225 



division of our resources between immediate national problems and the 

 longer range opportunities offered by the oceans. Responsible scien- 

 tists seek no more, and the Nation deserves no less. 



Developing the Nation's seas can only be accomplished properly 

 through a truly national effort. It is important for us to recognize this 

 point and distingTiish between the recommendations of the Commission 

 for a national program and the interpretation in some quarters that 

 this proposal is a Federal program. 



We at Woods Hole see this distinction clearly and suggest that 

 others who may have misinterpreted this basic premise take a closer 

 look at the Commission's report. "Our Nation and the Sea" is appro- 

 priately subtitled '"A Plan for National Action'" calling for a coopera- 

 tive effort by private enterprise, the individual States, the academic 

 community, and the Federal Government. This cooperation will be an 

 essential element for a national effort. 



The report of the Commission which considers both science (under- 

 standing the oceans) and engineering (doing things in the oceans) is 

 much too comprehensive and far-reaching to comment on each recom- 

 mendation. However, we do strongly support the main thrust of the 

 report and regard it as highly urgent that steps for implementation of 

 its key recommendations be taken by the administration and by the 

 Congress. 



Many of the recommendations, if adopted, will in one way or an- 

 other profoundly affect the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution 

 and influence the programs and policies of all ocean activities in the 

 United States. We do not endorse every proposal in the report but we 

 support the purpose of the Commission's recommendations and the 

 general direction in which they are attempting to move the ocean 

 sciences. 



In particular, I would like to comment on specific proposals and 

 recommendations in the report which are intimately related to the pur- 

 poses, policies, and objectives of Woods Hole and ocean science in gen- 

 eral, and which in turn determine the course of many future programs 

 for the years ahead. Some of this influence is, in fact, already being 

 felt. 



My own institution, the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, is 

 likely to be affected most dramatically if the Commission's recom- 

 mendation to establish three or four major university-national labora- 

 tories is adopted. We are most interested in the implications of this 

 concept and in all its interrelated facets including : The basis for selec- 

 tion or establishment of the laboratories; funding programs to provide 

 long-term financial stability; academic and professional freedom to 

 pursue basic investigations ; and cooperative programs of national and 

 international scope. 



In order to place these relationships in proper perspective and to 

 present our views on the proposal for a University-National Labora- 

 tory, I would like to remind you of some of the philosophy which has 

 guided the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution for the four decades 

 of its existence. 



The institution was founded in 1930 in accordance with the recom- 

 mendations of the first Committee on Oceanography of the National 

 Academy of Sciences. That committee recommended the establislmient 

 of a "single, w^ell-equipped oceanographic institution in a central loca- 



