261 



in Nevada and Arizona, for the San Francisco and San Pablo Bays, 

 the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers in northern California, and 

 for Puget Sound and the San Juan Islands in Washington. 



Coastal and Geodetic Survey small-craft charts, designed for cock- 

 pit use on recreational boats or as hand held copies on the bridges of 

 commercial vessels have received very favorable acceptance by the 

 boating public. The populatrity of these charts is indicated by the sale 

 of 194,988 in fiscal year 1967. The two most popular small-craft charts 

 are 824:-SC and 826-SC covering the New Jersey coast, with sales of 

 12,738 and 10,369 respectively in fiscal year 1967. 



The issue of new small-craft chart coverage for an area does not 

 adversely affect the issue of existing conventional chart coverage for 

 the same area. 



It follows, that the large issue of small-craft charts is stimulating 

 chart, use for safe navigation by the Nation's 8 million recreational 

 boats, who have spent $2.8 billion in 1966 on boating. 



Mr. Drewry. In the past we have inquired about the extent to which 

 the Coast and Geodetic Survey has cooperated with offshore industries, 

 with particular reference to taking advantage by contract or otherwise 

 of the extensive survey-type information, including bottom tox)og- 

 raphy, collected by the commercial geophysical industry in such areas 

 as the Gulf of Mexico. We have been told by industry sources that they 

 would be happy to help the Coast and Geodetic Survey from avoiding 

 duplication of effort by furnishing certain types of general oceano- 

 graphic survey information they have acquired in connection with their 

 geophysical survey. I gather that the Coast Survey feels that industry 

 acquired data is not in accordance with your requirements of produc- 

 tion of navigational topographic charts. Nevertheless, it seems to me 

 that there are prospects in this area well worth exploring in the in- 

 terests of greater economy and efficiency. 



Dr. White. Certainly these are prospects well worth exploring. In 

 fact, ESSA is investigating the possibility of acquiring hydrographic 

 data from commercial sources. As an example, in the Gulf of Mexico 

 area, the Coast and Geodetic Survey obtained sample hpdrographic in- 

 formation from the Independent Exploration Co., of Houston, Tex., 

 for evaluation. The depth information offered, at $2 per sounding, was 

 essen^tially a byproduct of a gravity survey and did not meet Coast 

 and Geodetic standards for a basic hydrographic survey or for nautical 

 charting or bathymetric mapping, in either data density or continuous 

 profile depth record. It w^as suggested that limited amounts of this in- 

 formation might be purchased for selected areas to help establsh the 

 rate of bottom changes and to assist in survey planning. 



Last year, a Coast and Geodetic representative contacted, among 

 others. Chevron Research, LaHabra, Calif., to determine the avail- 

 ability of useful, industry-held hydrographic information. He found 

 that Chevron and others jjossess thousands of miles of gravity-seismic 

 profiling, with continuous graphic profile depth recording, along the 

 U.S. w^est coast, to 100 or more miles seaward. The vast majority of the 

 depth data has not, however, been processed as depth information. It 



