NATIONAL OCBANOGRAPHIC PROGRAM LEGISLATION 441 



My observation of how this is occurring is that they are closely, 

 quickly, and intimately integrating the application of science and 

 teclmology to their marine strategy whereas we are doing extremely 

 competent oceanographic work without the link of application to in- 

 dustiy — to occupation and use. 



I will pomt out, also, that the merchant marine and fisheries have 

 considerable economic unpact on our country, as well as strategic, 

 and also that they are capable of having much more economic im- 

 pact- 

 There is a feeling in government and in the general public, for 

 instance, that fish are not being increasingly used in the United 

 States. This is simply untrue. The consumption of fish in terms 

 of pounds of round weight in 1948 was about 5 billion pounds in 

 the United States. In 1964 it was a little more than 12 billion 

 pounds. The amount we paid for the extra imports over what we 

 produced in 1964 was in the neighborhood of $600 million. The 

 Bureau of Commercial Fisheries will be able to provide you with 

 information to the effect that in their estimation, on the basis of 

 their unperfect present knowledge, the fish stocks adjacent to the 

 coasts of the United States are perfectly capable of producing in 

 a substainable manner in the neighborhood of 22 billion pounds of 

 fish per year. Thus, we have the resources m our coastal waters 

 with which we changed from being the biggest importer of fish 

 in the world to being the biggest exporter of fish in the world. 



I point out to you that this could have a major effect on the balance- 

 of -payments problem. 



To turn a moment to the Continental Shelf problem. We have 

 just inherited 850,000 square miles of territory, which is a good, big 

 piece of land. For all practical purposes, the mineral composition 

 of the Continental Shelf is similar to that of the adjacent land. The 

 wealth of this 850,000 square miles of territory is thus enormous. 

 As a matter of fact (and I believe your counsel can determine for 

 Tou these figures, which I have difficulty in digging out of the Presi- 

 dential budget message) I think I am correct in saying that the 

 Department of the Interior at the present time is making more money 

 per year from the sale of exploitation licenses for the harvesting of 

 the resources of the Outer Continental Shelf (not the Irnier Con- 

 tinental Shelf, but only the Outer Continental Shelf), already than 

 the Government is spending per year on the investigation and en- 

 hancement of use of the ocean. I thinlv there is a very good possibility 

 that as a strict business venture of maldng income for the Govern- 

 ment, a very substantial investment in investigation, exploration, 

 and enhancement of the use of the Continental Shelf would be a 

 paying proposition for the Treasury of the United States, and every- 

 thing that is in the record that I can fmd substantiates that statement. 

 I point out also that the convention on the territorial shelf, while 

 granting us sovereign jurisdiction over the resources of the Con- 

 tinental Shelf, leaves open the edge of the Continental Shelf by the 

 phraseology — 



to where the depth of the superjacent waters admits of the exploitation of 

 the natural resources of such area. 



We presently have drilling techniques that are perfectly capable 

 of drilling into the deep seabed at depths of water of 1,000 fathoms. 



53-367—65 29 



