ing. Besides, strong arguments could be ad- 

 vanced for pushing back the frontiers of hy- 

 drospace with its inherent food and mineral 

 resources. That the Federal government was 

 paying more than lip service to the ocean 

 could be seen in the funds allocated for sup- 

 port of oceanography. One conservative esti- 

 mate (28) shows Federal funds of $21.3 mil- 

 lion devoted to oceanography in the year 

 1958. In 1963 the annual amount was six 

 times that, or $123.6 million. These figures 

 reflect funding concerned only with describ- 

 ing and understanding the oceans. If funds 

 are included which reflect development of 

 fisheries, technology, coastal zone develop- 

 ment, mapping, charting, ocean engineering 

 and other ocean-related activities, these an- 

 nual figures are almost doubled. For exam- 

 ple, reference (29) shows $227.6 million in 

 1968; reference (30), which includes all ocean- 

 related activities, shows $431 million for the 

 same year. From 1958 to 1965 the funding 

 growth of oceanography was, no matter how 

 calculated, phenomenal. 



The Federal government was not the only 

 prospective customer. Just off the shoreline 

 and expanding outward and deeper was the 

 oil industry. For years the diver had been a 

 full-time employee of the marine petroleum 

 community providing repairs, inspection and 

 installation of various devices and hardware 

 associated with exploration, development 

 and production of offshore oil. Submersibles 

 could go deeper, stay down longer, and the 

 passengers need do no more than look out 

 the viewport. Certainly a market could be 

 found in this multi-billion dollar industry. 



Adding further enchantment was the tre- 

 mendous surge in recreational diving. With 

 interest running high, there must be a mar- 

 ket somewhere for small, inexpensive recrea- 

 tional submersibles; the tourist concept of 

 the AUGUSTS PICCARD was given more 

 than a passing glance. If 32,000 people were 

 willing to pay for a trip to the relatively 

 uninteresting bottom of Lake Geneva, it is 

 not unlikely that a continuing and even 

 larger number would pay for shallower, but 

 far more interesting cruises through the in- 

 credibly beautiful coral reefs of the Bahamas 

 or Florida. 



When one inspected the existing submers- 

 ibles in 1965 they all were employed to a 



greater or lesser degree. Those that were 

 not, were hurriedly going through testing 

 phases and acceptance trials. DIVING SAU- 

 CER just finished a lease on the West Coast; 

 ASHERAH was conducting biological surveys 

 in Uavfah; AUGUSTS PICCARD was making 

 an average of nine dives a day at the Swiss 

 Exposition; the government-owned vehicles 

 were either diving or testing; and the 

 smaller vehicles (PC-3B, SUBMARAY) were 

 being kept busy. Another new customer was 

 introduced in June 1965 when the U.S. Naval 

 Oceanographic Office chartered the PC-3B 

 for a series of cable route surveys off the 

 coast of Andros Island, Bahamas. This was 

 not the Oceanographic Office's only involve- 

 ment in submersibles. In the same year it 

 received its first funds for a research and 

 development program aimed at evolving de- 

 sign specifications, instrumentation and op- 

 erational techniques for a 20,000-ft Deep 

 Ocean Survey Vehicle. In the process, its 

 announced intention was to lease existing 

 vehicles and use them in actual surveys to 

 get a feeling for the problems involved in 

 undersea surveying; over $1 million a year 

 for the next 5 years was scheduled for sub- 

 mersible leases. 



If the potential submersible builder needed 

 further encouragement he could find it from 

 government officials, the press and his own 

 associates; for example: 



"TAie President (Johnson) announced 

 today that the Department of the Navy 

 and the Atomic Energy Commission are 

 jointly developing a nuclear-powered 

 deep submergence research and engi- 

 neering vehicle." 



— White House Press Release 

 April 1965 



". . . the field (deep submergence) is a 

 new one and the future rewards for any 

 company which can successfully build a 

 vehicle capable of working safely, effec- 

 tively and for a proper length of time on 

 the bottom of the ocean will be great J'^ 



— VADM I. J. Galatin 

 Chief of Naval Material 

 May 1965 (26) 



". . . in response to the growing demand 

 for both government and industry the 



50 



