NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC PROGRAM LEGISLATION 459 



bilities, as having preeminence in specific areas. For over 40 years 

 the Coast Guard lias conducted time-series oceanography in the North- 

 west Atlantic Ocean. Now we are applying the knoAvledge and ex- 

 perience gained in tliat local area to the establishment of time-series 

 and svnoptic descriptive oceanographic programs in the North Atlan- 

 tic and North Pacific Oceans. I might add that the blending of 

 oceanography with the professional engineering and seamanship capa- 

 bilities on board our larger ships has gone extremely well. The pro- 

 gram is flourishing and we have been able to retain a high level of 

 data quality. Incidentally our program is designed to serve the needs 

 of ;M occanographers in the Federal agencies and the academic com- 

 munity wlio are interested in the temporal variations of the oceans. 



To return to my earlier point regarding agency leadership in specific 

 areas, I can also note that the Coast and Geodetic Survey has estab- 

 lished itself as a leader in the exploratory surveys of the oceans and 

 the Fish and Wildlife Service is certainly the acknowledged leader 

 in fisheries oceanography. So one cannot say with candor that the 

 present Federal oceanographic activities are completely lackmg in 

 direction. Nor has there been any evidence of unplanned duplication. 



Final Federal programs often appear to be fractionated or trun- 

 cated. Wliile this sometimes results from Executive action on in- 

 dividual agency budgets, it also is a result of congressional action by 

 some 32 committees and subcommittees on budgets of the individual 

 agencies which contribute to the Federal program. Within the ICO 

 a need has been suggested for a chairman's fund established by agency 

 contributions which would be used to finance the staff and thus re- 

 move their agency identification. I cannot agree with critics who 

 suggest that the activities and studies of the ICO staff are colored by 

 loyalty to their parent agency, but this step would remove such crit- 

 icism. The fund could also be used to fmance management studies 

 by a disinterested consultant or research organization. While this 

 fund has not been established, I mention this as one example of the 

 type of management x^roposals considered by the ICO. 

 " Another point regarding Federal progress to date should be consid- 

 ered. The emphasis which has been placed on procurement of the tools ; 

 that is, ships, instrumentation, and shore facilities, is now being shifted 

 to production. The Coast Guard's experience in tliis regard would be 

 an excellent example. During the 3 fiscal years 1964 through 1966, we 

 have budgeted $2,725,000 for outfitting of our ships. In the same time 

 frame we have identified only $1,825,000 for ocean survey work. But, 

 in the 3-year period commencing in fiscal year 1967, our survey effort 

 wall total over $4 million. Put another way, the production of Coast 

 Guard oceanography will be doubled in the next 3 years within approx- 

 imately the same level of expenditures as a result of the tooling-up 

 process we have just completed. 



To review, I recommend enactment of H.R. 2218 as the immediate 

 step toward achieving the comprehensive program toward Avhich we 

 all are striving. 



This is the logical step toward an orderly growth in our Nation's 

 effort. As many commentators on the future of oceanography have 

 mentioned, we are still largely in the exploratory stage. Some defini- 

 tive surveys have been conducted but this phase is far from completion. 

 It would be premature to establish an organization to exploit our re- 



