The mining and petroleum industries have shown a considerable will- 
ingness to invest in the development of ocean or any other resources 
wherever commercial prospects appear reasonably good. These in- 
dustries, with their considerable commitment and experience, are very 
well situated to evaluate the relative economic attractiveness of dif- 
ferent sources of raw materials, including those under water. Thus, 
development of ocean raw materials is now subject to a market test 
that seems to be yielding reasonably sensible answers. Before any 
substantial Government involvement is advocated, proof should be 
rendered that private companies now involved have been grossly in- 
effective or socially irresponsible in exploiting oceanic raw materials 
(see secs. 4.11 and 10.2). 
The level of expenditure required to provide survey and similar aids 
for ocean development on a scale commensurate with that traditionally 
available on land depends on new technological developments, some of 
which might become available as a byproduct of national defense pro- 
grams. It has been estimated that an expenditure of approximately 
$50 to $100 million over the next 10 years on development of new survey 
equipment and instrumentation would eliminate major obstacles to 
obtaining efficient topographic and geological surveys of the U.S. con- 
tinental shelves (see sec. 4.6). Even with better equipment, however, 
some upward drift in survey expenditures from the present level of 
$12 million might be needed and justified for these purposes. 
With regard to better exploitation of marine biological resources, 
the NASCO report places a very heavy emphasis on improving the 
position of the U.S. fishing industry. Superficially, it would seem 
very difficult to confine improvement in fishery yields to the U.S. in- 
dustry as such. Improvements from oceanographic research that help 
the U.S. fishing industry would likely improve the position of fishing 
industries abroad as well. Indeed, present performance suggests that 
foreign fleets would be quicker than U.S. industry to adopt new tech- 
niques. The fact that several less-developed countries tend to have 
relatively substantial fishing industries further strengthens the argu- 
ment. The dubious character of national distinctions in these matters 
is only heightened by the fact that U.S. industry is increasingly in- 
vesting in fishing activities conducted under other national flags. 
Therefore, to the extent that improvement in oceanographic knowl- 
edge would lead to increased production in fishery industries of the 
world, a strong case might be made for at least perpetuating the pres- 
ent level of $50 million annually spent on oceanographic research 
related to fisheries. 
Potential economic benefits from marine biology are not restricted, 
moreover, to improved fish yields. The ocean appears to be a good 
° Crutchfield, James, “The Marine Fisheries: A Problem in International Coop- 
eration,” American Economic Review, LIV, No. 3, 207-218 (May 1964). 
60 
