Nation and in its stature as a dynamie scientific and engineering institution. In interviews with key officer and civilian personnel and in the review of written material relating to Survey opera- tions, a major concern was noted in all divisions about the inadequacy of data collection facilities. As an example, the Geophysics Division maintains eight geomagnetic observa- tories and a number of seismograph stations for the contin- uous recording of magnetic field fluctuations and of earth- quakes. This chain of observatories is undoubtedly too sparse for providing data of sufficient accuracy on magnetic and seismic conditions throughout the world, and is less dense than that of other technologically advanced nations. (The Soviet Union has 22 magnetic stations.) Appendix IV presents a sad picture of the condition of the Coast and Geodetic Survey fleet. Again, the personnel of the Survey have done a remarkable job in keeping outdated equipment operating effectively and producing quality prod- ucts with such equipment. It is apparent that funds in adequate amounts should be provided for reconditioning the better vessels of the fleet, replacing the most antiquated, and commissioning new vessels as required by the expanding program of the Survey. (App. IV lists the 15 ships of the Coast and Geodetic Survey, of which 5 are under 100 tons, 6 have a displacement between 100 and 300 tons, and 4 vary from 1,106 to 2,600 tons. Six are described as in good condition, 2 fair, 5 poor, and 2 very poor.) MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT 9 It is a matter of much concern to the Panel that, because of fund limitations, the Survey cannot procure, through its civilian operations, enough information to satisfy the de- mands of the Defense agencies and that the Defense agencies must establish duplicate facilities to satisfy the needs, and through military operations. The Survey has an unchal- lenged record for economy. It seems clear to the Panel that it would be far more appropriate to allocate funds in proper amounts to permit an adequate civilian program by a civilian agency. The space age is new. Its impact upon the Defense agencies is everyday knowledge to youngsters of preschool age. Yet the Coast and Geodetic Survey has been bypassed in the ‘‘tooling”’ for the new era—in spite of the fact that its products are an essential element in the planning, research and development which has made the space age possible and which will inevitably lead to further victories in space. From the point of view of basic economy, if for no other reason, the future budgets of the Survey should be increased substantially—in the immediate future. Allocations of this magnitude represent only a small fraction of a major defense project of today and could have a major influence on both the defense and commerce of our country. S. 2692 would authorize a substantial increase in funds for operation of Coast and Geodetic Survey ships, and construction of 10 ocean- going survey ships during the next 10 years. The bill would authorize inauguration in the Weather Bureau of a comprehensive 10-year study of the interchange of energy between the oceans and the atmosphere, phenomenon which has a profound influence on storms, climate, and weather. Touching on this scientific problem, the Academy committee states: Floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, droughts, frosts and air- pollution hazards have disastrous effects which, on occasion, have influenced the course of modern society. The economic losses accompanying some of these atmospheric catastrophes are staggering. Meteorologists do their best to predict and warn against these phenomena; they even hope in the future to be able to control them. But progress is impeded by lack of adequate knowledge concerning the processes that produce them. A close look at meteorology must inevitably point to the need for more research in order to reach the level of pre- diction and control that our society demands. The Academy Committee report on the Maritime Administration is essentially limited to recommending a broader program of research and development. S. 2692 would place on the Administration the re- sponsibility of constructing ships specifically designed for basic oceano- graphic research, giving due attention to quiet operation, efficient and economical scientist-crew ratios, space and power for winches and other scientific factors. The Academy Committee panel deplores the fact that: ‘The Maritime Administration does not have specific legislation directed to the performance of research and development,’ and recommends S. Rept. 1525, 86—2 2 10 MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT that the Department of Commerce seek such clear-cut legislative authority from the Congress. S. 2692 would provide the authority necessary for the agency to carry out those segments of the oceanographic program assigned to it under the bill. To sum up the preliminary steps toward an oceanographic program, the Department of Commerce, Department of the Interior, Navy Department, Atomic Energy Commission, and National Science Foun- dation sponsored and financed independent and extensive studies by outside committees of highly qualified and wholly objective scientists. These studies were completed. Reports were prepared. The re- ports were furnished to the sponsors. Strong emphasis is placed in these reports on the needs for greatly expanded and coordinated research in all marine scientific fields, and a program for such expansion and coordination is outlined. This program has been embodied in the bill. The needs are established. They are known to the agencies, to the Congress, to scientific organizations and institutions, and, as evi- denced by the large correspondence the bill has generated, to the general public. Similar consideration must be given to the benefits. BENEFITS TO BE ANTICIPATED From a NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC ResearcH Poricy AND PROGRAM The benefits which would accrue from the program authorized in S. 2692 can be roughly classified as: 1. Miltary. 2. Economie. 3. Welfare. 4. International. Some of the benefits in each of these categories previously have been touched on. But many remain, many of them brought out at hearings on the bill before your committee. Military benefits would include: Enhanced security from surprise attack by missile-launching enemy submarines. This will be achieved when we know more about under- water acoustics and have perfected our surveillance and detection systems. This will require extensive data on undersea water densities. To quote a forthcoming report of the Committee on Oceanography titled ‘‘Oceanography Research for Defense Applications’’: Density (temperature and salinity) is the fundamental parameter needed for an understanding and use of the propagation of acoustical energy. Applications of this in- formation are particularly important in forecasting sonar ranges, in all types of submarine and antisubmarine warfare, in convoy routing, in mine warfare, and in the planning and development of all types of detection and communications systems which employ acoustic energy. Since sea water is virtually opaque to all other forms of radiated energy, underwater sound offers the only foreseeable means of long- range detection, communication, and monitoring. “Today, there is no adequate defense against the nuclear, missile- launching submarine,” states the official publication of the Navy MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT 11 League, but this does not necessarily hold true for tomorrow, accord- ing to our foremost scientists in this field, if ample facilities are made available for continued research. These scientists have a twofold problem. They have the problem of perfecting ways in which our Navy can detect hostile submarines and keep them under surveillance. They have the converse problem of perfecting ways that will enable our own submarines to escape detection. We must be scientifically prepared for both undersea defense and offense, and this will require greatly intensified research and engi- neering. We must be prepared also to counter any underwater mine war- fare, in which the Soviet Union has long specialized. Today’s mines are more diabolical than any previously used. Some are fired by the sound of a passing ship. Others are activated by a ship’s magnetic field. Still others require only a change in water pressure, which also can be caused by passing ships. Some combine several or all of these ‘‘influences.”’ In antimine warefare we will need the councils of specialists in underwater acoustics (including knowledge of sounds made by fish and other forms of life in the sea), wave pressures and water density, magnetism, gravity, and bottom topography. There are other military uses for three-dimensional knowledge of the oceans, some of them classified. Economic benefits are incalculable. Witnesses at hearings on the bill testified emphatically that elimi- nating all military factors, the economic benefits from the projected research program would far outweigh the costs of the program. Economic benefits will be derived from the resources of the sea. These include food, liquid fuels, metallic minerals. Food possibilities are tremendous. Population the world over is exploding. By the year 2000 it is expected to reach 6 billion, more than double the present total. That of the United States will be 200 million by 1970; 230 million by 1980, according to the lowest Census Bureau estimates. As population soars the United States and other nations will seek to supplement their protein needs from the sea as do Japan and other heavily populated countries. Russia, though not heavily populated, is making a massive effort to increase 1ts protein food supply by harvesting the oceans. The Soviet Union has more than 100 fisheries research ships exploring the oceans and has invaded waters of the Bering Sea, the Grand Banks off Newfoundland, tuna fisheries in the central Atlantic and mid-Pacific, and other fisheries along the West Coast of Africa. Red China is making desperate efforts to double its seafood pro- duction. Meanwhile the United States catch has steadily declined, our fisheries research fleet and its activities have diminished, and we are in grave danger of losing an industry that produces food in the value of a billion and a half dollars annually and gives employment to 500,000 citizens. S. 2692 would authorize a scientific research program and economic studies designed to revive this industry and increase our food supplies from the oceans, their estuaries, and the Great Lakes. Your committee has been told that 40 percent of the world’s known reserves of liquid fuels lie offshore beneath the Continental Shelves. #2 MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT As our terrestrial oilfields become depleted these reserves will become increasingly essential to our economy. The committee was further told that the oceanic waters contain more minerals than have been mined by man in all history. Vast deposits of manganese, cobalt, copper, iron, and nickel nodules lie on the deep ocean floor—one of these is off our South Atlantic coast—and Dr. Milner B. Schaefer testified that he expects techniques will be developed which will enable them to be mined commercially within 5 or 6 years. Dr. Schaefer stated the mineral resources of the sea floor appear to warrant modest expenditures to assess their abundance and value, and for engineering studies of means of mining them, and added: I note with great pleasure that the Senate bill, S. 2692, introduced by Senator Magnuson and others, contains authorization for various appropriate Government agencies to carry out the researches recommended by our Committee in the field of ocean resources, and also provides for means of coordinating the work of different agencies through a new office in the National Science Foundation. Mankind will reap many benefits from marine research other than those derived from harvesting the ocean’s riches. Among them will be added safeguards against the ocean’s destructive forces, for the seas can be a friend as well as a mortal foe. Earthquakes in Chile in the latter part of May caused tidal waves, or tsunamis as they are known to scientists, that sweeping up, down, and across the Pacific have brought death to thousands. In distant Japan these waves, traveling at speeds up to 440 miles per hour, cost at least 180 lives, in Hawaii 55, and in seattered islands throughout the South and Southwest Pacific possibly many others. The Philip- pines, Formosa, and Pitcairn Islands were among those struck. Property damage at Hilo, Hawaii, was estimated at $60 million and the damage in Japan was many times greater. Science cannot control earthquakes and it cannot prevent them from causing tsunamis, but science can convey warning which should reach those living on the edges of the ocean basins far in advance of any tidal wave. The speed of sound under water is about 4.8 times faster than sound waves traveling through the atmosphere. Normal wave action also can be destructive and annually brings property losses to beach residents of the United States of more than $15 million. The Beach Erosion Board of the Army Corps of Engi- neers, with extremely limited research funds, is making significant contributions toward mitigating this damage and the value of its scientific work is recognized in S. 2692 by authorizing its expansion. Great damage also is caused annually by sea-born hurricanes, a combined oceanographic-meteorological problem of great magnitude. From 1915 to 1955 hurricanes caused damage to “coastal property of the United States totaling $2.837 billion. During the 4-year period since then property losses have aggregated $205 million despite im- proved warning systems. Scientists are now gleaning new clues about the relationship between water temperature and atmospheric circula- tion that may lead to hurricane forecasts before the hurricanes them- selves have formed, enabling ships at sea to avoid them and shore dwellers ample time to prepare against them. MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT 13 One of the most obvious benefits will be to commerce generally. Greater knowledge of currents, winds, and weather already enable our modern transocean carriers to clip a full day from the previous sched- ules. These are surface ships. Merchant ships of the not too distant future may be nuclear- propelled submersibles that could cross the oceans far beneath the surface. They might move at approximately twice the speed of present-day. craft, will seek out the favorable subterranean currents much as high altitude aircraft today take advantage of the jet stream, and avoid wind and wave resistance and be undisturbed by storms. Sonar would take the place of vision, and this will be a gain because underwater acoustic ranges will be far longer than line of sight ranges. Fog will be a forgotten problem. Underwater mariners will follow detailed charts of the bottom topography of the oceans much as motorists scan their roadmaps, and midocean automatic devices, many of them located on sea mounts, would substitute for lighthouses. To plot these sea mounts and the ocean bottom will require ex- tensive surveys by the Coast and Geodetic Survey and Hydrographic Office, and such surveys would be authorized in S. 2692. Welfare benefits would accrue from climatological studies, from extensive investigation of the effects on the marine environment of atomic fallout and radioactive wastes, and from research into methods of counteracting pollution of estuarine and inshore coastal waters. Medical possibilities were hinted by Dr. Ray, who told the committee: No marine invertebrate is known to suffer from cancer or any tumorous condition. Perhaps the most important benefit that can result from a long- range, coordinated oceanographic research program was voiced by Dr. Spilhaus when he testified: Like atoms for peace, we can use the oceans for peace. To do this, continued Dr. Spilhaus: We must have leadership on the oceans in the face of the threat of war and equally we must have leadership on the oceans in our hopes and our work toward peace. EXPLANATION OF THE BILL The bill would authorize a 10-year program of marine research, surveys, and education in which 5 departments of the Federal Govern- ment and 14 agencies would participate. Three of the agencies are independent; the remainder are within departments. The departments and agencies are: Departments: Commerce: Weather Bureau. Coast and Geodetic Survey. Maritime Administration. Bureau of Standards. 14 MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT Interior: Bureau of Commercial Fisheries. Bureau of Mines. Geological Survey. Navy: Office of Naval Research. Hydrographic Office. Health, Education, and Welfare: Office of Education. Army: Beach Erosion Board: Independent agencies: National Science Foundation. Atomic Energy Commission. Smithsonian Institution. Following approval by your committee of the bill as amended, comments on the bill were received from the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare proposing that should the committee take favorable action on the bill appropriate sections of the bill should be amended to include the Public Health Service, which, according to the Department, engaged in a number of scientific activities in the marine environment. The Department suggestion is meritorious and well grounded. However, as it was not made until after your committee had ordered the bill reported, as amended, the proposal can only be included by adoption by the Senate of an appropriate amendment offered from the floor. The bill, as introduced on September 11, 1959, contained 15 sec- tions. As amended in committee the bill has 19 sections. New sections were added to authorize participation in the 10-year program by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers through its Beach Erosion Board, which was requested in comments received from the Depart- ment of Defense, and of the Smithsonian Institution, requested by a number of scientific institutions and concurred in by the Committee on Oceanography. Remaining committee amendments are principally of a perfecting nature and a majority of these were suggested by departments and agencies in their comments on the bill. Others, designed to broaden the program in the interest of balance and efficiency, were proposed by scientific organizations or the Committee on Oceanography fol- lowing a review of its summary report. ANALYSIS OF BILL BY SECTIONS The title of the act, ‘“Marine Sciences and Research Act of 1959,” is given in section 1. DECLARATION OF POLICY Section 2 declares the policy objectives of the Congress with re- lation to oceanographic and lmnological research and surveys. — It substantially restates the objectives detailed in Senate Resolution 136, adopted by the Senate in the Ist session of the 86th Congress; declares that to fulfull these objectives requires establishment of a Division of Marine Sciences in the National Science Foundation, and authorizes this Division to accept certain responsibilities and under- take certain duties. MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT 15 A significant paragraph in this section states as follows: The Congress further declares that sound policy requires that the United States not be excelled in the fields of oceano- graphic research, basic, military or applied, by any nation which may presently or in the future threaten our general welfare, maritime commerce, security, access to and utiliza- tion of ocean fisheries, or the contamination of adjacent seas by the dumping of radioactive wastes or other harmful agents. Such a policy requires, the section amplifies, construction and modernization of research and survey ships and marine laboratories, development of new hydrographic research tools, recruitment of prospective oceanographers, collection and classification of biological marine data, establishment of a national oceanographic records center and development of formal international cooperation in the marine sciences and oceanographic surveys on a reciprocal basis subject to the approval of the President. The Division of Marine Sciences would be authorized and directed to develop and encourage a continuing national policy and program for the promotion of oceanographic research, surveys, and education in the marine sciences; recommend contracts, grants, loans or other forms of assistance for the development and operation of this program; cooperate with and encourage the cooperation of agencies participating in the program; foster interchange of pertinent scientific information, and evaluate the scientific aspects of programs of marine research, surveys and taxonomy undertaken by agencies of the Federal Govern- ment for work in these scientific fields. In other words the Division of Marine Sciences of the National Science Foundation would serve in a coordinating and evaluation capacity in addition to exercising certain planning and policy functions in connection with the 10-year oceanographic program and to giving direct assistance to that program through grants, loans, or contracts for research and education. Your committee had two alternatives in placing responsibility for coordination and evaluation of the national program as it progresses. It could create a separate agency, as was done with respect to the development of the nuclear and space sciences, or it could designate an appropriate unit within an existing agency to undertake these responsi- bilities and functions. The latter was preferred. Establishment of an independent ocean- ographic agency, it was believed, might duplicate or disrupt marine activities of a number of existing Federal offices and bureaus, create conflicts of authority, and increase capital and operating costs. For development of nuclear energy or the space sciences establish- ment of separate and independent agencies was appropriate because both were relatively new, as was the Government’s interest in them. Nor were these programs widely dispersed among the various Federal departments and bureaus. The marine sciences, on the other hand, are not new. They merely have been neglected. Work of the Coast and Geodetic Survey in this field, for example, dates back to 1807, and that of the Hydrographic Office to 1830. Both have, in times past, made significant contributions to our knowl- edge of the oceans, but their achievements often have been obscured 16 MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT because both agencies are submerged in major departments of our Government with numerous projects and programs. This is true generally of all scientific agencies within the departments engaged im various programs of marine research. Other programs in the depart- ments require larger expenditures and personnel and apparently re- ceive priority in budget considerations. The plaints of scientists, like those of small frogs in big ponds, too frequently have been only faintly heard. Scientific effort in the oceanographic field has suffered generally from lack of coordinated planning, effort, and evaluation. Yet a hard core of splendid scientific talent, extensive background data, and modest technical facilities exist in all of these agencies, and all of them have had operational experience. Some also have research or survey fleets, however small and antiquated. These facts were well presented to your committee during hearings on the bill. In view of these facts, it was thought appropriate to continue oceanographic operations in the existing agencies, but to provide these agencies with improved facilities for research and congressional assur- ance, in the form of a 10-year authorization, of contimuity m their scientific efforts. Likewise it was thought appropriate to place, through provisions of the bill, direct responsibility on the departmental Secretaries as well as on the agencies, for carrying out the activities authorized in the bill. The importance of this was emphasized by Dr. Columbus O’D. Iselin, dean of U.S. oceanographers, in his testimony at hearings before the committee on the bill. Dr. Iselin was discussing a research operation now taking place in the Atlantic in which four small ships and approximately 45 scientists are participating, and which he described as— both scientifically excitmg and an important part of the problem of detecting and destroying enemy submarines equipped with ballistic missiles. Dr. Iselin continued: This operation has been made possible through the coop- eration of several agencies, both governmental and private. The cooperation between the fellows who are working actually at sea today or in the air or beneath the seas—the cooperation is excellent. * * * People are working around the clock, not for a day but for days on end. From where I sit what bothers me is that the entire opera- tion has had to be organized at the working level. The senior members of the cooperating agencies have really no time to understand what we are trying to do, or what it really means to them in terms of efficiency of their service. In my opinion, Mr. Chairman, the most important thing that any bill that you can devise in support of marine science could do is to remind the heads of agencies (agencies which are in fact cooperating at the working level) that they, too, should take part in the planning of such future operations and that they should be cooperating as vigorously as the fellows who are struggling with seasickness and airsickness this morning. MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT LT There remained the problem of what instrument or group, respon- sive to Congress, should be given the responsibility of policy and program planning, coordination and evaluation of the national en- deavor, during the 10-year period of expansion authorized in the bill. This was a problem that had perplexed the Committee on Oceanog- raphy throughout its studies and which was left unresolved in its report. The question was raised again by Chairman Magnuson during hear- ings on the bill with Dr. Harrison Brown, Chairman of the Committee on Oceanography, appearing as a witness. Dr. Brown replied as follows: We found in our survey of the oceanographic situation that this is perhaps one of the most difficult aspects of improving the status of oceanography, particularly within the Govern- ment. This is a field which, as you know, completely cuts across numerous Government agencies. Almost every agency in one way or another has oceanographic interests and the problem is how should this be coordinated. Our own Committee discussed this at length. There were some of us who at one time felt that perhaps some kind of a central agency should be established. There were others who felt we ought to attempt to maintain independent de- velopment within individual agencies as much as possible _ and after thrashing this out we came to the conclusion that we favored a compromise between the central agency and the independent development approach. Now I believe that the decision that your committee makes in this legislation far transcends oceanography itself. I believe that it will get at the core of the very basic funda- mental problem of decision making, concerning science and technology in Government. In selecting the National Science Foundation as the agency in which these responsibilities should be vested there were these considerations: 1. The National Science Foundation is concerned exclusively with science and with the education and training of scientists. 2. It operates under a broad mandate of the National Foundation Act of 1950 to ‘‘develop and encourage the pursuit of a national policy for the promotion of basic research and education in the sciences.”’ 3. Its statutory duties include bringing about ‘“‘the effective coor- dination of the various scientific information activities within the Federal Government,” and fostering ‘the interchange of scientific information among scientists in the United States and foreign coun- tries.” 4. A major purpose under the act is to— evaluate scientific research programs undertaken by agencies of the Federal Government, and to correlate the Foundation’s scientific research programs with those undertaken by indi- viduals and by public and private research groups. 5. It reports annually to Congress and to the President. 6. The National Science Foundation is administered by a Director and a Board of 24 members who must be eminent in fields of science, S. Rept. 1525, 86—2——_3 18 MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT engineering, agriculture, education or public affairs. Members of this Board are appointed by the President. 7. The act provides that there shall be divisions within the Founda- tion, each concerned with a special field or fields of science, and that for each division there shall be a divisional committee which can con= sist of either members or nonmembers of the Board. Scientists from many universities and institutions serve on the Board and on the divisional committees, assuring broad expression of independent views. The Division of Marine Sciences for which the bill would provide would include both scientists not connected with the Government and representatives of the major agency participants in the program. This coincides partially with the British method of planning and conducting its oceanographic research with an enviable record of accomplishment. Great Britain in 1949 established a National Oceanographic Council, consisting of Government officials and representatives of universities and scientific bodies, the latter having an equal voice in formulating policies. An Executive Committee consists of a high Government official from each of four Government agencies and representatives from four major universities. This committee supervises execution of policy by a National Institute of Oceanography, headed by a civilian director appointed by the Executive Committee, and by a secretary who is designated by a Government agency. The principle of both governmental and nongovernmental partici- pation in planning, coordinating, and evaluating 1 is adopted in S. 2692, but not the centralized operational approach. A Division of Marine Sciences in the National Science Foundation with authority to carry out the responsibilities delegated to it in the bill would consolidate activities now dispersed in the agency among three separate divisions and one office—the Division of Biological and Medical Sciences, the Division of Mathematical, Physical and Engi- neering Sciences, the Division of Scientific Personnel and Education, and the Office of Special International Studies. The National Science Foundation, in its comments on S. 2692, takes the position that it prefers to keep marine biological activities separate from research in physical oceanography. In many countries and in many institutions of our own country, your committee is informed, biological, physical and chemical ocean research are carried on without discord by scientists and specialists in these fields associated and work- ing together on the same ship. Section 2 presupposes that similar harmony could exist within the National Science Foundation. No other agency in Government could perform a greater service to the Nation in this long-neglected scientific field than the National Science Foundation should it exercise the authority to be vested in it by section 2 of this bill. Committee amendments to section 2 1. Page 3, line 4, insert ‘‘and marine surveys” immediately following the word ‘research’. This amendment was suggested by the Navy and Defense Departments in their joint comments on the bill, and by the Committee on Oceanography. 2. Page 3, line 6: A period was placed after the word “Council.” oe Page 3; line 7, strike out ‘which requires but is not’? and sub- stitute “This progr am should include but not be” preceding the words MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT 19 “limited to the’. This language is suggested in the Navy-Defense Department comments. 4. Page 3, line 11, strike out “construction of’? and substitute ‘modernization of existing and construction of new Government and civilian’? preceding the phrase “laboratory and shore facilities’. Suggested in Navy-Defense Department comments. 5. Page 3, lines 15 and 16, strike ‘including but not” and insert “which may include but not be’. Suggested by Navy-Defense Departments. 6. Page 3, line 18, insert after “buoys” the words ‘instrumented marine towers, wave gages’. Suggested by Navy-Defense Depart- ments. 7. Page 3, line 25, and page 4, line 1, insert after the word ‘“‘under- graduate”’ the words ‘‘and graduate’’, after the word ‘‘chemistry”’ the word ‘“‘mathematics,” and after the word “biology” the words “‘, engi- neering, limnology, meteorology,’’. This increases the fields from which prospective oceanographers would be recruited for advanced education in the marine sciences, and was proposed by the Committee on Oceanography, the American Society of Limnology and Oceanog- raphy, and with respect to mathematics and engineering, by the Navy- Defense Departments. 8. Page 4, line 7: To the word “field” add the letter ‘‘s’’. 9. Page 4, line 8: Substitute the words ‘‘marine science’”’ for the word ‘‘oceanography’’. 10. Page 4, line 9, insert the word ‘‘classification” after the word “behavior” ending line 8. Suggested by scientists in a number of universities and institutions. 11. Page 4, line 20, insert ‘“‘and oceanographic surveys” after the word “sciences”. ‘This brings section 2, numbered paragraph 7, relating to international cooperation, into conformity with previously stated policy objectives. 12. Page 4, line 23, strike ‘‘oceanographic”’ and substitute ‘‘marine”’ after the word ‘‘of’’, and insert the words “and surveys’’ after ‘“Yesearch’’. 13. Page 5, line 17, insert the words ‘‘marine research” after the word “‘of”’ and the word “‘surveys” after “‘oceanographic.”” These are clarifying changes. 14. Page 5, line 25, insert “the Smithsonian Institution,” after “Survey,” and on page 6, line 1, after “Standards,” insert ‘‘the United States Army Corps of Engineers (including the Beach Erosion Board),’”’. The purpose of these amendments has been previously explained in the report. 15. Page 6, line 17, strike ‘“‘oceanograph and fisheries research and surveys” and insert ‘“‘marine research, surveys, and taxonomic pro- erams’’. This deals with evaluation of programs by the National Science Foundation and is intended to make the language more specific. 16. Page 6, line 20, insert “in these scientific fields” after the word ‘“Government”’. A perfecting amendment. DIVISION OF MARINE SCIENCES Sec: on 3 of S. 2692 would amend the National Science Foundation Act of 1950 to include a Division of Marine Sciences and a Divisional Committee of this Division. Six scientists selected on a basis of 20 ‘MARINE SCIENCES AND. RESEARCH ACT competence from universities and non-Federal institutions would serve with representatives from designated Government agencies on the Div:sional Committee. Committee amendments to section 3 1. Page 7, line 8, insert after the last word of this line the words “divisional, committee of the”’ 2. Page 7, line 13, insert after “Administration,” the words ‘the Beach Erosion Board of the United States Army Corps of Engineers,’’. This was suggested in the joint comments submitted by the Navy and Defense Departments. 3. Page 7, line 14, insert after the word “scientists”? the words “selected on a basis of competence”’; after the word “and” the word “non-Federal’”’, and strike after the word “institutions” the phrase “receiving assistance from the foregoing agencies.’””’ The purpose of the first amendment is to assure representatives chosen from non- Federal fields to serve on the divisional committee of the Division of Marine Sciences shall be highly qualified scientists. The final amend- ment in this section deletes what the committee considered to be an unnecessary restriction in this selection. AUTHORIZATIONS FOR NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Section 4 adopts the recommendations of the Committee on Ocea- nography in authorizing appropriations to the National Science Foun- dation of funds for development of the marine sciences over a 10-year period beginning with July 1 of the first fiscal year following approval of the act by the President, and would provide that these appropria- tions be in addition to other appropriations provided the Foundation to carry out its statutory duties. Other sections of the bill authorizing appropriations contain similar language with reference to the effective date of the act and to appropriations authorized being supplementary to other appropriations. Authorizations would include $9,950,000 for construction of research ships, $12,440,000 for their operation over a 10-year period, and $8,250,000 for shore facilities for marine research. Under authority provided in section 3 of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950 the agency may conduct these and other activities specified in the bill through contracts, erants, loans, and other forms of assistance. The bill would authorize $37, 200,000 for basic marine research operations with the sae that expenditures in this category not exceed $8 million in any year; $3 million for fellowships to graduate students and postdoctoral ilows training to become professional oceanographers, annual costs not to exceed $300,000, and such sums as may be adequate for special devices for ocean exploration and research. The latter would include bathyscaphs and other manned sub- mersibles, icebreakers and submarines converted for scientific use, acoustic telemetering devices, magnetometers and many other ad- vanced instruments. Expenditures under this provision would be limited to not more than $10 million in any one year. Total costs of this specialized equipment over the 10-year period have been esti- mated by the Committee on Oceanography at $50.2 million. For what the Committee on Oceanography recommends as the Foundation’s portion of a minimal national oceanographic program, MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT 21 the agency’s requirements over a 10-year period would approximate $121 million. Amendments to section 4 1. Page 8, line 8, and page 8, line 9, prior to the word “research” the word “oceanographic” is stricken and the wor¢ “marine”’ sub- stituted as a somewhat broader adjective. Suggested by several State fish and game departments. 2. Page 9, line 2, insert the words “and postdoctoral fellows”’ after the word “students” and the words ‘‘physical, biological, chemical, and geological” after the word “professional”. The purpose of these amendments is to broaden opportunities for persons with specialized knowledge to qualify for fellowships to be used in training to become professional oceanographers. They were recommended to your com- mittee by the Committee on Oceanography and other scientific groups and individuals. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Section 5 of the bill would authorize and direct the Secretary of the Interior to undertake certain activities, studies, and research as part of the general 10-year program for development of the marine sciences. The Department and its agencies have a primary responsibility to conserve and develop resources in order to meet the requirements of national security and an expanding economy. Several agencies within the Department, notably the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, the Bureau of Mines, and the Geological Survey have a direct interest in the resources, actual or potential, of and in the oceans and the Great Lakes. These resources include marine fisheries, metallic minerals, and offshore deposits of liquid fuels. To realize increased benefits from these resources an expanded program of ocean and Great Lakes research is required, both basic and applied. S. 2692 would authorize such a program, facilities to carry out such a program, and studies designed to augment the economic benefits of such a program to the Nation. Specifically, the Secretary of the Interior would be authorized and directed to— 1. Make grants of funds to qualified scientists, research laboratories, institutions, or other non-Federal agencies in fur- therance of the purposes of the act. 2. Replace, modernize, and enlarge the number of oceangoing ships being used for research, exploration, surveying, and the development of marine resources by the Department. 3. Construct and operate shore facilities and laboratories adequate to support the above ships. 4. Cooperate with other departments and agencies, including agencies of the several States, in the conduct of oceanwide surveys and of studies concerning the relation of marine life to radioactive elements. 5. Conduct studies of the economic and legal aspects of com- mercial fisheries and the utilization of marine products. 6. Cooperate with other governmental agencies, State agencies, educational institutions, and other public and private organiza- 23, MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT tions or individuals devoted to marine sciences and fishery research. 7. Determine reserves of metals of industrial or commercial value in adjacent ocean waters and ascertain techniques and probable costs of recovery and extraction. 8. Assist in taxonomic studies of marine organisms and in providing facilities for their preservation and scientific classifica- tion. Section 6 of the bill would authorize appropriations for the activities designated in section 5. Such sums as may be necessary would be authorized for construc- tion of new ships for fisheries exploration and research. The amount to cover the 10-year ship construction program is not specified, as your committee, which has legislative jurisdiction over the agency, will wish to review from time to time its progress in the program. There can be little question that the Bureau of Commercial Fish- eries, whatever the cause, has not kept pace with its responsibili- ties in recent years, although it still retains many dedicated officials and scientists. The Committee on Oceanography, in its report on “Ocean Re- sources” filed with your committee, has this terse comment on the Bureau’s ocean research activities: The principal Government agency with primary respon- sibility of research and development of living ocean re- sources—the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service—is retrogressing rather than progressing in its ability to engage in broader, basic pro- grams involving ship operations. Research ships of the Bureau are small and old and none in recent years have been replaced although many other nations, including the Soviet Union, Communist China, Japan, Canada, Great Britain, France, West Germany, and the Union of South Africa have aug- mented their fisheries research fleets with new and advanced vessels. While these and other foreign nations have been enlarging their fleets, that of the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries actually has diminished. The Bureau’s principal research ship in the Atlantic, prior to its deactivation March 9, 1959, Albatross III, has not been replaced. At the time of its retirement it was 33 years old. Scientific duties assigned to the Albatross III were transferred to the 147-foot trawler Delaware, a 22-year-old vessel also engaged in fisheries studies. Like- wise retired was a Great Lakes research boat, the Musky. Largest ship of the Bureau’s fleet, the 371-ton Black Douglas is 33 years old and capable of operating only light gear. The Bureau has been reduced to only six operating vessels over 40 feet in length. Dr. Schaefer informed your committee during the course of the hearings that — the Russians have been doing rather advanced work on ma- rine biology and particularly oceanography in support of fisheries development for about as long as we have. MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT 23 He continued: In fact, they had a three-vessel expedition working in the Bering Sea in 1935 and 1936. They have made a thorough survey there of the fisheries and the currents and the types of bottom, and so on, and in the fisheries resource development their work is every bit as good as ours and in some cases it is advanced. For example, one of their submarines, the Severyanka, has been converted into a machine with windows in it and samp- ling devices to study the upper reaches of the ocean, particu- larly in relation to the distribution of the herring and other fish in the North Atlantic. They have made some interesting discoveries with the submarine. This is one field where they are at least abreast of us. Senator Lausche, who was presiding at the hearing during this portion of the testimony, asked: From an applied standpoint, have they made advances in excess of ours, if at all? Dr. Schaefer: I would say equal to ours. One example of this is the use of the Severyanka in the herring fisheries in the Norwegian and Barents Seas. By using thissubmarine they were able to make observations on the behavior of the herring. On the basis of these observations they were able to design gear to greatly improve their catches. This is just one example. I wouldn’t say they are ahead of us, but they are certainly abreast and they are certainly working at it very hard. The Committee on Oceanography recommended that during the next 10 years the Bureau construct 14 research ships, 12 of 500 tons displacement and 2 of 1,200 to 1,500 tons displacement. It esti- mated the cost at $27.4 million. In the provision that would authorize appropriations for ship con- struction by the Bureau, the bill stipulates that the Bureau study the ships being built by other nations for exploration and research with a view to increasing the seaworthiness, range and efficiency of our own fisheries research fleet. Appropriations for operation of the new U.S. ships to be constructed under this section of the bill would be authorized subject to a limita- tion of $2 million per annum for operating costs. It is also provided that in research operations by the Bureau full consideration shall be given to the needs for research in the Gulf of Mexico, Bering Sea, other areas of potential commercial importance in the oceans, and in the Great Lakes. A similar stipulation is made in the authorization of such sums as may be deemed adequate by the department for capital expenditures in developing or expanding ocean resource studies with such devices as mesoscaphs for biological observations, automatic continuous plankton samplers, oceanaria, and instrumentation for studies of marine life behavior. The major authorization in this section, however, is that of such sums as are necessary for operations, excluding ship operations, of fisheries resource studies including biological surveys, marine popula- 24 MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT tion sampling, pond fish culture and brackish water farming, ecologi- cal mapping, taxonomy, estuary resources and potentials of nutrient increase. ‘lhese would be limited to $10 million per annum. The Committee on Oceanography, in its report, estimated that the total cost of these studies over a 10-year period would not exceed $67,430,000, the costs beginning at a moderate level and approximately doubling after the first 5 years, and after facilities in the form of ships and laboratories had been constructed for the work. Many of these studies, however, it is presumed by your committee, would be farmed out to non-Federal agencies, universities, or institu- tions through the program of grants authorized in section '5(a). Final authorization in section 6 is that of $11 million for continuing studies over a 10-year period of increased utilization of marine prod- ucts, the development of new uses of these products, for legal and economic studies relating to commercial fisheries, and for investigation of the mineral resources of the seas. It is specifically stated that in directing these studies the Secretary of the Interior shall give full consideration to their being carried on in existing institutions, agen- cies, or laboratories through the issuance of grants. A broad program would be assigned to agencies within the Depart- ment of the Interior. Execution of this program would require not only legislative authorizations and subsequent appropriations but a determination on the part of the Department and agencies to enhance utilization of the ocean’s resources in the national interest and for the benefit of the American people. Your committee, in reporting this bill, considers that the potential values of the resources of the oceans and of the Great Lakes merit the research facilities and studies authorized. What these values may be was ably cereitenr each for the committee at its hearings on the bill by Comdr. C. Wilbur, USN, in a 20- minute pr esentation. Commander W iIbur said in part: Fish: The sea is presently supplying only a small percent of its potential food harvest. Although 35 million tons of fish in various forms are taken annually, this might well be increased 10 times or more. Minerals: The sea is also rich in minerals—in fact, oceanic waters contain more minerals than have been mined by man in all history. Each cubic mile of sea water contains 18 mil- lion tons of dissolved salts of sodium, potassium, calcium, bromine, and phosphorous. There is enough gold in the sea to make every inhabitant of the world a millionnaire. In addition, on the floor of the deep seas—in the form of nod- ules—lie deposits of cobalt, copper, nickel, iron, and man- ganese. Oil wells: As each day passes our world requires more fuel to produce energy. Offshore—under the sea of the Conti- nental Shelves—tlies 40 percent of the world’s known petro- leum—20 million barrels of it. As commercial atomic power becomes a practical reality, the world’s oceans offer a promis- ing fuel source. Sea water is a source of both uranium for fission-produced power and deuterium for heavy hydrogen or thermonuclear power. In the opinion of your committee, this country can ill afford to take second place in exploring and developing these potentials. MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT 25 Amendments to sections 5 and 6 1. Page 9, line 5, insert ‘Geological Survey” after the word “‘Mines”’. This amends the heading over these two sections to read: “Bureau of Mines, Geological Survey, and Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, Department of the Interior.” Representatives of the Geological Survey, at meetings of the Committee on Oceanography and of the Interagency Coordinating Committee on Oceanography, have supplied convincing evidence that they should participate in the overall oceano- graphic program. As further evidence an outline of current research programs being conducted by the Geological Survey has been submitted to your Com- mittee on Interstate and F oreign Commerce in connection with its considerations of S. 2692. These programs include research into marine geology and mineral resources of the Continental Shelves and shallower oceanic waters; marine sedimentary diagenetic and mineral accretion processes; marine geochronology and the sedimentary record; paleoclimatology, paleo- biogeography and paleocirculation; major crustal features of the western Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, and California offshore basins; hydrodynamics of tidal and estuarine flow, and geochemical balance of the hydrosphere. The Department of the Interior, in its comments on S. 2692, states that present expenditures of the Geological Survey ageregate ‘ ‘some $600,000 annually,” a relatively small amount considering the magni- tude of the research it is attempting. 2. Page 9, line 16, insert after the word “institutions” the words “or non-Federal agencies”. This amendment is designed to make specific the inclusion of State fisheries departments among those eligi- ble to receive grants from the Federal department or agencies for basic and applied research programs, facilities or equipment. 3. Page 10, line 4, insert “including agencies of the several states”’ after the word ‘‘agencies”’. The purpose of this amendment is iden- tical to that above except that it is applicable to the conduct of ocean- wide surveys from which data relative to ocean resources may be obtained. 4. Page 10, line 7, strike the first word ‘‘Conduct” and substitute “Cooperate with other departments and Agencies, including agencies of the several States in the conduct of”. This relates to studies of the relation of marine life to radioactive elements, and has the same pur- pose as the two preceding amendments. 5. Page 10, line 16, insert the words ‘‘and cooperate with”’ after the word ‘‘from”’. This is a perfecting amendment suggested in com- ments received from the Navy and Defense Departments. 6. Page 10, line 18, insert ‘‘or their agencies, and with’ after ‘“States,”’. This is similar to numbered amendments 2, 3, and 4 above and relates to cooperation between Federal agencies and non-Federal agencies and institutions. 7. Page 10, line 19, insert ‘‘and the” after the word ‘‘research” and the letter “‘s” after “science”. 8. Page 10, line 20, strike the word ‘‘oceanography’’. 9. Insert after line 25 the following paragraph: (1) Encourage and assist in taxonomic studies of marine organisms and in providing facilities for the preservation of S. Rept. 1525, 86—2———4 26 MARINE SCIENCES AND RESEARCH ACT specimens useful in scientific classification of marine or- ganisms. 10. Page 11, line 1, strike ‘‘(i)”” and insert in lieu thereof ‘‘(j)’’. 11. Page 11, line 12, strike the word ‘Bureau’. 12. Page 11, line 13, strike the words “of Mines and the” and insert after the word ‘‘Fisheries,’’? the phrase ‘‘Bureau of Mines and Geological Survey’’. The purpose of this is to include the Geological Survey among the agencies in the Department of the Interior for which sums are authorized to be appropriated in this section. 13. Page 12, line 13, insert after “Studies” the words “which may include but not be”’ and strike the words “including, but not”. This is perfecting language which follows suggestions in the joint comments submitted by the Navy and Defense Departments. 14. Page 12, lines 23, 24, and 25, strike the word “north” ending line 23, all of line 24 reading “of 40 degrees north latitude, between 15 and 40 de-’’, and from line 25 the following: ‘‘gress north latitude,” and in line 25 insert after the word ‘Sea,’ the words ‘‘the Great Lakes, and’. The purpose of this amendment is to remove geo- graphical specifications relative to providing facilities for, and con- ducting ocean resource studies, which at hearings on the bill were objected to by the Committee on Oceanography as being unduly restrictive. 15. Page 13, line 1, substitute the word ‘other’ for the word “ocean” and strike ‘‘and the Great Lakes,” the Great Lakes having been inserted in the previous line. 16. Page 13, line 9, strike “taxonomic development” and substitute “taxonomy.”