OCEAN SCIENCES AND NATIONAL SECURITY 141 



graphic research program would mean that relatively, it would not 

 have grown at all. 



Considering the unusual vigor with which these proposals for re- 

 search have been pursued, it is natural to conclude that all three studies 

 intended that the special acceleration of the program would result in 

 gains over what would be realized if the field of oceanograph}^ were 

 allowed to mature in its own good time, and by purely random proc- 

 esses of growth. Apparently expansion b\^ something more than a 

 factor of two was intended. 



A close examination of the proposals reveals, that in terms of details, 

 an expansion bv a factor of 4 is actuallv involved, rather than by the 

 factor 2. ' 



For example, the proposals noted that the number of scientists 

 that can be effectively associated with each oceanographic research 

 ship (in terms of both those at sea collecting data, and those remaining 

 at the laboratories planning expeditions or analyzing and interpret- 

 ing earlier findings) amounts to roughly 60 per ship. If the fleet of 

 research and survey vessels is expanded to 85, as the NASCO report 

 visualizes, then the number of professional staff that would be cor- 

 respondingly employed numbers about 5,100. The number listed as 

 active in the field in 1958 was 1,548. As more laboratory facilities 

 are added by which conditions in the ocean can be simulated so as to 

 l^ermit the performance of controlled experiments, rather than utiliz- 

 ing the piu:ely random effects one finds in the open sea, the number 

 of laboratory staff relative to the size of the fleet ma}^ be even larger. 

 Not considered in these NASCO estimates are the additions of staft" 

 for other seagoing facilities; that is, special vehicles for exploration in 

 the very deep parts of the ocean, as well as mobile (floating), anchored, 

 or fixed stations (perhaps at the ocean bottom). 



Detailed analysis of the program content, in terms of funds for 

 research and for hydrographic surveying, also reveals an increase by 

 a factor of between 3 and 4. 



If the jprofjram has been designed to match the estimated needs for new 

 knowledge of the sea, then in the aggregate an expansion by something on 

 the order of 4 over the next 10 years rather than 2 is implicit in the p)fo- 

 posals — expansion in funding, and in staff. This is essentially double 

 the rate at which science and technology are now growing as a whole. 



As compared to growth in space research by a factor of 4 in an inter- 

 val of 3 years, this would not be a crash program. It is clear, how- 

 ever, from other indications, that this rate of expansion will not accrue 

 if the present low rates of graduates and of funding continue. 



The next question concerns the type of organizations in which 

 expansion should occur. Will all of the growth develop in existing 

 university and nonprofit laboratories? Will new organizations enter 

 the scene, and, if so, what kind? 



Regardless of whether the factor of 2 is selected for the degree of 

 future expansion of oceanic research, or some larger number, there 

 is question as to how and where this expansion is visualized as taking 

 place with greatest effectiveness. There may be arguments raised 

 that as a field of science, oceanography should grow unfettered by 

 specific Government planning. But the fact that the Government 

 will have a primary role of financial sponsorship generates a strong 

 obligation to study the increased disbursement of public funds very 

 carefuUy. 



