1021 
17, 1966, submitted for the acceptance of it by President Johnson. 
You were a member of the panel. 
I am going to ask unanimous consent to have inserted in the record 
at this point that part of the report that begins on page 87, designated 
as “Organization for the Future,” and to be concluded on page 91, 
lines 1 and 2. 
(The pages mentioned above follow herewith :) 
[From the Report of the Panel on Oceanography, entitled “Hffective Use of the Sea,” dated 
June 1966, for sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing 
Office. ] 
2 Pa ey # * * & 
10.4 ORGANIZATION FOR THE FUTURE 
If one examines present agency activities against the four governmental fune- 
tions defined in section 10.2 quite clearly the Government is doing very well 
in meeting its responsibilities in supporting programs of research and educa- 
ton. NSF and ONR have developed strong support for academic activities in 
oceanography, although these need to be broadened beyond oceanographic in- 
stitutions (see secs. 4.11, 5.4, 9). On the whole the Panel believes that both 
NSF and ONR have discharged their duties well. Beyond the provision of 
ships, laboratories, and the National Oceanographic Data Center, the Fed- 
eral Government has done little to provide technical services and facilities. We 
see an increased need for such facilities, and we expect the Navy to play a 
much more important role in the future than it has in the past. 
Some progress in describing the environment has been made, but our abilities 
to predict are still minimal (see sec. 6). Responsibilities for description and pre- 
diction are scattered throughout the agencies. The Navy supports a large survey 
program, as does ESSA, while smaller survey programs are found within Bureau 
of Commercial Fisheries, Geological Survey, and Coast Guard. The Navy, Coast 
Guard, and ESS& are all involved in the prediction problem, but the techniques 
remain primitive and do not reflect substantial advances in theoretical 
oceanography. 
Fostering development of biological resources of the ocean is the responsibility 
of BCF, while the Bureau of Mines, and Geological Survey have statutory re- 
sponsibilities regarding mineral resources. 
No single agency has prime responsibility for developing and advocating na- 
tional policy, although each agency on occasion develops programs of oceanog- 
raphy which further the particular agency’s mission. 
We could recommend continuation of the present organizational framework 
with words of caution regarding the importance of coordinated efforts. We do 
not believe this to be the wise course. For example one of our major recom- 
mendations is to develop the technology for improved use of marine food re- 
sources. Such actvity naturally falls into the domain of BCF. A cursory exami- 
nation of the required program, however, reveals that it would depend very 
heavily on physical oceanography. For example, thorough studies of upwelling 
and turbulent fluxes are required for proper implementation of certain phases of 
the program. Prediction of the environment is important. Would this mean that 
BCF should develop its own capabilities in physical oceanography, turn to HSSA 
or engage the Navy? 
ESSA is primarily charged with development of prediction techniques for fur- 
therance of commerce. Its rightful emphasis is on prediction of storms and re- 
search undertaken within the agency has little to do with problems of improving 
marine food technology. BCF could seek help from universities or industrial 
concerns, but again this would duplicate efforts of other environmental agencies. 
This brief example illustrates some of the problems the Panel foresees in imple- 
mentation of its major recommendations within the present administrative 
structure. 
The Panel recommends a major reorganization of non-Navy governmental 
activities in oceanography. The recommended reorganization would place in a 
single agency all those Federal activities related to description, prediction, and 
attempts to develop capabilities of modifying the environment (ocean, atmos- 
phere, and solid earth) and those activities concerned with managing and de- 
veloping resources of the ocean. The proposed reorganization emphasizes the 
