SEA GRANT COLLEGES 271 



The commercial fishing indnstrv in this country has long been aware of the 

 practical benefits, in terms of increased harvest and more effective conservation 

 of fishery resources, which could result from increased knowledge of the oceans 

 and their living resources. The United States has been unfortunately slow to 

 recognize the true significance of the world's ocean resources and the importance 

 of basic research and educational programs in the marine sciences. 



We have been pleased to note increased congressional awareness of the impor- 

 tance of the marine sciences, as evidenced by the introduction of a number of 

 bills and the extensive House and Senate hearings on this subject during the last 

 session of Congress, culminating In passage of S. 944, "The Marine Resources 

 and Engineering Development Act," which is currently in conference. 



We strongly believe that if the United States is ever t-o regain her traditional 

 place of eminence among the world's fishing nations, the marine sciences must be 

 as integral a part of our educational system as the agricultural and space sciences. 

 The establishment of a sea grant college program would seem a logical and neces- 

 sary step in this direction. 

 Sincerely yours, 



RoxALn W. De Lucien, 

 Director, Fishery Products Program. 



National Education Association, 



Washington, D.C., May 6, 1966. 

 Hon. Claiborne Pell, 

 Old Senate Office Building, 

 Washington, B.C. 



Dear Senator Pell : Dr. William G. Carr, executive secretary of the National 

 Education Association, has requested that I reply to your letter requesting com- 

 ments on S. 2439, the "National Sea Grant College and Program Act of 196.5." 



In general, we would support such a proposal as S. 24.39, and commend you 

 for your farsightedness in introducing such a bill. The statements in section 2, 

 "Declaration of Purpose" express our views very well, and we concur with them 

 completely. 



Section 3(b) causes us some concern. We are in support of the proposal, first 

 advanced by Senator Lister Hill in the lf>40's, for earmarking Federal income 

 from bonuses, royalties, and leases on ofi'shore lands for education. More re- 

 cently. Senator Paul Douglas has proposed that such income be earmarked for 

 payment of the national debt. We note that S. 2439 proposes setting aside 10 

 percent of such income for the purposes of this bill. Insofar as your proposal 

 does not conflict with the objectives of the others, we would support it. If such 

 earmarking is to be made, we suggest rewording the last three lines of section 

 3(b) (lines 22-24) to read "* * * in a special account in the Treasury to be 

 available (only) for appropriations to the Foundation, which are hereby author- 

 ized, to carry out only the purposes of section 3(a) ( 10 ) ." 



We also strongly urge that the new section 18(c) be amended to insert the 

 word "nonprofit" in line 15 after the word "private" in both instances to read 

 "grants to suitable public or private nonprofit institutions, etc." Similarly, on 

 page 7, subsection (3) , line 10, the definition of "sea grant college" should include 

 the word "nonprofit" after the word "private." 



The education community is becoming increasingly concerned with the weak- 

 ening of the proper educational functions of public and other nonprofit institu- 

 tions by the invasion of private profiitmaking interests into the field of Govern- 

 ment tax-supported re.search and education. 



Since the proposal for sea grant colleges is a new one, we feel strongly that the 

 opportunity provided in this bill should be confined to the public and private non- 

 profit institutions. If. after a reasonable length of time, they prove to be un- 

 equal to the task — and we do not feel this will be the case — then subsequent 

 amendments could be considered. However, the establishment of sea grant col- 

 leges can potentially be as great a step forward as the establishment of land- 

 grant colleges a century ago. We believe that such a resource, if developed as 

 you propose from public funds, should be protected from the special interests of 

 profitmaking agencies. 



With these re.servations in mind, we, in general, support the proposal to 

 establish sea grant colleges and commend you for your creative idea. 



I will be happy to discuss our views with you further if you wish. 

 Sincerely, 



John M. Lumley, 

 Director, Division of Federal Relations. 

 62-996—6(5 19 



