88 



envrionments within the EEZ, and for the deep sea, to full ocean depth. There is a need 

 IF this nation is serious about understanding, using, and conserving ocean resources, IF 

 this nation is serious about understanding global change issues, IF there is a desire to 

 maintain a leadership position with respect to ocean issues genoally. 



NURP is the logical organization to coordinate an expanded program of submersible 

 activity, in cooperation with institutions that already have a proven track record of 

 performance - such as Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. If a serious effort is 

 made to implement new platforms, a serious commitment must be made to provide on- 

 going support to NURP.. If NURP continues to be funded in the hap-hazard way, that has 

 chaiactoized the past decacte, it would be most inappropriate for NURP to be given 

 responsibility for major new focilities. 



QUESTION 10. Do you believe that thoe is ovctI^ or duplication in the undersea 

 research activities funded by NURP, Sea Grant and the Navy? How can we better 

 coOTdinate undersea research? 



RESPONSE. 



As indicated above, thoe is already some co(q)aation, but not much overliq> or 



duplication. If the time comes when there is serious development of federally supported 



civilian undersea research activity, it would be highly beneficial to encourage 



coordination and expanded cooperation among federal agencies — and relevant private 



institutions. 



QUESTION 1 1 . What is the danger of allowing J^»n to take the world leadership role 

 in undo^ea technology and research? What can the U.S. do to recapture the momentum 

 in this area (and) re-emerge as the world leader in this critical area of research? 



RESPONSE. 



Japan's present leadership in undersea technology stems from an awareness of the 

 economic, environmental and strategic importance of the oceans. Why should this 

 nation's interest be less? 



Presently, Japan supports substantial ocean research and development because it is 

 believed to be in that nation's best interest to do so. Is it not also in the best interests 

 of the U.S. to gain real working access to fiill ocean depth, therd)y putting all of the 

 living ecosystems of the world within reach - instead of ignoring vast areas, or leaving 

 them to the discretion of other nations? 



It is particularly important that the U.S. maintain at least equal access to the world's 

 oceans, particularly since jurisdictional questions are still largely open with respect to 

 areas beyond the EEZs of the world. Precedents will be set by those who have the 

 capability of getting to remote areas and establishing an effective working presence. 



If this nation is content for Japan to set the tone for what will happen to the remaining 

 ocean wilderness, to establish guidelines - through actions they uniquely can take — 

 for utilization of ocean space and ocean resources, then so be it By the end of 1993, 

 Japan will be the only nation in the world with effective working access to an area of the 

 ocean as large as the United States ~ the deep sea below 6000 meters depth. Maybe this 

 poses no dangers to the ocean or to our national interest, but it might be helpful if various 

 points of view other than those expressed by one nation could be taken into account with 



