NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC PROGRAM—1965 
475 
Chapter VII 
PROGRAM SUMMARY AND EVALUATION 
The national plan in oceanography for the next 
decade is in its gross features an extension of the 
trend established during the last five. Yet in many 
ways, it also represents something new. 
What is new is hard to measure since it is pre- 
cisely what is most uncertain. It includes continu- 
ously recording instruments which will permit sur- 
vey ships to make measurements under way, new 
submersibles for exploring the ocean at all depths, 
new buoy systems for quasi-permanent installation 
over great areas and new satellites for interro- 
gating them and relaying their stored up data to 
shore stations for analysis, new forecasting systems 
for the major oceanic variables of interest to fish- 
eries and to shipping as well as to scientists, new 
ways of mining the ocean floor, new ways of hunt- 
ing, herding, achievement of an underwater pest 
control (through interference with the food chain), 
and even cultivating fish, and perhaps even a new 
habitat for workers in underwater laboratories and 
communities. These are new tools on the one hand 
and new applications on the other. What is new, in 
other words, is the coming technology. What this 
plan attempts to provide, therefore, is an oceano- 
graphic establishment of men, ships, and facilities 
and a program of research and development 
which is ready and able to capitalize on whatever 
may materialize out of the coming technology and 
to apply it to the furthering of our national goals. 
The establishment which is being planned can 
best be seen in graphical form. Figure 5 shows the 
budget trend which is continued over the next ten 
years. The national budget of under $10 million 
in 1953 represents the relatively small effort de- 
voted to the field until very recently. In 1958, it 
had increased only $20 million. The increase from 
that point on has been at a rate of nearly $100 mil- 
lion in five years and projecting this into the future 
brings the overall-annual figure to about $350 
million by 1972. 
Some changes in the way the budget is allocated, 
however, are expected to take place during the 
decade. Figure 6 shows the 1963 allocation, both 
by goal and by agency, and Figure 7 shows the pro- 
jection for 1972. Most evident is the great expan- 
sion in the portion of the effort which supports 
basic science. It rises from some 43 percent of the 
budget today to about 57 percent in 1972. The 
support for defense has decreased in percentage 
from 44 percent to 32 percent while the effort put 
into resource and health management in the world 
ocean has increased from 15 percent to 24 percent. 
The oceanographic fleet is expected to change as 
is shown in Figure 8. There are 76 ships in it today. 
If the projections of this plan materialize, there 
should be over 120 by 1972. In addition, there 
may be a fleet of six to eight submersibles capable 
of exploring all depths of the oceans. 
The major marine laboratories, of which there 
are now 63, should have grown to some 85 by 1972 
as shown in Figure 9. The 26 which are operated 
privately today should have been joined by another 
10 to total 36 by this time while government labo- 
ratories are expected to increase in number from 
37 to 49. 
With these tools we should be able to make ma- 
jor advances in our basic understanding of the 
oceans, and the next decade is expected to see a 
great improvement in our ability to forecast and 
use oceanographic conditions for military advan- 
tage and to increase the yield of fish which the sea 
contains. With international cooperation a good 
start should have been made in surveying the 
oceans and their basins and in mapping the dis- 
tribution of major properties. Most of the mineral 
resources on and under the continental shelves 
should have been located and assayed. 
At least, that is the plan. How can the plan itself 
be evaluated? The terms for such an evaluation 
were suggested in Chapter I. They can be summar- 
ized in the following questions: 
Has the plan been able to avoid — 
duplication and waste, 
overlooking opportunities for new joint 
enterprises made possible by centralized 
planning, and 
inconsistency between goals, programs, and 
resources? 
Does the plan — 
justify the balance of effort among the vari- 
ous goals, 
show the long lead-time items in perspective, 
both as to requirements and worth, 
indicate major possibilities as yet uncertain 
but worth working for, 
