HRPRFEHECTIVE USE OF THE SHEA
WOODS Eo a | LIBRARY ee EME Ge ALI EG ede INSTITUTION sos carte a ‘ oN i we wa ' Wy, hg ve TL ‘ ie Ww aK N in : pig Eg, eee of eh i oe = Feu s8 ZA p z ee aS aw wag agus Aa SEDATE
REPORT OF THE PANEL ON OCEANOGRAPHY PRESIDENT’S SCIENCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
THE WHITE HOUSE June 1966
T ¢PE€2¢bOO TOEO g
WOO 0 C0 O
1OHM/198IN
HRFRFEHECTIVE USE OF THE SEA
REPORT OF THE PANEL ON OCEANOGRAPHY OF THE PRESIDENT’S SCIENCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Boe oe (UL etienecr ese “TUTION
JuNE 1966
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C., 20402 - Price 60 cents
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 17, 1966
Nature has lavished incredible bounty on this earth. Warmed daily by the sun, nourished by the land, sustained by atmosphere and water, man takes these riches largely for granted and often complains when they fail to suit his convenience exactly. But man can also use his energies and talents, constructively, to improve his surroundings.
Much of our natural bounty consists of water. A source of fish and transport to the ancients, as they are today, the oceans of the world hold great promise to provide future generations with minerals, food, energy, and fresh water. We must turn our attention to finding more appropriate ways and better means of transforming this promise into achievement.
This comprehensive report presents the findings and conclusions of a group of outstanding men who are deeply concerned to learn more about the oceans and how they can be made to serve mankind. I commend it to all who share that concern and ask the appropriate agencies and councils of the Federal Government to consider its recommendations.
II
PRESIDENT’S SCIENCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Chairman
Dr. DonaLp F. Hornie Special Assistant to the President for Science and Technology
Vice Chairman
Dr. HERBERT F. York, JR. Professor of Physics
University of California, San Diego
Dr. Ivan L. BENNETT, JR. Johns Hopkins Hospital
Dr. Lewis M. BRANSCOMB
Chairman
Joint Institute for Laboratory Astro- physics
Dr. MELVIN CALVIN Professor of Chemistry University of California, Berkeley
Dr. SIDNEY D. DRELL Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Dr. Marvin L. GOLDBERGER Professor of Physics Palmer Physical Laboratory Princeton University
Dr. PHILIP HANDLER
Chairman
Department of Biochemistry Duke University Medical Center
Mr. WILLIAM R. HEWLETT President Hewlett-Packard Company
Dr. FRANKLIN A. LONG
Vice President for Research and Ad- vanced Studies
Cornell University
Dr. Gorpon J. F. MACDONALD
Chairman, Department of Planetary and Space Physics
Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics
University of California, Los Angeles
Dr. WILLIAM D. McELRoy Chairman
Department of Biology
The Johns Hopkins University
Dr. GEORGE HE. PAKE Provost Washington University
Dr. JOHN R. PIERCE
Executive Director, Research Communications Sciences Division Bell Telephone Laboratories
Dr. KENNETH §8. PITZER President Rice University
Dr. FREDERICK SEITZ President National Academy of Sciences
Dr. CHARLES P. SLICHTER Department of Physics University of Illinois
Dr. CHARLES H. TOWNES Provost Massachusetts Institute of Technology
III
Contents
SUMMARY OF MAJOR FINDINGS AND RECOMMEN- DATIONS 225 S225) ele pees et
Introduction 2 4a. 2242.0 ok aie el oh a ee Findings and Recommendations._-..2..=..-- 3-22 =e
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
IV
INTRODUCTION: «..2- 22.25. 22225-0 2 eee
131 1.2
Bal 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6
Goals for a National Ocean Program_____________ Panel Objectives and Organization_____________-
The World. Fish Catcha: 524 seo5 5S Utilization of Fish for Human Consumption __-____ Aquicultures <1 flees. ee eee DuMM ary! oot i oes Se ee
MODIFICATION OF THE OCEAN ENVIRONMENT _
3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5
4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7 4.8 4.9
Specific Considerations. .2.2 2.2.42. > eee ae What Needs, To Be Done. 2-225 s28e0a.- ue eee
DUMMIATY = A Sate SE Nie Se ne
Positionme. Problems. 2) Se DA ee Identification*of (Objects. =_-- 22-2. __- = eee Tools*Problemitte 5 2) 8). Uae eee DOtVICCs tie eck Ae he ee eee
Surf Zone and Beach Engineering Problems_______ BUG VSS eh ne oak ots ot as ree fe eer Ce ee
4.10 New Lightweight, Compact Power Plant_________ 41 Mian tin Ghie Seaeee2 22680 Op oes et eh 412° Marmion ng 2a be a ee ee eee
Page IX
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
OCEAN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY AND NA- MONAT CS ECQCURERY 2.222222 5e2 oe ee eee
Sale. introductions. 4.202202) bes 8 Mee et ote kL. t 5.2 Vital Navy Missions Heavily Depende: t 0 Ocean
Seience and Technology... 22. 222522 -ehe 5.3 The Navy’s Oceanographic Program_-____________ 5.4 The Navy’s Role in Education and Research_____ 5.5 Interaction of Navy Programs With Civilian
Abechmiolosy 2.8 2 Ss es eee seo MC OMelUsIOnsis te fee es ee ee eE
OPPORTUNITIES IN OCEANOGRAPHIC RE- Boe Ae ey ee ee ee ee ee ee
Gala tObservation= 222422202 ete ee
6-2) -Predi@tions. 1.2220. on eee ee eo ee
Oromulnysical Processes. om ens eee ee ee GAC Biolosreal Processes 22. 48 Se 8
ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF OCEANOGRAPHY -____- (leo MTOAUCION as! ae ese eee eben es es 7.2 An Economic Evaluation of the Oceanographic
Pro GIA. 2222 ee ee
CURRENTS PAWUS 222 22522 bee ee eee ee
8.1 Organizational Structure_______________________ SAYA 11] 0) O10 ERD ee ae 8.3 Manpower Considerations_____________________- 8.4 National Interest in the Oceans________________-
EDUCATION AND MANPOWER... --_--------- eee
9.1 General Requirements in Oceanographic Man-
POWOI i = 65 ott eee ee ee Se eee Se 9.2 Education for Research Workers_______________- 9.3 Education for Technology and Commerce_ __-_-__- 9.4 Implications of Manpower Change______________ 9.5 Marine Study Centers________________________-
FEDERAL ORGANIZATION AND PROGRAM____-_-
10.1 Federal Interest—Past and Present_____________ 10.2 Federal Role in a National Ocean Program _____- 10.3. Present Organizational Structure______________- 10-4 "Organization for the Kuture_-~ (P) e_ nObpmewesalldrroblemat os © 22. he ee ee 10.6 Support and Operation of Oceanographic Ships__- LO National) Wacilitres-baete end esse Se es
Page
#10) PRIORTTIES 2050 S23 oh oe alte et eee ee
11.1 Ocean Science and Technology_--_-_------------- 11.2 Ocean Science and Technology in Comparison with
Other Wields 2572. 2 Umi aaniaa T bets aoe
APPENDIXES
J. Panel Membership and Activities___-.-_---.---------= Il. Moored-Buoy Array Program —__— 2... 42222 9220 2s III. Industry and the Ocean Continental Shelf__________-_--
ae 2. 3.
4,
5.
lnitroducnons =a ee 28 oe Sol a Oo oe
Participants in Continental-Shelf Conference at David Payson Niodell Bassinet. 2 22 Pb ee ee Summary Findings of the Five Industries_______-__-_-- RoelerenCes. 242 et eee ee ee
IV. The National Oceanographic Program—A Perspective--__ V. Earlier Views on Federal Reorganizations of the Environ- mental ‘Seiences: >) ae Jit St ah hae ee ee
VI. Marine Resources and Engineering Development Act of
VI
Summary of Major Findings and Recommendations
INTRODUCTION
The PSAC Panel on Oceanography was formed in May 1965 at a time when widespread and intense controversy existed concerning the adequacy of our national effort to explore, understand and devel- op the oceans. The controversy was illustrated by congressional hear- ings held in the summer of 1965 on some 19 bills submitted during the first session of the 89th Congress and by the formation of special indus- trial groups to examine oceanography. The Panel completed its report in June 1966 just as enactment of the Marine Resources and Engineering Development Act of 1966 assured the encouragements of a comprehensive and continuing long-range national program for the effective use of the sea.
Oceanography is defined in various ways depending on the concern of the definer. The Panel has adopted the broad view, prevalent in the Congress and industry, that oceanography connotes more than scientific study of the sea. In this report oceanography refers to activities within the ocean that have significant scientific or techno- logical content.
In its studies the Panel had four principal objectives:
1. To draft a statement of goals for a national program to serve the marine interests of the United States and to define the Federal role in pursuit of these goals.
2. To assess current and planned ocean-oriented programs for tech- nical soundness, adequacy of scope, balance of content, appropriate- ness of organization, funding, and management in light of relevant national goals.
3. To identify major opportunities for new programs in technology and science that should be given high priority in the next 5 to 10 years.
4, To recommend measures to effect an ocean science and technology program consonant with national needs and interests.
Vil
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
National Goals. The oceans’ importance to national security, con- sidered in the widest possible sense, requires that goals for the Nation’s ocean program be clearly stated and that the program be oriented to- ward meeting these goals. The Panel therefore recommends that the President state the ultimate objective of the national ocean program as being effective use of the sea by man for all purposes currently considered for the terrestrial environment: commerce; industry, rec- reation and settlement, as well as for knowledge and understanding. This objective implies four specific goals :
1. Acquiring the ability to predict and ultimately control phenomena affecting the safety and economy of seagoing activities.
2. Undertaking measures required for fullest exploitation of re- sources represented by, in and under the sea.
3. Utilizing the sea to enhance national security.
4. Pursuing scientific investigations for describing and understand- ing marine phenomena, processes and resources (see sec. 1.1).
Role of the Federal Government. Great concern was evident within the private sector as to the Federal Government’s proper role in developing the nation’s ocean program. The Panel believes that division of effort among government, industry, and universities ap- propriate to land-based activities is advisable for the oceans and that the Federal Government should not preempt these activities to the extent it has, for example, in space. We recommend that the Govern- ment perform four functions in achieving the goals of the national ocean program:
1. Enunciate national policies concerning the marine interests of the United States.
2. Foster exploration, development and use of oceans and their re- sources through establishment of appropriate financial, legal, regu- latory, enforcement and advisory institutions and measures.
3. Promote description and prediction of the marine environment and development of capabilities for its modification.
4. Initiate, support, and encourage programs of education, train- ing, and research and provide technical services and facilities related to activities in pertinent sciences and technology (see sec. 10.2).
These Federal functions are not new; however, only the last two functions are to any degree developed and coordinated across existing agency lines. Systematic development and application by a more cen- tralized authority are required for efficient implementation of the first two functions.
Oceans and National Security. Increased Federal participation in ocean activities is required for national security. The developing strategic situation, which may require a much improved undersea
VIII
deterrent force, coupled with the need for defenses against missile- launching submarines, implies that the Navy must develop the capabil- ity to operate anywhere within the oceans at any time. The Navy has underway a Deep Submergence Systems Project. This effort as presently constituted is insufficient if the Navy is to meet its goals in a reasonable time period. The Panel therefore recommends expansion of activities which will permit operation at any location and time within the oceans (see secs. 5.2, 5.3). It 1s recommended that a con- tinuing, special effort be made by the Navy to utilize personnel, facil- ities and know-how of the private sector in achieving its objectives in the Deep Submergence Systems and Man in the Sea Projects (see secs. 4.11, 5.3). Navy technological results in these programs should be made available to industry upon acquisition.
The Navy presently has primary responsibility for development of capability for using man at depths in the oceans. The general level of research in the Man in the Sea Project is inadequate. In- sufficient attention has been give to biomedical problems of survival in the wet, cold, dark, high-pressure environment, and our efforts in this field lag well behind those of other countries. If the goals of the Man in the Sea Project are to be achieved, adequate opportunities must be provided for basic studies by a variety of institutions. In par- ticular we recommend establishment of a major shore facility fully equipped for the range of basic studies required by Man in the Sea. This facility should be associated with a university or medical re- search center. Navy efforts may need to be complemented through instrumented, movable, submersible laboratories for basic studies on man living beneath the sea’s surface for extended periods. ‘These laboratories should be available to a wide community of scholars outside the Navy who are interested in biomedical problems of man in the deep sea (see secs. 4.11, 10.7).
The Panel recognizes that development of adequate programs in undersea technology and Man in the Sea may be hampered by tra- ditional views within the Navy to the effect that the Navy is primarily an operating force at or near the surface. If the Navy does not ade- quately pursue programs recommended in this report (see sec. 4), pro- gram responsibilities for Man in the Sea and undersea technology should be shifted to a civilian agency (see secs. 4, 5, 10.4).
The 7hresher experience in 1963 and the recent lost nuclear weapon incident off the Spanish coast clearly illustrate the continuing im- portance of search-and-recovery capabilities. We recommend that ocean search-and-recovery missions related in any way to national security be the Navy’s responsibility. However, the technology de- veloped through such programs should be made available to industry on acurrent basis (see sec. 5.2).
IX
The Navy should have broad responsibilities in furthering ocean science and technology in addition to its problem-oriented research. Most of the technology developed for undersea operations within the Government will result from the Navy’s efforts. An important need is development of a test range equipped with standardized stations at which components, systems, concepts, and materials can be critically tested. Such a range will be an expensive undertaking, though of great value to private industry and university research. We there- fore recommend that a supporting role of the Navy should be provision of test facilities that are open to scientific and technological com- munities. Users would be expected to pay a prorated share of operat- ing costs and depreciation, as is the case in other national facilities (see secs. 4.7, 5.5).
The Navy has maintained good relations with the academic oceano- graphic community, and, in turn, the community has frequently re- sponded to the Navy’s needs in rapid and effective manner. The suc- cessful bomb recovery operations off the Spanish coast are a recent, dramatic but typical example of this cooperation. Long-term support of academic oceanography through the ONR has been fruitful in the past, and we recommend that the Navy continue these programs (see sec. 5.4). The total Navy commitment to ocean science and technology has almost doubled in fiscal year 1965-67, yet Navy support of basic research has remained constant. This situation cannot continue if the Navy is to make adequate use of new developments in ocean science and technology; therefore, the Panel recommends that Navy support of basic research in the oceans increase at a rate consonant with the total Navy program in ocean science and technology (see sec. 5.4).
Marine Food Resources. In the civilian sector economic analyses— admittedly crude because of lack of adequate data and previous analy- ses—suggest that activities related to improved weather prediction and the near-shore environment can be justified on economic grounds (see sec. 7.2). Nosimilar economic justification for development of marine food resources exists; however, the Panel recommends that develop- ment of marine food resources be given very high priority for other vitally important reasons (see secs. 2.2, 2.4, 11.1).
A great public health problem is protein deficiency (it is the leading cause of death in the period between weaning and 5 years of age in certain countries). Proper long-range development of marine food resources requires numerous studies in marine biology. The protein- deficiency problem is so acute that efforts should be made to bypass the requirement for detailed understanding of means to obtain more food from the sea. New advances in development of marine food can greatly alleviate this problem, and we recommend expansion and improvement in technology for developing these resources and Government ap- proval for human use of marine protein concentrate (see sec. 2.4).
x
Emphasis should be placed on development of this technology for ex- port to underdeveloped countries in which malnutrition exists.
A program for the development of marine food resources offers a major opportunity for substantive international cooperation. Several countries, including Japan, U.S.S.R., and Norway, have advanced technologies for fishing. An international effort to further this tech- nology and expand it to other marine food resources for the benefit of underdeveloped nations could be of major importance in achieving peace on earth. Such a program might be developed through auspices of the United Nations.
Preserving the Near-Shore Environment. Almost half our popu- lation lives near the margins of the oceans or the Great Lakes. The near-shore environment is thus of critical importance. This environ- ment is being modified rapidly, by human activities, in ways that are unknown in detail but broadly are undesirable (see secs. 3, 6.4). Pollution, which renders beaches unsafe for swimmers, destroys valu- able fisheries and generally degrades the coastline, is the chief modi- fication. This problem is urgent, and dangers have not been ade- quately recognized. Specific recommendations cannot be made for solution of this serious problem because the research to date has been largely ineffectual. Therefore, the Panel recommends intensification of research in the area of pollution and pollution control.
Recommendations with regard to marine biology affect both the long-range goal of increasing marine food resources and preserving the near-shore environment. Specific recommendations are:
1. Intensive multidisciplinary studies of biological communities in marine habitats subject to human influence and exploitation. Such studies should include estuaries and the continental shelf. A very important, special case is the proposed sea level canal to join the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans (see secs. 3.3, 6.4).
2. Establishment of marine wilderness preserves to provide a base- line for future studies (see sec. 3.4).
3. Construction of facilities needed for studying organisms in special marine environments such as the deep sea and tropics (see sec. 10.7).
4, Increased encouragement and support of identification and use of marine organisms as tools for biomedical research and as potential sources of drugs (see sec. 6.4).
5. Establishment of a national center for collection, maintenance, and distribution of living marine organisms for use in marine and biological research (see sec. 10.7).
Unity of Environmental Sciences. Throughout its investigations the Panel has been impressed by the unity of environmental sciences. Methods of investigation, intellectual concepts and ways of analyzing data are remarkably alike in oceanography, meteorology and solid- earth geophysics. Educational, industrial, and governmental orga-
XI
nizations for the most part have not taken advantage of this unity in developing their programs. The Panel’s recommendations have been influenced to a large extent by similarities among these fields (see sec. 6).
Research in Oceanography. The Panel finds that much research effort in marine biology and physical oceanography during the last 10 years has concerned surveys of the ocean, measuring “classical” quan- tities. Such surveys were important 50 and even 20 years ago in defining problems; however, the subject has advanced to the stage that well-defined problems are known to exist. The Panel recom- mends that emphasis be shifted from surveys to solutions of these problems (see sec. 6). In section 6 a number of problems related to physical oceanography and marine biology are considered. A prob- lem of great importance in physical oceanography both because of intrinsic scientific interest and possible contributions to security and commerce within the oceans is that of oceanic weather, weather being defined as fluctuations of temperature, pressure and current over a wide range of time and length scales. Major progress in this area can result from implementation of any of several buoy programs pro- posed heretofore. The Panel therefore recommends initiation of a step-by-step buoy program from detailed studies of limited regions to larger scale studies. A step-by-step program is necessary because buoy technology is not well developed (see secs. 6.3, 4.9, and app. IT).
Development of undersea technology will depend on understanding the boundary between the oceans and the solid earth. Recent studies show that physical processes at this boundary are complex, and there is little understanding of them. The Panel recommends that high priority be given to benthic-boundary study (see sec. 6.3).
Education in Oceanography. Oceanographic education has been narrowly conceived and does not adequately recognize the importance of fundamental sciences in the subject’s long-range development. The intellectual isolation of many oceanographic institutions needs to be corrected. Attempts should be made to associate oceanographic insti- tutions with groups of universities to permit easy access by scientists and engineers throughout the country for work in ocean activities. The Panel questions the wisdom of granting Ph. D.’s in oceanography per se and feels education should be focused on a broad spectrum of environmental sciences, incorporating basic sciences. Many of the most active contributors to oceanography entered from. other fields. This practice should be encouraged in the future, perhaps through special efforts in developing postdoctoral programs in oceanography (see secs. 9.1, 9.2, 9.3).
As activities in the oceans increase, it is clear that there will be interaction between those interested in the science and technology of
XII
the sea and those interested in legal, social, and economic aspects. We therefore recommend establishment and funding of Marine Study Centers to examine a wide range of problems associated with activi- ties in the sea but not to be degree-granting organizations (see sec. 9.5). Research is particularly needed on economic aspects of ocean science and technology.
Ships for Oceanographic Research. <A substantial portion of the personnel in numerous oceanographic institutions is concerned with administration and operation of ships. Ship time is more readily available to members of an institution than to scientists at universities and other organizations not directly connected with such an institution.
Within the institutions ship operations are no longer as flexible or as responsive to scientific objectives as they were 5 or 10 years ago. Op- erating costs of many ships are met by a conglomeration of grants and contracts. Because of administrative difficulties, we recommend com- prehensive block-funding for oceanographic vessels (see sec. 10.6). The funding should imply a commitment for the operating cost of the ship for its expected life. Operating moneys should be funded separately from the oceanographic project for which the ship is used.
Block-funding will facilitate more effective planning and schedul- ing of oceanographic ships. It does not, however, solve the problem of access to ships by qualified scientists regardless of institutional affilia- tions. Therefore, we recommend that oceanographic ships be grouped generally into regional fleets of reasonable size. Perhaps three or four such fleets would serve the Nation’s needs. Fleets should be assigned to independent regional organizations representing user groups from oceanographic laboratories and universities. Every effort should be made to include in user groups those institutions which at present do not have formal activity in ocean science and technology (see sec. 10.6).
Organization of Oceanography Within the Federal Government. No natural advocate for oceanography was found within the Federal establishment; responsibility for oceanography is diffused through a number of agencies. The Navy, of course, must maintain a strong oceanographic effort in order to meet its mission requirements. How- ever, if the goal of effective use of the sea for all purposes now pur- sued on land is to be achieved, present methods of supporting civilian portions of the program are inadequate to the task, and basic revision of the system is necessary. In particular the Panel recommends that activities now included in the Environmental Science Services Ad- ministration, Geological Survey (regarding land and ocean activities), Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, oceanographic activities of the Bu- reau of Mines, and a portion of the oceanographic activities of the Coast Guard be combined in a single agency (see sec. 10.4). Such an agency would be competent to deal with the four governmental
XIII
functions specified earlier. A reorganization of this type would recog- nize the fact that Federal activities related to description and predic- tion of the environment are very closely related, and one cannot sen- sibly separate the atmosphere from the oceans or the oceans from land. In addition, the ability to develop ocean resources and to use the oceans for commerce depends very heavily on our ability to describe and predict. There is thus an intimate connection between environ- mental sciences in providing services and development and use of ocean resources.
The Panel recommends that the Nation’s oceanographic activities be supported in five ways:
1. By the NSF in its traditional role of supporting fundamental studies through grants and fellowships, with special emphasis on aspects that contribute to manpower education for ocean science and technology.
2. By the new agency in carrying out its responsibility for manage- ment of environment and ocean resources and for providing descrip- tion and prediction services through a balanced program of direct participation and support of industry and universities.
3. By the Navy in discharging its mission of national security through its laboratories and industry and through ONR support of civilian institutions, as well as by its supporting role in the develop- ment of undersea technology and provision of national test facilities.
4. By agencies such as AEC and HEW in carrying out their mis- sions.
5. By the Smithsonian Institution in fulfilling its major obligation to systematic biology (see sec. 10.4).
Creation of a mission-oriented agency, with major responsibilities as previously stated, does not by itself provide a clear mechanism for coordination, planning and budgeting. Several agencies, the Navy and NSF in particular, will continue to have major responsibilities in ocean-oriented activities. The need for information interchange and dissemination now discharged by ICO will continue, and we recommend formation of an interagency group under the Federal Council for Science and Technology to provide services now rendered by ICO and the Interagency Committee on Atmospheric Sciences (see sec. 10.4). This group should also have responsibilities for information interchange related to solid-earth sciences. It would thus link en- vironmental science activities within the new agency to those in other agencies.
Budget allocations among the new agency, NSF, and the Navy would be made on a competitive basis, recognizing the mission re- sponsibilities of the new agency and the Navy. The Federal Council, Bureau of the Budget, and Congress would all participate in the budgeting process. Although the proposed agency would not solve
XIV
all problems of budgeting, it will provide a centralized authority with major mission responsibility.
Cost of Recommendations. We have not attempted to estimate costs of individual recommendations contained herein because more detailed studies will be required before such determinations can be made. Instead, we recommend a general increase of the nondefense component of the national oceanographic program from the present $120 million to $210 million by fiscal year 1971 (see sec. 7.2). This is based on foreseeable national needs for Federal services and support of marine science and technology. We do not propose a uniform ex- pansion of the existing program; indeed, we believe some parts should be curtailed. We particularly recommend an increase in basic re- search and education support from about $15 million to at least $25 million by fiscal year 1971; these figures do not include cost of ships or other platforms.
The defense component of the oceanographic program will prob- ably increase more than nondefense expenditures if these reeommenda- tions are implemented. The Navy needs large, expensive facilities for its program. Furthermore, we have charged it with construction and operation of facilities for other agencies, industry, and private research, and with continuing support of education and research. Under the circumstances a doubling of the present program by fiscal year 1971 would not be unexpected.
The total, therefore, would increase from $310 million in fiscal year 1967 to roughly $600 million in fiscal year 1971. Much of the non- defense increase would be devoted to economically promising programs or would support socially crucial ones.
XV
om 7)
Siig Bris Dee, : Ween 2 savoury, Ups & Bhi Nano, hy oe
= 7 Z ~w rae , ae 22s a3 [ee ahead > v — a¢ n, 7 - a = | 7 4 a 7 - ; -@ at, 'Y 2 oe | a impe® s a} il ¥ a ig “wi 7 ceo ot i} agvespaaiess: Ae pe ‘i — _ 7 J - oa ; = 11° + 7 a Ww a = ~ + Anes es eos j a ce - a ’ - Fn . - re = oe rr _ t 1% SH _ rs ¥ os] 9 r 7 = as ae Pee day a 6 (ane Sl tee aude Neng 7 id tele 8 a a ; yf apc
a4
: ; ee eee
) ep een peel 6 = Sst? Sa
°° Ge shaves ee Semtee o 4 GAS coe “a a: Se rial 2° on #36 L, HS Sear ™ =< 5 > ste - op ne har 6 tat cups seme 14+ 1 pn CE,
VR te: pbeaicAs cr
= aertita | = ae 7 5h wre AS Ow ee ae
arr oon jy s
a
1.0. Introduction
A number of reports have been written about. the oceans and their vast resources. This report differs in that it views oceanography, broadly defined, as those activities in the ocean having significant scientific and technological content. The report is concerned with the marine activities of the Nation and how these activities contribute to the national well-being. Opportunities for the future are identi- fied and discussed. However, the relative importance of these oppor- tunities can be judged only when the national goals for the total ocean program are clearly defined.
1.1. GOALS FOR A NATIONAL OCEAN PROGRAM
Goals for a national ocean program must, of course, be based on marine interests of the United States. These interests are threefold: social, economic, and strategic. Science and technology supports these three concerns.
Marine science interests of the United States, which are shared by scientists around the world, involve observation, description and un- derstanding of physical, chemical, and biological phenomena of the marine environment. Once adequately served by conventional ocean- ography, today marine science converges with meteorology and solid- earth geophysics so that consolidation into environmental science is required for progress in both research and education. This conver- gence is most advanced in programs aimed at environmental long-range prediction, modification, and control.
Similarly, technological—or engineering—needs of many environ- mental 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.
Marine economic interests of the United States entail shipping, food, minerals, and recreation. As on land, complex, interacting factors affect the profitability of efforts to exploit the seas’ resources: access to markets, legal ownership of resources, availability of relevant tech- nology and capital, strength of competition, safety of operations, and inadvertent or uncontrolled interference from other human activities such as waste disposal or warfare. Despite the many uncertainties,
220-659 O—66——2 1
developments detailed later in the report indicate that American in- dustry may well be poised on the edge of what could, during the next 10 to 20 years, become a major, profitable advance into the marine environment.
Strategic marine interests of the United States have both military and nonmilitary aspects. Whereas the military aspect is both long standing and relatively familiar, the nonmilitary aspect is less well known and stems primarily from two developments of quite recent times: 2
1. The decreasing likelihood of a direct military confrontation be- tween the United States and a highly industrialized nation such as Russia over territorial disputes, due to the unacceptable risk of mutual nuclear annihilation.
2. The increasing worldwide importance of more food, especially for underdeveloped nations, and the apparent possibility of a major breakdown of the world food economy within perhaps 20 years.
The first development strongly suggests that where competition develops for the acquisition of ocean resources such as fish, minerals, or even the right of passage, such nonmilitary factors as prior presence cr continued use will in some contexts be decisive in determining the outcome.
The second development indicates a potential value that transcends mere monetary considerations of marine food resources for underde- veloped nations. Food from the sea offers at least temporary and local relief from exhausting efforts to feed increasing populations. The United States interest in these efforts is not only humanitarian, but is also national because of the worldwide political and social stability expected asa consequence. The strategic importance of food resources suggests a new focus for part of the national program.
These social, economic, and strategic marine interests interwoven and rapidly evolving in a context which includes similarly developing marine interests of other nations, seem to require establishment of a more comprehensive national program framework than is usually im- plied by the term, “oceanography,” or is contemplated by any single, existing agency’s missions. <A truly adequate national ocean program should have as its ultimate objective effective use of the sea by man for all the purposes to which we now put the terrestrial environment : commerce, industry, recreation, and settlement, as well as for knowl- edge and understanding. This objective implies four specific goals:
1. Acquiring the ability to predict and ultimately to control phe- nomena affecting the safety and economy of seagoing activities.
2. Undertaking measures required for fullest exploitation of re- sources represented by, in and under the sea.
2
3. Employing the sea to enhance national security.
4. Pursuing scientific investigations for describing and understand- ing marine phenomena, processes and resources.
Effective human use of the sea does not imply any inevitable abridg- ment or infringement of other nations’ rights or interests. In fact, the oceans are so huge and potential benefits so great that a cooperative, international effort to develop marine resources for the benefit of all humanity seems both logical and appealing. Institutional means for this development, however, are so rudimentary, and activities and interests of other nations are evolving so fast, that an urgent U.S. effort is required in the interim to preclude possible abridgment of our interests by others.
The implication is that “freedom of the seas” cannot be conceived as being static, especially since increasing intensity and sophistication of ocean exploitation require legal arrangements beyond the simple, traditional understanding of this concept. We do not wish to imply that more suitable versions of “freedom of the seas” must reflect nar- row conceptions of owr national interest. The problem is to adapt the principle of freedom to the general interest, rather than to any exclu- sive interest of our own. A realistic conception of freedom of the seas is likely to remain vital to protection of U.S. marine interests.
1.2. PANEL OBJECTIVES AND ORGANIZATION
The Panel adopted four main objectives:
1. To assess current and planned ocean programs for technical soundness, adequacy of scope, balance of content, adequacy of orga- nization, and funding and management in light of relevant national goals.
2. To identify major opportunities for new programs in technology and science that should be given high priority in the next 5 to 10 years.
3. To draft a statement of goals designed to serve the marine inter- ests of the United States and to define the Federal role in their pursuit.
4. To recommend measures to effect an ocean science and technology program consonant with national needs and interests.
Panel membership and a description of its activities are provided in appendix I. The Panel purposely reflects a diversity of backgrounds, experience and professional affiliations. The science of oceanography and related environmental sciences (meteorology and geophysics) are represented, as are biology, applied mathematics, physics, economics, and engineering. In terms of institutions, the university community, the nonprofit defense and environmental research community, and the profit-oriented industrial community are represented. It should be emphasized that Panel members participated as individuals and not as spokesmen for their fields or organizations.
The Panel’s work was aided by the availability of numerous ocean- ographic reports and studies, some of which are cited herein. Spon- sored primarily by the National Academy of Sciences and the Inter- agency Committee on Oceanography, these reports have greatly aided formulation of the Panel’s recommendations.
Considerations of marine biology appeared especially important in evaluating the national program. Because of this, a subpanel under the chairmanship of William D. McElroy was formed to examine problems and prospects in biological oceonography. This subpanel met as a group on 11 days (see app. I).
Meeting for formal sessions on 18 days, the PSAC Panel heard about 50 invited experts and agency representatives. Early meetings were devoted to gathering information about the scope, content, and nature of the wide range of activities being conducted in and on or associated with oceans. Opinions about future actions were sought, and con- sideration was given to limitations and constraints imposed by man- power, funds, prospects of economic returns, and laws or the lack thereof. In general, these meetings were held at places where ocean- ography or related scientific work was being conducted. Smaller groups under Panel members’ leadership also worked in such areas as the law of the sea and technological possibilities for seagoing or underwater engineering.
In addition to formal Panel activities, individual members visited facilities, discussing oceanography with interested members of the scientific and industrial communities. Indeed, it is not an exaggera- tion to state that many Panel members have devoted a substantial part of the past year to these activities. A more complete listing of Panel activities is given in appendix I.
There are limitations on this report. It is not a blueprint with detailed projects or activities whch would constitute a national ocean program for the years to come. Rather, it is an attempt to identify the current problems of national interest and to present a framework within which program details can be most effectively planned by those responsible for carrying them out. We have identified important op- portunities which such a program should recognize and attempt to exploit and have given an assessment of the priority which we feel should be attached to the national ocean program as a whole and to its expected major components.
2.0. Food From the Sea
2.1. INTRODUCTION
Adequate nutrition is prerequisite to all other human activities. For most of humanity, life is supported by a diet which is largely, if not exclusively, of vegetable origin. Only in the developed areas is a significant fraction of calories and of proteins and vitamins sup- plied by food stuffs of animal origin. Approximately 1.5 billion per- sons, largely in the tropical and subtropical zones, live on diets which are frequently dominated by one staple crop although occasionally mixtures of vegetables and cereals are available. But many vegetable diets fail to provide protein either of the quantity or the quality needed for adequate human nutrition. The quality of protein depends on its composition of amino acids. Vegetable proteins frequently are abso- lutely or relatively deficient in one or another of the ten amino acids essential for human nutrition. For example, corn is seriously defi- cient in tryptophan and is not adequate in lysine content.
Chronic protein deficiency, the consequence of inadequate amino acids in the diet, is a serious public health problem of man. Combined with infectious diseases whose effects it magnifies, this form of mal- nutrition is the leading cause of death in the period between weaning and 5 years of age in all countries in the equatorial zone. Protein deficiency accounts for as high as 50 percent of deaths at these ages. Protein deficiency also limits the lifespan and productive capacity of adults. If these peoples are to be assisted in their entry into the 20th century, if they are to be offered opportunity on the scale available to developed nations, it is imperative that their diets be improved, particularly with respect to protein.
Several techniques for nutritional improvement are apparent. One of these is to redistribute agricultural products to assure that, instead of a single staple, a mixture of vegetables and vegetable products with a balanced amino acid composition is consumed regularly. Experi- ments are in progress but to accomplish this redistribution on a large scale would be an enormous task.
The second technique is to provide a nutritional supplement of 10 to 20 grams of animal protein per day to a predominantly vegetable
5
diet. The specific animal protein is of little consequence. Beef, pork, chicken, rabbit, fish, mollusks, and crustaceans—any will serve. In fact, if man is to be adequately nourished, each source must be ex- ploited to the fullest. The relative inefficiency, however, of convert- ing agriculturally produced grains and grasses into animal protein, i.e., beef, pork, or chicken, makes it increasingly difficult to use these animal proteins to supply the needs of a hungry world with a rapidly increasing population.
The available projected growth of world population indicates that the nations of the world will be hard pressed to meet caloric needs from conventional agriculture, ignoring the problem of providing reasonable amounts of animal protein (table 2.1). For example, one estimate states that? “the new mouths in the underdeveloped world will need some 300 million tons of additional grain annually by 1980— an amount approaching the present total production of North America and Western Europe combined.” Obviously neither our present sur- plus farm capacity nor a markedly increased effort here and in other developed countries can meet the growing nutritional needs of the world’s population. Before long i major portion of the food supply must be produced in the very countries where it is needed. Unfor- tunately, experiences in underdeveloped nations indicate that it is difficult to upgrade local agriculture to levels of production achieved in the United States and in Western Europe. Improvement of living standards in developing nations which have gained political inde- pendence but have yet to achieve industrial development cannot be expected unless their people are adequately nourished.
TaBLE 2.1.—Projected World Population and Annual Protein Demands
1900 | 1920 | 1940 | 1950 1960 1980 2000
Population (billions)_-__-| 1.55 | 1.81 | 2.21 2.51 2.91 4,22 6. 27 Annual: Protein demand (billion pounds) :
AG oh ere | Naa een | eerie, ee en 20.0 23.6 33.9 50.3
TAU S CS eh Ne Re oe alae cp 30; 2 Ome 50. 9 75.6
Cereals aves eve a eee rans neo 90.3 | 105 153 227 Roy eee ter eer cee ees) es Manes = eee | yen ee 141 164 238 353
It. is for these reasons that the Panel considers it imperative that a third technique, full exploitation of the opportunities for obtaining food from the sea, be attempted as rapidly as possible. ‘These oppor- tunities are commensurate with the magnitude of the nutritional prob-
1 International Science and Technology, December 1965.
6
lem in the world. In 1964, the world fish catch contained 17.1 billion pounds of protein (based on wet weight of fish containing 15 percent protein), an amount which would have supplied slightly more than 10 grams of protein per day to 2 billion individuals, and would have been effective in eliminating or alleviating chronic protein deficiency for the people of the equatorial zones. That this opportunity for up- grading nutrition has not been adequately exploited, reflects cultural as well as economic barriers, failure of distribution, and inefficiencies of use.
2.2. PROTEIN PRODUCTION IN THE SEA
It is estimated that at least 400 billion tons of organic material, wet weight, are produced annually in the sea, only a tiny fraction of which is harvested by man. In the sea, as on land, food is produced by plants that utilize energy in sunlight to synthesize organic materials from inorganic substances. The “grass” of the sea, composed of mi- croscopic plants (phytoplankton) is eaten by the grazers (zoo- plankton) which in turn are consumed by larger animals such as fish. This isthe food chain of the sea (see sec. 6.4).
Agriculture to be highly productive requires continual replenish- ment of plant nutrients through artificial fertilization. In the ocean, nutrients are replenished by natural processes such as regeneration due to microbial activities and inflow of fresh waters which contain nu- trients from the land including agricultural fertilizers and sewage. With the death of animal and plantlife in the sea, the organisms sink - and are decomposed, releasing nutrients. These nutrients are concen- trated in bottom waters where, due to the absence of light, they cannot be used for photosynthesis. In areas of upwelling, the nutrient-rich bottom waters are brought to the surface where they sustain large populations of phytoplankton. Wherever this occurs, such as in the Humboldt current off the coast of Peru, phytoplankton flourish and a vigorous food chain is sustained, leading to the production of large quantities of fish.
2.3. THE WORLD FISH CATCH
The present world fish catch is about 114 billion pounds (table 2.2). The magnitude of the catch is dependent upon many factors, among which are the rate of production of fish in a given area and intensity of harvest. These factors vary for different species and for different areas of the ocean. The catch increased from 60.5 billion to 114 bil- lion pounds in the last 10 years. It is uncertain how large a crop can be harvested. The most dramatic instances of increased catches in recent years have resulted from finding new fishery stocks. Indeed, the most dramatic has been off the coast of Peru, where a catch of 20
c
vit GOT cOT 9 'F6 vg € 90 °€ 6G ces 68'S SI 9 cco 0779 L8 ‘6 €°8 L6°L LIL a! 8 FI LST 8 FT G06 o ST Seek joa P96l e961 o961 T96T
8961
‘8 [OA ‘SUONBN powUgQ sy} Jo UOMeZIUeZIO sINI[NIISy pue poo, ‘sa278170IG Asaysty fo yooquvax WOT eye z
“YS 1djVM YSOIJ PUB S9IVIGO}IBAUL SUIPN[OUL SoYdzeo [VIOIBUIUIOD [8404 ae BICC 1
LS6I
9961
cS6l
P61
sT96T TEE] WoLg pl1oM 2Y) Lof pun sarujunog burpwaT sof (spunog wuorig U2) 1 YDD YSiy PnUUuy—ZZ TTAV IL,
billion pounds of anchovy was taken in 1964 whereas 10 years pre- viously the catch had only been 2 percent of that amount. Even though relatively primitive techniques are used for harvesting an- chovy, the resource may have been overfished and the Peruvian gov- ernment has this year restricted the catch to 15 billion pounds as a step to assure a continuing and stable harvest.
The U.S. fish catch for the last 30 years has been about 6 billion pounds which does not include sport fishery catches. The sport fishery catch in coastal and marine waters was estimated at 590 million pounds in 1960.1
Additional resources are present in waters off the U.S. coasts. It is estimated that a standing crop of about 15 billion pounds of hake and anchovy is present in the California current off the coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington. Until recently, this resource has not been utilized because, for one reason, anchovy are food for sport fishes, and sportsmen are concerned that intensive fishing on anchovy might disrupt sport fishery populations. An agreement has now been worked out by the California Fish and Game Commission to allow some 150 million pounds to be harvested in 1966 for process- ing into fishmeal and oil. If properly managed, these hake and anchovy populations might yield an annual catch of 2 or 3 billion pounds.
Fishery resources in all parts of the world, especially in those areas near populations with protein deficiencies, have not been studied as thoroughly as those in the California Current. Therefore, it is difficult to predict the maximum harvest and the amount of food potential now present in the world’s oceans. Some estimates indicate that the world’s fish catch might be increased three or four times. More optimistic estimates predict a tenfold increase. One pertinent fact is that the fish catch in the last 20 years has increased at a faster rate than the world’s population.
2.4. UTILIZATION OF FISH FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION
Whereas certain fishes are brought to market directly for human consumption, a large fraction of the total fish catch is not utilized directly by man. This is particularly true of fishes of relatively moderate and small size—e.g., anchovy, menhaden, and hake—which are caught in great numbers by simple trawling and seining proce- dures. These “industrial fish” are processed for oil and fish meal. Fishmeal is used as a high protein source for poultry and livestock feeds. From the standpoint of human nutrition, this use is wasteful because some of the protein in fish is lost in its conversion to poultry and livestock protein.
* Sport fishing—today and tomorrow. Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission Report 7. 1962.
9
Nevertheless, the problems of storage and transportation, rapid spoilage, costs of processing small fish, and the cultural habits of many people, make it apparent that only a small fraction can be utilized directly as food by man. The major portion of the catch, such as the small sized fish which abound in the Humboldt Current or off the Cali- fornia coast, must be processed into a form which is readily stored and transported and acceptable as food by peoples of many cultures. The Bureau of Commercial Fisheries has developed a solvent extraction process for preparation of a marine protein concentrate from various species of hake. The resultant product, which is 85 percent protein, is highly nutritious and almost tasteless and odorless. It is estimated that this material can be produced commercially for about 25 cents per pound. A ton of hake when processed yields 320 pounds of con- centrate containing about 250 pounds of protein—an animal protein supplement of 10 grams per day for 30 people at a cost of $2 per person annually.
It is unclear how many other species of animals in the oceans might be utilized similarly. Intensive exploration and research on artificial cultivation of marine organisms might well lead to new sources of such protein concentrates.
There remains, however, the very serious problem of getting the peo- ple in some underdeveloped nations to accept marine protein concen- trates. The few attempts which are known to the Panel have not been successful. Since the problem of protein malnutrition is most acute in young children, it would appear that a great and important oppor- tunity of using marine protein concentrate is being overlooked. Fortifi- cation of processed foods for children of the “breakfast cereal” type, with marine protein concentrate, should be acceptable to young chil- dren and also invaluable in protecting their health.
2.9. AQUICULTURE
Although the opportunities to enrich and amplify man’s food sup- ply by fishing in the open sea are highly significant, they are, never- theless, limited. An entirely different set of opportunities is offered, however, by the potential crop that might be obtained by systematic and scientific farming of restricted areas of the sea—“aquiculture.” As noted above, the yield of fish in some areas of the sea depends largely on the nutrients supplied by upwelling. Attempts can now be undertaken, at least on a pilot scale, to utilize natural hydrodynamic or atmospheric energy sources to bring to the surface nutrient-rich deep water to fertilize selected marine habitats such as bays or coral la- goons. The problems involved are technological as well as biological and their solution requires a marriage of engineering and marine biology on a scale not attempted previously. In a general way, two large problems must be solved: (a@) means of using hydrodynamic or
10
atmospheric energy to drive the artificial upwelling which-is desired, and (6) control of the amount of nutrients delivered so desirable phyto- plankton are produced, and so that excess production of organic matter does not exceed the carrying capacity of the environment, specifically for oxygen, causing mass mortality of marine life (see sec. 6.4).
Some of the most appealing opportunities for aquiculture exist in our estuaries and coastal waters, regions which are most accessible and amenable to control and management. Unfortunately, in places these waters are being overfertilized from nutrients in sewage discharge. Regulation and control of such nutrients, to the same extent as that re- quired in any deliberate fertilization practice, could potentially trans- form what is now a public health hazard and a national disgrace into the opportunity for production of valuable marine products (see sec. 3.4).
In view of the obvious need for more protein to feed the world population, the Panel recommends that attempts be made to augment the food supply through marine aquiculture. This recommendation is made with the full realization that little of the necessary technologi- cal knowledge is currently available, but the dire need for increased protein production in the world, nevertheless, argues strongly that we should encourage the development of a strong research program that will be needed for effective aquiculture. At this time the U.S. effort in marine aquicultural research is essentially nonexistent except for limited studies on oysters, clams, and shrimp.
Current Attempts at Aquiculture. Japan is the current world leader in marine aquiculture. Its efforts have been directed to pro- duction of organisms with a high market value such as fish, shrimp, and shellfish, including oysters for pearl culture, and have not at- tempted to produce low-cost food. Japan’s success is indicated by the data in table 2.3. Limited experiments on farming the sea in Scottish lochs have indicated that fish production can be increased by fertilization, in some cases as much as 16 to 18 times. However, the scale of these experiments was relatively small. The yields of fish grown in unfertilized ponds in different areas of the earth are similar to cattle and swine production. If the waters are fertilized, the yields of fish are much greater (table 2.4) and are comparable with yields obtained from converting agricultural crops into domestic livestock.
Oysters, Clams, and Other Phytoplankton Feeders. Because en- ergy is lost at each step in the food chain (i.e., not all of the food eaten is transformed into new, living material), it is evident that animals which feed directly on phytoplankton are most promising as efficient protein producers. Oysters, clams, and other shellfish are such phyto- plankton feeders.
Oyster culture was started in Japan and in France 300 and 100 years ago, respectively. It involves finding suitable spawning and
it
TABLE 2.3.—Harvest and value of sea fisheries and aquiculture in Japan in 1963!
Sea fisheries Aquiculture
Harvest Value Harvest Value
Billion pounds?) Million dollars | Million pounds | Million dollars
LOSI 2 saree. soe eee eee Sedu es 193 |. eae NOS Dee hee Se ae LO C2 acer Sane 220 «||_45 See OSE cs eo et ee ee eee Oi eee Slt) 2a 1S ay SS yee gS ee hae ap ei OF One Seats ae 320) 32 eee 1 ASS) lle ace 2 eh ea hes ae a be Re 9 NOMS: lasses. ae 340". eee DS Gee ee eee arte eee hoy ete Oh aenae ee eee 397 | 26S DOD ee See eee ee era eee eet oe 529) ||. LOG Rien Se a 2 ee ee a Ie | eee se ee AT 2, |e a= GS Gare eens cere Sree ee ee te 12.3 739 497 64 TOGO! Siete ene eee ee ee 12.8 892 625 94 1) aa ah a ae spl pe 13.9 1, 000 687 126 OGD Bye Se Bel Pe ASS 14.4 1, 070 797 149 LOGS Re es = eens See ee = 13.6 1,190 857 180
1 Data from “Fisheries Statistics of Japan 1963,’’ Statistics and Survey Division, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. Government of Japan. 1965. 2 Average for years 1945-50 was 5.5 billion pounds. 3 Average for years 1945-50 was 90 million pounds.
seeding areas, collecting larvae on artificial surfaces and transplant- ing seed into bays, estuaries, and ponds that have rich algal growths which favor rapid growth to commercial size. Private concerns in many parts of the United States culture oysters, but to a great degree we still exploit and try to preserve the natural beds. The production of oysters on the U.S. west coast is based almost solely on seed im- ported from Japan.
Forty years ago the Japanese began growing oysters on long ropes hanging from floating rafts or on ropes sustained by buoys. The difference in production is astounding: the old method yielded an- nually no more than 600 pounds per acre, while the raft method yields as much as 16,000 to 32,000 pounds per acre. With the new method, oysters are grown throughout the water column, not only on the bottom; therefore, oysters free from bottom predators grow rap- idly even when the bottom is unsuitable for their development.
In Japan oysters are bred and selected for flavor and maximum yield. Progress was rapid after suitable methods were discovered for feeding oyster larvae artificially on cultured algae. A similar research program for growing clams is in progress at the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries Laboratory, Milford, Conn.
In the United States, the Public Health Service has identified areas, totaling more than 10 million acres, that are suitable for shellfish production. Only about 7 million acres were in production in 1964— the unused acres were inactive due to pollution and other causes. It
12
TaBLE 2.4.—Annual production, live weight of animals in pounds per acre }
Yield Animal (Average or range) Sea water, unfertilized: 2 Fishponds, Philippines -_--_-------- Milkfishs=. 23222242 400-980 ishponds, Franeé...._..2-...-... Grey mullet 2o...22- 300 Pishpowds, Java_....-....-...-=-+ Wolisits iia 2 en sa R Sth eases | E1050 af =| Sym eae a eg cae (ERA Cee eee ae ee 40 Richest coe eae ee ca ee em ee aoe ee ee 300 Fishponds, Indonesia_-_-_----------- Milkfisht2> 223222240 140 Prawnsees= ss 25a 46 Wild fishes ssa 23 North Sea, W9222 22222025222 See | T=) 0 eae On aR 21.3 World marine fishery 3_____________]____- (0 0 ree es oar cea 0. 45 PAV ATi ea G1 CS eee ee ee ee et [Ed ee CO eee Be) Pet 4.6 Middle Atlantic Continental Shelf 4_|_____ dol sete 2 ae 61.9 Humboldt Current, Peru ®_________ Anchovy=o2..20-22- 300 Chesapeake Bay 5 oyster bottom____| Oyster_____________ 600 Sea water, fertilized: 2 Fishponds, Formosa___________---_- IMO Stas a 1, 000 Brackish water, fertilized: Experimental fish farm, Palestine___| Carp_--_-_-_-----_- 755-7, 970 Commercial ponds, Palestine_-_---__|---_-- doe fees eee 356-4, 210 Land: Cultivated land__............--- SWIG sae. Sone 450 Grneniand 2 052.652 eee es Cattle sate = ee se 5-250
1 Data unless otherwise indicated from C. H. Mortimer and C. F. Hickling, ‘‘Fertilizers in Fishponds.”’ Fishery Pub. No. 5, 1957. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
2 Ponds constructed so that sea water can enter through gates. Gates can be closed to contain fish.
3C. L. Cutting. Economic aspects of utilization of fish. Biochemical Society Symposium No. 6. Bio- chemical Society. Cambridge, England.
4 Range of values for selected ocean areas listed by H. W. Graham and R. L. Edwards. 1961. Fish in nutrition.
5J. L. McHugh. In press. In Symposium on Estuaries. American Association for Advancement of Science.
6M. B. Schaefer. 1965. Transactions American Fisheries Society. Vol. 94, pp. 123-128.
is informative to make some calculations concerning potential oyster production in these areas. If 600 pounds were produced per acre, the yield in Japan and in Chesapeake Bay under natural conditions, then the total U.S. production would be 6 billion pounds annually or about equal to the present U.S. fish catch (table 2.2). If the pro- duction rate in these areas were increased 15 times, the yield would be 90 billion pounds a year or nearly equal the present world fish catch. A 15-fold increase does not seem unrealistic since the Japanese have increased yields as much as 50-fold. The yield of oysters is appar- ently limited by their food supply. If production of suitable kinds of phytoplankton could be increased by artificial fertilization (see
13
sec, 6.4), even greater yields might be realized or greater areas might become available for exploitation.
Shrimp and Crab. A successful method has been developed in Japan to culture large prawns. It requires indoor culturing of new- born larvae which are fed first on diatoms and then on tiny brine shrimp. Ina month the larvae are almost an inch long and are ready to be cultivated in artificial ponds formerly used for salt production. Adults are produced in 1 year by being fed ground shellfish and scrap fish. The present complex technique is commercially profitable in Japan because the Japanes gourmet is willing to pay $2 to $4 per pound for live shrimp. For similar size shrimp, the U.S. fisherman receives from 50 to 80 cents per pound for the tails alone. This is the first commercial trial in Japan, and cheaper cultivation techniques will undoubtedly be found.
The complete life cycles of several species of crabs are known in the United States, opening the way for artificial cultivation. Attempts are now underway to rear spiny lobsters in Japan.
Squid. Squid are a delicacy for the Japanese and Mediterranean peoples. In Japan five species of squid are cultured in the laboratory. Growth in culture is faster than in nature; commercial squid weighing a pound or more are obtained in 3 to 5 months. Probably, more rapid growth can be obtained by further refinement of techniques and by continuous feeding. It is interesting that squid can be reared and maintained alive for months in captivity, whereas captured adults die in a few weeks.
Phytoplankton Production. Since organic productivity rests on the energy-trapping ability of the plants in the sea, basic and applied research on the ecology of ocean pastures should be fostered. This research is needed if selected areas of the sea are to be farmed.
Mass culturing of marine phytoplankton is feasible because the main nutritional requirements are known. It should be possible to produce large quantities of phytoplankton in lagoons and artificial coastal lakes. Algae could also be grown in floating plastic tanks or in gigantic submerged plastic sausages. Basic requirements for growing algae are ponds or large containers and relatively small amounts of nutrients to. add to the water.
Phytoplankton production under controlled conditions is essential for development of marine aquiculture. Many economically important organisms feed on phytoplankton either throughout life (e.g., oysters and clams) or during early stages of development (newborn shrimp larvae eat phytoplankton and later become carnivorous). Algae are also needed for food for the shrimplike creatures which constitute the bulk of the zooplankton—the food of many economically important marine animals.
14
Research is needed to identify algal species having high food values and rapid growth rates. Preliminary research indicates that manip- ulation of growth conditions and nutrients can induce accumulation of particular components altering, for instance, the protein-fat ratio of algae. This metabolic flexibility, in addition to offering the pos- sibility of tailoring composition to suit predators’ nutrition, may provide new means of obtaining high yields of fats, sterols, antibiotics, and vitamins (see sec. 6.4).
2.6. SUMMARY
No one of the approaches outlined above will suffice. The total de- mand for animal protein by the world’s population cannot be met ade- quately for many years, probably not until the turn of the century when, it would be hoped, the world’s population will have been stabi- lized and agricultural and aquicultural technology will have had an opportunity to catch up. We cannot expect to close this gap unless we begin now.
Clearly, the United States ie behind other nations in the tech- nology of fishing and aquiculture. Future food problems of the world require that we develop these technologies and assist other nations to develop them. The Panel assigns very high priority to this task and further notes that to foster the needed technology, at least in the early stages, will require support by the Federal Government, both in its own laboratories and in extramural institutions.
15
3.0. Modification of the Ocean Enviroment
3.1. INTRODUCTION
Man can and does interfere with the oceans and atmosphere in a number of different ways, thus, in a sense environmental modification is already a reality. In oceans, man’s ability to produce deliberate, beneficial changes is still very limited. For example, he can attempt to alter the configuration of the coastline, although the results are not always predictable. Besides deliberate modification, there is the in- advertent modification in which we know man is participating to an increasing extent, but the consequences are too little known.
3.2. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
“The Nation behaves well if it treats the natural resources as assets which it must turn over to the next generation increased and not im- paired in value.”—President Theodore Roosevelt.
“Our conservation must not be just classic protection and develop- ment, but a creative conservation of restoration and innovation.”— President Lyndon B. Johnson, in his message on Natural Beauty.
Today, as nearly a century ago, the Federal Government recognizes the need to treat our natural resources as assets. As the complexity of society increases, it becomes more difficult to protect, preserve, and conserve these resources. Programs are needed for marine as well as terrestrial, atmospheric, and fresh water environments.
Continuing population growth combined with increased dependence on the sea for food and recreation means that modification of marine environments will not only continue, but will drastically increase. New technological developments such as atomic power reactors, sea level canals, weather modification and desalinization plants lead to new forms of modification. We are far from understanding most short- range and all long-range biological consequences of environmental modification.
These considerations suggest that we now need to preserve the quality of as much of the unmodified or useful marine environment as we can and to restore the quality of as much of the damaged en- vironment as possible. Delay will only increase the cost in money, time, manpower, resources, and missed opportunities.
16
3.3. SPECIFIC CONSIDERATIONS
Inadvertent modification occurs in many forms. The most widely spread and most pervasive ones are various kinds of pollution. Pol- lutants include garbage, sewage, agricultural and industrial wastes, pesticide and herbicide residues, and waste heat. Future pollutants may include radioactive waste from nuclear reactors and salt wastes from desalinization plants.
The marine environment is particularly susceptible to pollution be- cause most avenues of disposal terminate in the oceans. In the past, pollution of the oceans has been of little concern because the oceans have always been considered so large. However, most pollution occurs at the margins where human activities are centered and the concen- trated wastes remain for varying times in this region before dispersal into the vast open ocean. Moreover, the potential for pollution is in- creasing as more of man’s activity is concerned with the oceans. It was once thought that rivers could not be polluted seriously, but the truth is now obvious. It is also becoming evident that large bodies of water such as the Great Lakes can be drastically altered and reduced in value as natural assets. We have paid a great price to learn these lessons and should not make similar mistakes as we inhabit and exploit the oceans.
Fishing and other means of harvesting plant and animal popula- tions have produced dramatic changes in distribution and abundance of marine organisms. Classical cases in this category are found among the marine mammals: especially baleen whales in the Antarctic ; blue California gray whales; sea otters; fur seals, and southern and northern elephant seals. Habitat destruction by improper fishing techniques have affected our biological resources. An example of the latter is oysterbed destruction.
Introduction of organisms into areas has sometimes been extremely successful and valuable. Atlantic oyster culture in Nantucket and Martha’s Vinyard sounds off Cape Cod and importing Japanese seed oysters to the Pacific Northwest are examples. In other cases intro- ductions have been disastrous. Predatory Japanese snails introduced into the Black Sea in 1949 virtually eliminated mussel populations and apparently caused a sharp decline in flounder fisheries. Introductions have been planned or inadvertent. A great number of inadvertent introductions into the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans may result from opening the proposed sea-level canal across Central America. De- liberate modification of the coastline, such as channel dredging for marinas, shoreline modification for beach stabilization and filling in marsh areas for developmental purposes, Pose serious problems. These modifications are occurring in estuaries which are important natural resources for recreation and food production. These areas
IEP
220-659 O—66——3
are the nursery gounds for many marine organisms. How severely these and other environmental alterations affect the biota is unknown.
Finally, if weather modification becomes a reality, we can anticipate large-scale alteration of the marine environment in ways never pos- sible previously. Changes in rainfall patterns on the land, shifts in wind distribution and changes in air temperature may produce per- sistent changes in near-shore salinity distributions, in patterns of wind-driven currents ana in water temperature distribution. Subtle changes as far as man is concerned in the physical environment may greatly affect biological populations. Invasion of west Greenland waters by Atlantic codfish and probably the recent disappearance for commercial purposes of California sardines are examples of what may result from natural environmental fluctuations or a combination of natural and manmade effects.
3.4. WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE
Five courses of action should be undertaken by the Federal Government:
1. Establish a system of marine wilderness preserves as an extension to marine environments of the basic principle established in the Wilder- ness Act of 1964 (Public Law 88-577) that “it is the policy of the Con- gress to secure for the American people of present and future genera- tions the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness.” In the pres- ent context, specific reasons for such preserves include:
(a) Provision of ecological baselines against which to compare modified areas.
(6) Preservation of major types of unmodified habitats for research and education in marine sciences.
(ce) Provision of continuing opportunities for marine wilder- ness recreation.
2. Undertake large-scale efforts to maintain and restore the quality of marine environments. Goals of these efforts should include increas- ing food production and recreational opportunities and furthering research and education in marine sciences. A multiple-use concept should be evolved for marine environments analogous to that used for many Federal land areas (see Public Law 88-607, sec. 5B). It should be emphasized that this concept includes the recognition that for some areas, such as wilderness, only one use is possible.
3. Increase research on biological effects of present and anticipated marine-environment modifications. This research should take into account local, reversible, small-scale effects and large-scale, essentially irreversible, regional effects. Efforts should be made to predict bio- logical effects of proposed or planned modifications so the effects can be assessed and evaluated prior to modification.
18
4. Increase research on application of biological knowledge to rectify and alleviate undesirable consequences of environmental alteration. Solutions could lead to positive assets. For example, growing shell- fish and other organisms in marine waters fertilized by effluents from sewage treatment plants would improve water quality, and the orga- nisms could be used as animal-food supplements or as fertilizer for plant crops.
5. Insure that possible biological consequences are considered in planning environmental modification affecting marine environments, especially but not only for weather modification. Obviously, the long- term as well as the short-term effects of environmental alterations should be considered in this context.
3.5. SUMMARY
Man’s ability to modify and alter the marine environment necessi- tates (1) establishment of a system of marine wilderness preserves, (2) large-scale efforts to restore and maintain the quality of already damaged environments, (3) increased research into possible biological effects of environmental modification, and (4) advance consideration of biological effects of proposed programs that might cause environ- mental modifications.
19
4.0. Undersea Technology
Developments in undersea technology traditionally have resulted from: 1. Navy operational requirements. 2. Industrial attempts to create new business opportunities in and under the ocean. 3. Government-supported developmental efforts aimed at pro- viding a higher level of services to ocean-based users.?
This division reflects the apportioning of responsibilities into: 1. National security.
2. Commercial exploitation. 3. Government-provided service.
This division of responsibility has proven successful in the past, and it will be a good pattern for the future. Accordingly, our appraisal of technology assumes a continuing role of present participants (see sec. 10.2.)
The following survey and appraisal of future opportunities is lim- ited to undersea operations in the nonmilitary sector. The Navy’s problems and roles are discussed in section 5, while problems in food production from the sea are considered in section 2. For purposes of this discussion, we consider “technology” to be the proven, existing capability whether or not the hardware is commercially available.
Our review of the status of undersea technology, as well as this Panel’s overall recommendations, was greatly aided by results of a conference held September 20-23, 1965, involving Government and industry under the auspices of the Ocean Science and Technology Ad- visory Committee of the National Security Industrial Association. The conference was held at the request of the PSAC Panel on Oceanog- raphy and the Chairman of ICO. The conference report, together with a list of attendees, is given in appendix III.
+The intense and continuing government-industry interest in undersea tech- nology is indicated by a few representative references: ‘Proceedings, Govern- ment-Industry Oceanographic Instrumentation Symposium,” ICO, 1961; “Ocean Engineering,” 6 vols. R. D. Terry, editor, published by North American Aviation in response to request from Chairman of ICO, 1964; ‘Buoy Technology,” trans- eript of Marine Technology Society Symposium, 1964.
20
4.1. MATERIALS
A continuing need exists to provide vehicles with large working volumes at atmospheric pressures to protect instruments, equipment and personnel deep below the ocean.
In 1966 we are limited to usmg HY80 and maraging steels for the pressure containers. By 1970 high-strength titanium alloys will be commercially available, and in the 1975-80 period high-strength glass and cast ceramics will come into general use. Rapid progress is also being made in composite and fiber-reinforced materials.
The materials problem is difficult, and progress will be slow because of testing requirements; but solutions required for ocean applications are definitely on the way and should be available in time to accomplish missions which the Panel foresees.
4.2. INSTRUMENTS AND TOOLS
Navigational Problems. A need exists in the mineral industry to locate a point on the surface with an accuracy of :
1. 30 feet from a stationary ship within sight of land in order to exploit an entire lease or other mining claim without leaving a 150-foot (or more) border around the claim.
2. 150 feet from a stationary ship on the high seas in order to locate and return to a point accurately.
3. Ultimately 30 feet when underway for survey and research applications.
The best available commercial navigational equipment when utilized within sight of shore gives an accuracy of about 150 feet. It is pos- sible today, by using extreme care from a stationary ship, to better this, but it is expensive because it requires precision geodesy to locate reference points and perfectly tuned beacons coupled with good con- ditions. Several systems including optical radar are under develop- ment which have not had sufficient testing to be operational and for which commercial equipment will not be available in less than 3 to 5 years. Within 10 years surface navigational accuracy of better than 100 feet underway will be available.
4.3. POSITIONING PROBLEMS
Drilling and construction activities require the ability to locate a bottom point to a position of better than 10 feet when referred to a point on the surface in the same vicinity.
Depending upon the depth of water and currents beneath the ship, conventional plumb-bob techniques provide adequate accuracy for determining bottom positions on a relative basis. On occasion, how- ever, it is desirable, having located the specific spot on the bottom, to
21
return precisely to it. In the case of deep drilling, MOHOLE re- search and development indicate that we can reenter deep-line drill holes if we plan in advance to do so. The MOHOLE techniques are good for this purpose, but are too expensive for conventional needs such as oil wells.
Humble Oil Co., in the Gulf of Mexico, has demonstrated an accu- racy of precision in location by drilling to within a few feet of a 10- inch diameter pipe from a horizontal distance of 1 mile. This was necessary to cap a ruptured well by slant drilling and plugging with concrete. Although cost of surveying and guiding the drill was high, it was a remarkable feat of technology to do the job at all, even in shallow water.
4.4. IDENTIFICATION OF OBJECTS
In clear water under ideal conditions presently available optical im- age systems can give resolutions on the order of 1 inch at a range of 150 to 3,000 feet.
An important technological need is high-resolution imagemaking in turbid water. Some acoustical image systems in research today will not be available even as initial models for 2 or 3 years. The Panel esti- mates that within 10 years it will be possible to achieve resolution in turbid water using acoustical systems on the order of 10 feet in the range of 3,000 feet. While this is adequate to conduct surveillance under many conditions, it requires too close an approach for reconnais- sance and adequate identification of many important objects. Pres- ently there does not seem to be any good solution to the underwater visibility problem. What is needed is acquisition of 10-foot objects at 1 to 5 miles with a resolution of roughly 1 foot at a mile in muddy water. The development of adequate acoustical imaging systems will require the application of the most advanced optical imaging techniques.
4.5. TOOLS PROBLEM
As yet little has been done to make available the kinds of instruments and tools which would change the scope and nature of work performed by divers on the ocean floor. Examples of such devices are:
1. Nondestructive testing equipment to determine diagnostically the acceptability of components of bottom-mounted structures. A simple problem is reliability of a weld or porosity of a tube.
9. Tactile manipulators which give the diver (or ultimately the instrument-working platform) added strength and sensing abilities.
3. Semi-remote-control powered tools and support structures.
22
4.6. SERVICES
On land, Government traditionally provides many highly technical services for a wide variety of uses. We believe that these same serv- ices should be supplied to support ocean-going operations. The Panel has attempted to identify a most pressing technical need as seen by the users of these services.
Surveys. Good topographic and geologic surveys are needed. These surveys should first extend to the Continental Shelf of the Unit- ed States. Second priority is given to other continental shelves, third priority to the deep ocean off the United States, and fourth rank to other deep-ocean areas. A major problem is to reduce the time and cost of surveying without reducing precision of the final result.
Using the best systems available today, it takes a single mothership plus small boats and a full crew an entire summer to chart the Martha’s Vineyard-Nantucket Sound. It is uneconomical to consider doing the continental shelf of the world in this way. There are conceivably three ways of improving the technology of these surveys:
1. Development of a surface ship with much improved sensory equipment. This ship should be capable of taking differential data rapidly so that changes would be measured carefully, while data which vary slowly will be taken at a much slower rate. Both data taken and reduction should be automated so that final charts are produced in the original surveys. Present methods involving hand recording of many results indicate that this field is hampered by tradition.
2. Development of a submersible to carry out surveys. The submersible would do the entire job of maneuvering, sensing, data- taking, and reduction, thereby improving the accuracy of bottom topography and bypassing the surface-speed limitation which re- sults from noise-suppression requirements. A major difficulty in such a scheme is accurate positioning of the submersible.
3. Development of towed or surface-commanded, free sub- merged platform to travel within perhaps 50 feet of the ocean sur- face. The towed body could be manned. Today’s technology is adequate to build some sort of towed-body system, and the general opinion of industry is that by 1975 we can do bathymetry better, quicker, and more economically with submersibles than by follow- ing the present route.
In addition to the technological problems, topographic surveying 1s hampered by strict adherence to international conventions developed at a time when the technology was more primitive than it is today. Adequate surveying for the future will require a more realistic cou- pling of international convention with technolgy.
23
Forecasting. Ocean users inform us that we are not obtaining necessary weather data. The Michaelangelo incident provides one dramatic example of the need for short-term forecasts in the open oceans. The recent destruction of the British petroleum platform, with the resulting loss of 11 lives, has created new concern among un- dersea oil exploration companies. The basic problem in such sea op- erations is getting people off the rig when storms come. Large storms such as hurricanes take a long time to develop and are not as dangerous as more local storms having a shorter time scale. Present technology requires surface-mounted platforms, and users badly need data regard- ing predictions of wave height and local storms. Lacking these data, oil companies are presently designing platforms to operate from 50 to 150 feet below the surface of the sea, away from the weather.
The consensus of oil companies is that by 1975, if technology is available, most stationary installations will be on the bottom of the sea, not on the surface. Most drilling will probably be conducted from the surface, but 011 well operations and some temporary storage facilities will be on the bottom. Presently, we do not have the tech- nology needed for building installations on the ocean floor, but oil companies are determined to obtain it. They have estimated that about 10 years will be required to develop the technology and operat- ing experience.
4.7. STANDARDS
Very few data and still fewer primitive, engineering standards now exist for underwater operations. If there is to be any substantial construction activity on the ocean floor as has been suggested, the fol- lowing types of data and information must be provided:
1. An engineering characteristic for a variety of important bottom conditions to include standardized tests and their inter- pretation.
2. Environmental data on the water column (this is essentially the “weather in the sea” problem) and the relationship of water- column dynamics to bottom conditions.
3. Engineering standards for designing bottom-mounted struc- tures in light of “‘sea-weather” data.
The Panel believes that in developing engineering standards for design and use in undersea installations, it is desirable to utilize com- petent, existing standard-making organizations. The Navy, the American Bureau of Shipping, and the American Standards Asso- ciation Center should be the core of undersea standard-making activi- ties. Specifically, the Panel does not recommend forming a new organization for the promulgation of engineering standards in the ocean environment.
24
One particular standard problem deserves mention. The Navy is presently the only organization equipped to certify submersibles. To date the Navy has certified only one such vehicle. Since the national requirement for developing deep-submergence capability in the next decade is clearly a Navy role, the Panel recommends that the Navy be the only agent to certifiy submersibles until undersea standardmaking organizations can develop the required competence and willingness to assume this responsibility.
The needs of industry for understanding bottom conditions and for describing weather within the sea in large measure parallel oppor- tunities for scientific research discussed in sections 6.2 and 6.3.
4.8. SURF ZONE AND BEACH ENGINEERING PROBLEMS
The Nation needs to improve the technology for constructing coastal zone structures, which will make the national expenditure on break- waters, harbors, beach erosion, docks, etc., more effective. The Panel was distressed to find a high failure rate of construction projects in the surf zone and on beaches, the destruction of beaches by break- waters designed to extend the beaches, the silting of harbors and marinas as a result of construction designed to provide shelter, and the enhancement of wave action by the building of jetties supposed to lessen wave erosion are but a few examples of the inadequacy of our knowledge and practice in coastal construction. The Panel did not have sufficient time to draw major conclusions about these efforts but does offer the following observations:
1. The small budget of CERC (Coastal Engineering Research Center) cannot possibly underwrite the research and development program which is required to devise engineering techniques neces- sary for solving the difficult construction problems presented by the surf zone and beaches.
2. Engineering schools have been remiss in not participating in this problem through research projects proposed for governmental support.
3. The opportunity exists in many fine graduate departments in civil engineering and mechanical engineering to develop courses or specialty options which would lead to significantly higher levels of understanding and performance in near-shore construction projects, most of which are performed using public funds.
The university community should undertake responsibility for see- ing that the best modern, engineering practice is being applied to publicly funded and executed surf zones and _ beach-construction projects.
25
4.9. BUOYS
Several scientific problems discussed in section 6.3 require deep- ocean buoys. In addition enhancement of weather-prediction capa- bility will be in part based on observations from buoys. Thus, it is fortunate that buoy technology is developing rapidly. Buoys have been tethered and maintained in the deep sea for as long as 18 months. Buoy data can be tape recorded and telemetered on command from buoys to ship, to shore, and to satellite installations. The Panel be- lieves it should be technically possible by 1975 to mount a World Weather Watch using buoys as sensing stations. This will not be pos- sible, however, unless we soon begin to gather statistical experience with buoys. Too much effort has been expended, in the Panel’s opin- ion, on obtaining an advanced buoy technology in a single step rather than in a broader program. There are also too many proposals for federally sponsored, buoy-experimental programs. What is required is a well-planned, evolutionary buoy-development program aimed at an operational World Weather Watch beginning in the 1975-80 time period.”
4.10. NEW LIGHTWEIGHT, COMPACT POWERPLANT
At present American undersea vehicles possess only an “elevator” capability. Purists may object to this statement, but the recent Spanish coast search operations force this conclusion. A small sys- tem of limited mobility would require a powerplant producing 10-100 kw. It seems reasonable that such a power system based on a fuel cell could be developed and be operational by 1975 if it were given sufficient priority by the Navy. For larger vehicles cruising at modest speeds (greater than 10 knots) for long times (weeks), however, it will be necessary to have reactor power sources in the 1-10 mw range. It is generally agreed that the present water reactor cannot be reduced in weight below 85 pounds per kilowatt where less than 50 pounds per kilowatt is required for the mission. No reactor technology which can meet this need is currently available, and in the Panel’s view no private group is likely to undertake such a development during the 1965-80 time period.
The Panel does not believe that serious consideration should be given to concepts such as deep-ocean airplanes in the next decade. It will stretch our technology to the limit to build a versatile mobile platform from which two or three men can perform useful work in deep oceans.
>See app. II for a developmental program designed to use increasing buoy- system capacity to solve several scientific problems.
26
4.11. MAN IN THE SEA
Marine construction and maintenance operations in 1966 require free divers. The opinion of oil company staffs is that free divers will continue to be used where they can be put down and provided with tools to do useful work. Since oil and mining companies expect by 1975 that some operations will be conducted at depths byeond 1,500 feet, there will be a transition from divers to unmanned vehicles or manned instrumental platforms.
Oil industry needs clearly show many potential uses for man in the sea. Other users have requirements that demand a capability for men to live and work beneath the surface for extended periods. This capability may lead to new opportunities in the production of food either by fishing or aquiculture. Further, the interest of national security may make it necessary or strategically desirable to occupy areas of the oceans for extended periods.
Major groups of problems are associated with man living and work- ing beneath the surface of the sea:
1. Problems directly related to survival, including biomedical problems and hazards from marine organisms.
2. Problems associated with design and operation of facilities for working while underwater. Certain of these problems have been considered earlier in this report.
Biomedical problems of survival are divisible into several categories. Most immediate are those produced directly by the wet, cold, dark, high-pressure climate. These include but are not restricted to an increased resistance to breathing during exertion and at rest; central nervous system narcosis by nitrogen and probably any other inert gas; long, slow decompression necessary for safe elimination of ex- cessive inert gas from the tissues; toxicity of oxygen at high pressure; loss of body heat during prolonged submergence; and complex inter- actions of these factors. As the duration of man’s underwater stay increases, additional problems appear. These include man’s nutri- tional requirements under these rigorous conditions, composition and palatability of foods, psychological behavior of isolation and crowd- ing in small spaces, and impairment of speech by unusual atmospheres. Medical procedures, including action of drugs on man in the sea, also require study. The similarity of certain of these problems to manned spaceflight is obvious, and advantage should be taken of this fact.
The presence of other sea organisms constitutes yet another group of complications. In many marine environments a variety of orga- nisms are toxic if touched or eaten. Also, predatory forms such as sharks consider divers fair game.
Human survival underwater thus requires solution of a multiplicity of problems. Current knowledge in most of these areas is at best
27
fragmentary; in some—especially long-term habitation problems—it is essentially nonexistent. Current research activity, directly appli- cable to oceangoing operations, is minimal in most of these areas.
Men working underwater require a wide range of support facilities. These include various underwater vehicles, underwater chambers in which to live and shore facilities for studying the effects of high pres- sure. Shore facilities should perhaps include high-pressure chambers for studies on man and animals, with capabilities to stmulate depths of at least 1,000 feet.
Facilities are needed to meet the problem outlined above. In no university or private institution in the United States is there an ex- tensive investigative program on the effects of very high pressures on man. The Navy is carrying out studies of man’s long-term ex- posure to depths, but investigations are not primarily concerned with basic physiological effects at high pressure. Research of this type requires teams of trained specialists in medicine and biology and might best be conducted by a university medical center (see sec. 10.7).
The Panel does not foresee the need for a diver-operating capability in depths beyond 1,000 feet before 1975. At greater depths the diver will be replaced with highly instrumented platforms capable of ma- neuvering sensing devices, communicating with the surface and per- forming useful work. The technology being developed for space application may contribute substantially to unmanned operations at depth. Very likely these platforms will be manned and will require containers at atmospheric pressure.
4.12. MARINE MINING
The possibility of mining the sea floor has caught the popular imagination because of numerous articles and speeches about the po- tential riches of the sea. Mineral resources certainly exist under the oceans, but their economic potential varies enormously, depending on depth, location, and geological setting. Accordingly, we distinguish three general classes of minerals: Surface deposits on the shallow con- tinental shelves; bulk deposits within the rocks under the shelves; and deposits on and in thin sediment layers of the deep sea floor (see also app. III.4).
The surface ore deposits of the Continental Shelf are mainly of two types, placer ores concentrated in submerged river channels and beaches and blanketing layers of nodules such as phosphorite, precipi- tated from sea water. ‘These types of ores have been mined in various places around the world. Examples are: diamonds off Africa; tin off southeastern Asia; iron ores off Japan; and gold in many places. An attempt to mine phosphorite off California was apparently frus- trated by a concentration of unexploded naval shells. Various coun-
28
tries have encouraged development of these ores by surveying their continental shelves. The Union of South Africa, New Zealand, and Australia, among others, have conducted or supported mineral sur- veys of the shelf. The United States is in the initial stages of such surveying, and we recommend that this program be accelerated. This is in line with our general recommendation that the Federal Govern- ment provide the same service in support of industry on the conti- nental shelves as it does on land (see sec. 10.2). Development of new capabilities in undersea technology recommended in this report should greatly enhance the economic potential of mineral deposits discovered by Government surveys.
Geologically, rocks under the Continental Shelf differ in no sig- nificant manner from those of the adjacent continent. Hence, they probably contain the same mineral deposits. This has been confirmed by widespread exploitation of oil and gas. Ina few places, moreover, mines have been extended from land under the sea. However, the economic potential of solid-mineral deposits within the submerged rock of the shelf appears minimal. The Geological Survey is deter- mining the general structure of this submerged continental margin, and we recommend that this work be accelerated in order to bring it to the same level as geological mapping on land.
The deep-sea floor (under 2 or 3 miles of water) is paved in many places with nodules containing manganese, iron, cobalt, copper, and nickel in concentrations which approach the mineable levels on land. The potential resource is enormous, but the economic or mineable potential is certainly much less. The distribution, nature, and origin of the nodules are the subject of research presently supported by the Federal Government. In addition several mining companies have conducted special surveys of apparently promising deposits of nodules discovered in the course of oceanographic research. We consider this to be an appropriate division of Government and private effort and see no requirement for accelerated research on potential mineral re- sources of the deep-sea floor.
5.0. Ocean Science and Technology and National Security
5.1. INTRODUCTION
The most urgent aspect of Federal involvement in ocean science and technology for the next 5 to 10 years relates to national security in the narrow, strictly military sense. The U.S. Navy, which has responsibility for essentially all our defense efforts involving the ocean environment, will have increasing need for specialized oceanographic data for specific devices being developed or improved and will con- tinue to require better understanding of characteristics of the ocean environment in which it operates.
In particular the Navy will need to improve the capabilities of its undersea strategic forces and ASW forces, as well as to increase its ability to perform undersea search and recovery. Improvement of the Navy’s capabilities in these areas depends heavily on our national ability to discover and exploit new knowledge in ocean science and on our success in developing new and relevant ocean technology. A1- though everyone is aware in a general sense that ocean knowledge has military implications, the underlying reasons may not be widely understood. The military importance of oceanography entails an understanding of the nature of our national security programs, which themselves are not always completely comprehended.
Whereas the Navy’s involvement in oceanography because of se- curity and its often specialized interest will of necessity be distinct from that of other Government and private programs, the Navy must maintain working relations with all elements of the scientific and technological communities concerned. This relationship has been excellent in the past, correctly reflecting the Navy’s deep interest in oceanographic research, and it should be strengthened in the future.
5.2. VITAL NAVY MISSIONS HEAVILY DEPENDENT ON OCEAN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Antisubmarine Warfare. The submarine threat to the United States has been and is expected to remain a very serious consideration in defense planning. The Soviet Union now has a massive submarine
30
force consisting both of nuclear and nonnuclear vessels. This force is being modernized and increased in size on an intense scale. Like- wise, mainland China has already built several submarines, and even small powers such as North Korea and Egypt have conventionally powered submarine forces.
The massive Soviet submarine force threatens our naval forces and merchant shipping and its nuclear tipped missiles are capable of strik- ing the continental United States. A more modest Chinese submarine force may develop in the next few years. To counter the threat from the U.S.S.R. the U.S. Navy is now spending and will undoubtedly continue to spend several billion dollars annually in operating and de- veloping its antisubmarine forces. The effectiveness of these forces is limited in part by the incomplete understanding we have of environ- mental conditions in which antisubmarine sensors and weapon systems are employed. Considering the cost of operating our antisubmarine forces, an increase of a few percent in the effectiveness of these forces is worth several tens of millions of dollars a year.
Sensors used for detection, classification, localization, and tracking of submarines include active and passive sonar, Magnetic Anomaly Detection (MAD) and radar working in a very complex ocean environ- ment. Their effectiveness depends heavily on environmental condi- tions in which they operate. We hardly have sufficient information on these conditions to do estimations and predictions sufficient for Navy needs.
Sonar provides a good example of the problems the environment imposes on our ASW forces. Sonar, both active and passive, is now and will probably remain the most important sensor for antisubmarine warfare. It can be designed to utilize several modes of underwater sound propagation. The effectiveness of these modes for any given piece of equipment and in any given situation depends critically on such detailed characteristics of the immediate ocean environment as the speed of sound (index of refraction), variation with depth, and absorption and characteristics of the ocean bottom and surface. These characteristics vary with locations and with time at any given posi- tion. Therefore, detection and classification ranges of a particular sonar system may vary tremendously from one time to another and from one location to another. These peculiarities must be understood and exploited to a great degree if we are to make our ASW forces as effective as possible.
The importance to ASW of a continuing, effective program to study and characterize the ocean environment in which its equipment is designed to operate cannot be overstated.
Strategic Forces. Development of long-range ballistic missiles in the last decade caused a revolution in the method of waging strategic warfare. Starting in late 1953 the United States engaged in an ur-
31
gent program to build up its ballistic-missile forces. The U.S.S.R. embarked on the same kind of program even earlier. Missiles were originally contemplated as fixed devices on land.
At roughly the same time, however, the Navy undertook a program to develop a nuclear submarine and mounted a highly concerted and highly inventive weapon systems’ development program to adapt ballistic missiles to it. The system, named Polaris, consists in essence of a small, solid rocket-ballistic missile launchable from a submerged nuclear submarine. Polaris, with a high degree of invulnerability, has become a fundamental building block for strategic forces. In- deed, a thought often expressed at the time was that ultimate nuclear stability would have both the U.S.S.R. and the United States equipped only with invulnerable Polaris forces and that neither side would have a ballistic-missile defense for population centers. In that way the out- come of a nuclear exchange would be clear and unmistakeable, and the possibility of a first nuclear strike even in critical times would be minimized.
The effectiveness of the submarine-based missile force is highly contingent on concealment, dispersion, high mobility, and very long patrol time. It is precisely for this reason that key interests of ocean- ography and the Navy, reflected in the development of the submarine- based strategic-missile force, have so much in common. With this relationship in mind the Navy instituted a special program of long- range research support for academic oceanography and intensified field studies by its own laboratories and ships. Even so, oceanographic research needs continuous and vigorous support from the Navy.
This research must cover on a massive scale the entire technological spectrum from basic and applied research to marine engineering. For example we must be able to verify that no presently unknown (to us) physical effects in the ocean environment make nuclear submarines susceptible to continuous tracking and location. Because of the pos- sible increased emphasis in our strategic-defense capabilities in terms of the Navy’s submarine-based missiles, and because this emphasis would only be well placed in the absence of any degradation of the submarines or of the enhancement of detection capability, the Navy must support a program which continuously explores all aspects of the ocean environment which conceivably could be exploited or utilized to allow continuous targeting of such submarines. If Polaris sub- marines could be continuously targeted, they would be open to premp- tive attack by ballistic missiles with relatively large warheads.
As enemy missile accuracy improves and as enemy missile payloads become more sophisticated, concealment and mobility become relatively more important. As we become increasingly concerned with pene- trating enemy ballistic-missile defense, larger and more sophisticated payloads for our own strategic forces become increasingly important.
32
Development of the Poseidon Undersea Launching System will provide a significant improvement in our strategic capability in this regard. However, we can look forward to the need for even greater strategic capabilities in the future. Moreover, a submarine-based missile force has some less-than-ideal characteristics. It is relatively expensive to operate compared to land-missile forces; and it is presently limited in warhead size. Consequently, the ocean-based missile force could conceivably take some totally new direction of development in the fu- ture which would hopefully combine many of the better characteristics of the land-based force: Less expensive, larger payloads; better com- mand and control, with some of the characteristics of the submarine force; i.e, invulnerability. This does not imply that we will not also have an interest in developing missile-carrying submarines capable of operating at much greater depths than currently. Perhaps the ocean bottom would help conceal their presence and thereby make them even less susceptible to enemy counteraction.
Such developments may, for example, take the form of missiles of Polaris’ size or even considerably larger placed on relatively shallow underwater barge systems on the Continental Shelf in a way which conceals their location and requires the system to move infrequently so that the potential of its being tracked by motion-generated noise is minimized. In addition one might consider a slightly mobile ocean- bottom system which creeps along. Systems of this kind, if they are ever to be realized, will require different kinds of marine engineering research from that which produced the current submarine-based force. Such systems can involve much larger missiles, might require under- water maintenance by personnel also located underwater, might entail development of new kinds of implacement gear for positioning missiles, might necessitate new kinds of detection and survival equipment to prevent attacks on the implacements, and so on.
In summary it is very possible that the kind of strategic offensive force we may wish to develop for the future will rely even more heavily on ocean-based systems than that which we now have. Such systems may very well require operations at a much wider range of ocean environment and for much longer times than at present. Thus, the need for oceanographic research and support of these weapon systems becomes even greater and will certainly have to encompass a wider problem area in development and maintenance of present sub- marine forces. These problems will range from ascertaining that the ocean-based systems cannot easily be compromised by an enemy’s ex- ploitation of some hiterto hidden effects of the ocean’s environment to development of massive ocean engineering capabilities. It is likely that the Navy’s involvement in oceanographic research to develop, support, and maintain our weapon systems will increase rather than
220-659 O—66——-4 33
decrease in the future and will include a more widespread range of problems than it currently does.
Search and Recovery Exploration. Loss of the Thresher in 1963 and the recent search for the lost nuclear weapon in the Mediter- ranean off the Spanish coast cannot be regarded as insignificant, iso- lated incidents in long-term plans for national security. A continu- ing requirement will be seeking, identifying, and retrieving objects related to national defense from the ocean floor. These objects can be grouped roughly as follows:
1. Disabled submersibles with survivors.
2. Weapon system components, instruments, or data packages.
3. Hardware, recovery of which is based on economic consid- erations or diagnostic needs.
4. Debris, recovery of which is required for diagnostic pur- poses.
When life is at stake, it is essential to move quickly and to mo- bilize men and equipment at the site of the incident. In view of the sensitive nature of many of these tasks, the military research-recovery mission must be assigned to the Navy.
In order to carry out these missions the Navy should create a spe- cially trained task force to cope with deep sea recovery. It must be continually on call and highly mobile so that the requisite force to initiate search operations can be assembled almost anywhere in the world within 24 hours. Technology required by this task force exists only in part and will have to be developed by the Navy in the next several years. In time the civilian sector will need some of this tech- nology and eventually perhaps will conduct search and retrieval activities. Notwithstanding, the Panel recommends that all ocean search-and-recovery missions related in any way to national security be the responsibility of the Navy.
5.3. THE NAVY’S OCEANOGRAPHIC PROGRAM
The Navy’s oceanographic program excluding the one-time ship- construction appropriation of a nuclear-powered deep-ocean engineer- ing vehicle has expanded from $120 million in fiscal year 1965 to $141 million in fiscal year 1966 and to $205 million for fiscal year 1967. Although the program has been subdivided in many different ways, it can for the purposes of this report be divided into:
(a) Basic research and education;
(6) Research and development for undersea weapons and sen- sors;
(c) Mapping and charting:
(d) Undersea technology;
(e) Rescue, search, and recovery of undersea objects;
(f) Test and evaluation facilities ;
(g) Oceanographic data and information services.
Basic research and education are so vital to both the Navy and the national interest in the marine environment that they will be discussed singly in the next subsection. Research and development for under- sea weapons and sensors are the Navy’s purview, and any discussion must take into consideration the Navy’s requirements, which is beyond the scope of this Panel’s assignment. The Panel does recommend:
1. Unclassified R & D information be made available in timely fashion.
2. Classified R & D information in the area of sensor develop- ment be made more available to Federal and industrial com- munities having application for the data than has been the case.
The judgment of the Panel is that current Navy classification poli- cies often weigh short range and narrow security considerations too heavily as compared to the longer range security which must be gained by more rapid and effective development of the scientific and techno- logical base from which its systems are derived. Our recommenda- tion therefore is that the Navy review its classification policies with a view to furthering more rapid progress by increasing the diffusion of deep sea technology. While information that will compromise military systems must be classified, advantages of wide diffusion and input diversity from scientific and industrial communities generally outweigh any risk involved.
Mapping and charting, sometimes referred to as hydrographic sur- veys, are responsibilities of the Defense Intelligence Agency. Ocean mapping and charting by the Navy are executed as part of the total national oceanographic program. Military requirements dictate a greater degree of accuracy in charting the ocean bottom than is re- quired by other Federal agencies. Therefore, no quantitative recom- mendations can be made with respect to the Navy’s survey program requirements. However, criticism applicable to the survey program of ESSA is equally valid with respect to the Navy’s Hydrographic Survey Program (see sec. 4-6). The Panel concurs on the recent action to establish an R & D program in Navy mapping and charting and recommends:
1. A minimum expenditure of $2 million per year in light of significant Navy expenditures in mapping and charting.
2. Continuation of commercial ship leasing for added survey requirements.
Undersea technology is that general area of ocean engineering not associated directly with specific defense systems. The ability to con- struct towers on the ocean floor, general undersea navigational con- cepts, and deep undersea materials technology form part of the Navy’s
30
undersea technology program. The Sea Bed (vol. 4) report recom- mended a substantial Navy program of several hundred million dol- lars’ expenditure over the next several years in this area. The Panel recommends a significant increase over the present $2 million a year in Navy expenditures.
Shortly after the loss of the Thresher the Navy convened a board to evaluate and ascertain the Navy’s ocean capabilities specifically with regard tosubmarinerescue. After a year-long study this group (Deep Submergence Systems Review Group) recommended establishment of a 5-year program having four basic areas, costing about $332 million. These four categories were specified for the Navy’s concentrated effort:
1. Submarine location, escape and rescue;
2. Deep-ocean, small-object location and recovery ;
3. Increased salvage capability ;
4, Extended capabilities of man as a free swimmer to perform useful work in the ocean environment to his physiological limits.
As a result of these recommendations the Navy formed a special group called the Deep Submergence Systems Project which was to implement these capabilities and enable the Navy to have worldwide operational capabilities by 1969. This group, initially placed within the Navy’s special project office, was recently made a separate CNM- designated project in order to focus the Navy’s effort on exploration of oceanic depth. An additional task for this new group was man- agement of the nuclear powered oceanographic vehicle (NR-1). The accomplishment of the four specific tasks initially given this group has been delayed in part because of funding problems. This year’s budgeting for the prototype rescue vessel is approximately $314 mil- lion short of the amount required; this difference is attributable to the low estimated cost at the onset of the program. This vehicle, now stripped of all significant search-and-recovery capability, will give us limited capability by the end of 1968 to rescue men from disabled sub- marines at their collapse depth. A full complement of six vehicles in 1970 will provide worldwide rescue capability. There exists today no demonstrated, operational capability to rescue personnel from sub- marines beyond a depth of 600 feet; this leaves a depth gap with no capability to rescue and no capability to rescue from under ice.
Search-and-recovery capability regarding small objects has suf- fered the most severe cutback. Initial recommendations to the Navy provided a capability to locate and recover small objects over 98 per- cent of the ocean floor (20,000 feet) by 1970. A worldwide operational capability in this field will require highly sophisticated, deep-diving search-and-recovery vehicles, supporting research and development and instrumentation. The experience off Spain in the recovery of the nuclear weapon illustrate the problems in the fields of acoustic detec- tion and imaging, underwater navigation and marking devices and
36
endurance and maneuvering capabilities in the vehicles (see secs. 4.1, 4.2,4.3,4.4). It was fully 3 weeks after the loss of the nuclear weapon before any deep-ocean equipment was on the scene and an adequate surface-navigation network established. This portion of the Navy’s program is now limited to one R & D prototype search-test vehicle with limited depth capability. In the area of large-object salvage the initial goal, salvaging an attacked submarine from its collapse depth, has been restricted by lack of funds to a 1970 operational capability of 600 feet, the depth of the continental shelves. Backup studies will enable implementation of desired capabilities, should adequate fund- ing be made available.
In the area of extending man’s capabilities as a free swimmer at de- sired depths, the Navy is performing only the minimum necessary, specific physiological research and development through controlled experiments in shore-based pressure facilities (see sec. 4.11). This work is supported by a series of experiments (Sea Lab 1 and 2 being completed and Sea Lab 3 scheduled for February 1967). These experi- ments are expected to continue until there is a demonstrated capability as deep as 1,000 feet.
In summary the four specific areas of effort recommended by the Deep Submergence Systems Review Group to the Secretary of the Navy regarding implementation and operational capabilities continue to be hampered by funding limitations. A worldwide rescue capability will be available in 1970. There is no planned capability for locating and recovering small objects from ocean depths beyond 6,000 feet (the mean depth of the ocean is 12,000 feet). The effort to extend free- swimmer capability into depths is proceeding on schedule but lacks adequate physiological and biomedical research (see sec. 4.11). The Navy’s salvage capabilities for intact submarines will be limited to the Continental Shelf.
3.4. THE NAVY’S ROLE IN EDUCATION AND RESEARCH
Although the Navy’s role in ocean science is separable and clearly mission-oriented, the Panel feels very strongly that it should continue to be closely linked with academic education and research. In the past this connection has been mutually profitable. Academic oceanography would hardly exist if the Navy, chiefly through the Office of Naval Research, had not provided leadership and imaginative support during the past 20 years. This is a debt universally and freely acknowledged by research oceanographers. On the Navy’s side support of broad re- search has provided substantial information about oceans necessary to carry out its present mission. In addition many research tools devel- oped for basic oceanography have served as prototypes for operation- ally useful equipment. Examples include explosive echo-ranging, the bathythermograph, deep-sea-moored buoys, deep submersibles, under-
37
water photography, bottom profiling by precision depth-sounders and discovery of deep-scattering layers. Variable-depth sonar and short- pulse target identification were byproducts of oceanographic research.
Moreover, oceanographers are highly responsive to Navy problems having little connection with research. Many instances can be cited of the Navy and the scientific community working hand in hand. Most recent of these is, of course, the concerted, successful effort to locate and recover the unarmed nuclear weapon off the Spanish coast. Response of the oceanographic community was instantaneous, and this group played a leading role in the weapon’s recovery. In this instance, as in the tragic loss of Thresher, oceanographic institutions and civilian scientists put aside personal plans and volunteered to assist the Navy in its recovery mission. This civilian-Navy teamwork has proved highly successful and harmonious. Conversely, Navy personnel by virtue of their support of oceanographic laboratories are sufficiently aware of laboratory capabilities to facilitate immediate, effective action when an emergency arises.
Navy support of marine geophysical work in this country during the past decade has led to development of techniques for obtaining long- range sound transmission in oceans and acquisition of knowledge re- garding parameters that affect it. When the Navy encounters diffi- culties with its sonar operations, competent people are available to rectify them. Similar instances in other fields of oceangraphy illus- trate the interaction between civilian scientists and the Navy. Fur- ther, as the Navy’s detection and weapon systems become more so- phisticated this interaction can be expected to increase.
Finally, and vitally important, the Navy has been a major consumer of the output of academic oceanography in both manpower and science. Without increased numbers of scientists and engineers knowledgeable about oceans the Navy cannot carry out many of the programs re- viewed above. Likewise, without the generalizations produced by aca- demic research the Navy cannot efficiently utilize information collected to support these programs.
For these reasons the Panel strongly recommends that the Navy continue its support of academic research and education related to oceans. As was pointed out previously, the Navy’s budget for ocean- ography has almost doubled in the fiscal years 1965-67 period. The Navy’s contribution to academic oceanography in the area of basic research during the period has remained constant. Under these cir- cumstances the Navy may not be able to effectively utilize ocean- ography in the future. It is important that the Navy maintain a proportionality between its support of academic research and educa- tion and its total oceanographic program. This would imply a marked increase in support of academic oceanography if the proportionality prior to 1965 is to be maintained as the whole Navy program expands.
38
We suggest, in addition that the ONR might profitably reexamine the particular importance of ocean science and technology to the Navy’s basic mission.
3.0. INTERACTION OF NAVY PROGRAMS WITH CIVILIAN TECHNOLOGY
The Panel’s projections concerning directions and rate of techno- logical development discussed in section 4, upon which so much of the Nation’s ocean program depends, assume that the Navy will success- fully pursue its current projects on Deep Submergence Systems and Man in the Sea. In the event the Navy fails to accomplish its ob- jectives in these areas the Panel’s estimates of progress, time, and cost will have to be revised. In such case it would be in the Nation’s interest to assign programs with similar goals to civilian agencies.
The recent successful location and recovery of the unarmed nuclear weapon off Spain demonstrated the mutual benefits of close Navy- industry cooperation. It is recommended that the Navy make a con- tinuing, special effort to utilize the people, facilities, and know-how of the private sector in achieving its objectives in the Deep Submergence and Man in the Sea Projects. Only in this way can the Nation hope to capitalize quickly and profitably on its ocean technology capability. In the event complete information exchange would involve classified data, the Panel recommends that arrangements be made to provide properly qualified industrial groups with access to this classified in- formation. By 1975 the Panel foresees the possibility of conducting complex, highly technical operations on the ocean bottom which are well beyond the limits of present technology. The Panel recommends that a proper Federal role related to ocean-technology development would be provision of a test range equipped with standardized stations in which component systems, concepts, and materials can be critically tested. Such a test range might consist of stations on the water’s edge in the surf zone, at depths of 200, 600, 2,400, and 6,000 feet and per- haps in the abyssal deep. This facility would engender government- industry cooperation and technology developments with the desirable result. of shortening the time required for specific developments and acceptance testing. The Navy in meeting its needs will undoubtedly require such a range. The Panel recommends that the Navy under- take a study which could lead to development of this range. Once implemented it should be made available to industrial and university groups, users, being expected to pay a prorated share of the total operating cost and depreciation, as is the case in other national facilities.
5.6. CONCLUSIONS
In section 5.2 an already extensive Navy dependence on oceano- graph R & D was predicted to increase rapidly in the future. Not
39
only are oceans becoming more important as arenas for strategic and tactical military operations, but operations themselves are pressing into less familiar or understood portions of the marine environment. The twofold growth of the Navy’s oceanographic program over the fiscal year 1965-67 period, presented in section 5.3 testifies to the degree of recognition given by the Navy and Congress to increasing military need for knowledge of the marine environment and for carry- ing out service operations within it. This trend apparently will not be deemphasized in the future; if anything, the overall Navy oceanog- raphy program may accelerate.
The priorities which determine the bulk of the Navy’s oceanographic efforts are primarily military, and certain of these considerations are paramount, involving specialized requirements for both research and surveys, as well as engineering developments. We therefore recom- mend that the program remain solely under Navy direction rather than consolidated with perhaps somewhat similar programs of other agencies such as ESSA or a new civilian agency of ocean development such as the one proposed in this report (see’sec. 10.4).
Support figures discussed in section 5.3 indicate that basic research has remained relatively constant while the overall Navy oceanography program has approximately doubled. It is not entirely clear to us that the great increase in ocean-engineering effort associated with such new programs as the Deep Submergence Systems Project should pro- ceed indefinitely without a corresponding increase in the Navy’s basic- research support. A proportionality between research, particularly basic research, and the total R & D effort in the given fields should probably be maintained if brute-force engineering solutions are not to be inadvertently substituted for what ought to be more discriminating deployment of operational requirements made possible by greater en- vironmental knowledge. Such knowledge generally requires consid- erable lead time for development and a long-term investment attitude toward research programs that produce it. It is in this connection that we wish to emphasize the importance of strengthening the tradi- tional Navy tie with the oceanographic research and educational com- munity, which appears to be jeopardized at present by stronger bonds with industry. Prompt and effective assistance from the ocean-science community to such urgent needs as the Thresher search and the recent successful weapon-recovery operation off Spain are, we feel, dramatic and by no means isolated examples of the beneficial, responsive nature of this tie. Both direct evidence from budgets and indirect evidence from excellent research proposals for basic studies which have been refused suggest the need for increased Navy support of the basic oceanographic sciences and technologies.
40
6.0. Opportunities in Oceanographic Research
6.1. OBSERVATION
Until recently oceanographic observations could be characterized as being exploratory in nature. Expeditions were undertaken, usually with a single ship, to survey unknown regions or to observe special phenomena discovered on an earlier expedition. Exploratory surveys have frequently provided new information which has been useful in asking questions of critical scientific importance but not so often in answering them. Another consequence of the emphasis given to ex- ploratory observation is that oceanographers have been physically and intellectually isolated from their colleagues in basic disciplines and in other geophysical sciences.
In recent years exploratory observations, although they still dom- inate oceanography, have begun to yield to more systematic observa- tions designed for specific purposes. There are a number of reasons for this change.
First, there is a growing awareness that the most challenging scien- tific problems encompass two or more of the environmental sciences. For example, oceanic circulation cannot be understood apart from at- mospheric circulation, nor can atmospheric circulation be predicted for periods of more than a few days without considering the ocean. Development of a theory of climate will require treating the oceans and atmosphere as a thoroughly interacting system. The complexi- ties of the interactions are illustrated by the processes of sedimentation on the bottom of the sea. These processes are governed by physical and biological conditions within the volume of the oceans, which de- pend on the interaction of the oceans and the atmosphere.
Second, new platforms and sensors are becoming available which permit new observations. Acoustic and electromagnetic probes make possible remote sensing, “swallow” floats give unequivocal records of subsurface currents, thermistor chains can furnish continuous records of temperature distribution and “hot wires” provide information about the turbulent spectrum. Many other examples could be cited.
Third, developments in data processing and in methods of data analysis represent major advances. Telemetering techniques provide
41
vast quantities of data far beyond that available a decade ago, and the newer computers permit systematic analysis of these data and facilitate study of matematical models by integration of governing differential equations. A consequence of these new capabilities in data processing and analysis is that quantitative determinations are beginning to re- place qualitative and intuitive accounts which characterized geophysi- cal sciences a few years ago. For example, direct measurement of vertical flux and wind stress can now be made by spectral analysis of fluctuations. New insights into the mechanism of nonlinear coupling, made possible by computer technology, have contributed significantly to theories of wave generation and motions of a variety of scales.
These developments in observational techniques, data processing, and interpretation have proved to be equally valuable in studies of the oceans, atmosphere, and solid earth. A strong coupling of research among various fields of geophysics exists. There is a basic com- monality in observational platforms, techniques of analysis and under- lying theory. A fruitful idea in one field is likely to be equally profitable in other geophysical fields. Thus, broadly trained, creative scientists may provide crucial leadership in several fields simultane- ously.
A close connection also exists between geophysical and biological problems, despite the fact that these connections have often been over- looked. Certain regions owe their great biological productivity to subtle combinations of chemical and physical processes which vitally need to be understood. Oceanographers are well aware of the im- portance of these relationships, and in the future we see a closer rela- tionship between biological and physical studies of the sea. This will be especially important as modification of the environment. be- comes more widespread (see sec. 3).
Our new abilities to observe and interpret the environment have brought within the range of reasonable possibility a number of major scientific and technological enterprises. These require increased un- derstanding of the functioning of systems far more complex than those which can be studied in the laboratory. Consequently, there are of the highest intrinsic scientific interest, as well as of great practical importance.
6.2. PREDICTION
We are in the very early stages of developing the capability for ocean prediction. Until World War II ocean predictions were limited to truly periodic phenomena whose mechanism was clearly under- stood—tides and seasons. Tidal predictions are still imperfect, and improvements based on more complete treatment of nonlinear effects and transients associated with surface winds and pressure are within reach.
42
In the past two decades methods have been devised for :
(a) Prediction of surface waves based on observations and pre- dictions of surface-wind distribution..
(6) Warnings of tsunamis produced by earthquakes which are readily detected at great distances.
These methods have proved vital for safety and economy in coastal areas, in commercial shipping and for many military operations. Further improvement in wave prediction is tied closely to atmospheric prediction, for which atmospheric observations over the oceans are required. In a similar way prediction of the depth of the surface mixed layer, still in its early stages, is closely tied to the meteorologi- cal problem. Understanding the processes occurring in the surface mixed layer is important for acoustic-transmission applications within the sea and for marine biological problems.
We have reason to think that these phenomena, for which rather simple prediction methods are available, fail to encompass other char- acteristic, important features of the ocean. From the fragmentary evidence we have at present, it appears that a wide range of time- dependent phenomena do indeed occur in the ocean, as our experience with stratified fluids in the laboratory or in the atmosphere would lead us to expect. Ocean weather may be as varied and complex as the weather in the atmosphere. For example, we see indications of inter- nal gravity waves, inertial motions associated with the earth’s rotation, turbulence, meanders in the Gulf Stream and other currents and fluctuations in surface temperature over large areas; but we have not yet adequately described any of these phenomena. Whether current systems occur which are comparable in size to atmospheric planetary waves remains to be discovered. The extent to which prediction of these phenomena is inherently feasible and for what scales of time and space remains unknown; these problems appear destined to become some of the most exciting objectives of ocean research in the next decade. The answers are not obvious, for although the governing differential equations are well known, we do not know the strength of coupling between observable and unobservable scales.
We do know, however, that lack of ocean surface-layer observations restricts effective atmospheric prediction to a few days.
Until the prediction problem is better understood, the potentialities of deliberate ocean modification cannot be determined. Without such understanding, large-scale experiments addressed to diverting ocean currents, to melting the Arctic ice or to overturning large regions of ocean water would be extravagant and highly irresponsible. How- ever, inadvertent modification of coastal areas, already of local con- cern, is likely to become more serious. In order to plan wisely for use and development of coastal areas we must learn to predict such
43
effects as increased pollution, changes in coastlines, and deepening of harbors.
Finally, a remark should be made concerning the space and scale of ocean observations envisioned by this Panel. For the present and for the foreseeable future ocean observations should be undertaken as research and development programs, with specifications closely linked to objectives and with results linked to subsequent planning. The first stages should be distinctly limited in scope and in areal extent ; but one should anticipate observational systems covering very large areas. It will be necessary to establish and maintain numbers of observing platforms in, on and above the sea. Reliable communication systems of considerable complexity will be needed. Furthermore, the inher- ently global nature of many scientific problems will require support of research on a larger scale and more stable basis than has been the case heretofore.
6.3. PHYSICAL PROCESSES
A catalog on research problems in physical oceanography captures neither the flavor nor the intellectual quality of scientific challenges posed by the oceans. For example in the ocean bottom a well-docu- mented history of our planet is recorded, perhaps containing far more information about the early stages of evolution of our planet and the solar system than on the moon’s scarred surface. The oceans are a giant laboratory for fluid dynamics, which illustrates the full com- plexity of hydrodynamics. The oceans, in turn, interact with both the solid earth and atmosphere in direct and subtle ways, and one can never hope to gain a comprehensive understanding from study limited to the oceans themselves.
We will not compose a detailed framework of oceanographic research nor catalog the variety of work in progress at existing institutions." Instead, we will concentrate upon defining specific, new types of large- scale projects not yet underway which seem to offer great potential for increased knowledge. The emphasis on large-scale projects in this section does not imply that progress in oceanography can be achieved only in this way. The large-scale projects originate through the efforts of individual researchers seeking answers to problems posed by theoretical, laboratory of small-scale observational studies.
Benthic Boundary. At the bottom of the deep ocean there is a transition from fluid, to fluid with suspended particles, to solid with interstitial fluid, to solid. The detailed nature of this boundary is unknown, as well as whether its characteristics result primarily from physical or biological processes. An understanding of this boundary
Chapter II, “National Academy of Sciences’ Committee on Oceanography Report” (in preparation), provides one account of such background material.
os
is essential in order to solve such problems as long-range sound trans- mission of powerful sonars (SQS—26), occupation at the bottom in permanent or semipermanent structures and search for objects at or near the bottom. The study of the benthic boundary is now possible because of the development of recording devices and probes which measure temperature, velocity, and pressure fluctuations at great depths.
The benthic boundary is a base for studying the earth below. Beneath the oceans the earth’s crust is thin, and environmental condi- tions for measurement are quiet. A recent surprising discovery is that standard geophysical methods of exploration (seismic, gravi- metric, magnetic, and geothermal) yield better results than on land. The greater technical difficulties of working on the sea bottom are more than compensated by advantages of a uniform environment. There remains, of course, great ambiguity about the deeper material. This can only be resolved by coring the sediments (JOIDES) and the layer beneath (MOHOLE).
An opportunity exists for adapting other geophysical techniques developed on land for marine use. For example, measurements on the sea bottom of the fluctuating electric and magnetic fields at various frequencies could provide information about the variation of con- ductivity with depth; from this, one can, in principle infer internal temperature and ultimately horizontal stresses between oceans and continents. Our understanding of mountain making and of the very existence of oceans and continents depends on assessment of stresses at the margin of basins.
It is now possible to make deep-ocean tide measurements from in- struments lowered to the seabed. Theories of the origin of the moon depend critically on the efficacy of tides in disposing of the mechanical energy of the earth-moon system. Do tides in the solid earth slow down the earth’s rotation and move the moon outward or are the ocean tides responsible? Additional tidal measurements on a global scale are required in order to settle the problem.
Further understanding of the benthic boundary depends on con- tinued development of instruments operable at great depths. Many observational programs require data-collection over long periods of time, and substantial technological problems exist in collecting these data. Furthermore, the ocean bottom is not uniform, and isolated observations are unlikely to yield a proper view. We can thus expect continuing expansion of measurements on a global scale. The oppor- tunity exists for perhaps solving an important cosmological problem, and we recommend that tidal measurements be made for many parts of the oceans to determine once and for all the nature and magnitude of oceanic tidal friction.
45
The Abyssal Ocean. The deep distribution of oceanic variables (temperature, salinity, current, etc.), and planktonic and sedimentary particles appears to be determined by upwelling and turbulent fluxes. The most urgent need is for observational studies of the turbulent mixing processes. <A thorough, well-planned effort to study the turbu- lent microstructure of the main thermocline would provide insight on the general circulation of the oceans, global weather and climatic fluctuations as well. It is intolerable that direct measurements of turbulent fluxes at depth are not being attempted. In our judgment this is within present-day technological capability but might require substantial engineering. A few pioneering studies made with sensors mounted on submarines and lowered by wire from surface vessels have shown fascinating microstructure. These studies provide a good basis for future development. Submarines are essential to the study of water under ice sheets. This cold water, of high salinity and density, eventually becomes the water at the greatest depths. The development of the bottom water remains largely unknown.
Distinction between various modes and types of internal waves and what is ineptly referred to as turbulence has to be clarified. Perhaps, most. random variation of temperature currents can be associated with internal, gravity-inertial and planetary waves. Distribution of energy among different modes, frequencies, and directions needs dis- entanglement. The existence of an equatorial, internal wave trap be- tween 30° S. and 30° N. lends interest to a geographical study of these distributions. Nonlinear interactions among these modes (including “general circulation” as zero frequency mode) and the irregular sea bottom need to be studied theoretically and experimentally. It is here that a solution to the problem of dynamic oceanography may be sought. We must cease to be surprised at irregularity of oscillations whenever appropriate observations are made. Irregularity is ex- pected as a consequence of the fact that 10° ergs sec? of energy are dissipated in the ocean, and this calls for r.m.s. (root mean square) shear of 107 sec".
Buoy Programs. During the past few years several draft plans have been submitted to international bodies for oceanwide observa- tional programs employing dozens of ships extending over several years—purportedly to study variability of oceanic circulation. To us they have seemed ill-designed from the point of view of sampling, because we believe it would be better to study smaller scales and higher frequencies first, even though these do not provide busywork for fleets of oceanographic vessels. In fact instrumented buoys seem better adapted to variability studies, although ships will, of course, be nec- essary to service them.
To date, use of moored buoys has been largely limited to efforts of individuals who, lacking the resources, logistic support, and necessary
46
organization, have been unable to maintain dense enough arrays for a long enough time to gather statistically significant data. The signals are complex, and a sophisticated measuring program is required to read them. The problem would be difficult enough if all oceanic fluc- tuations were a broad spectrum of linearly superimposed internal waves, but, as mentioned above, there is undoubtedly a significantly nonlinear domain. Oceanographers need to evolve some fairly elabo- rate measuring arrays, with limited regions heavily instrumented. They are in the position of radio astronomers who need a radio tele- scope of a novel design, a facility quite beyond the capability of a single individual to design, build, and operate. The oceanographic community has been too concerned with conventional research and fund-raising and has devoted insufficient attention to exciting new scientific projects such as a viable buoy program.
A graduated program for measuring and identifying regular oscilla- tions in a typical deep-sea area is described in appendix II. This is one of several proposals which have emerged in the last few months from groups interested in buoy programs.
Air-Sea Boundary. In order to predict large-scale atmospheric behavior for periods longer than a day or two, vertical fluxes of heat, momentum, and water vapor must be specified at the surface, both on land and in sea. Research and development along several independent lines are needed.
The spectral structure of atmospheric turbulence is being deter- mined, and direct measurements of vertical fluxes are being made with rapidly responding sensors mounted on fixed platforms, aircraft, or submarines. Temperature and wind velocity sensors exist in experi- mental form. Interesting work is under way at a few institutions, but adequate humidity sensors have yet to be developed. This lack repre- sents an important constraint on air-sea interaction research. Mean profiles measured from fixed platforms and buoys are also being used at a few institutions to estimate vertical fluxes.
However, in order to relate vertical flux measured at a point by either of the above methods to the “synoptic” scale commensurate with the weather prediction problem, measurements using integral methods over extended areas are needed. These require a carefully planned and coordinated program of research utilizing fixed platforms, buoys, aircraft, and possibly submarines. To date such programs have not been initiated.
Methods of isotopic and surface chemistry have recently been ap- plied to the air-sea boundary, and these offer some interesting oppor- tunities which should be exploited.
A substantia] effort has been directed to the study of surface waves, particularly with regard to nonlinear actions and generation by wind. Studies have been dominantly theoretical; the need is for adequate
47
field and laboratory measurements. Recent measurements of wave growth seriously differ from the accepted theory of wave generation. A substantial improvement could be achieved by means of a larger array of bottom-mounted pressure sensors (avave telescopes) which monitor the surface-trapped energy with reasonable resolution.
Coastal Boundary. The focus of the intersection of the surface and bottom boundary is the coastal zone. The hydrodynamics of breaking waves, tides, and tsunamis on the sloping shelf is not clearly understood. The mechanism of interaction between moving fluid and sediment underneath is not at all understood. It is well known that coastal structures do not perform in a way that is expected in other engineering fields. There are many examples of marinas where the annual dredging cost equals the construction cost, or harbors where sheltering breakwaters have led to increased seiching or wave action within the harbor. This points to the subject’s difficulty, the need for fundamental research, and better application of known rules to actual practice.
The Individual Scientist’s Role. Hydrodynamic studies of the oceans and atmosphere have fused with similar geophysical and astro- physical areas in recent years, forming a new arena of intellectual activity called “geophysical fluid dynamics.” Although originally oriented toward theoretical aspects, there has been an increasing ten- dency to develop laboratory experiments and field observations. In theoretical work and laboratory investigations efforts are largely in- dividual, the goal being to formulate and solve problems in fluid me- chanics which have bearing on basic understanding of the oceans. The geophysical fluid dynamics group focuses on exchanging ideas and maintaining enthusiasm at a high level of creative, individual activity. From these individual scientists come most of the ideas which are translated into questions about the oceans, which, in turn, motivate larger, organized data-collecting projects mentioned above. For example, the suggestion of an internal wave trap about the equator resulted from pioneer investigations of the motion of fluids on a rotating sphere. Conversely, results of the observational projects react on theoretical work so that it proceeds soundly. Our reason for mentioning the role of these individuals is to emphasize how essential they are and to insure that this effort is not overlooked in the hurly- burly of larger plans.
Summary. It appears to us that it is now appropriate to end an era in which the main emphasis within physical oceanography has been on exploration. The MOHOLE and JOIDES programs to core far below the sea floor at carefully selected sites are more reasonable for the present level of oceanography. Likewise, the new, developing technology of bottom-mounted and buoy-supported instruments coupled with theoretical advances derived from efforts in geophysical
48
fluid dynamics should lead to substantial, new, observational pro- grams. These programs, as outlined above, can provide information about the environment essential for living sensibly within the oceans and using them. The focus should be on the nature of the benthic boundary, the weather and climate of deep oceans, and the inter- action of oceans with the atmosphere and the coast.
6.4. BIOLOGICAL PROCESSES
The subpanel on marine biology has surveyed the major areas of current biological research through discussions with Federal agency representatives, visits to selected laboratories and discussions with biologists. Although some of the major problems of marine biology have been considered in previous reports,? the Panel believes that there are three areas of research to which insufficient attention has been given. These concern new approaches to obtaining more food from the sea (see sec. 2), use of marine organisms in biomedical re- search, and problems associated with large-scale environmental modi- fications (see sec. 3). The latter problem is illustrated currently by the possibility that a sea-level canal will be constructed across the Isthmus of Panama.
The Panel believes that marine biology must be regarded in broad terms. Specifically, marine biology embraces four major areas of research :
1. Animal and plant populations and their interaction with each other and the ocean.
2. The unique characteristics of diverse marine organisms that enable them to survive in the ocean.
3. Utilization of marine organisms as unique experimental ma- terial for investigation of biomedical problems.
4. The processes and factors involved in food production from the sea.
Some of the most scientifically interesting and socially significant problems confronting mankind exist in this arena.
Populations in the Sea. The conversion of photosynthetic plants to animal protein on land is relatively well understood. In the sea, however, photosynthetic plants are restricted largely to microscopic planktonic algae (phytoplankton) ; conversion to animals large enough to serve as food for man usually involves many intermediate steps.
2Chapter II, ‘National Academy of Sciences’ Committee on Oceanography Report” (in preparation) ; “National Oceanographic Program Fiscal Year 1967,” ICO Pamphlet No. 24, March 1966; “A Report to the Division of Biological and Medical Sciences of the National Science Foundation” by the ad hoc Committee on Biological Oceanography; “A Scientific Framework for the Study of the World’s Oceans,’”’ UNESCO.
220-659 O—66——_5 49
Our knowledge of the complex and diverse food chains and food webs of the sea is very sparse. The natural foods of even the best-known marine animal species are unknown except in general terms. Cen- tral and prerequisite to scientific control and ultimate management of marine food resources is further knowledge of essential nutritional requirements, of feeding habits and food preferences, and of effi- ciency in converting planktonic algae to animal protein.
Plants and Photosynthesis. Photosynthetic plants in the sea and on land use solar energy to synthesize organic matter from inorganic materials. In agriculture, solar energy is channeled into production of plants that are useful to mankind, either directly as plant prod- ucts or indirectly as animal food. Growth of plants in the sea, on the other hand, is a process over which we have no control and little knowledge. Some species of planktonic algae are recognized as food organisms for marine animals; others are “weed” species of little or no nutritional value; still others, such as “red tide” organisms, are noxious or lethal to marine life. To increase significantly the amount of food obtained from the sea, we must learn to control the kinds of phytoplankton produced as the primary food source. Ex- panded and intensified programs in marine microbiology in its broad- est sense, including both laboratory and field studies, are needed to provide fundamental background and practical experience.
Environmental Studies. Although human intervention is increas- ingly affecting natural populations of organisms, very little is known about environmental conditions that govern these populations in nature. Without adequate knowledge it is difficult to predict the effects of human intervention or to define proper procedures for man- agement and exploitation. The complexity of the marine environ- ment has limited the rate of progress in understanding (see sec. 3).
Comprehensive studies are needed for insight into the complex rela- tionships of organisms to their environment. These must be suf- ficiently long-term to permit measurements of fluctuations in the meaningful parameters and the resultant changes that occur naturally. Included should be intensive studies of carefully selected habitat types with surveys of related habitats to indicate variability. Most importantly, there should be constant interplay between observation and analysis of the natural situation by experimental alteration of biological, physical, and chemical properties of the environment and by laboratory experimentation under controlled conditions on a suf- ficiently large scale to provide an adequate model of the natural habitat. The requisite research groups should include scientists who are knowledgeable about the physical and chemical properties of the environment and those specifically competent in the physiology and behavior of organisms.
50
It is evident from studies of organisms in fresh-water environments that the difficulties in understanding the complex relationships and interactions among organisms are compounded by lumping species to- gether as plant producers, herbivores, and carnivores. There is a need for precise identification of each species, rare as well as abundant. Abundant species may account for most food production, but rare ones often provide essential services, such as parasite removal, to other species. Eliminating these services may be catastrophic. In addition, cryptic species may be present which, while not differing appreciably in morphology, have quite different behavioral, physiological and population characteristics in the environment.
Consideration of the function of individual species in the environ- ment brings into prominence the present shortage of systematists who define species, suggest evolutionary relationships, and identify dis- tinguishing characteristics of organisms. There is great need of com- prehensive study of the systematic, taxonomic biology of marine or- ganisms involving morphological, biochemical, and behavioral dif- ferences among species. Such studies provide a basis for selecting races or strains, within a single species, with characteristics which render them particularly appropriate for exploitation and cultivation by man. Characteristics of interest are rapid growth, adaptability to culture conditions and resistance to disease.
If a sea-level canal is opened across Central America, many biologi- cal problems of great potential consequence will emerge. A number of species have close relatives on opposite sides of the present land mass which has existed for 80 million years. These closely related species show different amounts of divergence. What will happen if the barrier is breached so that organisms can move between oceans through such a canal? Will changing selection pressures and com- petition eliminate species? Will closely related species interbreed and form a hybrid population or remain separate with, perhaps, accom- pany changes in their genetic, physiological, behavioral, and popula- tion characteristics? Will present populations resist invasions un- changed, or will serious disruptions occur, accompanied by violent oscillations in the composition and abundance of species ?
Knowledge of characteristics of both successful and unsuccessful invading species should help us predict the effects of purposeful introduction or removal of species elsewhere. Some changes are likely to be dramatic and easily documented; others will be more subtle although of equal importance in furthering our understanding. It will be impossible to recognize and understand these subtle changes unless the present state of populations of various species is known thoroughly. In view of the immediate need for background infor- mation, the Panel recommends undertaking an intensive study of marine organisms on both sides of the proposed canal site. Concur-
51
rently, for purposes of comparison and generalization, planktonic and benthic organisms in the adjacent deep seas and in waters on the continental shelves should also be studied intensively.
Unique Characteristics of Marine Organisms. Existence and be- havior of marine organisms in specific habitats depend on unique physiological characteristics which deserve investigation in their own right. For example, organisms deep in the oceans live under extra- ordinarily constant and extreme conditions. In the deepest areas, pressures are more than 500 atmospheres, temperatures are less than 4° C. and darkness is total except for occasional flashes of light pro- duced by luminescent organisms. The environment is unlike any- thing encountered elsewhere in the solar system. Investigation of organisms adapted to live under such extreme conditions, though difficult and requiring special laboratory facilities, may provide new insights into man’s basic metabolic processes and physiological mechanisms.
Biomedical Applications. Our present understanding of many bio- medical problems is based largely upon research initially conducted on lower organisms. The insights so afforded are valid because many biological processes of most kinds of organisms are fundamentally alike. Understanding of mammalian genetics stems in part from re- search on insects and micro-organisms; our understanding of human biochemistry derives from studies of lower animals and plants; and many of our present insights into the phenomena of fertilization and embryonic development are derived primarily from investigations of marine organisms.
One of the most challenging areas of contemporary biological re- search concerns growth and development. We still know little about how a human egg, one cell, is transformed into an adult composed of billions of cells in a thousand varieties, all precisely organized to pro- duce a normally functioning individual. When normal development goes awry, various abnormalities or birth defects result. Much of our knowledge of fertilization and development has been obtained from studying marine organisms, some of which develop from egg to adult in 1 day and during this time are open to continuous observation and experimental manipulation. Study of the development of diverse marine organisms remains the best opportunity for enhancing our understanding of developmental biology.
Other general biochemical and physiological processes have also been investigated effectively with marine organisms. The use of squid axons to study conduction in nerves is a dramatic example. Our knowledge of the structure and function of sensory receptors and the significance of neurosecretion have also been enriched greatly through use of marine organisms.
52
With the conquest of many infectious diseases, the degenerative dis- eases of old age have become increasingly important and research on the aging process is rapidly becoming more sophisticated. Because some marine organisms reach old age in a few hours, whereas others have long lifespans or reproduce asexually and hence are virtually immortal, marine organisms are valuable for studies on the processes of aging in nature.
The value of biochemical studies on the great diversity of marine plants and animals is indicated by the isolation of chemicals that have antiviral, antimicrobial, cancer-inhibiting, nerve-blocking, or heart- stimulating properties in laboratory experiments. Some of these chem- icals have potential pharmacological value, as shown by biotoxins from poisonous shellfish and pufferfish that are 200,000 times more power- ful in blocking nervous activity than drugs such as curare presently used for this purpose. Such powerful chemicals are obviously import- ant tools for neurologists who are elucidating biochemical events re- sponsible for nerve and brain activity, and offer promise of applica- tion as useful drugs.
The number of chemicals that may be found by intensive analysis of marine organisms is well illustrated by recent studies on sponges, one of the most primitive animals. Sponges produce at least 15 different types of sterols not found in higher animals, including man. By studying unusual sterols in sponges, we may acquire a better under- standing of the role of related sterols in man. In addition, investiga- tions of sponges unexpectedly revealed a unique material, an arabinosyl nucleoside, which may have practical importance in that it is apparently highly effective in treatment of certain virus infections and leukemia in laboratory animals. Other products from sponges also show a broad spectrum of antimicrobial effects.
Many sea cucumbers, starfish, and their relatives produce highly toxic mixtures of steroid glycosides, a group of chemicals that includes the powerful cardiac drug, digitalis, which is obtained from a ter- restrial plant. Steroid glycosides from these marine organisms have suppressed growth of several different kinds of tumor in experimental animals and may provide leads toward the chemotherapy of malignant tumors.
The list of pharmacologically active substances extracted from marine organisms is expanding as more investigators enter this virtually untapped field of research in natural products. With de- velopment of biochemical analyses and refined techniques for culti- vating many marine organisms that produce chemicals which may prove to be of medical importance, the time is now ripe for intensified research in marine biochemistry and pharmacology. Drugs are now derived primarily from terrestrial plants and bacteria or are synthe-
53
sized in the laboratory. The great variety of plant and animal life in the sea offers abundant opportunities for study in many areas of bio- medical research.
The results cited above have resulted mainly from individual re- search. There is an obvious need for larger scale projects, but it is clear that advances in marine biology will always depend heavily on individual research. It is, therefore, essential that support for these scientists be continued and increased.
In summary, the situation with respect to marine biology parallels that of physical oceanography. There are many clearly identifiable problems. Although there remains a need for special ocean surveys, we no longer need to give special emphasis to them. The broad out- lines of the subject are clear. What is needed is a much greater emphasis on the problem areas reviewed above.
04
7.0. Economic Aspects of Oceanography
7.1. INTRODUCTION
An ideal economic evaluation of oceanographic research and de- velopment would compare the future performance of an economy with and without different levels of expenditure for oceanographic programs. It would emphasize that the value of the oceanography is likely to be crucially dependent upon concurrent technological, demographic, and economic developments. Moreover, it would deter- mine the value of the programs only after due consideration of their interactions with other existing and potential economic activities. For example, an investment in oceanography might find deposits of low-grade nickel ore on the sea floor. However, the same investment might also find similar ores on land. Likewise, developments in metallurgy might substantially reduce requirements for nickel in al- loys of steel and thereby make all but the highest grade ores on land uneconomical to mine. These are rather simple alternatives. Analy- sis may become much more complex if such problems as the strength of the merchant marine or the drain on gold reserves enter into con- sideration. Finally, the analysis becomes much more uncertain as the time between expenditure and potential benefit increases.
Consequently, a really effective model for evaluating oceanographic programs is almost certainly beyond the state of the art. We are reduced to accepting the usual alternative used by economists when evaluating large Government programs; namely, partial analysis on a project-by-project basis. The validity of this approach usually depends crucially on the assumption that certain interactions between the program and other economic activities are relatively unimportant. The technique is widely used in the Defense Department but the plan- ning horizon is usually only 5 years and the application usually has been to develop the optimum means for achieving a fairly well-defined objective. Thus, this application is considerably simpler than an analysis of the potential economic benefits of oceanographic research and development programs which has neither agreed objectives nor a definite time limit.
59
Nevertheless, an attempt to apply project-by-project analysis to oceanography exists... It is imaginative and pioneering, but can be criticized on several grounds:
1. An inadequate distinction between gross and net benefits;
2. A casual approach to estimation of future demands and benefits ;
3. The assumption that the future benefits from different invest- ments will not vary too irregularly over time;
4, An incomplete effort to estimate the probable effect of other changes in technology and economic preferences on benefits de- rivable from the oceanographic program ; and
5. A failure in some instances to distinguish whether the relevant area or economy over which benefits are to be calculated is na- tional or international.
The application of benefit-cost analysis to oceanographic research (as differentiated from oceanographic programs) is also of uncertain value. There is considerable evidence that most Government-spon- sored research is supported because it contributes to certain national objectives. Thus, oceanographic research, as such, probably should be construed as an overhead, staff or support activity for achieving na- tional objectives related to the ocean. Consequently, it is not partic- ularly fruitful to evaluate the specific benefit. of individual research efforts in oceanography, because they are rarely directly identified with any particular mission.
For oceanography, and apparently many other research activities as well, two levels of research support seem to exist: The first tier in- cludes research activities undertaken quite directly by an agency as- signed with a specific operating responsibility; the second relates to a more general level of research support with benefits accruing to a broad group of missions. National Science Foundation support seems more akin to the second type. By contrast, many research activities conducted within and directly under the control of an operating agency with specific missions are fairly attributed directly to those missions.
1“Heonomic Benefits from Oceanographic Research,” National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council (Publ. 1228), 1964. This is referred to in this section as the NASCO Report.’
2? Wor a critical evaluation of the NASCO Report, “Economic Benefits,” see be- low and James A. Crutchfield, Robert W. Kates, and W. R. Derrick Sewell, “Benefit-Cost Analysis and the National Oceanographic Program,” to be published in the Journal of Natural Resources, October 1966.
56
7.2. AN ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF THE OCEANOGRAPHIC PROGRAM
The objectives or missions of the national oceanographic program may be placed under six headings.*
1. Improved environmental prediction and modification ;
2, Aiding development of new sources of raw materials for in- dustrial use;
8. Furthering the more complete exploitation of biological re- sources represented by marine life, ranging from improved fish- eries’ yields to biomedical applications ;
4. Improvement of near-oceanographic environment by finding more expeditious and less costly means to preserve, modify, or reduce pollution of estuaries, beaches, and other coastal waters;
5. Improvement in ocean navigation, ship design, and ports;
6. National defense.
At the present, allocation of national oceanographic program funds to these missions (other than defense, which is treated separately else- where in this report) appears to be roughly as shown in table 7.1. These figures do not include approximately $14 to $15 million of gen- era] or second tier nondefense research support not directly related to a mission. For the most part, this second tier research is conducted at academic institutions or similar facilities and is funded by NSF.
By way of comparison, NASCO estimates of the discounted annual value of average benefits to be realized from civilian missions of the national oceanographic program are presented in table 7.2. It should be stressed that these numbers are reported only to lend perspective. There are many reasons for suspecting these estimates.* Further- more, the costs reported in table 7.1 are not directly comparable to benefits reported in table 7.2, since realization of estimated benefits would depend upon additional investments or outlays being under- taken elsewhere by the government or in the private sector of the econ- omy to complement these programs. For example, environmental objectives would almost surely need to be complemented by Weather Bureau activities (which now require an expenditure of well over $100
* These mission definitions were adapted from the NAS/NRC report, “Economic Benefits From Oceanographic Research.” Much of the structure of the following discussion results from accepting these definitions to facilitate comparisons.
* For documentation of this point see Crutchfield, et al.
57
million annually) while exploitation of raw materials in the sea would require considerably more than expenditures on oceanography alone. In short, benefits reported in table 7.2 are gross benefits that might be expected from the national oceanographic program taken in conjunc- tion with a range of private and public expenditures elsewhere in the economy. These gross benefits could be used to derive a meaningful net present value or benefit/cost ratio only with an estimate of all investment and operating costs, both public and private, of achieving these benefits.
TABLE 7.1.—Hstimated oceanographic nondefense expenditures on major U.S. Government missions related to the ocean or environmental improvement,*
fiscal year 1967 [In millions of dollars]
Improved environmental prediction and modification__________-________- 14.5 Development of new sources of raw materials for use in industry_________ 12.0 Improved exploitation of marine biological resources (mainly fisheries)___ 45.0 Improvement of the near oceanographic environment_________________-_~_ 10.5 Improvement inocean naviration: ete= 2) 2 Eee 38. 0
Tota ret Ae aa ea ae es Pa a ei ee 120. 0
*These numbers differ from those listed by ICO for the national ocean program. The Panel believes that this table more adequately describes the total level of activity.
TABLE 7.2—NASCOO estimates of the discounted annual value of average benefits of the civilian missions of the National Oceanographic Program
Million
dollars
Mission : per year Improved environmental prediction and modification (mainly better
weather, TOrécasting) 28 22s 2 a es oe eee 600
Development of new sources of raw materials for use in industry__---_ 105 Improved exploitation of marine biological resources (U.S.-owned fish-
@QIGS) ONLY) ee Aes 20s ee yh Fa EE 8 Re 414 Improvement of near oceanographic environment (including cost re-
ductionsinjsewage disposal))|S2222 28 2a he eee 629
Improvement in ocean navigation, ete. (U.S. shipping only) ---------- 365
Moreover, the benefit figures reported in table 7.2 are somewhat tenuous. For example, the major expected benefits from improved weather forecasting listed in the NASCO report are as follows (on
an annual basis, undiscounted) : Millions Reduced flood) damage: 2422s ee a ee eee $280 Increased efficiency in scheduling labor and equipment in the construction INGUStr ys ee ee eS 1, 000 Savings from better scheduling coal, oil and natural gas production, oil refining; and: transportation] =2— =" — ee eee 500
58
Improved planning and scheduling of commercial vegetable, potato, and
fruit production: * Millions Onkthertarms Omlye = oe ees ee et er ee ee a ee we $185 Including processing and marketing cost____--_-_-_--------------__-- 185 Better planning of cattle and hog production____________________ pe sm see BS 450 FS fea aaa a he Me Pn oe OYA We A EAT eae eel EO eat 2, 600
1The $370,000,000 figure reported here for savings on commercial vegetables, potato, and fruit production is to be contrasted with the $500,000,000 reported in NASCO’s report. The $370,000,000 figure was derived by reworking basic numbers NASCO reported and applying their percentages to derive savings. It is not clear exactly how they derived the $500,000,000 estimate, but it was more than compensated by rounding their total to $2,000,000,000.
An interaction problem immediately arises with regard to the flood control estimates; clearly, if NASCO estimates are correct and the oceanography program NASCO projects are adopted, Corps of Engineers’ estimates on savings to be obtained from flood control installations should be adjusted downward in some cases. Further- more, for an estimate of the net social benefit to the economy, it would have to be assumed that increments to the flood control program planned by the Corps of Engineers over the next few years that could be expected to yield or duplicate identical benefits would be eliminated from Corps of Engineers’ budgets; whether or not this elimination would occur would depend, of course, upon a number of uncertainties, some of a political nature. It is also possible that the Corps of Engineers’ program would be a cheaper solution to flood control than an oceanographic program. Indeed in all probability the optimal or lower cost solution involves some of both programs.
Similar detailed criticisms could be made with regard to other estimated savings. Given these conflicting considerations, it is very difficult to say what actual savings would result from improvements on long-range weather forecasting. With conservatism, the $2 billion annual estimate reported by NASCO, might be reduced to one-half billion annually undiscounted or approximately $150 million on a discounted average annual basis. The important point is that even this very conservative figure is quite large compared to the present annual outlay of $14.5 million on oceanographic efforts in weather forecasting. Of course, this is only part of the Government’s effort to improve weather forecasts or environmental control. Still, potential gains seem large enough to justify at least the present expenditure and probably to justify an increase.
A somewhat more cautious conclusion seems warranted for Govern- ment-oceanographic expenditures except for surveys and other con- ventional services, aimed at developing new sources of raw materials.
59
The mining and petroleum industries have shown a considerable will- ingness to invest in the development of ocean or any other resources wherever commercial prospects appear reasonably good. These in- dustries, with their considerable commitment and experience, are very well situated to evaluate the relative economic attractiveness of dif- ferent sources of raw materials, including those under water. Thus, development of ocean raw materials is now subject to a market test that seems to be yielding reasonably sensible answers. Before any substantial Government involvement is advocated, proof should be rendered that private companies now involved have been grossly in- effective or socially irresponsible in exploiting oceanic raw materials (see secs. 4.11 and 10.2).
The level of expenditure required to provide survey and similar aids for ocean development on a scale commensurate with that traditionally available on land depends on new technological developments, some of which might become available as a byproduct of national defense pro- grams. It has been estimated that an expenditure of approximately $50 to $100 million over the next 10 years on development of new survey equipment and instrumentation would eliminate major obstacles to obtaining efficient topographic and geological surveys of the U.S. con- tinental shelves (see sec. 4.6). Even with better equipment, however, some upward drift in survey expenditures from the present level of $12 million might be needed and justified for these purposes.
With regard to better exploitation of marine biological resources, the NASCO report places a very heavy emphasis on improving the position of the U.S. fishing industry. Superficially, it would seem very difficult to confine improvement in fishery yields to the U.S. in- dustry as such. Improvements from oceanographic research that help the U.S. fishing industry would likely improve the position of fishing industries abroad as well. Indeed, present performance suggests that foreign fleets would be quicker than U.S. industry to adopt new tech- niques. The fact that several less-developed countries tend to have relatively substantial fishing industries further strengthens the argu- ment. The dubious character of national distinctions in these matters is only heightened by the fact that U.S. industry is increasingly in- vesting in fishing activities conducted under other national flags. Therefore, to the extent that improvement in oceanographic knowl- edge would lead to increased production in fishery industries of the world, a strong case might be made for at least perpetuating the pres- ent level of $50 million annually spent on oceanographic research related to fisheries.
Potential economic benefits from marine biology are not restricted, moreover, to improved fish yields. The ocean appears to be a good
° Crutchfield, James, “The Marine Fisheries: A Problem in International Coop- eration,” American Economic Review, LIV, No. 3, 207-218 (May 1964).
60
source of other foods and pharmaceuticals. Marine biology might also be expected to contribute to improved techniques for depollution and sewage disposal (see secs. 3 and 6.4). Far more important, food from the sea can be used to improve world health, especially in under- developed countries. The foreign policy of the United States since the end of World War II has been committed to the view that U.S. prosperity and peace depend crucially upon improving living stand- ards in the world at large, with particular emphasis on improving nu- trition and health.
Specific estimates made by NASCO for improvements in near-shore sewage disposal and recreation are based upon extrapolation of present prices paid or imputed to recreational expenditures in seashore areas and upon cost reductions in sewage disposal. The estimates, at least on a gross basis, appear conservative. In particular, benefits from improvement in near-oceanographic environment are likely to extend well beyond recreational opportunities or cost reduction in sewage dis- posal. However, this depends on just how much people are willing to pay for improvements in their general living environment; for exam- ple, elimination of offensive odors or unsightly vistas. The ready and widespread Congressional acceptance of Great Society programs with similar orientations suggests that public valuation of these improve- ments is quite high. Probably the best argument for expanding the oceanographic effort in this area, in fact, is the potential complemen- tarity with other Government programs for eliminating pollution, beach conservation and establishing seashore parks. An expanded oceanographic effort in relevant study areas (e.g., biology of estuarial regions and physics of wave action) would seem to be essential and proper support activity for these programs. Given this complemen- tarity, the rather modest level of present expenditure at $10.5 million and the seemingly high benefits, some expansion of present programs relating to the near-ocean environment seems well justified (see secs. 3 and 4.8).
By contrast, considerable doubt surrounds any positive estimate of benefits to the United States from improvement of navigation and similar activities except for avoidance of rocks and shoals. There are good technical reasons for believing that the $364 million of bene- fits attributed to improved ocean navigation in the NASCO report are grossly overstated.® In short, the present level of nondefense ex-
*The NASCO report fails to consider interactions between different estimates. For example, direct savings in ship-construction costs, navigation costs, turn- around times, maintenance expenses and loading and unloading are all reported. It is reasonably clear, though, that the total required size of the ship fleet would be greatly affected by reported improvements in operating and maintenance pro- cedures. Operating and maintenance costs would be reduced as the size of the fleet is reduced. Direct percentage reductions applied to present fleet and cost figures can therefore be misleading.
61
penditures on oceanography related to maritime improvements is prob- ably of dubious value. At a minimum, any marked expansion would not seem wise, and very careful consideration should be given to some contraction. This program probably should be confined to activities aimed at port improvement, elimination of fouling and boring and any portion that might be related (in a byproduct sense) to defense. Re- search on containerization, hydrofoils and bubble ships suggested or sponsored by the Maritime Administration would seem to have more promise.
A potential bottleneck in the oceanographic program might be avail- ability of research talent, although the expected increase in manpower in oceanography suggests this will not be a limitation (see sec. 9). Relationships between research and basic research expenditures in that program are therefore of interest; these are summarized in table 7.3 as they appear at present and in the recent past. Research might be defined, of course, in several ways: Broadly to include nonacademic as well as academic activities; with or without ship-operating costs included and inclusive or exclusive of different classes of engineering development. By the usual definitions, column (d) in table 7.3 seems to be the best estimate of basic research in the national oceanographic program, defined as expenditure for research in academic laboratories or in other laboratories organized in a similar manner. The figures are admittedly quite crude or approximate. (If one seeks estimates with ship-operating costs included, column (e) should be scaled up by about 50 percent.) It is interesting that the proportion of the total oceano- graphic program devoted to “basic research” in recent years is not too dissimilar (though slightly higher on average) to the roughly equiva- lent figures for other Government science programs, both before and after adjustment for ships or similar heavy hardware in other fields.
At present approximately $14 to $15 million (exclusive of ship- operating costs) is spent on basic research as part of the nondefense national oceanographic program. This implies that basic research is about 12 percent of the total expenditure of $120 million on non- defense missions. If this outlay of $14 to $15 million is expanded at a rate of 15 percent per year over the next 4 or 5 years, expendi- tures on basic research to support the nondefense national oceano- graphic programs would rise to a level of about $25 million (exclusive of ship-operating costs) by 1971. If the basic research component con- tinues to be 12 percent. of the total mission expenditure, this would imply an increase from $120 to $210 million per year in the total in a period of 5 years. Such an increase should provide sufficient scope for most justifiable programs now foreseeable in the nondefense sector. (The “sufficiency” will depend to some extent on the level of defense expenditures undertaken.) Presumably, most of the $25 million spent for basic research in 1971 on nondefense purposes would
62
be channeled through NSF, Bureau of Commercial Fisheries or similar sources possibly connected with a new agency for marine and environ- mental programs. If biological aspects of the national oceanographic program are emphasized in the future, as advocated in this report, the proportion of academic research supported by the Bureau of Com- mercial Fisheries should be increased; this is in keeping with the NASCO recommendaticn that approximately $5 million for such purposes should be channeled through the Bureau in the future.
TABLE 7.3.—Research in relation to total NOP expenditures (including defense)
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) NOP Estimated Estimates of re- Estimated Research expend- search as percent Fiscal year NOP total expend- itures on of total program expend- itures as basic re- itures ! estimated search 3 by ICO? (c)/(b) | (d)/(b) Million dollars Million dollars Million dollars NOGSs2 6 55 12-4.- 155 31 NA 20 NA U9G4 reo Se 188 42 23. 9 22 13 WOGS Seren caso 248 46 26. 1° 19 11 W9G6S2 = nts 244 51 24. 6 21 10 IIA 7 fe ane 312 55 27.5 18 9
1 These figures are larger than those reported by ICO due to inclusion of some Naval oceanography not covered by ICO.
? After deducting an assumed one-third for ship-operating costs.
3 Office of Science and Technology estimate of research conducted in academic institutions or equivalent private and Government laboratories, again exclusive of ship-operating costs.
The 15-percent annual growth figure in “basic” or academic re- search underlying these extrapolations is not magical, but it corre- sponds to recent growth rates or needs projected on reasonably con- servative bases for such programs.’ However, the very rapid increase in the expected number of oceanographers (see secs. 8.3, 9.4) suggests that the rate of increase of basic research may need to be substantially greater than 15 percent; therefore, basic research may represent a higher proportion of the $210 million budget.
A 5-year national oceanographic mission budget consistent with a $210 million total outlay is shown in table 7.4. Especially rapid growth is projected for environmental prediction and control and for hear-oceanographic environment programs. On the basis of crude benefit assessments previously reported, these two would seem to be the most promising of today’s nondefense oceanographic programs.
*“Chemistry : Opportunities and Needs,” NAS-NRC, Committee for the Survey
of Chemistry, 1965, p. 21; “Physics: Survey and Outlook,” NAS-NRC, Physics Survey Committee, 1966, p. 118.
63
Substantial growth is also projected for marine biology and raw ma- terial surveys. An approximate 25-percent cutback in programs aimed at improvement of navigation, port improvement, ship routing, etc., is suggested, from a level of $38 million for fiscal year 1967 to a level of $30 million in 1971.
TABLE 7.4.—Some suggested projections of nondefense national oceanographic budgets
Fiscal year
1967 1968 1969 1970 | 1971
Environmental prediction and control__| 14.5 25.0 35.0 45.0 55.0 Surveys relative to raw-materials de-
velopment {seers x eae eee ees 12.0 14.0 17.0 21.0 25.0 Marine biological resources - _- _---___-_- 45.0 48.0 51.0 55. 0 60. 0 Near-ocean environment-__-____---_--- 10.5 15.0 22. 0 30. 0 40.0 Navigation aids, port improvements,
ST Cea eee eee ic PE Me AO Re ate aN 38. 0 36. 0 34. 0 32.0 30.0
Totalice ease. See eee 120.0 | 138.0 | 159.0 | 183.0 | 210.0
The rationality of a sharp increase in the marine biological program budget depends to a considerable extent upon a political as much as an economic decision; namely, whether development of greater food yields from the ocean—a development which is likely to benefit pri- marily South American, Asian, and African countries—is a legitimate part of U.S. foreign policy. As noted, some good arguments can be made for such a view. Quasi-political judgments, of course, can be quite relevant in determining the level of other oceanographic pro- grams as well.
Needless to say, programs perhaps not even envisioned today might be well justified in the future. New technological developments, more- over, could alter some basic assumptions built into these projections. Finally, it should be stressed that these extrapolations relate only to nondefense aspects of the oceanographic program; as indicated else- where in this report, the Navy program might properly experience a considerable expansion in the near future. In addition, the budget out- lined in table 7.4 may not allow for sufficient development of expensive instrumentation or ocean engineering programs. This is not to say that there is no scope for such programs within these figures. Never- theless, the possibility must be recognized that some relatively ex-
pensive, special projects may be needed in the nondefense budget ; this will be particularly true if projects for deep sea submersibles and instrumentation improvements are not funded as part of the Navy’s effort.
Strong arguments might be made for intermittently implementing even some of the more marginal instrumentation or engineering under- takings if: (1) It were deemed in the national interest to maintain more or less intact existing “systems engineering groups,” in the aero- space, electronic, and similar defense industries; and (2) at some time these industries were to experience temporary, cyclic reductions in defense demand. Only temporary, as differentiated from long-term reductions in defense demands would justify such consideration. The economic argument would be that the cost of these system-engineering groups would be relatively low when employed on oceanographic undertakings during periods of temporary displacement from their normal activities. Needless to say, there are many complex issues in- volved in such a decision, not the least of which would be differentiat- ing between temporary and long-term reductions in defense require- ments and evaluating the cost of transferring system-engineering talents from one activity to another and back again.
An ad hoc character also surrounds decisions to invest in more ships for oceanography. As suggested elsewhere in this report, the major problem with regard to ship operations today appears to be funding of operating costs and allocating and combining use of ships for the needs of many small science projects. The budget projections pre- sented in table 7.4 are consistent with the suggestions elsewhere in this report that the present need is not so much for more ship-operating funds as for better coordination and efficiency in use of ships (see sec. 10.6). The possibility should still be recognized that some upward ad- justment in the table 7.4 figures could be required to properly fund ship operations. Certainly, very strong arguments exist for avoiding the situation of the recent past in which ships were seemingly kept op- erating only at the expense of cutbacks in basic research budgets.
A relatively modest budget in absolute terms seems to provide con- siderable scope for the orderly expansion of government-civilian ac- tivities in, on, and around the ocean. Such expansion, moreover, seems consistent with the development of basic oceanographic research, and academic support that is both feasible and not disproportionate to expected needs and development of other scientific fields. Finally, it is a budget that should meet major new needs for civilian ocean missions with a proper emphasis on expanded activities in particular sectors which appears to have the greatest potential for economic benefits.
220-659 O—66—_4 65
8.0. Current Status
This section sumarizes the current status of marine science and technology in terms of recent history and predicted growth. We have attempted to minimize duplication with the reports of the National Academy of Sciences and the Interagency Committee on Oceanog- raphy,’ and thus have not included a description of the number of laboratories and research ships. However, the current organization, financial support, and manpower are crucial to many of our recom- mendations.
8.1. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
Activities in marine sciences and technology tend to be interdisciph- nary and as a rule lack strong professional or academic traditions. Only recently have professional groups developed in ocean technol- ogy. Organizations concerned with broad aspects of geophysics and biology, as well as smaller groups devoted primarily to the oceans, are involved with scientific aspects of oceanography. As a result integra- tion of work in marine science and technology is accomplished by complex interacting organizations and committees which differ in certain respects from those of other fields. Scientific and profes- sional societies have committees, publications, and annual meetings. Ad hoc or continuing groups within industrial associations organize frequent symposia to consider special problems. News of general and particular industrial interest appears in trade publications. Direc- tors of academic oceanographic laboratories meet, usually informally, to consider common interests. Regional associations coordinate ac- tivities of Government, industry, and academic groups. Organiza- tions overlap to considerable extent ; consequently, there is an intimate and fairly rapid exchange of information and opinion.
The Federal organization for marine sciences and technology de-
*“Oceanography 1960 to 1970,” NAS-NRC Committee on Oceanography. Is- sued in 12 parts, 1959-60.
“Oceanography, the Ten Years Ahead,” ICO Pamphlet 10, 1963.
“Oceanography, Achievements and Opportunities,” NAS-NRC Committee on Oceanography (in preparation) ; we are indebted to the committee for allowing us access to current drafts of the manuscript.
66
serves special consideration because it is central to the national effort (see sec. 10 for a detailed discussion of the Federal organization). The Federal Council for Science and Technology, with membership comprised of a high scientific or professional official of each major operating agency and chaired by the President’s Special Assistant for Science and Technology, is responsible for coordinating the agen- cies’ activities in oceanography. The Council created an Interagency Committee on Oceanography, which has members representing more than 20 agencies with missions involving marine science and technol- ogy. The committee records and if possible coordinates the often overlapping programs of the agencies. The Interagency Committee since 1961 has prepared an annual report, the Vational Oceanographic Program, summarizing budgets, goals, problems, and achievements. The Interagency Committee has subpanels which make detailed studies on such subjects as “manpower” or “research ships.” 2? With the aid of a small permanent staff the committee issues special reports in response to the many public inquiries about oceans. Through its many activities and those of its individual members, this committee provides the focus for national as well as Federal activities in marine science and technology.
International activities are also coordinated through a complex or- ganizational structure. Coordination is accomplished through groups representing governments, such as the Intergovernmental Oceano- graphic Commission in UNESCO, and other groups which represent scientific societies within the International Council of Scientific Unions. The impact of these groups is manifest in such large proj- ects as the International Geophysical Year and the International Indian Ocean Expedition.
8.2. SUPPORT
Federal support of oceanography has grown rapidly over the past 10 years. We have selected various measures to indicate this growth, ranging from the support of two older oceanographic laboratories (Scripps Institution of Oceanography and Woods Hole Oceano- graphic Institution) to the Federal budget for oceanography (fig. SEL ye
The most commonly used measure is the budget of the National Oceanographic Program, prepared annually by the Interagency Committee on Oceanography. It has grown from about $8 million in fiscal year 1953 to $220 million in fiscal year 1967. The pattern of growth appears to follow a logistic curve, with an exponential growth of 44 percent per year from some time before 1958 to 1963.
° “Scientific and Technical Personnel in Oceanography,’ ICO Pamphlet 21, No-
vember 1965. “Undersea Vehicles for Oceanography,’ ICO Pamphlet 18, 1965.
67
The logistic curve was approaching a limit of $140 million by 1966, and growth ceased by loss of definition, a characteristic way for a logistic curve to stop. It is not surprising that oceanography which was easy to identify at the $8 million level should be less definite after a seventeenfold growth in funding. For fiscal year 1967 the program was redefined by ICO to include major components of oceanographic engineering in the MOHOLE and Deep Submergence Systems programs, among others (fig. 8.2). Consequent development may initiate a new period and type of growth.
The total Federal oceanographic budget includes defense compo- nents which are not included in the National Oceanographic Pro- gram. The total program, as reflected in the Federal oceanographic budget, continued its exponential growth until 1965, 2 years later than the National Oceanographic Program. It then fluctuated and now stands at about $310 million.
Components of marine science and technology supported by the Federal oceanographic budget are research and teaching in academic institutions. As the concept of oceanography has broadened, the pro- portion of the budget supporting academic research has decreased. A measure of academic oceanographic support is the sum of pertinent grants or contracts from the National Science Foundation and Office of Naval Research. This support grew exponentially from 1957 to 1963, then began to decline (fig. 8.1). Much of the growth in the period 1957-63 supported the establishment and strengthening of new oceano- graphic centers. Asa result older laboratories received a smaller frac- tion of new money. The total Federal contribution to Scripps Insti- tution of Oceanography and Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution grew exponentially from before 1955 and 1963, but at a slower rate than other components of the Federal oceanographic budget (fig. 8.2). During the next 2 years Federal support to these institutions was essentially constant, while the whole oceanographic budget continued to grow rapidly.
The pattern of Federal support which emerges seems reasonably clear. The whole budget and different components all grew expo- nentially from roughly 1958 to 1963. The doubling time was only 2 to 21% years, however, and could not continue for many years without reaching an unsupportable level. Growth in different components
of Federal support from 1958 to 1965 was as follows: Fuld 1. All support of SIO (Scripps Institution of Oceanography) plus WHOI
(Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution) ~_______________ 3 2. Selected support of all academic institutions___________________________ 6 3d. .Nationaloceanographiciprocrams= 29s) 2. ee eee ee ee 9 4: Total Hederalvoceanographic programs. =) 2 ee es al
Beginning with nothing but basic research and education on a few campuses, marine sciences and technology have developed an under-
68
100,000
10,000
1000
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS
100 redefinition
Prior to < redefinition
SIO + WHO! Total Federal support
e @ ence eee?”
Total Academic Oceanography From ONR + NSF
1950 1955 1960 1965 FISCAL YEARS
Figure 8.1. Growth of Federal support for different components of marine science and technology which are discussed in text
lying pyramid of research, development, and service for the Federal Government and technology and service for industry. Applied re- search and development have grown more rapidly than basic research, and it appears that technology in industrial components supported by the Federal Government is growing most rapidly of all.
Federal support of marine sciences and technology is supplemented by activities of State governments and industry. Funds attributable to State governments and industry were quite small only a few years ago, and we know of no summary of them. Consequently, we can only surmise from fragmentary information that support from these
69
300
250 a 200 = S Qa Le Oo » 150 r= fe) = S = oo
100 xe
wrk 7 & New 1yPe> 50 4 PS ~~ 2 oo” zZ eNt07a,~*— was <h RS wr “Se 0
1953 1955 1957 1959 1961 1963 1965 1967 FISCAL YEARS
Figure 8.2. Growth of Federal support for marine science and technology facilities and operations as discussed in tert
sources has grown and is growing very rapidly. In the past 5 years industry has produced a very substantial capacity in marine sciences and technology which is now backed by a fleet of ships (including deep submersibles), several field laboratories, large staffs and com- mitments for future growth. It is likely that this growth has been even faster than growth in Federal support in this field, but con- clusive data are not available.
8.3. MANPOWER CONSIDERATIONS
Present Manpower. We estimate that about 500 to 600 profes- sional oceanographers are active in the United States at present, even though comprehensive polls on the number, distribution, and training of oceanographers yield conflicting results. Further studies probably will not resolve differences because of the difficulty in defining an
70
oceanographer. Accepting various definitions * in 1963-64 the total oceanographic science staff was 2,600 to 3,200, and the number of Ph. D.’s was 500 to 600. Other definitions yield different though simi- lar numbers. Some 550 individuals, for example, are sufficiently well known to be listed in the latest International Directory of Oceanog- raphers.* Another measure is the number of degreeholders in oceanography. A poll of the degree-granting institutions showed that 504 M.S. and 266 Ph. D. degrees have been granted to oceanographers over the past 20 years. An oceanographer in this definition is taken to be a degree-recipient with experience at sea and a broad knowledge of the ocean, regardless of the field of study. Finally, the number of oceanographers who produce scientific papers important enough to be cited by other scientists can be counted. Some 370 such individuals have been identified by our study, and a more comprehensive one might raise the number to 500. As in other sciences, however, 10 percent (37) of these cited oceanographers receive 50 percent of the citations. It should be noted that various attempts at measurement do not neces- sarily relate to the same people. Many oceanographers with Ph. D.’s did not receive them in oceanography.
Sources of Manpower. An oceanographer is a scientist or engineer whose work is concerned with the sea. Concern may have developed at any stage in his training or professional career. Manpower comes into the field in many ways, and opinions differ on what is ideal. Some of today’s leading oceanographers took courses in oceanography, but many did not. The important point is that all scientists and engi- neers, regardless of training, are potential oceanographers. It may be difficult for a chemist to become a biologist, but it is relatively easy for him to become a marine chemist.
Students. We concern ourselves here only with graduate students working toward degrees in marine sciences. The number of students identified by the Interagency Committee on Oceanography and the National Science Foundation increased from 90 in 1960 to 290 in 1965 (fig. 8.3). These numbers, referring to students in “oceanographic departments” defined in a certain way, do not purport to be the total number in the marine sciences. Consequently, we polled 12 oceano- graphic departments and found that students working toward degrees at these places increased from 547 in 1963 to 763 in 1965 (fig. 8.3). This, once again, is not a complete list of students even in marine sciences, because oceanography is taught elsewhere. It does show that
% «Seientific and Technical Personnel in Oceanography,’ ICO Pamphlet 21, 1965. “A Study as 'to the Numbers and Characterisics of Oceanographic Personnel in the United States,” Internat. Ocean. F'dn., Miami, Rept. to NSF, 1964.
* Vetter, R. C., An International Directory of Oceanographers, 4th ed., NAS- NRC staff rept., 1964.
fg
there are more students than have been recognized and provides infor- mation on the rate of increase in their number.
Our data and ICO-NSF data show that the number of oceanography students has increased exponentially for the past 3 years. Moreover, students from these separate studies were proportional during 1964 and 1965. Using this relationship to extrapolate data back to 1960, the number of students at that time would be 220. On this basis, the number of students in 1954 would be 100; the number in 1947 would be 30. These figures seem reasonable in terms of the experience of Panel members. If these extrapolations can be accepted, the number of students increased exponentially for almost two decades at about the same rate that it has during the past few years.
The rate of increase for the past few years is 18 percent per year, and the doubling time is 414 years. If this trend, which probably has continued for a considerable length of time, prevails for only one more doubling period to fiscal year 1970, the number of students will exceed 1,500.
Degrees. The Interagency Committee on Oceanography and the National Science Foundation have determined the number of degrees granted in oceanography, defined with the same restrictions used in determining the number of students. They find the number of M.S. degrees is increasing sharply, but the number of Ph. D.’s is relatively constant (fig. 8.3). We have polled 12 degree-granting institutions. In 1962 and 1963, 17 and 16 Ph. D.’s, respectively, were granted, which is somewhat larger than the ICO-NSF determinations but indicates the same constant rate. In 1964 and 1965 a striking growth occurred to 28 and then 57 degrees, respectively. This growth is reflected in several individual institutions. The series for 1962 through 1965 at the University of Miami is 1, 3, 6, 10; at Scripps Institution of Oceanography it is 3, 2, 11, 17.
Growth in Ph. D.’s is exponential with a doubling time of about 1 year. That it may continue for another year is indicated by numer- ous spontaneous comments received in the course of the polling. For example at certain institutions more students received degrees at the middle of the present year than the whole of last year. At others which do not grant midterm degrees, many students have had theses accepted, although in the past theses have rarely been completed so early. Growth cannot continue for very long, because degrees are currently being granted to almost as many students as entered the in- stitutions only 6 years ago. Presumably, the time required to earn a degree in oceanography has declined sharply in the last few years, as the number of students increases. Perhaps after 1 more year the rate of increase will drop to 18 percent, parallel to the increase in number of students. Even with such a dramatic drop, some 200 new Ph. D.’s will be granted in oceanography in 1970. Thus, the annual production
72
of Ph. D.’s by 1970 will be of the same order as the total produced in the last two decades. We conclude that the rapid increase of Federal support to oceanography in the period 1958-63 has had a profound influence on the number of professionally trained oceanographers. This rapid increase, if accompanied by a continuation of the present budget, can only lead to major problems some 2 to 4 years hence.
1000
e e s of
Graduate students at 12 oceanography centers
100 oe
Graduate students in ¢ ‘‘Oceanography’’ as identified by |CO—NSF
PhD’s granted at 10 oceanographic centers
10 —
NUMBER OF STUDENTS OR PhD’S
PhD’s granted in ~osor" ‘‘Oceanography’’ as in identified by ICO—NSF
1958 1960 1965 1969 FISCAL YEARS
Figure 8.3. Growth of students and degrees in oceanography as discussed in text
8.4. NATIONAL INTEREST IN THE OCEANS
While we address ourselves in this report primarily to the Federal role in the oceans, we are fully aware that State and municipal govern- ments and particularly private industry are important components of the national interest in the oceans. We believe that this awareness is evident throughout the report, in that we recommend strengthening Federal programs in the oceans which support socially and economi- cally important activities by the States and private industry. We rec-
73
ommend, for example, increased support for near-shore oceanography, the subje¢t of greatest immediate interest for recreation and pollution control. We recommend increased weather and sea-state predictions, which are urgently needed by the marine components of industry. However, it is useful to compare the Federal ocean program with other components of the entire national program to indicate the back- ground which influenced the Panel in its deliberations. The total Federal program in marine science and technology for fiscal year 1967 is funded at $310 million. This is less than the $380 million value of the U.S. fisheries’ catch in 1964.6 Federal expenditures for marine science and technology during the past decade approach $1.5 billion.® During the same period U.S. petroleum companies spent a far larger sum on the Continental Shelves of this country. From 1953 to 1964, the Outer Continental Shelves yielded over $2 billion in bonuses, rentals, and royalties,’ and the Inner Continental Shelves from 1956 to 1965 yielded another $963 million. During this period the petro- leum industry also spent $400 million on geophysical exploration of the shelves * and supported the development of a prosperous industry constructing off-shore drilling platforms.
These are only examples. A comprehensive catalog of components of the national interest in the oceans would be very lengthy indeed, and we list only a few statistics related to marine science and tech- nology in table 8.1. We focus on the Federal program with due con- sideration of its impact on the whole national interest.
TABLE 8.1.—Some statistics related to marine science and technology
1. National oceanography program (1964)____________________ $123, 000, 000 2. Navy classified oceanography (1964)_____________-_________ 55, 000, 000 o. ATM y, COrps Of -Hinginers) (1964 222222 eee 183, 000, 000 (a) Construction of harbors and channels (marine) __~ 95, 000, 000
(6) Operation and maintenance, harbors and channels (Ma.Tine)) hee oe ee Se ee 84, 000, 000 (c) Beach erosion control, surveys, research____--__~~- 4, 000, 000 4 Maritime: Administrations (1964) ete seas ee eee 273, 000, 000 (@)) .Salary.supplement222 22 =e ee eee 187, 000, 000 (O) 2 Draining = tae ee oe eee eit Ra ee eee 8, 000, 000
(@eShipreonstructionssubsidies=22222 222-2 — aaa 78, 000, 000
® Department of Interior appropriation hearings, 1966.
7 Carl Savit, hearings before Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, H.R., Aug. 21, 22, 1963. Annual and accrued mineral production, U.S. Geological Survey, various years. Includes $771 million in dispute with Louisiana.
5 Based on the Panel’s correspondence with agencies of the States of Alaska, California, Louisiana, Oregon, and Texas.
* See Savit under (7) above.
74
TABLE 8.1.—Some statistics related to marine secience and technology—Continued
5. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, ship construction subsidies
(CLOG) Pe IS NRE Se ee $5, 000, 000 6. World fisheries catch (1964)__________ (billion pounds) ____ 114 7. U.S. fisheries catch (1964)___________ (billion pounds) ____ 5. 82 8. U.S. fisheries catch (1964) value 1964______________ 380, 000, 000 9. Value world fisheries 1964__________-________-___- 5, 000, 000, 000 10. Offshore geophysical exploration for oil (1961) _____________ 28, 000, 000 11. Total cost of U.S. offshore geophysical exploration for oil LOR LOGO Seas a ae ee eee ee nee ee 400, 000, 000 12. Bonuses, rentals, and shut-in gas payments, U.S. Outer Con- tinentale Shelf (1953-64) =.= 2 ee ee 1, 664, 000, 000 13. Royalties U.S. Outer Continental Shelf (1953-64)__________ 388, 000, 000 14. Oil wells off Louisiana (1963) _____________________ 4, 400 15. Expenditures of sport fishermen (1960) ___-_______________ 2, 690, 000, 000 16. Value of outboard motors sold (1960)_____-_______________ 167, 000, 000 17. Value of outboard motorboats sold (1960)___-_-_________ 257, 000, 000 18. Bonuses, rentals, and shut-in payments, Inner Continental Shelf(1956—6)0) 2222— 3a ae ne eee eee ee ee 411, 000, 000 19. Royalties Continental Shelf (1956-65) _____________________ 552, 000, 000 20. Total revenues from U.S. Continental Shelf during about OMY Career ea See eS ee eo eee ee 3, 000, 000, 000
ala le
12. 13. 15. 16. 17.
REFERENCES AND NOTES
ICO Pamphlet 17, January 1965.
ICO Pamphlet 17 gives DOD oceanography as $55 million—almost all Navy. DOD appropriation hearings, 1966, pt. 5 states only 47 percent of total Navy oceanography appears in ICO estimates for 1966. Classified, thus, is assumed equal to unclassified in 1964.
Presidential budget, 1966, 3 a, b, all identifiable expenditure on rivers eliminated. Federal expenses may not exceed one-third of cost.
Presidential budget, 1966.
Department of Interior appropriation hearings, 1966.
Department of Interior appropriation hearings, 1966.
Department of Interior appropriation hearings, 1966; equal to $100 million of GNP according to Economic Benefits from Oceanographic Research.
‘Pure guess at $0.05 per pound. . Geophysics, v. 27, pp. 859-886. For 275 crew-months and estimated $0.1 million
per month.
. Carl Savit, hearings before Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, H.R.,
Aug. 21, 22, 1963.
Annual and accrued mineral production, U.S. Geological Survey, various years. Includes $771 million in dispute with Louisiana.
See 10.
See 10.
Statistical abstract, 1964, ocean component not identified.
See 15.
See 15.
18-20. Based on Panel’s correspondence with agencies of the States of Alaska, Cali-
fornia, Louisiana, Oregon, and Texas.
75
9.0 Education and Manpower
9.1. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS IN OCEANOGRAPHIC MAN- POWER
It is very difficult to anticipate absolute future needs for ocean- ographic manpower. In the future oceanographers may be employed by liberal arts colleges and universities, oceanographic departments and institutions, Gvernment agencies and industry. They may serve on foreign assignment as experts or may train administrative sup- port personnel including those for ships. Numbers that will be needed are most uncertain. For example we do not know whether or not liberal arts colleges and universities will be giving courses in ocean- ography in the next 20 years. The Panel believes, however, that projected figures for manpower discussed in section 8.3 are sufficient to meet foreseeable needs. Of greatest concern to the Panel is not the number being trained, but the quality of their education.
9.2. EDUCATION FOR RESEARCH WORKERS
As noted before it is possible to begin work related to oceans at any level of academic training or even after formal training has ceased. At the time an individual receives a Ph. D., he is qualified to do re- search (and teaching) in at least a limited field. This limited field may be exhausted rapidly, however, or may expand in unexpected directions. If the scientist is narrowly trained and unable te start over again, his career as a researcher may be concluded a few years after it begins. In contrast if his training is broad, he has little difficulty in following wherever his work leads or in transferring his interest to some new and exciting sector of research. Although the number of Ph. D.’s in oceanography is increasing very rapidly, the proportion that are adequately trained in basic physics, mathematics, chemistry or biology issmall. Thus, the large number should not give us comfort, because only a much smaller group is equipped to be effective in applying new techniques from contemporary science to problems in the ocean. Some individuals with oceanographic training have made contributions to a wide range of scientific fields, but these are exceptions.
76
Most educational institutions have discontinued undergraduate training in oceanography, reasoning that at least an undergraduate degree in fundamental sciences is necessary for effective work in the highly competitive oceanography of the future. A Ph. D. in oceanog- raphy may be too specilized if it exerts a negative influence on the intellectual level of oceanography. This is reflected in research pro- grams, in vaguely defined objectives that purportedly justify world- encircling expeditions and even in lack of focus on proposed national programs in oceanography. The limitations of depth in graduate training in oceanography have caused concern in some academic oceanographic centers. Consequently, a broad background in basic sciences is required for admission to some graduate schools. It is also increasingly common for advanced training in basic science and mathematics to form an integral component of graduate education in oceanography. This is a very promising development which may eventually produce a larger percentage of Ph. D.’s in oceanography capable of full, productive careers in research and training. Another hopeful development is the establishment of educational programs in the broad area of environmental sciences. The close linkage of oceanography with other environmental sciences and with basic sciences has been illustrated throughout this report and supports the thesis that classical Ph, D. training in oceanography will not serve the purposes of ocean science and technology in the years ahead.
If oceanographers receive most of their education in basic science, mathematics, and environmental sciences, it may be possible to educate them in places other than oceanographic laboratories. If a biology department in any university has a few or even one professor interested in the oceans, he can direct thesis research and produce students capable of undertaking careers as oceanographers. The actual research may require some use of special facilities in an oceanographic or marine biology laboratory. However, it may be even more dependent on a reactor or an advanced computer which may be available at the univer- sity but not at the marine laboratory. The need for special facilities provides one reason for organizing associations of universities and oceanographic laboratories. Arrangements can be made for joint degrees, exchange of lecturers or some other appropriate relationship. In this way the number of students trained in basic science with marine- oriented theses could be substaintially increased at a relatively low cost. Rather than establishing new oceanographic laboratories, nu- merous existing ones could be expanded to accommodate visiting grad- uate students and professors. The Panel believes that restricting education to a few oceanographic institutions will exert a debilitating effect on long-term development of oceanography. We would prefer to see a wide variety of institutions throughout the country have a few faculty members interested in oceanography and capable of directing
77
student theses even though some portion of the work will be taken at a special facility which has limited, if any, relationship with the university.
Some system is needed to attract scientists whose interest in the oceans is aroused only after they have received Ph. D.’s. It seems cer- tain that the most effective but difficult way to recruit oceanographers would be to effect a postdoctoral transistion ; for example, from a Ph. D. physics education to research in oceanography. <A favorable environ- ment for such transition would exist if university and oceanographic laboratory associations which we have suggested are formed. If facul- ty members in university departments of basic sciences do research on marine aspects of their disciplines, students may be expected to con- sider similar research careers. It should be emphasized that these re- marks apply to research and teaching in engineering as well as science. In fact the recent history of engineering education may be cited as a precedent for the whole discussion. Engineering students take in- creasing amounts of mathematics and basic science, and training for various specialities is almost indistinguishable. Oceanographic en- gineering research thus generally will be performed by very broadly trained engineers.
In the future many university departments may include faculty members whose research is ocean-oriented, provided that the research standards in the field compare favorably with those in other areas. Spreading oceanography into more universities is thus critically de- pendent on raising research standards related to the oceans to the quality maintained in other sciences.
9.3. EDUCATION FOR TECHNOLOGY AND COMMERCE
Some areas of the industrial community have suggested that aero- space engineers should do oceanographic engineering if defense or space requirements should slacken. This substantiates the point that a career in marine technology or commerce may be based on education which is not marine-oriented. On the other hand, the oceanographic environment is complex and little known, and it would be surprising if oceanographers now being trained at oceanographic laboratories did not remain in demand for marine technology and commerce. Ma- rine mining, aquiculture, geophysical survey, pollution control, and the like will require individals with broad understanding of the complete marine environment.
9.4. IMPLICATIONS OF MANPOWER CHANGE
The rapid increase in students and degrees which we have identified (see sec. 8) has had a marked effect on Federal support for oceano- graphic education. The total number of NSF and ONR contracts and grants to oceanography gives a measure of Federal support. By this
78
measure the support granted for Ph. D.’s has declined by 67 per cent during the past 2 years. If both support and degree output grow at expected rates, present support per individual will decrease nearly 90 per cent by 1970. This does not mean that it will be small compared to other sciences. At present, Federal support is $170,000 per year per Ph. D. granted, a figure which is substantially higher than Federal support of about $39,000 per Ph. D. in chemistry but of the same order of magnitude as that for high energy physics. If all qualified students who wish graduate education in oceanography are to receive training in the present style, support will be grossly inadequate by 1970. How- ever, an unrestricted expansion of the present style of education 1s not a desirable goal. The alternative of education through associations between universities and oceanographic laboratories should be less expensive as well as more fruitful than expansion of laboratories alone. On the other hand, it is evident that some expansion of laboratories, especially student facilities (including housing), will be essential re- gardless of the mode of oceanographic education.
9.5. MARINE STUDY CENTERS
In a few universities graduate departments other than environ- mental sciences have become increasingly involved in ocean-oriented research and education. Adoption of the recommendations of this report would accelerate this trend by calling attention to the highly interdisciplinary nature of many of the most important and interest- ing problems involved in ocean science and technology. The report naturally emphasizes scientific and technological challenges. How- ever, we are critically aware of numerous legal, social, and economic problems posed by the proposed redirection and expansion of our efforts in the ocean.
Work in interdisciplinary areas would be facilitated by the estab- lishment of Marine Study Centers, whose role would be not only to foster studies on applications of science and technology to the sea, but also to relate them to underlying natural sciences and to social sci- ences—economics, sociology, psychology, politics, and law—as they are affected by and in turn affect occupation and exploitation of the sea.
We visualize Marine Study Centers as centers of advanced study, not as degree-granting departments. We recommend a Federal grant program for developing this capability in institutions already deeply involved in marine-science study.
79
10.0. Federal Organization and Program
10.1. FEDERAL INTEREST—PAST AND PRESENT
Federal involvement in marine science, oldest of the Federal Gov- ernment’s scientific pursuits, began with the Coast Survey’s found- ing in 1807 to meet the needs of the Nation’s navigators. Over the years other agencies manifested need for knowledge of the sea, but federally sponsored marine-science programs did not gain momentum until 1956. At that time a group of Government oceanographers, stimulated by advances realized under Navy sponsorship dating from World War II and impressed by opportunities the imminent Inter- national Geophysical Year presented, initiated activities which pro- duced today’s greatly expanded program.*
A major report on the national importance of knowledge of the seas with a recommended program for its pursuit was produced in 1959, under a Government contract, by the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Oceanography. This report, a prototype of many which have subsequently appeared, motivated increased Federal interest and support for oceanography and also raised serious ques- tions in industry and Government about the adequacy of the pro- grams planned for exploring and understanding the seas.
The intensity of present interest within the industrial community and in Congress is well illustrated by the lengthy congressional hear- ings held in the summer of 1965 regarding some 19 bills submitted during the first session of the 89th Congress. These and subsequent bills reflect a widespread impression that the Nation’s marine interests are not being adequately pursued by the executive branch. This is commonly attributed to organizational fragmentation of Federal responsibility for oceanography and to lack of a sufficiently high- level advocate for ocean science and technology.
The executive branch’s position has been that oceanography has advanced rapidly in the last 5 years under the leadership of the Fed- eral Council for Science and Technology with the coordination pro-
1 An excellent historical summary is given in the preface of ‘National Ocean- ographic Program,” ICO Pamphlet 24, 1966, which is included as app. IV ot this report.
80
vided by its Interagency Committee on Oceanography. The Marine Resources and Engineering Development Act of 1966 incorporates the first two approaches. The Act establishes a National Council on Marine Resources and Engineering Development, chaired by the Vice President and with Cabinet level members. The Council has very broad responsibilities to advise and assist the President in furthering the effective use of the sea. The Act also establishes a Presidential