through the Congressional appropriation process. 

 The Marine Council has been able to do somewhat 

 better in the formulation of National goals and 

 programs. Being a cabinet level coordinating and 

 planning mechanism chaired by the Vice President, 

 it has had some success in providing a substantial 

 amount of leadership, and within the executive 

 branch programs have retained their coherency. 

 However, it has had no more success than the 

 Interagency Committee on Oceanography in pro- 

 viding cohesiveness of programs through the Con- 

 gressional process. 



Confronting this maze of the Federal market- 

 place is the marine scientific community, as 

 complex and diverse as the Federal structure it 

 would interest in its programs. 



Ocean science is where one finds it; it is found 

 in such prestigious institutions as Woods Hole 

 Oceanographic Institution, Scripps Institution of 

 Oceanography, and Lamont Geological Observa- 

 tory; in such vital and growing centers such as 

 Oregon State University, University of Miami, and 

 University of Washington; in such smaller labora- 

 tories of specialized competence as the Chesapeake 

 Bay Institute of Johns Hopkins University and the 

 Duke University Marine Laboratory. 



Some of the best research in the field is done at 

 institutions distinctly removed from the main- 

 stream of marine science such as Yale University 

 and University of Chicago. The number of institu- 

 tions involved in the field has grown by leaps and 

 bounds. Interagency Committee on Oceanography 

 Pubhcation 30 lists 65 schools which now offer 

 curricula in the marine sciences.' 



The scientific conmiunity, too, has its organiza- 

 tions for the exchange of information and the 

 exercise of concerted action. At the apex of these 

 bodies are the Committee on Oceanography of the 

 National Academy of Sciences, and the National 

 Academy of Engineering Committee on Ocean 

 Engineering. 



The prestigious platforms of the National 

 Academies offer the scientific community a means 

 to make its opinions known and its influence felt 

 in the highest councils. It criticizes, reviews, and 

 recommends. Federal agencies are extremely sensi- 

 tive to viewpoints expressed through the Acad- 

 emies. 



University Curricula in the Marine Sciences, ICO 

 Pamphlet No. 30, August 1967. 



None of this alters the fact, however, that the 

 competition of the science marketplace determines 

 which programs are funded, and to what extent. 

 Many scientists have no real knowledge of how to 

 operate effectively within the system. Conversely, 

 those who are aware of its complexities, its rules, 

 and its procedures are in a better competitive 

 position. 



Although it is far from a perfect system, this 

 competition is at the heart of the vigor of our 

 marine science enterprise. Given intelligent, knowl- 

 edgeable management within the Federal agen- 

 cies—management with a broad view of the needs 

 of science in the Nation— the enterprise can con- 

 tinue to prosper under this system. Because of the 

 influence wielded by a very few Federal managers, 

 every effort should be made to insure continuation 

 of wise, dedicated management at this level. 



Scientists, almost to a man, not only approve 

 but applaud the diversity characterizing the fund- 

 ing of the science effort. They view with out- 

 spoken alarm anything which to them smacks of 

 centralization. 



The fragmentation of the system, however, 

 brings complaints of a lack of flexibility to deal 

 with emerging basic science problems. The Na- 

 tion's scientists foresee the need for large sea and 

 shore based facilities, requiring large capital out- 

 lays, which the splintering of the present market 

 makes it difficult to supply. They foresee an era of 

 "big science," and they see in the present system 

 no mechanism capable of meeting its demands. 



The marine science enterprise is in a period of 

 adolescence. The signs are everywhere. Marine 

 scientists spend much time trying to define what 

 they are. They see a unity in all ocean science, but 

 this unifying concept has yet to weld a single 

 strong scientific society which can represent their 

 views or provide a suitable coherent forum for the 

 exchange of ideas or presentation of publications. 

 The fisheries and biology oriented marine scien- 

 tists belong to the American Society of Limnology 

 and Oceanography, the physical oceanographers 

 and marine geophysicists are organized principally 

 within sections of the American Geophysical 

 Union, and the marine technologists in the new 

 and growing Marine Technology Society. These are 

 but institutional symptoms of some of the prob- 

 lems troubling the science— the lack of rapport 

 between the scientist and technologist, the split 



M8 



