60 SEA GRANT COLLEGES 



One problem which somewhat baffles government agencies concerns prac- 

 tical implementation, that is, the translation of the concept into actuality. The 

 main question is: What devices can the government provide to make a certain 

 idea work? 



Here is where we must throw off the crutch provided by the parallelism 

 with the land-grant college system, because essentially that system and all the 

 colleges supported under it depend solely on one government agency --the De- 

 partment of Agriculture. What we have to consider is the multiplicity of federal 

 agencies concerned with the ocean. 



The ultimate goal of the sea- grant concept is to exploit the ocean in the 

 national interest. Its intermediate goal is to develop the scientists and engi- 

 neers who are going to do it. The land- grant college system was started with 

 the simple objective of improving agriculture and the mechanical arts, whereas 

 the sea-grant concept, as already mentioned, has many applications, depending 

 on the missions of the various government agencies. 



The questions arise: What does this diffusion of purpose lead to in terms 

 of implementation? Which government agency should be assigned the mission of 

 administering a sea- grant college program? If, as has been suggested, the 

 National Science Foundation takes on this task, would this arrangement soomer 

 or later conflict with the activities of the Bureau of Mines, Bureau of Commer- 

 cial Fisheries, Geological Survey, Navy, Army, Environmental Sciences Service 

 Administration, Public Health Service, and Office of Education? 



For answers to some of these questions, we might refer to Dean Spilhaus' 

 remarks. He has suggested curricula devoted to aquaculture and ocean engi- 

 neering, with harbor agents corresponding to county agents, to quickly relay the 

 findings of new marine engineering to the users. He has proposed relationships 

 with law schools to provide a new look at laws of the sea. He has further pro- 

 posed contacts with a sea home-economics department, to develop ways of mak- 

 ing sea products more appetizing. These ideas could serve as basic hints on how 

 the sea-grant principle would be applied -- but not as a sea-grant college. 



Accordingly, I would say the following: 



(1) That the suggested source of support -- the realizing of funds 

 from rents, royalties, and bonuses accruing to the federal government from the 

 leasing of lands on the continental shelf --is excellent. 



(2) That rather than to create and maintain new colleges and univer- 

 sities, these funds can be utilized to foster sea-grant programs on institutional 

 bases through carefully planned undergraduate and graduate curricula, leading 

 to the emergence of students trained in all the practical aspects of ocean devel- 

 opment mentioned by Dr. Spilhaus. 



(3) That courses should be arranged cooperatively in various depart- 

 ments of existing universities which would qualify under the terms of the ar- 

 rangement: the law school, the sanitation laboratory, the colleges of science and 

 technology, and the schools of engineering. 



(4) As an equitable method of determining appropriate support levels, 

 I would favor flexibility over a rigid formula pattern. Certainly, an approximate 

 federal- to- state relationship will have to be reached, but I am opposed to any 

 system which tends to ignore merit. Therefore, I would strongly recommend 

 that this relationship be used merely to set limits within which the granting 

 agencies can operate according to the scientific and engineering merits of the 

 proposed programs. 



34 



