OCEAN SCIENCES AND NATIONAL SECURITY 159 



instance, from 1953-57, when IGY began, the responsibihties for plan- 

 ning were vested in the USNC-IGY completely fostered by the Na- 

 tional Academy of Sciences. This IGY Committee had full respon- 

 sibility for planning all aspects of the scientific program, including 

 its administration, fiscal management, and logistic support. Funds 

 were provided through the National Science Foundation. 



When the Committee on Polar Research succeeded the IGY Com- 

 mittee, these responsibilities were undertaken on behalf of the Na- 

 tional Science Foundation by the National Academy of Sciences. 

 In the main, however, logistic support was arranged through the 

 Navy which, at that time, was providing the necessary logistic support 

 at DOD expense rather than that of the Committee on Polar Research 

 (from the National Science Foundation). Many of the same staff 

 from IGY continued with the CPR. 



This activity, however, was not consistent with the normal func- 

 tions of the National Academy of Sciences which, with the exception 

 of such unusual circumstances as the IGY itself, does not engage in 

 scientific operations, but rather serves in an advisory capacity to the 

 Government. It is for this reason that in 1959 the Academy divested 

 itself of Antarctic responsibilities and the National Science Founda- 

 tion, consonant with its statutory requirements, accepted the full re- 

 sponsibility. Many of the same CPR staff also transferred to the 

 NSF so that some continuity in program and management was 

 maintained. 



At the present time, the National Science Foundation has overall 

 program and budgetary responsibility, although it solicits advice 

 from the National Academy of Sciences, regarding both national pro- 

 grams and policies. The Academy is responsible for international 

 cooperation through SCAR, the Special Committee on Antarctic 

 Research, set up under ICSU at the conclusion of the IGY. 



Logistic support, incidentally, is still to a great extent provided 

 by Navy Task Force 43 and there is every expectation that the re- 

 sponsibilities for a U.S. program in the Antarctic mil continue through 

 NSF. 



That some uneasiness has developed concerning the effectiveness of 

 the current program is revealed in a statement by Representative 

 Clement J. Zablocki, of Wisconsin, appearing before the House Com- 

 mittee on Interior and Insular Affairs, June 13, 1960, and spealdng 

 on behalf of a bill, H.R. 5222, concerned with the establishment 

 of a commission to plan, develop, organize, coordinate, and direct 

 Antarctic activities; 



I am certain that you will atrree with me, Mr. Chairman, that United States 

 activities in that vital region have been conducted by a number of offices, agencies 

 and Departments, many of them achieving outstanding results in their own 

 efforts. What has been lacking, however, is a coordinated continuing and con- 

 sistent interest in the Antarctic. We have no long-range plan which would 

 advance our national interest in that continent. We have no coordinated sup- 

 port of study, research and development of programs for peaceful uses in science, 

 commerce and other activities related to Antarctica. Our plana and undertakings 

 have been sporadic, discontinuous, and lacking in clearness of purpose. 



With a change in only one or two words, this statement may be 

 found to match those of witnesses appearing before other Congres- 

 sional committees in support of pending legislation in oceanography. 



