NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC PROGRAM—1965 45 
reviewed our program last year and the year before, put in sufiicient 
funding for shore facilities, they recommended we give much more 
attention to this, and we have taken their advice. 
In the area of research and surveys, there has been a long discussion 
between the research people and those engaged on surveys. It is 
partly a semantic argument and partly a misunderstanding. The 
research scientists In oceanography are not usually interested pri- 
marily in surveys; they are interested in precise research data. 
The survey people are interested more in a broad look into an area, 
like the Indian Ocean, rather than going particularly te one spot and 
doing an intensive job in research there. By bringing the two groups 
together, the survey group with the research people, through the 
National Academy of Sciences, who are engaged in research work in 
oceanography, we have clarified a lot of differences, we have coor- 
dinated programs so surveys and research work on a given ship, or 
group of ships, and can go along together in a more harmonious man- 
ner. This was also pointed out as a misunderstanding by the ad hoc 
panels for the last 2 years. They have been most helpful to us, and 
we have felt that a good outside look at our program has been healthy 
from the whole point of view. 
Mr. Rocrrs. Yes. As I understood from previous testimony, the 
Advisory Committee really works with your panels and with your 
Interagency Committee, more than it does with the Federal Council. 
Dr. Waxetin. Well, a typical case in point would be the review of 
our 1964 program last summer. This took a period of about a week 
of very intensive examination by the ad hoc panel meeting with each 
of the panels in detail. 
Mr. Rocrrs. I see. And then they give their advice and then it 
comes before the Interagency Committee ? 
Dr. Waxetin. They give their advice really to Dr. Wiesner and the 
Federal Council. They pointed out the weaknesses and the strengths 
of the program. 
Mr. Rogers. Could you tell me about what amount of money is being 
expended on the beach erosion problem and wave action problem? Are 
we intensifying that greatly ? 
Dr. Waxe.in. It is not a substantial part of our program, Mr. 
Rogers. Ican give you a figure for 
Mr. Roesrs. It looks to me like it is about $500,000. 
Dr. Waxetin. The 1965 budget includes about $800,000 for the 
Corps of Engineers for work in beach erosion and for the Coastal En- 
gineering Research Center. 
As I recall—I think my memory is within an order of magnitude of 
correctness—this has been about the level of effort for the last 2 years 
in beach erosion. 
Mr. Rogers. There has been no increase in that ? 
Dr. Waxettn. There has not been any substantial increase in beach 
erosion work in our program. 
Mr. Rocerrs. Do you feel this is a proper phase of oceanography— 
beach erosion studies ? 
Dr. Waxettn. Yes, sir; Ido. I feel that the influence of the ocean 
on the shoreline, the influence of coastal waters on the relocation of 
land, sand, and so forth, the effect of waves in remaking, in a large 
measure, long areas of our shoreline is something we should spend, I 
think, more than $800,000 a year on. 
35-377 64 4 
