sea, extend the state's own existing interest into the sea. I agree completely with President Horn that we must not go into this new concept with funds restricted to a project basis. We must have unrestricted institutional funds so that people can wander around, have an idea and follow it wherever it takes them and not put blinders on them. The best things I've ever gotten out of libraries is when I've gone in knowing exactly what I wanted to look for, but then found on the stacks that the book next door was much more interesting and led me off on a tangent which resulted in a far more fruitful investigation than the one I started on. A certain amount of this kind of randomness is the essential to creativity. FOLLOWING THESE OPENING STATEMENTS, THERE WAS GEN- FYE John, I too have been surprised at the amount of agreement in this large group of oceanographers. But I would like to comment on the problem of how you start, and how you select the colleges, and how many sea-grant colleges you have. I'm not sure about this, but I don't think that this should be restricted to a very small number. Admittedly, starting any new program with limited funds necessarily means that you must start small and with a very few participants. But it seems to me that we're not very far from the time when we need to have a form of marine science and ocean engineering in every decent university. All universities are now teaching something about one form of engineering or mathematics or physics. I think the oceans are such a vital part of human endeavor that their study must be a part of many universities. Maybe they don't all need it, but the concept that all universities should have the availability of intellectual pursuit in this area is a sound one. HORN May I start an argument? As a university president, this is the sort of point of view that gives the university president nightmares. This is what he hears all the time. "We can't be a great university unless we have a Ph.D. program in every one of the disciplines, across the board." The fact of the matter is, gentlemen, this concept has got to go out the window for any except universities like California, Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin, the really large, extremely well supported institutions. The smaller university simply cannot look forward to this sort of a proposal, and it seems to me that one of the major areas where this goal can be accomplished most easily in terms of preparing for a specialized approach to it, is in oceanography, because, as has been pointed out here, it's a graduate discipline. It's based upon the fundamental sciences and mathematics. This can be done in every university, but one can't afford to establish a graduate program leading to a Ph.D. in every single one of these fifty state institutions plus another twenty-five of the major private ones. Now, 62-996 - 66-7 I'm perfectly willing to concede that maybe at Woods Hole there is an opportunity to create out of an existing educational institution that is not a university a unique sea-grant university, taking only the students who come to them prepared in these other sciences. But I'd also have to point out that it seems to me that it is very difficult if not impossible to develop a serious program leading to the Ph.D. degree in oceanography without some supporting sciences at the graduate level on the same campus. I've been told that we at URI can't run a decent program in oceanography without a Ph.D. in mathematics, and I think that this is probably correct, at least I've given in to the idea. But I come back to the point which supports Dr. Spilhaus very strongly, concerning any institution that has special competence in a field allied to oceanography. It would be foolish for the University of Rhode Island, for example, to try to develop a program in petroleum simply because it has implication for oceanography. Let's go to the best petroleum place, to Texas or Oklahoma, wherever it may be, and see what it can contribute to the sea-grant program. We should not, moreover, deny to a marine biologist or an ichthyologist on a campus that is not a sea-grant university opportunity for a grant if he wishes to work on a project involving the open ocean. All I'm saying is, we cannot afford anymore to look upon this new concept the way we looked upon the land-grant movement a hundred years ago, that is, to develop a full fledged graduate program, highly developed, and devoted to research, bringing in post doctoral fellows, etc., in every one of the fifty land-grant institutions in every one of the fifty states, plus maybe another twenty-five selected private universities. HARGIS In some scientific areas a long time is required from the conception of the project or a program to the eventual yielding of economically measurable results, in others, it is not so great. In marine science, time required is usually fairly short. Scientific results in marine science often quickly find military or civilian application. I think that in general, while there would be exceptions, five years is a minimum time to realize significant economic return from research. Of course, all institutions already have programs in existence which can be improved immediately if additional funds are available. It is also certain that more emphasis can quickly be placed on development and training in ocean engineering, an area which is now lacking; therefore, engineering progress can be realized quickly if adequate funds are available. Administrative resources and facilities are already present to improve existing programs and initiate new engineering projects in most marine institutions, so the return will be relatively rapid. HORN I criticized the project-grant business in setting this up. Nevertheless, I did say institutions not designated as sea-grant institutions ought to have project money. I would suggest simply as a practical proposal in this connection, that if this concept goes through, whatever agency, NSF or an Inter-oceanographic Committee, or anyone else who's running the program in Washington, should assign on a continuing non-restrictive basis 50% of whatever money is available to those institutions that are designated sea-grant institutions. Suppose that there are ten or a dozen of them, and let me say parenthetically, that whatever ten or twelve or fifteen are designated in the beginning does not mean that they will necessarily continue to be the sea-grant universities. I don't think I agree with the speaker this morning that we must only support those universities which are now in the business. There may be some very good universities that have unique opportunities in this field that are not now in oceanography, but ought to be. I don't know what North Carolina's doing, for example, but it ought to be in the business in a big way, I should think. So, take half of the money and assign it to the institutions designated as sea-grant universities, and take half of it for projects available to all universities. Actually, under the land-grant system, there are certain funds in agriculture that are allocated on a project basis, although most of the money is handled regionally. This way would make possible to continue the individual research of people interested in the marine sciences, no matter where they work, even in a small college. At the same time the program would start out with a modest but very helpful half million dollars a year, perhaps, to ten institutions, and this money would really make the difference between a real center of excellence in oceanography and a mediocre one. CASTLE I would like to make just one point relative to the earlier question that was raised about pay-off. This is one reason why I feel it's exceedingly important if you go ahead with the idea of the sea-grant university to incorporate adult education or extension into the program. The period of the pay-off will be much shorter, the closer you get to the industry which you are trying to help. In most of the industries I'm familiar with, there is usually considerable basic knowledge that is not being applied. Now then, if this is true, as someone said about the fisheries industry this morning, there may be information here that can be applied immediately. It may very well be that it won't take five years to get some pay-off in certain areas. FYE I'd like to return just a moment to what I thought was an enlightened concept suggested by Wilbert Chapman earlier this morning. The more I think of it, the more I think that he was absolutely correct when he said that sea-going people are different from land people. It is important in our thinking about seagrant colleges that we plan from the beginning to have a successful conquest of the oceans, to attract to the problems related to the ocean a large number of very intelligent people, and to insure that these sea people are well trained. I don't think that we have done this adequately or very successfully in the past. I think we can do a great deal better, and perhaps that's the answer as to why we really and truly need to implement the sea-grant college idea. HARGIS I would say that we have discussed difficulties, perhaps prematurely-although this is what this forum was called for, of implementing the program. Several of us, and I'm just as guilty as others, have interjected our own selfish ambitions, and ambitions for our own programs, into the dicussion; but I wish to say that in the sea-grant concept we have a good vehicle to attract public, legislative, and executive support. The cause is good. Practical results with ecocom.s, military and social pay-off certainly result, probably much faster than we expect, and so I would suggest that we all get together and pust the notion, try to promote the program. It w be worthwhile for the nation and Might I say just one thing. I think Dr. Spilhaus' adcress this morning was of the most exciting addresses I have ever heard in my life. In terms of holding up to us the projections for the future of what is possible, I think it prosadly is a lot better that we talk, not about oceanography, but about ocear engineering, as he did this morning. In this broader concept, in spite of the fact that some of these things sound so fantastic, I'm positive that time is going to prove Dr. Spilhaus correct. Anything we can do to provide individuals with the sort of a creative imagination Dr. Spilhaus has displayed, individuals who want to see if what he has put before us can actually materialize, deserves our widest support. And I hope, therefore, that we can get these people, turn them loose, and see what they'll come up with, see whether or not this massive projection Dr. Spi.haus has made will not in 10, 15, 20, or 25 years actually come to pass. The world will be a much better place if it does. SPILHAUS Thank you. If we cease to dream, we'll wither and die as human beings, and in all this discussion of money and who gets it, I can just say I'm glad that this idea of mine is greater than the money we have to implement it. Otherwise, I would feel intellectually bankrupt. SEA-GRANT UNIVERSITIES: PROBLEMS OF IMPLEMENTATION (A Panel Discussion) Robert B. Abel, MEA, George Washington University, 1961. Since 1961, he has been the Executive Secretary, Interagency Committee on Oceanography, and the Assistant Research Coordinator, Office of Naval Research. For five years he was chief scientist aboard two ships of the U. S. Naval Oceanographic Office. It has been a good five years that our program (ICO) has been in existence. There have been some very significant research accomplishments in all aspects of oceanography, in marine biology, marine meteorology and in the air/sea interaction, submarine geology, geochemistry, the elucidation of current circulation. There's been some very exciting research accomplished. Incidentally, it is hoped that we will be able to document the results of these research projects, and issue them in some kind of compiled report form by early next year to provide a compendium of what has been going on recently in oceanography. Probably equally important, there has been a rather sizeable investment in building up our potential ability to take advantage of new research accomplishments as they occur. This investment is exemplified in ships, laboratories, and (certainly, at least as important as the rest), in student populations in the various universities in the country. So I repeat, it has been a rather good five years, good enough to whet our appetites for considerably more progress in the next five. One thing that struck me about the proceedings yesterday was the concerted drive to carve up Senator Pell's poor little chicken before it has even emerged from the shell. neering. I would hope that instead we can concentrate on what it is we're trying to do, what is in this for the people of the United States, how we're going to attain our goals. Hopefully, stemming from this conference, there can emerge some rather substantive ideas. Ideas should be generated within the states, themselves. First of all, we need ideas to strengthen the quality of Senator Pell's bill. After all he did leave us with this request yesterday, that support is needed and needed from many sectors of the scientific spectrum. Secondly, we might consider for awhile what must be at least one of the principal objects of our attention and that is the student, the ocean engineering student. Consider if you will what we plan to do to this student. We're going to immerse him in engiWe will flavor this immersion with some law, and with some home economics; we will push him part way through a sanitation laboratory, and all the time we are doing this, we are also implementing what someone asked for yesterday--that the sea-grant college be a sea-going college. So we're going to send this student out. He's going to spend considerable time at sea if he's a worthwhile student, and this will, of course, prolong his stay at school, four, five, six, perhaps seven years. This is the history of oceanography, as you well know. Now, what's he doing all that time? He's certainly prevented from holding down a conventional job ashore. In his shore hours, he cannot normally be an assistant because as you know, there are almost no undergraduate departments in oceanography where he can help students, and so he must have unique sources of income available to him. Now, all this time that he has prolonged his education, he has been raising a family, and this simply adds to his financial discomfort. That is why, you see, this concept of sea-grant support is particu larly precious to me. point of view of the student. I believe there is going to be a lot of work in it from the tioned the possibility of training foreign students. Finally, there is an international kick to all this. Some one yesterday menPossibly some of you are better acquainted with facilities in other countries. I don't know myself of any |