122 'OCEAiq^oGiSA^pirY 



The promise for eventual deliberate farming of the sea depends on these par- 

 ticular areas of research. To omit these phases of the program is perhaps to 

 deny the future. It seems to us that failure to include these phases is evidence 

 of ah unfavorable preponderance of emphasis on relatively narrow trade-oriented 

 commercial fishery thinking. The result, in our view, is too much emphasis on 

 applied as distinct from basic research. A greatly strengthened ecological 

 approach needs to be injected to give better balance to this very important 

 program. 



The Committee's question No. 5 dealing with the balance between the 

 various aspects of marine .science brings up another point which we feel should 

 be called to the attention of your committee. 



There have been a number of expressions of concern about the relative lack 

 of emphasis on the biological sciences in the NAS-NRC report. The American 

 Fisheries Society, for instance, adopted the following resolution in September 

 li)59 : 



"Whereas the National Academy of Scienees-National Research Council has 

 recently published reports pointing out the Nation's critical need for an expanded 

 oceanographic research program : and 



"Whereas the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives have each cre- 

 ated a special committee to study oceanographic problems and recommend new 

 legislation and programs to implement the National Academy of Sciences-Na- 

 tional Research Council reports: and 



"Whereas a careful study of these reports and publications indicated that the 

 biological aspects of the proposed program are subt)rdinated to other disciplines : 

 Now, therefore, be it 



''Resolved, That the society (1) commends the administration and the Con- 

 gress for the interest the.y have expressed in expanding the national effort in 

 oceanographic research; (2) expresses its concern that the vitally important 

 biological aspects of the oceanographic research program be given more adequate 

 recognition in the development and implementation of plans * * *." 



This rather obvious neglect of the biological aspects of oceanography has been 

 noted by other groups. For instance, the Department of the Interior's Advisory 

 Committee on Fish and W^ildlife made the following recommendation to the 

 Secretary of the Interior on October 20, 1959 : 



"The 10-year oceanographic research program of the National Academy of 

 Sciences is a vitall.v important undertaking which the Committee supports. The 

 Committee is hopeful that greater emphasis will be given to the basic biological 

 aspects, especially of the fishes. A preponderance of effort is now proposed 

 on physical oceanography. AVe believe that added emphasis on biological re- 

 search would strengthen the program and greatly increase its overall value." 



To sum up our views, we question whether the proposed national oceano- 

 graphic research program adequately meets the accepted Federal resptmsibility 

 for basic research. We appreciate that the long-range national security benefits 

 are implicit in efforts to increase food supplies — but this is not the entire prob- 

 lem. There should certainly be a more e<iuitable balance between the biological 

 and physical aspects of the program to enhance what are perhaps equally im- 

 portant long and short-range social and economic benefits to our Nation realiza- 

 ble from sport fishing. There should also be a better balance between inshore 

 and estuary research and the deep sea research that has been most emphasized 

 in previous testimony. 



Obviously, we are concerned more with the details rather than with the basic 

 structure of the report. This is because the implementing recommendations 

 made thus far for detailed ocean resource studies that woidd follow seem to us 

 to be somewhat more narrowly conceived and shortsighted than desirable for 

 the overall public interest. Basic research is accorded secondary importance 

 when it should l)e primary. There is an obvious lack of balance, not only in 

 the overall report as between physical and biological research, but in the sec- 

 tion on ocean resources as between basic ])iology and trade-oriented develop- 

 mental research as well. There is an evident lack of appreciation for the under- 

 lying long-range importance of detailed life history and ecology studies, be- 

 havior in nature, and population dynamics of marine organisms, espei'ially 

 fishes. 



We are concerned, too, as you might expect, over thf overt restriction of re- 

 search attention to coinmeiTial or food fishes. Tliis indicates inadeipiate appre- 

 ciation of the vast soci;il and ecoinmiic signiHcaiH e of marine <^islierv resources 

 and the sport fishing industry. For exam])le. in 19"."). t^ dota'led study of the 

 State's marine sport fi.shery was made by the New .Jersey 1>-" artnient of Con- 



