Statistics on State and private funding are now being collected by 

 the Council because encouragement of non-Federal investment is a 

 matter of special concern in order that all activities be mutually 

 reinforcing. When economic incentives are promising, American 

 private enterprise takes the initiative. When profits are too long 

 deferred or risks too high (relative to alternative possible ventures), 

 private investment is inhibited. With better understanding of the 

 total Federal/non-Federal enterprise, appropriate Federal steps can 

 be developed for sound private investment in exploration, techno- 

 logical development, marine commerce, and economic utilization of 

 marine resources. 



A similar objective appears with regard to the States. Local and 

 regional interests and problems — related especially to development of 

 seashore resources — are so varied that local initiatives should be en- 

 couraged to study problems, to develop solutions, and to make thought- 

 ful use of local resources. Here also, the Federal Government may 

 take the lead to foster a creative partnership with the several States 

 in marine science affairs. 



Council Analysis of Federal Programs 



At the July 13, 1966, commissioning of the ESSA ship Oceano- 

 grapher^ the President requested his Marine Sciences Council to re- 

 view the report, "Effective Use of the Sea," which had just been 

 released by his Science Advisory Committee, and to develop initial 

 recommendations by the following January. Accordingly, the Coun- 

 cil analyzed ongoing efforts to identify gaps or lack of balance. It 

 then concentrated on selecting priority areas, developing action pro- 

 grams, designating agency responsibilities, and formulating means for 

 interagency collaboration in conformity with statutory marine science 

 objectives and policy. 



Prompt action was desirable because budget planning for fiscal year 

 1968 was well underway. Unless analyses were completed in time to 

 identify program changes for the 1968 budget cycle, the direct impact 

 of Council actions on programs requiring financial support would 

 almost surely have been delayed a full year. 



In addition to analyzing the more than 100 recommendations in- 

 cluded in the report of the President's Science Advisory Committee, 

 the Council staff carefully considered suggestions of the Interagency 

 Committee on Oceanography and the National Academy of Sciences' 

 Committee on Oceanography, as well as recommendations submitted 

 by individual Government agencies related to new possibilities in the 

 marine sciences programs. The Council then selected nine programs 

 for priority attention and made recommendations to the President 

 accordingly. Eight of the programs require additional fiscal year 

 1968 financing in the amount of $40.5 million. In addition, the Coun- 



30 



