18 



part of the ocean, going along with some of the other testimony 

 you have heard. 



We, the scientists and the centers, applaud the House of Repre- 

 sentatives and the Senate both for their efforts in trying to get 

 through a bill. Last year, the National Undersea Research Pro- 

 gram Act of 1992 passed the House, almost got through the Senate, 

 and, unfortunately, was killed in the last minutes of the last Con- 

 gress. This legislation is absolutely essential to assure stability in 

 the programs, both nationally and regionally, and we hope that a 

 new bill will be introduced this year. We feel that it is absolutely 

 essential to give a message that undersea research is here to stay. 



I have some comments on the bill, and hopefully we can work 

 with your staff later on if a bill is introduced with some specific 

 information that we would like to give them. And I would just like 

 to say that, again, we really do appreciate the foresight and sup- 

 port of undersea research by Congress over the years and feel that 

 if it wasn't for Congress, we basically would be studying the oceans 

 from a glass-bottom bucket. Thank you. 



[The prepared statement of Dr. Wicklund may be found at the 

 end of the hearing.] 



Mr. Ortiz. Doctor, thank you very much for sharing with us your 

 ideas and, of course, your views. Certainly, this has been very, very 

 interesting testimony. At this time, I would like to ask a few brief 

 questions and then open the floor to members to see if they might 

 have questions from this panel. 



I would like to address this question to the entire panel. Do you 

 feel that the $16 million appropriated last year for NURP is ade- 

 quate to support the needs of the civilian undersea research com- 

 munity? If not, how much more additional funding is needed so 

 that you all can adequately do the job that has to be done? 



Dr. Earle. The answer to the question is no — inadequate. How 

 much? What is it that we want to accomplish? It is easy to dream. 

 The price tag can be small, and the accomplishment small. The 

 price tag can be large, and the accomplishment small depending on 

 how it is used. The funding needs to be coupled, of course, with a 

 wise plan. There are many people eager to contribute to such a 

 plan, and many people have been working toward that end. 



You have heard in this testimony of earnest efforts to try to ad- 

 dress what the National Underwater Research Program should be, 

 and we are far short of the goals that are set out as defined by 

 these various studies, and it isn't just what we have heard in dis- 

 cussions today. I mean, the National Academies have had various 

 times in the past few years looking at issues, but the funding stays 

 low, and it seems to be a low priority. And I don't mean to pick on 

 poor NOAA or the Department of Commerce. 



I think it is a national issue, that if we as a nation are commit- 

 ted to a strong national underwater research program, the agencies 

 responsible for this will follow and take the lead that the Nation as 

 a whole gives. But we have struggled with this profile that people 

 take for granted perhaps that we already have the answers to the 

 questions that NURP is addressing. The truth is we don't have the 

 answers. We really need to draw on the expertise and develop a 

 strong national plan and the funding to go with it. 



