National Sea Grantcollege Program: the First Ten Years

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 197 994 SE 034 173

AUTFOR Hull, F. W. Seabrook TITLI7 National Sea GrantCollege Program: The First Ten Years. INSTITUTION NRtignal Oceanic and AtmospheT.Lc Administration (DOC), Rockville, Md. National Sea Grant Program. PUB DATE Mar 79 NOTE 899.: Contains numerous photographs which may not reproduce well. AVAILABLE FROMOffice of Sea Grant, SG-3, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 6010 Executive Blvd., Rockville, MD 20925 (frees.

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC04 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS College Programs: Environmental Education: *Environmental Research: Federal Aid: *Federal Programs: *Higher Education: *Marine Biology: *Oceanography: Program Descriptions: Science Education rDENTIFIERS *Sea Grant Program

ABSTRACT The National Sea Grant College Program sponsors efforts which encomp?ss research applied to current problems,. labor Force development, end transfer of technology and knowledge to people who need it in a form they can use. Summarized ir this report are Sea 3rant's history, programs, and results during its first decade (1967-1976). Provided is an overview of the program's philosophy and Doeration, along with numerous descript.lons of research, development, tnd educational projects funded. (Author /W9)

r********************************************************************** t Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made * t from the original document. * M********************************************************************** National Sea Grant Col lege Program

';2.._ c 'f1UAA -z. :i. in Z 9.4 The 0 4> rel Z Z 0. kr t P 0FA ,,<<". -9p. , First Ten Years ' /WENT OFeV' By: E. W. Seabrook Hull

For: The OFFICE OF SEA GRANT U S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. EDUCATION A WELFARE NOAA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF 6010 Executive Boulevard EDUCATION THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRO. Rockville, MD 20825 DUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROM THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGIN. ATING IT POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONS STATED DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRE. SENT OFFICIAL NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION POSITION OR POLICY

-,:.-T or

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Juanita M. Kreps, Secretary National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Richard A. Frank, Administrator Office of Sea Grant Ned A. Ostenso. Director March il19

2 ThEcl

...Bob Abel and the staff of the NOAA Office of SeaGrant in Washmgtor, with a special note of appreciation toProgram Analyst Ernest Greenwald for his prompt responses to my many requestsfor data ...

...Those Sea Grant Directors who took the timeand trouble to thought- fully reply to my very demanding questionnaire.In the aggregate, their replies provided an extraordinary insight intothe thinking and dedication that makes Sea Grant the firmly based successi t is ...

...Those many Sea Grant communicators who told meabout their individual State's program, who answered repeatedrequests for information and pictures with promptness andgood humor and, without whom,' Sea Grant's light would be very much under abushel ...

...Those Sea Grant Marine Extension Agentswho took the time to explain and show me what they are doing andhow they are doing it. They are the linchpin of the whole Sea Grant effort ...

...Joe Easley, captain-owner of the fishingboat Estop, out of Coos Bay, Maryland, Rhode Island, . Oreg., and other fishermen in North Carolina, and elsewhere for the opportunity totalk and go to sea with them ...

...Tom Flor, Marine Science ResearchAssistant at the University ofSouth Ca;0,ina, for his help in preparing thetables, proofreading the manuscript, and critiquing it for flow, organization,and interest.

Nellie, my wife, for her patience duringwhat proved to be a rather more demandingbut still fascinatingtask thananticipated and for her always valuable assistance in proofing and editing ...

...And, all those others who went out oftheir way to help increase my understanding of this most remarkable program.

3 PROLOGUE THE WORLD OF SEA GRANT vi

PART 1 SEA GRANT ORIGIN AND PROCESS Introduction Philosophy and Precedent Education Experiment Extension Financial Support Local Response to Local Needs Mobilizing Existing Resources Direct Involvement From a Proven Base Sea Grant: Process, Mechanics, and Control The Sea Grant: Process, Mechanics, and Control The Sea Grant Charter Three Basic Grants Program Quality and Fiscal Control Gett'ng It Going Measure of Success

PART 2 SEA GRANT IN ACTION 17 Introduction Marine Resource Development Aquaculture Fisheries Marine Biomedicinals and Extracts Minerals from the Sea Socioeconomic and Legal Research Marine Technology Research and Development Marine Environmental Research Marine Education and Training Marine Advisory Services Program Management and Development

PART 3 SEA GRANT BENEFITS 65 Sea Grant Benefits Sea Grant Meets National Needs Sea Grant Future Different Needs in Different States Future Tasks Conclusion INSERTS, FIGURES AND TABLES

Table I Program Status and Funding Summary Figure 1 Program Category Funding History Table II Marine Resources Development Case in Point Ranch Farming Salmon Table III Services `to Fishermen Case in Point Precious Coral Table IV Sea Grant-Supported Fisheries Projects Table V Sea Grant-Supported Drugs/Chemicals Projects Table VI Sea Grant-Supported Minerals Projects Table VII Marine Socioeconomic and Legal Research Projects Table VIII Sea Grant-Supported Socioeconomic and Legal Table IX Marine Technology Research and Development Table X Sea Grant-Supported Technology Research and Development Projects Table XI Marine Environmental Research Table XII Sea Grant-Supported Environmental Research Table XIII Marine Education and Training Table XIV Sea Grant-Supported Education andTraining Projects Table XV Courses Funded by Sea Grant Table XVI Marine Advisory Services Table XVII Sea Grant - Supported Marine AdvisoryServices Projects Table XVIII Program Management and Development Table XIX Sea Grant-Supported ProgramAdministration and Development Projects Table XX Examples of Specific Benefits "Since ancient times man's relationship with thesea has been a significant one and one which has necessitated that man search for away to harness the tremendous power of the sea for his own benefit. Thesea has brought man both good and bad: It has been a life source, it has beena cause of death, and it has brought man new beginnings. Thenew beginnings which the sea can now provide have overwhelming implications formankind's future in terms of future energy supplies and foodresources. Scientists feel that the sea will provide the answers to these complex problemsof survival acid progress which face us in the future.

"The conclusion seems obvious: We must continue to supportan educational endeavor which is teaching us to explore and exploitone of the world's greatest natural resources, the treasurehouse of thesea. Thanks to the Sea Grant College Program the great unknown ofthe sea is becoming more comprehensible, more manageable andan even more harmonious and helpful part of the world environment. This isour opportunity to initiate a second decade of cooperative scientific research and investigation in this important area." --" Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr. Speaker of the House of Representatives ""T1rif-> .1 (

There are no hard and fast delimitations to the world of SeaGrant. In general, it includes coastal lands to some moderate distanceinlandsay, 50 milestheir abutting bays, estuaries and tidal riversand the offshore waters, seafloor, and subsoil of three great oceans, theGulf of Mexico, and the Great Lakes. This means the coastal zonesand offshore waters of 30 of the 50 States, the United States dependentterritories and islands, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. The World of Sea Grant has 20,000 miles of generalcoastline, 93,311 miles of detailed tidal shoreline, 600,000 square miles ofland and inland waters, more than 60,000 square miles of territorial sea,and some 830,000 square miles of water, continentalshelf, and submerged lands. The 200-mile economic zone raises that last to more than threemillion square miles and includes the resources of the superjacent waters aswell as of the seafloor and subsoil. In contrast, the land area of the 50U.S. States is 3.6 million square miles. The national continental margin contains theUnited States' largest untapped reserves of oil and gas. Since 1946, morethan 17,000 wells have been drilled in the offshore waters of Louisiana,Texas, California, and Alaska. Many more States are being added to thelist, and the pace of exploration is accelerating. Hand-in-hand is theneed for expanded refinery capacity. There is a similar demand for more electricitygenerating plants. The majority of those planned and being built is in thecoastal zone; as the number of acceptable sites dwindles, there is pressureto locate them offshore. These same waters contain the world'srichest fisheries. In excess of 12 billion pounds of fish aretaken from American offshore watersannually up from 4.4 billion poundsin 1948. Virtually all of that expansion comes from increased foreign fishingefforts. In 1973, more than 150,000 full- and and part-time U.S. commercialfishermen operating about 87,000 small large fishing vessels caught 4.7 billionpounds of fin and shellfish with a landed value of $907.4 million. Foreignfleets just beyond the 12-mile limit caught 7 billion pounds. The Worldof Sea Grant also contains an estimated 3,000 fish-processing houses andwholesaling establishments employing some 90,000 people. Some 624 counties and independentcitiesa third of the U.S. total are entirely or substantiallywithin 50 miles of the shoreline. Theycontain more than 110 million people,54 percent of the national totalcompared to 46 percent in 1940 and 25 percent in 1850. Of33 Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (a Census Bureau definition) with a populationof a million or more, 23, with more than 63 million people, arein the World of Sea Grant. Twenty-five coastal counties alone accounted for 75 percentof the national population growth during the 1960-70 decade.Of some 274 counties actually on the ocean, Gulf ofMexico, or Great Lakes coasts, all but 55 showed population increases during this period. Coastal zone populations earn an average of $500 more a yearthan those living inland. Of 15 States with a medianfamily income of $10,000 or more, 14 are in the World ofSea Grant. Conversely, of 13 States with a median family income of less than $8,000 a year, onlyfive are there.

vi 7 With less than 17 percent of the national land area, the World of Sea Grant contains more than 40 percent of all manufacturing plants with 20 or more employees. Some 60 percent of all U.S. refinery capacity is found in just four coastal StatesTexas, Louisiana, California, and New Jersey. All of the Nation's 630 million tons (1972) of waterborne foreign trade pass through the World of Sea Grant, as do some 243 million tons of domestic coastwise waterborne trade. Serving this trade are more than 1,600 marine terminal facilities in 132 ports with controlling channel depths of 35 or more feet. All but two of America's 10 busiest airports are in the coastal area. Meanwhile, the United States remains absoutely dependent on imports for its energy requirementssome 40 percent of its need in 1975-76. The most efficient way to move this oil over water is in VLCCs (Very Large Crude Carriers). There are more than 500 of these giant ships transporting oil from the Middle East and elsewhere, but there is not one American port which can accommodate them. Ports undoubtedly will be built, and they unquestionably will be built in the World of Sea Grant, as will the special facilities required for offloading LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas). Not counting houses, factories, docking facilities, offshore oil platforms, and the like, there are more than 3,000 major modifying structures in the World of Sea Grant, including 725 jetties, dikes, and breakwaters with an average length of 930 feet, 464 causeways; 525 pier bridges; and 1,165 dredged channels of at least 35 feet. It contains more than 3,500 miles of intracoastal waterways. Each year, some 140 million cubic yards of dredge spoil are disposed of in the region's open waters, and another 67 million cubic yards are dumped into special containment areas. Eight billion gallons of municipal wastes are discharged daily into coastal waters, while ocean dumping of other wastes is officially tallied at 12 million tons a yearmostly along the Atlantic coast, mainly industrial wastes and sludge from sewage treatment plants. In addition, there are some 10,000 polluting spills a year, mostly petroleum products and mostly in the World of Sea Grant. If this World of Sea Grant is where people like to live and workand obviously it isit is also where many more like to play. Of 21,724 miles of U.S. tidal shoreline with a "recreation potential," 19,934 are privately owned. Of the publically owned 1,790 miles, access to 581 is restricted because they have been taken over by military bases, space stations, and other Federal installations. This leaves only 1,200 miles (less than 6 percent) for public recreation. About 120 million people spend $15 billion a year on beach and other 4,11'

N.-kr water-related recreation, and both figures are rising rapidly. Swimming, sunning, and other beach activities are the most popular coastal recreation. During the past 20 years, the number of marine sport fishermen has increased at a rate of 10 percent a year, while their expenditures have gone up at a rate of almost 11 percent. Some 16 million now spend more than $2 billion a year on this sport alone. Recreational boaters in the World of Sea Grant number over 20 millionof which 40 percent prefer sailand their number is rising by at least 200,000 a year. The World of Sea Grant contains some of the Nation's most important flyways and wintering areas for migratory waterfowl. These flyways are

vii essential to survival of the species that usethem, yet become unusable if occupied or modified by man. These waterfowlprovide recreation for about two million hunters who spend a quarter of abillion dollars a year on this activity. Estimates vary, but at least two-thirds of themarine fish caught by sport and commercial fishermendepend absolutely on coastal marshlands and estuaries for all or critical parts oftheir lives. Of the original127million acres of wetlands in the UnitedStates, only75million remaina decline of 40percent. The survival of this resource andof the land and sea animals that depend on it requires that it be leftlargely unmodified by human intervention. Also in the World of Sea Grant, theNational Park Service operates 22major recreational areasincluding 13national parks and monuments, 9 national seashores andlakeshoresand28historic sites. The National Wildlife Refuge System includes 91 coastalrefuges totalling some20.4 million acres. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineersitself operates numerous recreational areas as adjuncts to its floodcontrol and waterways activities. Additionally, there are many State-ownedand operated coastal recreational facilities. There emerges in this high-demand marketstill another compelling use of coastal and marine resourcesoneof potentially great national benefit. That is aquaculture, the husbandingof marine and freshwater plants and animals for the food industry.Where such farms are located, they cannot but restrict the extent towhich such areas can be used for other purposes. In addition to oil, gas, fish, andelectric power, in addition to marine trade and recreation, in addition to new housingand industry, in addition to aquaculture and the wetlandsconservation imperative, in addition to these and other pressures, the offshore andcoastal World of Sea Grant also produces some18million tons a year of seashells (forcment and construction aggregate) worth more than$50million and 100 million tons with of sand and gravel (other than thatneeded for beach replenishment) run an onsite value of$250million. Estimated reserves of these resources to billions of tons. From seawater itself we take$180million a year of magnesium metal and compounds, bromine, salt, andfreshwater. A variety of other metals and mineralsgold, platinum, titanium, copper,iron, zinc, manganese, glauconite, barite, phosphoriteare eitherbeing mined in small quantities from beaches and submerged coastallands or have a near-term potential. Some of the Nation's most importantphosphate deposits are found beneath coastal marshlands. This thumbnail sketch does not coverall of the resources and activities in the World of Sea Grant. It is notintended to; that would take a book. Rather, it is designed to show thediversity and intensity of rising pressures to the national on our coastal andmarine resources, and their importance well-being. Both the World of Sea Grantand its resources are finite. There is no type of human activity that occursinland that does not also occur in the World of SeaGrant. But a number of ocean-and estuarine- of related activities occur only there.Add to this the greater complexity

9 viii both the human and natural environments, and the crescendo of growth that characterizes the area, and one is faced with a management problem that is immense, intricate, and sensitiveand in the resadion of which the stakes are many and high. Indeed, it is a public management challenge without precedent both in scope and urgency. It is for the purpose of helping to develop the knowledge, tools, and skills necessary to this task that Sea Grant exists.

"... the purpose of the National Sea Grant Program is to accelerate national development of marine resources, including their conservation, proper management, and economic utilization. This is to be accomplished through the sponsorship of programs which encompass (1) research applied to real and current problems, (2) adequate training and education of manpower, and (3) transfer of technology and knowledge to the people who need it in a form they can use.

Dr. Robert M. White Former Administrator National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE The World of Sea Grantthe somewhat statistical essayis more than a mere tally of super- latives. It is the diagnosis of a problem and the setting for a challenge. It describes in geographic, economic, demographic, and societal terms the tremendous variety and rising intensities of pressures of use and nonuse being imposed on the complex, diverse, delicate, and finite environment where man, land, and sea meet. America's coastal seas and bounded land are the locus of special resources of great variety on which the Nation increasingly depends for its future growth and well-being. For many reasons, it is where more and more people and industries want to settle, work, live, and play. It is also, therefore, where the greatest protection is required of the natural environment if its resources, both living and nonliving, both economic and abstract, are to be preserved for the use of this and future generations. / The problem is to understand the interrelationships of all these different kinds of human activities with each other and with the natural milieu "Just as the scholars in the Land Grant Colleges de- on which they are imposed. The challenge is to veloped a passion for the land and led not only in ways transfer that understanding to the Nation as a to benefit by it, but also in the ways to preserve itwe whole and to devise and execute planning and must seek through a welding together of science, art, literature, engineering, medicine, law, public adminis- management schemes to provide the greatest tration, and politics to develop a public which will not benefit to the greatest number of people in both only homestead our new spaces in the sea, but colo- the present and the future. This requires a fine nize and civilize them through an integrated inter- balance beween exploitation and use, on the one disciplinary education in the Sea Grant Colleges." hand, and conservation and preservation, on the Dr. Athelstan Spilhaus other hand. This requires management and regulatory strategies and institutions which rec- creating new ones demands a very special ognize the needs, expectations, and equities of approach in areas of great ecologic, economic, the present without abrogating responsibilities to cultural, and political sensitivity. The first task has the future. It requires continuous and intimate been to produce the processes by which such two-way interaction with people and economic goals could be achieved most logically and most entities in ways that are responsive to needs, yet economically. One such process is the National are neither abrasive nor divisive. It requires levels Sea Grant Program of the Department of Com- of knowledge and awareness among both man- merce's National Oceanic and Atmospheric agers and the general public that are without Administration (NOAA). precedent. To accomplish these things in the least In the early 1940's, Dana E. Wallaceas Chair- costly, most effective manner, to balance the do's man of a committee of the Atlantic States Marine with the don't's, and to resolve conflicts without Fisheries Commissionoutlined the parallel

Point Judith, Rhode Island 121 between American agriculture under Land Grant Lincoln. Twenty-seven years later, the Hatch Act and the needs of the U.S. national seas. authorized establishment of a system of agricul- In 1963, Dr. Athelstan Spilhaus proposed a sys- tural experiment stations, and in 1914-52 years tem of Sea Grant Colleges to do for fisheries and after the original Land Grant College Actthe other marine resources what Land Grant had done Smith-Lever Act formalized the Agricultural for agriculture and the "mechanic arts" a century Cooperative Extension Service. Given this earlier. country's then-abundant natural resources and The Sea Grant Colleges and Program Act was the dynamic energy of its people, *:-Ie system of signed into law in 1966, and early in calendar year Land Grant Collegesprobably niore than any 1967 the Office of Sea Grant came into being. other single developmentwas responsible for Today (1977), the National Sea Grant Program the tremendous growth and excellence of this totals some $46 million a year, two-thirds of which Nation's agriculture and industry, a record yet to is Federally funded and one-third of which is be matched by any other nation. provided locally by the affected States and Just 113 years after Turner's historic proposal, communities. As of June 30, 1976, this money oceanographer, inventor, and writer Dr. Athelstan underwrote 57 grants which, in turn, supported Spilhaus on September 12, 1963, asked a meeting 692 separate projects. Working on these were of the American Fisheries Society in Minneapolis, 3,637 people, including 1,685 faculty and other Minn.: professionals, 747 graduate students, 395 under- JVhy, to promote the relationship between graduate students, 279 technicians, 358 clerical academic, State, Federal and industrial institu- workers, and 173 others. Not all of these people tions in fisheries, do we not do what wise men work full-time on Sea Grant projects, however, had done for the better cultivation of theland a and the full-time equivalent total was 1,910.These century ago? Why not have Sea Grant people and projects were distributed among more Colleges? than 200 universities, colleges, junior colleges, technical schools, State agencies, and other The seed thus planted germinated, took root organizations in 29 States, the District of and grew into the National Sea GrantProgram. Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, and the Even as Land Grant was responsive to the millions, Pacific Trust Territories. great inland trek of America's burgeoning But Sea Grant is neither discerned nor under- so is Sea Grant responsive to thecountermigration stood by statistics alone. The statistics merely to the coastal area and the acceleratingextension indicate Sea Grant's fiscal dimensions. This isthe of human activities seaward. differences story behind those figures. There are similarities and there are between Land Grant and Sea Grant. A brief com- parison of the two programs serves as a good introduction to the rationales and methodsof Sea Grant. The three key words are education, Though StGrant is new, the basic idea comes from an earlier century. Jonathan B. Turner in experiment, and extension. 1850 first proposed "A Plan for a StateUniversity for the industrial Classes." It was academic, even Education social, heresy. At that time, universities wereelitist Land Grant extended higher education to the institutions turning out a favored few lawyers, needs and aspirations of a whole and uncom- doctors of medicine, educators, and membersof monly energetic Nation. Recognizing education's the clergy. They were dedicated more to the Potential role in realizing econor-'c, social,and transfer of existing knowledge than to the devel- pcli:ical growth, it introduced grtt diversification That its opment of new knowledge. Turner proposed new of study disciplines and degree programs. institutions which would be open to all, at whic:i initial emphasis was on the "agriculture andthe agricultural and technologic subjects would be mechanic arts" was a function simply of the taught and where research and experimentation needs and opportunities of the time. Itsbasic the pursuit of new knowledgewould beunder- principles apply equally to the needs and oppor- which taken. tunities of coastal and marine resources, It was a 12-year struggle over muchopposition, is the first rationale of Sea Grant. but in 1862, Senator Justin S. Morrill's LandGrant As did Land Grant, Sea Grant fosters diversifi- Act wasconed into law by President Abraham cation of study disciplines and degree programs

2 to Experimentation at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, LaJolla,California

and basic changes in the ways ,nstitutions of the college of the sea to bring together men of higher learning think and function. New to the all these disciplines to carry out their scholarly scene, for example, and of growing value to con- pursuits, research, and education in relation to temporary society are interdisciplinary educa- the ocean... tional programs, interdisciplinary team appr )aches to problem definition and solution, and the The net effect of this has been to increase evolution of Sea Grant universities as centers of greatly the sensitivity of the participating uni- knowledge responsive to local, State, and regional versities to their public service roles and re- needs. Because of Sea Grant, too, different de- sponsibilities. With this awareness has comea partments within universities now work together in wi'!!ngness to abandon traditional approaches in ways, and with results, that a few years ago would fmor of those which encourage greaterrespon- have been unthinkable. Institutions which once siveness to community needs and opportunities. wt re bitterly competitive now work cooperatively. This, in turn, enhances the institution's image in The late Dr. Milner B. Schaefer put it thus: its community. In a very elementary sense, Sea Grant is responsible for bringing abouta moti- Fulfillment of our destiny in the ocean requ'res vation among its participating institutions that is a great deal more than the application of sci- both exciting and rewarding. ence and technology. This strange milieu, the sea, presents pr....131ems of economics, sociology, Experiment law, and philoc,Jhy to which old solutions and In 1850, Jonathan Turner urged that: old traditions imperfectly apply. New institutions and new ways of thought require development. To facilitate the increase and practical appli- Our entry iltr, this new realm requires the cation and diffusion of knowledge, the profes- integration of many disciplines in both the sors should conduct, each in his own depart- sciences and humanities. We need to have ment, a continued series of annual experiments. scholars working closely together in the hard This philosophy was integral to the Land Grant sciences such as physics, chemistry, biology, concept from the very beginning; later, Congres- and mathematics; the soft sciences, such as sional action only formalized what already was in sociology and economics; in engineering; in bei lg. Similarly, applied research and develop- law; and others. There is an obvious need for ment is an essential ingredient of Sea Grant. As

3 14 with the early Land Grant Act, theSea Grant Act makes no provision for ocean orcoastal experiment stations and, indeed,specifically prohibits the use of Sea Grant funds to buyland and facilities. While some Sea Grant institutionshave oceanographic laboratories, these seldom serveSea Grant in the same way that experimentstations serve Land Grant. There is adifference between experiment (applied research) and basicresearch. Oceanographic laboratories are mostlyoriented toward basic research whichusually means high-seas research, with no goalother than the quest for knowledge. SeaGrant is oriented toward applied research, specificproblem solving, and it is concerned almostexclusively with the coastal zone and contiguousoffshore area. Fund- ing for oceanographic research comesfrom sources other than NOAASea Grantnamely, the National Science Foundation andthe Office of Naval Researchwhose projectstend to utilize fully the capabilities and resourcesof laboratories Marine Advisory Service Agentdemonstrates weather funded and developed for that purpose.Similarly, gauge to volunteer in Virginia the majority of the oceanographicresearch ves- Sea Grant success. Both assuretimely and effec- sels was built for high seas work,and Sea Grant tive transfer of knowledge tothose who need it. projects suffer under a low priorityin the assign- They also provide a real-timefeedback mech- ment of ship time. anism for alerting managers andresearchers of current and upcoming problemsand opportunities. Extension concentrates of Oregon State The Agricultural Extension Service In 1931, W. J. Kerr, then President on farmers and ruralcommunities. Sea Grant has Agricultural College (now OregonState Univer- a much broadermissionproviding research, sity), stated that: education, analysis, advice, andcounsel to local, The first great task of the LandGrant Colleges State, and Federal agencies and toindustry on was the developmentof science and its appli- the problems, constraints, andopportunities cation in agriculture and industry ...Except for inherent in the use and managementof the the resident instruction andextension divisions, Nation's coastal and marine resources.Land the benefit of the discoverymight never have Grant brought the widelydiversified university into been put to general use. being. Sea Grant enables it torealize its full- service potential. In 1968, William Q. Wick, nowDirector of Extension Grant College pro- At many institutions, Cooperative Oregon State Univerity's Sea Agents and Sea Grant Marine AdvisoryAgents gram, stated that: work in close cooperaionmeldingthe long Putting America's oceans to workrequires a experience of the former in extensionwith the major national commitment.The universities knowledge of the latter in thecoastal zone, the their can play a significantrole. Training students, sea, and the peopleand machines that make however, is not enough. Appliedresearch on way thereby. They make apotent team. ocean problems is not ens,gh. But insuring the public use of knowledge through anorganized Financial Support advisory programcombinedwith training and The way financial support isprovided marks a researchis a first team effort. difference between early LandGrant and early Sea Grant. The Morrill Act gaveLand Grant The Cooperative ExtensionService remains key Colleges an initial endowmentof 30,000 acres of to the success of LandGrant. Similarly, Marine and Member of the including the Marine Federal lands for each Senator Advisory Services (MAS), which the State was Extension Service (MES), is a coreelement of House of Representatives to 4 15 entitled. Subsequently, the Federal Government tive way to anticipate and treat local needs and donated 11,383,000 acres under this provision. opportunities. This approach provides local, In his early Sea Grant proposals, Dr. SpilhaL's central, and accessible sources of knowledge, urged that: research, testing, and analysis. It combinesa Sea Grant Colleges should be given grants of knowledge of local conditions, needs, andexpec- seashore and lakeshore, seawater and bottom tations with a continuing awareness of develop- within the territorial limits as their experimental ments and practices throughout the United States plots to stimulate aquaculture in the waters and and abroad. It can relate distant technologies, the prospecting and ways of exploiting the equipment, and experience to local requirements natural resources of the sea bed. These watery and, where existing technology or science is in- grants would serve the additional purpose of adequate, conduct original research. preserving tracts of seashore and open waters The local response capability with basic policy from the fiercely competitive pressures dueto guidance from, and two-way dialogue with, Wash- increase in population and industrialization ington assures that Sea Grant, like Land Grant, preserving them not only as natural habitats for also is responsive to national needs. Active in- ecological studies but as important nursery volvement at the local level by scholars and areas for high seas fish and residences for in- extension agents alike serves asan early warning shore food fish and shellfish. system of incipient national problems, because symptoms frequently are more evident in the field The original Sea Grant Bill proposed that 10 than they are from the remote perspective of the percent of "all bonuses, rentals, royalties, and Nation's capital. other sums" realized from exploitation of the mineral resources of the outer continental shelf Mobilizing Existing Resources be assigned to support the Sea Grant program. The way Sea Grant functions, it does not so Neither proposal became law, so Sea Grant fund- much create new institutions and capabilities as ing is subject to the vagaries of the annual it mobilizes those that already exist to tackle new Federal budgeting process, though withone im- and exciting challenges. These are the talents and portant exception. facilities already in being in the Nation's colleges The law says that for every two dollars the and universities. Sea Grant serves as the catalyst Federal Government puts up at least one dollar and, through NOAA funding, provides the incen- must be provided locally. Contrary to some earlier tive for bringing these intellectual and physical fears, this matching fund requirement has proved resources to bear on the needs and opportunities to be a blessing. Because the States must put up of the communities those institutions serve. their money, Sea Grant enjoys a degree of local Because they do utilize largely existing people use and involvement that many purely Federal and facilities, an asset of considerable pragmatic programs do not. Because it is their money, the value is created at a comparatively low cost to the States make sure they get a fair return on their taxpayer. investment. Conversely, because the institutions depend on State and other local supportno Direct Involvement matching funds, no Federal fundsthey have a Continuous direct involvement is what makes both special incentive to be responsive to local needs. Land Grant and Sea Grant work. Local educators, Not only is it an incentive that works well, but the scientists, lawyers, engineers, extension agents, results are so good that almost from the begin- and others deal directly with the affected people. ning, matching funds have exceeded the statutory They pose and try solutions to problems. Theycan 33.3 percent and, indeed, averaged out officially see the results immediately and in real, not ab- to something above 40 percent and unofficially stract, terms. And so can those they serve. The (including support provided for Sea Grant situation permits and encourages success. It is projects but not tallied in official totals) 50 not only a matter of peer approval; there is a percent. direct feedback loop which enables mistakes,as learning experiences, to contribute as much to Local Response to Local Needs overall progress as success. Indeed, continuous An important characteristic in common is that bothonsite participation reduces the possibility of Land Grant and Sea Grant are locally planned, serious error by encouraging early identification staffed, and managed. Land Grant has proved and of faults and permitting the imposition of remedies Sea Grant is proving this to be a singularly effec- before serious damage is done to either budget or reputation.

5 1 From a Proven Base Throughout, the Land Grant-Sea Grantanalogy holds true. The play is the same; onlythe scenery and dimensions are different. In some ways,Sea Grant is played on a somewhat biggerstage, for it addresses itself to a muchbroader spectrum of problem areas and to a rather morediversified constituency. But the principle of local response to local needs, the ability to seewhat's needed, what works, and what does not, and thetrident thrust of education, experimgnt, andextension are the same. Land Grant is old, established, and proven.Sea Gran:. is young, still evolving. It is notretracing Land Grant's long trek up the learning curve, however; rather, it starts from that proven,well- founded baseadopting, adapting,and innovat- ing to best suit its special purposes.The crisis conditions that already prevail in thecoastal zone, the rapidly rising importanceof marine resources to the national futureand, simply, the contemporary pace of events in thelatter half of the 20th Century already demand far moreof Sea Grant than was either required orexpected of Land Grant in the middle of the 19thCentury. Grant has been The record of performance Sea "A Sea Grant University ...it is one of the most stimu- able to establish in its first decadeprovides lating educational concepts in many years." evidence that its contribution toAmerica's future Senator Claiborne Pell might be every bit as great as LandGrant's contribution to America's present. sources through activities in areasof education, research, and public service. A Sea GrantCollege would specialize in the application ofscience and Sea Grant: Process,Mechanicstechnology to the sea, as in underwaterprospect- and Control ing, mining, food resources development,marine immediate pharmacology and medicine, pollution control, Dr. Spilhaus' proposal drew an and enthusiastic response. In August1965, Rhode shipping and navigation, forecasting weather introduced S. 2439 climate, and recreational uses. It would relate Island Senator Claiborne Pell sci- to provide for "the establishmentand operation of such application to the underlying natural of education, ences, which underly socialsciences, as they are Sea Grant colleges and programs occupation and training, and research in themarine sciences and affected by, and in turn affect, the services relating to activi- exploitation of the sea. Thus, a SeaGrant College a program of advisory intellect.,a1 ties in the marine sciences ..."In October of that would bring to bear the wide variety of leadership of the University resources usually associated with auniversity on year, under the strong We are not of Rhode Island's (URI) Dean ofOceanography, the development of marine resources. suggesting the establishment of new schools, Dr. John A. Knauss, a nationalconference on University" was colleges, or universities, but rather thedevelop- "The Concept of a Sea Grant private Insti- convened at Newport, R.I., and gavestructure and ment of this capability in State and utions already deeply involved in the studyof substance to Dr. Spilhaus' proposal.The proceed- ings of that conference producedthe following: marine sciences, institution of Florida's Representative Paul Rogers gotthe A Sea Grant College would be an of Represen- higher education devoted to increasing our Sea Grant ball rolling in the House H.R. 16559. Support Nation's development of the world'smarine re- tatives with the introduction of

6 17 Administration (NOAA) of the Department of Commerce, where it has remained. Sea Grant's mission was and is to aid in the establishment of Sea Grant Collegesa desig- nation which must be earned by existing institutions. A prerequisite is demonstrated service through multidisciplinary approaches to solving problems and realizing opportunities in coastal and marine affairs. In 1971 the University of Rhode Island, Texas A&M University, Oregon State University, and the University of Washington became the first Sea Grant Colleges. Since then, the University of Hawaii, University of Wisconsin, University of California, State University of New York/Cornell University, State University System of Florida, University of Delaware, University of North Carolina, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Louisiana State University have been added to bring the total in 1978 to 13. The Sea Grant Charter The Pell-Rogers Act was a pioneering document. It recognized the functional interrelationships and complexities of the human-land-sea system. It provided not only for research and development in the natural, engineering, legal, social, and ". I urged the Congress to approve this program to expand the ranks of our marine brainpower in order to economic sciences, but also for them to be con- develop the skills and technology necessary for marine sidered in interdisciplinary concert as a total, exploration. Our returns will not only be financial, but dynamic, interactive whole. The Act, thereby, this Nation will prosper with the development of the anticipated some of the most crucial imperatives seas in this century under the Sea Grant College Pro- of coastal zone management. grams, just as America has prospered as a result of the Land Grant College system established in the 19th The Act provides for "Federal support toward Century." the establishment, development and operation of Congressman Paul G. Rogers programs by Sea Grant Colleges and Federal support for other Sea Grant programs designed grew in both Houses of Congress. A bill was to achieve gainful use of our marine re- passed, and on October 15, 1966, President sources ..." Marine resources include "animal Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Pell-Rogers Sea and vegetable life and mineral wealth." The Act Grant College and Program Act into Public Law emphasizes aquaculture which "can substantially 89-688. Sea Grant started life in the National benefit the United States, and ultimately the Science Foundation in February 1967, and in the people of the world, by providing greater eco- following February, the first Sea Grant awards nomic opportunities, including expanded employ- were made to Massachusetts Institute of Tech- ment and commerce; the enjoyment and use of nology, California Institute of Technology, and our marine resources; new sources of fcSod; and Louisiana's Nicholls State College. new means for the development of marine re- Since that modest beginning through June 30, sources." 1976, 473 grants including more than 4,000 proj- The Act defines "support" of marine develop- ects have been awarded with a Federal and local ment as: matching funds total of $217 million. In October scientific endeavors, relating to the marine en- 1970, under Reorganization Plan IV/1970, the vironment, including, but not limited to, the fields Office of Sea Grant (OSG) was transferred from oriented toward development, conservation, or the National Science Foundation to the newly economic utilization of the physical, chemical, created National Oceanic and Atmospheric geological and biological resources of the marine

718 Technical training at the University of Rhode Island

Research at the University of California Sea GrantCollege Program. 19 8 environment; the fields of marinecommerce and marine engineering; the fields relatedto exploration or research in therecovery of natural re- .01 sources from, and the transmission of energy in, the marine environment; the fields ofoceanography and oceanology; and the fieldswith respect 4:4 V to the study of the economic, legal, medical,or sociological problems arising out of themanagement, use, development, recovery, and controlof the natural resources of the marineenvironment. r In addition to a broad and flexible mandate,the Act also decrees to Sea Grant a broad realmas including: the oceans; the Continental Shelf of the United States; the Great Lakes; the seabed andsubsoil "7"."* of the submarine areas adjacent tothe United States to a depth of 200 meters or beyondthat limit to where the depths of the superjacentwaters admit of the exploitation of the naturalresources of the area; the seabed and subsoil and similar submarine areas adjacent to the coasts of islands Marine Advisory Service Agent with boatowner. which comprise United States territory; andthe natural resources thereof... of commitment and capabilities in sucha way as to minimize the administrative load on OSG while This does not mean that Sea Grant mustgo out assuring a.maximum level of local control com- and do all these things in all theseareas. It is not mensurate with sound quality control and the a mandate for excess. Rather, it is a mandate for realization of Sea Grant objectives. The three flexibility, for responsiveness to local needs and types of grants are: opportunities of whatever nature. The Sea Grant Act was not intended to, and did not until after (1) Institutional grants which go to institutions of legislative mandates for such efforts in 1976, higher learning, or combinations thereof, with an produce a national program per se. Rather, the existing broad base of competence in marine 1966 law authorized and encouraged the develop- affairs; and a positive, long-term commitment to ment of a process, a system of multidisciplinary Sea Grant objectives "as evidenced by commit- centers of excellence capable of responding effec- ment of the institution's own resources in the tively in a great variety of ways according to local form of matching funds, creation of the organiza- and regional demands andin a broad and tion necessary for management of the Sea Grant fundamental sensein accordance with national Program, establishment of interdisciplinary re- interests. search teams, and development of advisoryserv- The Act also defines the three main elements of ice mechanisms for strong interaction with marine the Sea Grant process as: communities in its region." Sea Grant Colleges are named from this group. (1) Education and training in order to assurean (2) Coherent Project grants which go to institu- adequate supply of marine-wise, trained profes- tions which have some, but not comprehensive, sionals; competence in marine affairs. They enable such (2) Research in order to provide the necessary institutions to apply their expertise toward Sea knowledge and technology; and Grant objectives and to develop the broader base (3) Advisory services both to identify needs and of competence necessary to qualify for institu- opportunities and to transfer knowledge to tional support. Coherent Project supportmay also those who would use it. be used "to bring into the Sea Grant Program,on a more or less continuing basis, qualified entities Three Basic Grants which have rare or unique capability in a special- Sea Grant awards three basic types of grants. ized field of marine affairs." Such entities need not They are designed to accommodate various levels be institutions of higher education.

9 20 review and (3) Project grants which no to individualsfor to extensive internal and external funds clearly defined activities with outstanding merit control. The sharp competition for limited busi- and contribute to fulfillment of Sea Grantobjec- itself is a winnowing process. It is a tough tives. Project support is usually, though not ness, and, generally speaking,only productive exclusively, for one-year efforts. and responsive projects survive. On the local level, then, the director is agrant- Both Institutional and Coherent Project support ing center. This gives him or her a higherdegree presume a continuing effort through the yearsby of control than if the position were merely a the grantee institutions. In return for thiscommit- university administrator or departmental chair- ment, an effort is made to assure continuityof person trying to coordinate disparateprojects Federal support. A college or university musthave for which the principal investigators hadobtained been in an institutional grant status for at least their support independently from one or more three years to qualify for consideration as aSea distant sources in Washington. Indeed, manyuni- Grant College. versity administrations welcome this aspect ofSea Grant as restoring centralized researchauthority Program Quality and Fiscal Control to the universities. Sea Grant'srnultiproject grant How Sea Grant appears to function to the casual approach assures primary review andcontrol at observer and how it actually functions are two the local level; it also assuresadministrative quite different things. Technically, SeaGrant pro- simplicity for OSG which otherwise would have to vides most support through institutionalblock administer more than 10 times the number of funding. This implies lump sum payments to grants it does now. institutions with which they are free to do pretty Once the local Sea Grant directorforwards his much as they please within often quitebroad or her proposal to Washington, awhole new limitations. review process begins. New project proposals are This is not the way Sea Grant works. sent by OSG for critical screening tooutside While the majority of Sea Grant funds is ex- experts familiar with V, e proposedfields of investi- pended as block grants to institutions, thegrants gation. This review frequently includesFederal are made for specific programswhich, in turn, and State agencies on which the workmight consist of numerous individual projects.Before impact. Concurrently, OSG staff programmonitors they are approved for support, the programsand carefully scrutinize the proposals, assuringthat each individual project undergoseveral layers continuing projects are maintaining theirfocus, and types of critical scrutiny. Once funded,they are making significant progress, areremaining are subject to continual reviewfor performance. relevant, and that national as well aslocal inter- Typically, the procedure is as follows: ests are being served. The resultsof these review Regular and frequent communication by staff processes go back to the local director,and if his members of the NOAA Office of Sea Grant with or her proposed level ofFederal support is too the institutional Sea Grant directors keepsthe high, suggestions are made for cuts. directors current on Federal budget developments and national interests and constraints.By the time proposals are submitted, most individualprojects already have been discussed with OSG represen- 11. tatives and likely levels of support areknown. This is the first level of coi aro!. The local Sea Grant director does not act unilaterally or arbitrarily but has his or her own system of advice and review, such as: theMarine Advisory Services, the principal investigators, a Sea Grant executive committee drawn fromwithin the institution, and a Sea Grantadvisory council drawn from the community served by theinstitu- tion and consisting, variously, ofindustry leaders, labor, civic groups, professional societies,State agencies, and local governments. Thus,both new University of Delaware investigatorexplains research and continuing projects are subjectedindividually proposal to Sea Grant site visit team.

10 21 Meanwhile, a 6- to 10-person "site-visit" team has been named from the National Sea Grant Review Panel, the OSG staff, relevant Federaland State agencies and other Sea Grant institutions including always a specialist in advisory services. Well in advance of the team's visit to the Sea Grant institution, copies of the proposalare sent to team members and to various Federal agencies (always including the National Marine Fisheries Service) which may or may not choose to be represented on the team. The actual visit is an intensive 2- to 3-day affair. The first day, the institution staff presents its program and is questioned by the team. That evening the team meets in executive session to review the program project by project. The next day, the team meets with local Sea Grantman- agement in a candid give-and-take session in which team members make their views known and the local Sea Grant personnel are givenan opportunity to respond. This is a critical time in the project approval process. Back in Washington, the NOAA Sea Grant program monitor prepares a report on the visit, obtains corrections and approval from team members, and forwards the finished product to both the local Sea Grant director and the full membership of the National Sea Grant Review Panel, which is given an opportunity to comment. ". .. Sea Grant directors have been chiefly responsible This 15-person panel consists of university, gov- for the smooth functioning of the extremely compli- ernment, and industry personnel and represents a cated messianic activity necessary to induce vice broad mix of disciplines, interests and geographic presidents, deans, department heads, and professors regions. It meets formally twice a year to discuss, in myriad scientific and technical fields to subordinate their individual aspirations to programs built around advise, endorse, and/or criticize both the overall common themes and to pursue these programs in a Sea Grant effort and its constituent programs. totally coordinated manner." This panel has guided national Sea Grantman- Dr. Robert B. Abel, agement since before the first institutional grant Former Director, was awarded in 1968. National Sea Grant Program Thus, block funding, as practiced by Sea Grant, does not relinquish control. Quite the contrary, it assures much closer control and guidance of both money and project quality. At the same time, however, it encourages great flexibility in local responsiveness and in the development of useful knowledge and capabilities. At the institutional level, the director has both authority and responsibiliy to manage and mold his or her program. As previously noted, the director has a system of review processes and advice. Having local funding authority, he or she is able to assure coherence and coordination among the various elements of the program, to attract top talent, to instill the Sea Grant essence of service and, where the indicated, to encourage interdisciplinary, inter- port, bring it money and prestige, strengthen departmental, and interinstitutional team ap- appeal and contribution of its educational pro- and vital proaches. Add to this the subsequent layers of grams, and, in general, add a new review and control at the national level, and the dimension to the university's role in contemporary Sea Grant management method probably society. Though Sea Grant would require achieves closer program control than can be changes, these would in no way derogate the found in almost any other Federal granting pro- institution's traditional standards and responsi- gram. The significant point is that thisNOAA pro- bilities. they gram achieves fiscal and qualitycontrol without Faculty members had to be convinced that imposing Washington's whim and will on local could do useful, exciting, and rewarding work as This program content or method. part of a coordinated interdisciplinary team. was not an easy task and, at someinstitutions, it is Getting It Going not done yet. Individual facultymembers had grown increasingly independent,both of one "... Sea Grant directors have been chiefly another and of their administrations.Professional responsible for the smooth functioning of the rewards and recognition were attuned toindi- extremely complicated messianic activity vidual research and publication in highlyspecial- necessary to induce vice presidents,deans, ized professional journals. In contrast, Sea department heads and professors in myriad Grant's goal was contemporary problem solving, scientific and technical fields to subordinate with results immediately useful to societyto be their individual aspirations to programs built given prompt and wide disseminationnotonly around common themes and to pursuethese among planners, managers,legislators, and busi- programs in a totally coordinatedmanner." ness executives, but also amongthe general public. Dr. Robert B. Abel, Former Director National Sea Grant Program Measures of Success How well the National Sea Grant Programhas At start-up, Sea Grant's first job was to get succeeded in realizing these objectives canbe the process goingto explain and sell the con- seen, in part at least, in the figurestheshift cept and mechanics ... through the years from project awards to institu- ... of newlevels of university responsiveness tional awards and the increase in Sea GrantCol- to community needs and opportunities; leges. Institutional awards presume that the ... ofadaptive education to meet the changing recipient university system has interdisciplinary needs of contemporary society for new breedsof team approaches and adaptiveeducational pro- professionals and technicians; grams, is responsive to communityneeds, is ...of the quest for solutions rather thanmerely coordinating all applicable university resources the quest for knowledge; within the State, has effective communications ...of the interdisciplinary approach to problem with its coastal and marine constituency,is con- coastal solving; tributing to its State's effort to manage its ...of interdepartmental cooperation and co- and marine resources, is attractingindustry ordination in both research and education; interest and participation, and is workingproduc- ...and of interinstitutional cooperation,rather tively with local, State and Federa'agencies. than costly and sometimes duplicativecompeti- Winning the coveted Sea Grant Collegedesigna- tion. tion says that the institution is notonly doing This process could not be done by edict orthe these things, but also is doing them well. issuance of a handbook. It required a fine mix Sea Grant's record shows that: of logic, diplomacy, blunt talk, cajolery, pressure, (Federal + and, of course, the enticement of a new sourceof In Fiscal Year 1968, a $7.9-million funding. The only person who could do this was matching funds) effort included sixinstitutional, project grants in the local Sea Grant director. Clearly, he orshe two coherent project, and 21 with a had to be a person of very special talents. 18 states and the District of Columbia, University administrators had to be sold onthe funding distribution of 55 percent, 5 percent, that time, there idea that successful Sea Grant participation and 40 percent, respectively. At In Fiscal Year would strengthen the institution's community sup- were no Sea Grant Colleges.

12 23 Program Status and Funding Summary Sea Grant Table I

FISCAL YEAR 1976 CUMULATIVE FUNDING HIGHEST PROGRAM FUNDING 1967-76 STATUS STATE/DEPENDENCY $1,000 $1,000 (Fiscal Year 1976) Total Federal Matching Total Federal Matching

524.2 1,083.3 3,192.0 3,774.4 6,966.4 ALASKA Coherent Project 559.1 51.4 84.3 32.9 51.4 84.3 ARIZONA Project 32.9 24,907.5 Sea Grant College 2,767.1 1,936.8 4,703.9 12,993.7 9,913.8 CALIFORNIA_ 947.9 47.5 24.0 71.5 309.1 638.8 CONNECTICUT Project 446.7 1,227.9 4,069.4 2,374.7 6,440.1 DELAWARE Sea Grant College 781.2 1,166.8 2,497.7 8,770.6 5,799.6 14,570.2 FLORIDA Sea Grant College 1,330.9 524.5 1,107.5 2,397.1 2,072.5 4,469.6 GEORGIA Institutional Program 583.0 991.0 2,626.6 9,510.9 6,296.1 15,807.0 HAWAII Sea Grant College 1,635.6 615.5 1,315.9 4,747.8 3,999.2 8,747.0 LOUISIANA Institutional Program 700.4 622.1 1,615.4 5,265.5 3,171.3 8,436.7 MAINE/NEW HAMPSHIRE Coherent Project 993.3 47.6 124.0 649.1 331.5 980.6 MARYLAND Project 76.4 1,423.6 894.9 2,318.5 5,477.7 3,535.3 9,013.0 MASSACHUSETTS Institutional Program 382.3 847.1 4,814.9 2,626.4 7,441.3 MICHIGAN Institutional Program 464.8 99.7 99.8 55.6 4,155.4 MINNESOTA Project 34.6 35.3 363.9 938.9 2,505.7 1,914.4 4,420.1 MISSISSIPPI/ALABAMA Coherent Project 575.0 155.9 376.0 880.2 481.7 1,361.9 NEW JERSEY Coherent Project 220.1 812.5 2,061.8 8,248.6 7,823.9 16,072.5 NEW YORK Sea Grant College 1,249.3 417.5 1,252.5 5,002.2 3,945.3 8,947.5 NORTH CAROLINA Sea Grant College 835.0 172.5 98.6 271.1 OHIO Project 45.0 135.0 503.0 251.5 754.5 OKLAHOMA Project 90.0 2,107.6 1,265.4 3,373.0 11,520.7 6,995.3 18,516.0 OREGON Sea Grant Collage 598.4 298.8 987.2 PENNSYLVANIA Project 884.0 2,670.4 8,389.0 4,441.5 12,830.5 RHODE ISLAND Sea Grant College 1,786.4 191.3 551.3 1,252.2 707.2 1,959.4 SOUTH CAROLINA Coherent Project 360.0 982.3 2,481.3 9,699.9 5,205.6 14,905.5 TEXAS Sea Grant College 1,499.0 813.0 2,577.6 1,408.9 3,986.5 VIRGINIA Coherent Project 520.7 292.3 2,384.3 9,894,7.. 5,702.9 15,597.6 WASHINGTON Sea Grant College 1,564.6 819.7 1,731.3 7,104.3 3,792.9 10,897.2 WISCONSIN Sea Grant College 1,131.3 600.0 477.7 270.0 747.7 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Project 19.7 9.9 29.6 200.0 163.9 363.9 GUAM Coherent Project 76.8 157.5 90.7 248.2 AMERICAN SAMOA Project 46.7 30.1 102.6 53.3 155.9 tiiRGIN ISLANDS Project 123.5 191.4 260.2 451.6 TRUS7 TERRITORIES Project 55.1 68.4 25.0 55.0 PUERTO RICO Project 30.0

ti 14 5 1976, a $38.6-million effort included 15 institu- picked up by other agencies for continued tional, 12 coherent support, and 25 project fundingMassachusetts Institute of Technol- grants in 27 States, the District AColumbia, ogy's electron beam water purification scheme American Samoa, and the Trust' Territories, with is now funded by the National Science Founda- the funding spread at 74 percent, 19 percent, tion's RANN program, while the Coastal Plains and 7 percent, respectively. And, there were 11 Regional Commission is funding aquaculture Sea Grant Colleges (See Table 1). projects begun by Sea Grant in the Carolinas. 34 More than 200 academic institutions are now More Federal agencies are transferring funds involved in Sea Grant work. to OSG to support projects in their mission 2 More than 200 industrial, association, and pro- areas. fessional organizations are participating in Sea More Federal agencies are going directly to Grant projects, including many which contribute Sea Grant-developed capabilities for research matching funds as well as time, facilities, and and analysis. knowhow. TAI Some 25 Federal and 220 State and local gov- The extent to which a program's capabilities ernment agencies are involved in Sea Grant and resources are used is a measure of its suc- projects, both as clients and as participants. cess and utility. The extent to which it cooperates 0. Sea Grant matching funds are budget line with, and defers to, others is a measure of its items in more than ten states, while in others, maturity. On all counts, Sea Grant is building an university budget increases are specifically ear- enviable record. Another measure of success is marked as Sea Grant matching funds. the extent to which a program contributes to to Rhode Island, Michigan, and Delaware have individual, local, regional, and national wealth, named their Sea Grant programs as State health and well-beingand, that is what the rest coastal zone laboratories; New York, California, of this report is all about. Texas, Louisiana, Oregon, and Washington, "One fisherman from Newport came to me while not having taken such formal action, when I was appointed director of the Sea Grant nevertheless rely on Sea Grant for the same Program. He said: 'I hope that when you get kinds of services. over to the Corvallis campus that you will Interstate cooperation is increasingthe straighten that place out.' I said, yes, I hoped Mississippi-Alabama and Maine-New Hampshire so toobut what should I straighten out? bi-state Institutional programs, for example, as His response was that all of the fishermen in this well as the movement eastward of Hawaii's port are making more'money today because of freshwater prawn farming technology to Florida the Sea Grant program; they are better fisher- and South Carolina and the transfer of Oregon men, and they take better care of their fish. He salmon-farming knowhow to New England. said that their attitude is more optimistic, and la While there is a healthy competition among Sea their understanding of the environment is Grant institutions, there is also a willingness to better. 'And, they have no idea how they learned learn from one another. Oregon led the way in all this. Why can't you tell them that the univer- developing a Marine Extension Service. Rhode sity through Sea Grant is doing this?' " Island led in fisheries training. Others learned from them both. William Q. Wick Projects begun by Sea Grant are frequently Director, Sea Grant College Program Oregon State University

15 26 {, .sEGI 9 - .01 s Sea Grant in Action part2

Introduction of Sea Grant, while four inland states, Arizona, Sea Grant builds no great monuments or citadels. Colorado, Idaho, and Oklahoma are included. It has no bridges, dams, interstate highways, or With more than 750 separate projects in 35 moon rockets. It is not that kind of program. It different major political entities, without writing a has numerous accomplishments, but none of their book it is not possible to review the whole Sea dimensions is either large or neatly discrete. Grant program either project-by-project or State- Rather, Sea Grant is thousands of small actions by-State. Neither is it possible to take one State's individuals responding to individuals, small groups program and say, "This is typical." There is no interacting, problems identified and solved, "typical" program. Needs and perspectives vary information sought out and transferred, smail from one region to another. Great Lakes States, solution-oriented research projects, subtle for example, are concerned with water levels, ero- changes in educational processes, new percep- sion, ice, pollution, maritime transport, electric tions of university roles and missions, and a power plant siting, aquaculture, and underwater better-informed public. mining, but are in no way affected by the 200-mile It is in the aggregate that these activities take offshore economic zone. The Nation's ocean and on national substance. Even then it is difficult to Gulf of Mexico States, however, are very much answer the question: "What has Sea Grant done concerned with the meaning and impact of that for America today?" How does one measure the zone. Except for Alaska and the Great Lakes success of such an effort? By a great variety of indicators, such as rising personal incomes, expanded tax bases, community satisfaction and optimism, fewer and less divisive conflicts, better environmental management, improved quality of life, more and better seafood delivered to the consumer, new job opportunities, reduced dependence on imports, higher export earnings, better-prepared professionals and technicians, and more responsive local, State, and national government. Some of these indicators are measurable; many are not; and either way, it virtually is impossible to assign quantifiable credit for these kinds of progress to Sea Grant or any other program. Too often, the only standard of measurement is what might have been if... For reporting and budgeting purposes, OSG groups the several hundred individual projects underway at any given time into seven major categories, which, in turn, are subdivided into 81 classifications. The fiscal evolution of Sea Grant and the proportion of effort going into each major category are shown in Figure 1. Sea Grant Milwaukee Harbor projects are or have been active in 30 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and the Pacific Trust Territories. Only Illinois and Indiana, among the coastal States, have failed to take advantage States, none really is concerned withice. Atlantic responsiveness, methods, geographic spread, and coast States consider the imminence ofoffshore benefits. The purpose of this section is to provide oil exploration to be a crisis issue, whileLouisi- understanding and insight-a "feel" for the Sea Grant process, how it functions, how itcontributes ana, Texas. and Californiaalready have been State to the to more effective and more acceptable manage- that route. Sea Grant varies from one exploitation next, also according to how and howwell Sea ment, how it promotes more efficient and Grant has developed and what kinds of com- and a better balance between exploitation munity responsibilities each has assumed. conservation, and how these things, as local for What follows is a selection of Sea Grantactiv- efforts, help to build a sound underpinning ities designed to show their variety, adaptiveness, national well-being.

Program Category Funding History Sea Grant Figure I

1973 1974 1975 1976 PROGRAM CATEGORY 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972

Resources Development 145 173 169 155 Number of Projects 76 126 46 518 58,475 52,817 Average Award/Project (S) 79,050 42,719 50,661 8,064.9 9,882.3 8,186.6 Total Prograr ($1,000) 6,007.8 5,382.6 7,345.8

Socioeconomic and Legal Research 63 76 57 Number of Projects 28 46 57 26,329 37,687 Average Award/Project (S) 29,908 27,942 28,927 24,345 1,648.8 1,533.7 2,001.0 2,148.2 Total Program ($1,000) 837.4 1,285.3

Technical Research and Development 139 108 118 Number of Projects 40 100 107 42,537 37,399 Average Award/Project (S) 68,699 49,548 43,586 34,485 4,793.4 4,594.0 4,413.1 Total Program ($1,000) 2,748.0 4,954.8 4,663.7

Environmental Research 165 155 180 Number of Projects 82 124 163 37,948 34,730 Average Award/Project (S) 53,191 39,062 39,522 34,718 5,728.5 5,881.9 6,251.4 Total Program ($1,000) 4,361.7 4,843.7 6,442.1

Education and Training 76 85 Number of Projects 64 78 79 90 48,832 Average Award/Project (S) 59,347 43,944 45,686 34,298 40,539 3,081.0 4,150.7 Total Program ($1,000) 3,798.2 3,427.6 3,609.2 3,068.8

Marine Advisory Service 113 Number of Projects 63 71 78 113 101 75,567 Average Award/Project (S) 26,789 47,080 51,901 47,437 69,495 7,019.0 8,539.1 Total Program ($1.000) 1,687.7 3,342.7 4,048.3 5,360.4

Program Management and Development 44 Number of Projects 22 39 38 56 49 51,294 Average Award/Project (S) 75,378 61,548 70,311 54,990 83,939 2,256.9 Total Program "($1,000) 1,658.3 2,400.4 2,671.8 3,079.4 4,113.0

Grand Totals Number of Projects 375 584 667 799 734 752 Average Award/Project (S) 56,264 43,899 34,609 39,608 49,826 47,801 36,572.235,946.0 Total Program ($1,000) 21,099.1 25,637.1 23,083.931,647.1

(1)All dollar figures include NOAA/Sea Grant funds plus local matching funds. 29

18 11)1S()1111 whElluerpossIbleilbsifishumengiNtheir irIHRisotimNvipetprojEtili liNgitheiraisitnocharge totry outa new

cundwithimclipg, SuNqi119, d84101)14 Rtrolt piece ofgear with their oily ocpctito

011801g, arkmanaging the limg atl ItrwqlorORNR IP fish, 1111'q COplieS

110111lig resns Of 1118seal SH monq and kigislicsto

mayrangefmmlhesimpleactoidemolstratirig glopitermethocis of Almtersming, thenst6nef a resou rce to the (18V814110Of 2Kp1P4(ritiorilainigi ligHSirl kilt* dVionshtlonVOIni$1 \hrinellmiasCleglopmdisdidd and theOVP10011 ofROCIOMIC projdes 1)alocultalOhyingTsmosphrtim ( marketing stratOsi 4(1Uhli, (3) MUIR b1011edICIli eX

SeaGrantpolleyislo themomum Ittslvtl@)milerals,l2ble11s1owsNe cooperation Riptipalsof the rivMSet Call of theN6ift Marine Resources Development Sea Grant Table II (Fiscal Year 1976 Awards)

Matching Funds Active. Projects Federal Funds Total Per Cent Average Per Cent Program of Total Project Subcategory Cost Per of Total Budget"' (S-million) (S-million) Program Number Project Federal (S- million) Budget(3) (5) Sea Grant`"

11.7 1.8 40 4.5 70 64,000 2.7 Aquaculture 1.6 6.7 0.8 35 Living Resources (other) 2.4 54 44,000 0.3 1.4 0.3 46 Mineral Resources 0.6 14 43,000 0.4 1.8 0.3 38 Biomedicinals, Extracts 0.7 17 40,000 53,000 5.0 21.6 3.2 39 Category Totals 8.2 155

local matching funds. (1) This includes NOAA Sea Grant funds plus of activity. (2) This is a percentage of the total NOAASea Grant budget for all seven major categories (3) This is the matching fund percentageof the total program budget in the far left column.

The first task has been to build asound tech- Aquaculture nological base. Sea Grant support hasbeen con- Aquaculture is to water what agriculture is to cerned with such efforts as: identificationof most land. It is farming plants and animals that grow adaptable species, selective breedingfor "most salt water. in waterwhich may be either fresh or farmable" traits, diets, diseases, parasites,canni- of Sea To date, it has consumed the major share balism, breeding in captivity, spawning onde- budget. Grant's marine resources development mand, and the design and engineeringof efficient Abroad, it is a very old business, but most methods structures, materials, and systems.Among the are labor intensive anduneconomic in the United lobsters country has species being studied are: "Maine" States. That it can be profitable in this (Homarus americanus), giant Malaysianfresh- and catfish. been well proven in the case of trout water prawns (Macrobrachiumrosenbergii), The underlying thrust of Sea Grant-supported penaeid shrimp, salmon, dolphinfish (Coryphaena profitability efforts is to increase the variety and hippurus), yellow perch, walleye pikerabbitfish To minimize of the species that can be farmed. (Siganus canaliculatus), oysters, clams,scallops, been on the economic risk, initial emphasis has lugworms (for bait), giant brown kelp(Macro- high value species--though the long-term (Eucheuma). of low- cystis), mussels, and Irish moss promise is one of large-volume production Sea Grant-supported aquaculturalresearch cost sources of high-protein foods. farming to com- saltwater, runs the gamut from open-range Because most coastal States border pletely closed cycle system. Anexample of the species. The the primary emphasis is on marine first is the ranch farming ofsalmon, first devel- University of Wisconsin, however, hasbrought introduced in farming vir- oped in Oregon and now being both yellow perch and walleye pike Washington, California, Alaska, and NewEngland. Sea Grant- tually to commercial feasibility. Other Farmers raise young salmon in hatcheriesand species to supported projects will enable marine release them to the sea. New lawsgive them a from the be raised profitably hundreds of miles preferential right to the salmon whichlater return sea. Kansas City oysters orlobsters may one day as adults. Despitehigh natural mortality rates and be as famous as Kansas City steaks! a substantial catch at seaby both sport and The benefits of successful aquaculture are commercial fishermen, this is turning outto be a manifold: new sources of high-demand,high- Sea Grant nutritional quite profitable business. A small protein foods; an augmented national investment is resulting in many millionsof dollars base; new jobs; new opportunitiesfor venture is expected reduced imports; of private investment which, in turn, capital; an expanded tax base; to produce revenues in the tensof millions. This increased exports; and, when used forthat pur- technique promises to more thanoffset the recent rebuilding, and transplanting pose, enhancement, sharp decline in the natural harvestof salmon as of wild stocks.

20 31 Malaysian Prawn research at the University of Hawaii.

10-

\744s:ft 44\ ..or^

Closed cycle aquaculture system at the University of Delaware.

21 32 from thermal power plants, and in abandoned quarries in West Texas. This last usessaltwater found in naturally occurring aquifers a fewfeet below ground level. Pan-size salmon are now being marketed in the Northwest which areraised in pens anchored in Puget Soundatechnique that is spreading to other parts of the country. North Carolina Sea Grant has found thatdolphin (fish, not porpoises) are capable ofbeing raised in tanks. Scientists at Woods HoleOceanographic Institution have developed and demonstrated a multistep, integrated aquaculture systemwhich uses the high-nutrienteffluent from secondary sewage treatment to producealgae and oysters, while simultaneously providing effectivetertiary sewage treatment. The extent of Sea Grant involvementvaries widely from one project to another. It mayprovide most of the support for originalresearch, or it may step in along the way toprovide lesser though critical support. Multi-institutional cooperation is a common feature of SeaGrant aquacultural research. California, NewYork, and Rhode Island closely coordinate theirlobster farming workall of which enjoys SeaGrant support. Hawaii is providing its basicMacro- brachium know-how to both Florida andSouth Carolina and is participating in efforts toadapt the technology to those States' differentclimates. Both Oregon State University and the University of Washington are cooperating in the transfer of various salmon farming techniques to northern well as to contribute materially to therebuilding New England. of natural stocks. It may well beapplicable to Frequently, both State and Federal agencies as other anadromous species, such asshad, herring, well as industry and academia cooperate on projects. Initial research on the pen-rearingof and striped bass. Closed cycle systemssuch as thosedevel- salmon, for example, was carried out by the oped for clams and oysters at Delawareand for National Marine Fisheries Service; as the project salmon at Rhode Islandare particularlyexciting. progressed, several Washington State agencies, Farms, They mean that mariculture (farming ocean the University of Washington and Domsea Domsea species) can be completely independentof Inc. (a private firm), all became involved. proximity to the sea. And, because they areclosed believed in what it saw and is now harvesting yearat an average cycle systems, they eliminate anyproblems of more than 1,000,000 pounds a pollution which accompany many farming oper- price of $1.50 per poundand is stillbuilding. Plant ations. Ultimately, they may mean that many Sea Grant, University of Hawaii's Marine Colloids, Inc., (a marine species will be capable of beingproduced Agronomy Program, and Marine establishing close by their inland markets, thusbypassing private U.S. firm) have cooperated in (Eucheuma many problems of preservation,storage, and more than 1,000 new Irish moss striatum) farms in the Philippines and other transport. This There are many variations between open-range Pacific Rim countries and U.S. territories. tenfold increase in one year in and closed-cycle aquaculture.Penaeid shrimp effort produced and have been reared successfully in saltwaterponds world production of kappa carrageenan especially close by the sea, in the heated cooling water solved a serious shortage, which was

22 33 acute in the United States, where carrageenan is foreign fishing fleets, or they are not caught at all. an important prepared foods additive. The newly enacted 200-mile offshore economic Sea Grant's aquaculture program is moving zone is expected to give Americans fair and into the critical phase now, where it moves from reasonable access to stocks which to date have research and experimentation into commercial been largely denial to them. production. With successes already scored in Commercial fisheries support may come from several States in salmon, oyster, lugworm, kelp, any of Sea Grant's major project categories Irish moss, and clam farming the prognosis is gear development under technology research and good, if not exciting. Already the subject of development, or marketing under socioeconomic millions of dollars of investment and multimillion- and legal research. Contributionsrange from dis- ddlar revenue levels, aquaculture in the United covery of new stocks of fish and improved fishing States and its dependencies has the potential for methods, to assistance in writing legislation, becoming a major source of food and a major better seafood processing, and waste manage- national economic activity. It is an area in which ment (See Table III). The effort is local and Sea Grant has played and continues to playan addresses problems and opportunities of specific important pioneering role. fisheries. It is frequently a cooperative effort among Sea Grant institutions, State agencies, Fisheries Federal agencies (such as NOAA's National In the last 20 years, the world fisheries catch has Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA's National gone from 40 million to 70 million metric tons a Weather Service, Internal Revenue Service, and year. The U.S. catch has remained static at 2.2 the Environmental Protection Agency), thesea- million tons, while both per capita fish consump- food processing industry and, always, thecom- tion and total population have increased. The mercial fishermen. United States supplies less than half of the Key to the whole effort is the Sea Grant Marine Nation's needs. The import bill to make up the Advisory Services which maintain continual, close difference is some $2 billion a year. Ourcon- contact with the local fisheries community. It spots tiguous ocean waters produce more than enough needs and opportunities, proposes solutions, and, fish to fill our needs, but they are either caught by where appropriate, brings in Sea Grant institution

A SEA GRANT AQUACULTURE CASE IN POINT Ranch Farming Salmon

The NOAA Sea Grant investment in ranch farming of salmonwas $375,000 over a 9-year periodfor hatching techniques, pilot demonstration, etc. What's the payoff? Several companies have madea commitment. Others seek licenses. Let's just look at one of themthe wholly ownedWeyerhauser sub- sidiary, Oregon Aqua-Foods. Just about halfway tofulloutput,ithas proved the percentages in practice. By 1980 and after a $6- to-$10 million investment, its operation will looksomething like this: Each year the company will hatch and release 40 million chum salmonsmolts (young salmon) to the sea. Of these, roughly 37 million will fall prey to natural predators. Of the remainder, U.S. commercial fishermen will catch over one million (market value, $15.1 million); sportfishermen, 400,000 ($5.6 million); and Oregon Aqua-Foods will harvest 000,000 (a fishreturn of 2 percent worth $11.2 million). Aside from new jobs, exciting opportunities for investment capital, anda considerable addition to the national nutritional base, that is a $26.3 million product fromone company's efforts alone. Multiply that by 15 to 30 other companies on the United States east and west coasts.... Much of the new salmon production will be exported, helping our balance ofpayments, and helping to fight inflation. And, don't forget the tax base. The poundage tax commercial fishermenmust pay on a million salmon is $376,000 more taxes in one year than the whole Sea Grant investment. That doesn't count personal and corporate income taxes, and propertytaxes, at both the State and Federal levels. Talk about payoff....

23 It scientists, engineers, technicians, economists, Sea Grant tries not to reinvent the wheel. this proves whatever. New information and improved gear first searches existing technology. If quite by the marine fruitless, it then invents to order. It has been are passed on to the fishermen of tech- extension agent, who then rides herd on itsinitial successful on both counts. As examples Grant intro- application to help in any debugging that maybe nology transfer, Rhode Island Sea duced European pair trawling to its PointJudith necessary. fishermen with spectacular results. By thistech- nique, two boats hauling one large netbc:ween what each Sea Grant Table III them can catch more than three times could catch fishing alone. Doing isproving, and Services to Fishermen pair trawling is now spreading up anddown the the travel is Develop greater knowledgeof fishery popu- east coast. The cost to Sea Grant was the United lation dynamics. expense of one Irish fisherman to of e Identify yields and marketpotentials of under- States to explain it. Similarly, University adapted the utilized species. Georgia Sea Grant debugged and s Expand resources by stockrebuilding and never-to-then quite successful Gulf of Mexico side-by- species transplants. "twin trawl"substituting two smaller, needs of n Describe ecological requirementsof important side nets for one larger oneto the 60 per- species. southeast Atlantic coast fishermen, with a Again, it El Define effects of naturaland human environ- cent improvement in catch efficiency. mental modification. worked, and the practice is being adopted by successful tech- s Study fish predators,parasites and diseases, others. As yet another example of how and their control. nology transfer, Hawaii Sea Grant showed Introduce and test improved fishing gearand modern scuba gear and manned submersibles could be used to survey, manage,and harvest methods. expansion of N Develop better fish handling,processing, and precious coralresulting in a major depend- distribution techniques. this industry while virtually eliminating Now this tech- e Explore new fish andfish-product markets at ence on foreign coral sources. home and abroad. nology, too, is being transferred elsewhere, ag Expose fishermen to betterbookkeeping and namely to the U.S. Pacific Trust Territories. successful. management methods. Inventing to order has been ecually Technology Sea a Inform fishermen ofvarious sources of capital The Massachusetts Institute of have tested suc- financing. Grant designed, and fishermen ye which greatly z Make fishermen aware ofavailable Federal and cessfully, a hookup block for trawls possi- State services. simplifies this operation and redoces the developed, z Establish liaison betweenfishermen and regu- bility of injury. Oregon State University simple and inex- latory agencies. and industry is now producing, a outboard s Mediate disputes withother users of marine pensive hydraulic power takeoff for and resources. motors. This increases fishing efficiency Oregon and Pa Be alert to potentialconflicts and work to avoid takes a lot of the sweat out of the Washington dory fisheries for both cohosalmon them. and Federal agencies in fish- and dungeness crabs. Rhode IslandSea Grant has al Assist local, State, their eries management. combined the fishermen's knowledge of In general, work to upgrade thenational com- prey's habits with wind tunnels, tow tanks, com- design an mercial fisheries effort. puters, and other modern tools to entirely new high-rise bottom trawlwhich, having proved in practice to be more-efficient,has spread to other StatesincludingMassachusetts, New York, New Jersey, the Carolinas, andOregon, That is the way its goes: problemsidentified, solutions developed and tried. Usually,the suggestions are enthusiastically receivedby the

24 35 A SEA GRANT MARINE RESOURCE CASE IN POINT Precious Coral

The NOAA Sea Grant Investment in Hawaii'scoral industry is $148,500 over a 5-year period to discover new coral beds, develop conservative harvesting techniques,and establish the bases for resource management within the bounds of maximum sustainable yield.What's the payoff? When Hawaii Sea Grant began this work in 1971,the main coral collecting company, Maui Divers of Hawaii, Ltd., had 50 employees andgross sales of $500,000 a year. Hawaii's coral jewelry was some 90 percent dependent on imports for itsraw materials, arid supplies were drying up while prices were rising. In 1974, the company grossed $7.8 million(retail value some $14 million) and had 214 employees. A much expanded coral jewelry industry dependedon imports for less than a quarter ofitd supplies. New kinds of precious coral hadbeen discovered, and techniques had been developed for selective harvesting to depths of 1,200 feet. Thoughits original investment in 1971 was $101,500, by 1975 Sea Grant was out of it entirely, and the State of Hawaiiand private industry together had invested $294,277. This is the way Sea Grant is supposedto work: recognize an opportunity, do what is necessary to show the way, and then step back in favor of localefforts, whether State, private, or both. This one has already more than repaid theinvestment in new tax revenues and will continue to do so over and over again. As a case in point, Maui Divers paidor withheld $556,934 in taxes in calendar year 1974.

fishermen; they catch more fish, save money, and different parts of the country. Manywere started are safer. long before Congress passed extended jurisdic- Discovering new stocks of fish and finding tion (200-mile) legislation. Some are quitecom- markets for known but underutilized resources is prehensive. As a result, when the law was passed, also an important Sea Grant function, which not much of the groundwork already had been done. only helps to meet domestic demands but also It was a situation that was thoroughly understood, can strengthen the export potential of the Ameri- and many alternative approaches to management can fishing industry. Toward this end, Oregon and exploitation already had been devised, State Sea Grant has identified massive stocks of analyzed, and compared. anchovy off its shoresenough possibly to make Sea Grant contributions to fishery management, the United States a net exporter rather than a net exploitation, and conservation are many and (and heavy) importer of industrial fish and fish variedtoo numerous and too diversified tocover meal. Texas A&M University is targeting in on them all here. They range from development of some way to land economically the hundreds of laser and freeze branding techniques whichen- thousands of tons of "trash fish" thrown over- able crabs, lobsters, and other crustaceans to be board each year by Gulf of Mexico shrimpers. tagged and followed through several molting Rhode Island is developing fishing methods and stages, to the development of effective and eco- exploring markets for squid, which n plentiful nomica! acoustic fish counters and computer in New England waters. California Sea Grant is models of important fisheries, to the evolution of defining the market potentials for both squid and management criteria of intertidal resources under sea urchins, while Wisconsin already is test increasing recreational pressures, to the develop- marketing products made from such Great Lakes ment of more efficient and sanitary seafood proc- nuisance fish as alewives, burbot, and suckers. essing techniques. Proof that salmon sniff their Fisheries management is also an important area w their home streams and can be imprinted of Sea Grant research. Several studies of the with artificial odors and drawn back to meaning of, and management strategies for, ex- entirely different streams was developed through tended fisheries jurisdiction have been completed Sea Grant research, also. Sea Grant fisheries covering different aspects of the problem in projects by States are shown in Table IV.

25 36 Sea Grant Table IV Sea Grant-Supported Fisheries Projects MASSACHUSETTS FishEffects of Hydrocarbons ALASKA FishTagging and Population Studies Bivalves and MollusksBiology Snow CrabBiology MICHIGAN Shellfish Poison Test Marine OrganismsCoding MINNESOTA

ARIZONA MISSISSIPPI/ALABAMA CONSORTIUM Artificial ReefsDevelopment CALIFORNIA Marine AnimalsParasites Salmon Osmoregu/ation Ciguatera in Fish Anchovy and Herring/n Humboldt Bay SquidMarketing NEW JERSEY Spiny Lobster/n Surf Grass Shelf Bivalves Growth Kelp Bed Fish Mortality Age Distribution CONNECTICUT NEW YORK DELAWARE Clam IndustryHistory Delaware Bay Food Resources Resources ShellfishDiseases FLORIDA Viral Flora Spiny LobsterBiological Attractants Fish Protein IndustryPotential Blue CrabMigration FisheriesEconomic Evaluation Marine InvertebratesPathology Social Value BacteriaAs Marine Pathogens VirologyProtection of Marine Organisms NORTH CAROLINA Commercial FishEgg and Larva Abundance Estuarine DetritusNutrition Bacteria in GEORGIA Food Chains Offshore Fish tries Survey Green TurtleSalmonella Mariculture Suoport Fungal Diseases of Economic Species

HAWAII OHIO Precious CoralsResource Survey Ecology and Growth Rates OKLAHOMA Harvesting Techniques Management Scheme OREGON Fish Eggs and LarvaeEcology AnchovyPopulation Studies Effects of Pollution FlatfishProduction System Tuna Bait Resources AlbacoreResearch Program Salmonids/mmune Responses Diseases LOUISIANA Clams and ShrimpMicrosporan Finfish, Shrimp, and CrabsResourcesSurvey Pelagic Fisheries Environment Fisheries ResourcesMigration Distribution PENNSYLVANIA

MAINE/NEW HAMPSHIRE CONSORTIUM RHODE ISLAND ShellfishRed Tide Toxins Regional Fisheries Management OystersCell Cultures Fish Pathology Disease Underutilized Species DevelopmentRedCrab Salmon PancreasInfectious Squid Potential of Fish Disease Service CrabsBiology Population Dynamics SOUTH CAROLINA MenhadenPopulation Dynamics MARYLAND Shellfish BacteriaIncidence TEXAS Survival Sport Fish Populations Pathogeneity Estuarine Ecology 37 Fish and Shrimp-Parasites frequently slow and tedious. The potential, how- Microbial Diseases ever, is great. Compounds already have been Coastal Waters-Potential Health Hazards isolated which show promise in a wide variety of VIRGINIA applications ranging from treatment of leukemia, Cownose Ray-Management cancer, and heart ailments, to agricultural pesticides, antibiotics, and antifoulants for ships' hulls. WASHINGTON University of Oklahoma scientists, with Sea Resource Assessment-Acoustic Techniques Grant support, have supplied hundreds of marine Salmon-Bases for Management of Fishery extracts for testing by the National Cancer Insti- tute-104 of which are active against leukemia and WISCONSIN 30 of which are active against human Whitefish-Population Statistics cancer. This Environmental Requirements is a very high activity yieldmore than four times Lake Michigan Sucker Populations that realized with terrestrial plants. Extracts from Lake Trout and Whitefish-Reproduction 12 marine species have shown bioactivity incar- Salmon-Environmental Preferences diovascular systems, indicating potential in the treatment of heart ailments and hypertension. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA University of Washington Sea Grant researchers have started a minor industrial revolution with AMERICAN SAMOA their work on chitosan, a polymer derived from -"GUAM the shells of shrimp, crabs, and lobsters. It began Deep Water Shrimp Studies as a project to solve the waste problem in shellfish processing houses. The. researchers have TRUST TERRITORIES converted an important part of that problem into an economic asset. They have found uses for it VIRGIN ISLANDS in nonwoven fabrics and paper, wherea 1 percent PUERTO RICO addition hikes wet strength by 44 percent and greatly improves printability. Scientists at the NOTE: This is not a complete listing of all project Massachusetts Institute of Technology, with Sea areas undertaken during Sea Grant's first 10 Grant support, are using X-ray and electron diffrac- years. Rather, it is intended simply to be repre- tion techniques to determine the different chitosan sentative of the nature and variety of activities source materials and processing methods. Univer- under this category. sity of Delaware investigators have devised techniques for precipitating chitosan in crystalline fibers with a potential for use as food wraps, Everywhere the procedures are the same: local absorbable surgical sutures, and biological response to local needs. That is where the action membranes. is, and that is where Sea Grant isgenerating more and better jobs; increasing efficiency and Among other products of this research are: safety; fostering better resource management; Ei Development at the University of Washington of getting a better quality and wider selection of fish a fast, sensitive, and inexpensive way to deter- to the consumer; spotting, avoiding, and resolv- mine calcium ion concentration in blood serum ing conflicts. using the protein Aequorin extracted from the jellyfish Aequorea aequora, which is being test Marine Biomedicinals and Extracts marketed by the Sigma Chemical Company. Most of today's drugs and pharamaceuticals are Isolation of organic compounds from the mac- derived from studies of land plants and animals rophytes Chara foliolosa and Cleocharis mic- digitalis from foxglove, penicillin from the molds rocarpa by University of Southern Mississippi Penicillium notatum and P. chrysogenum. The sea scientists. The compounds inhibit the growth of is a new and largely unexplored resource, which blue-green algae and may lead to synthetic scientists have only just begun to examine for products for controlling algae in a variety of this purpose. Sea Grant plays a small but sig- applications, including sewage lagoons, aqua- nificant role in this effort. Screening and testing culture ponds, and swimming pools. biologically 4pive compounds is challenging, but ea Discovery by researchers at the Agricultural

27 3g Experiment Station, Geneva, N. Y., that an have inventoried its offshore sand and gravel enzyme from the digestive system of surf clams resources; North Carolina investigatorshave catalyzes the hydrolytic breakdown of very identified recoverable deposits of quartz gravel, stable carbohydratesgiving it a potential in shell gravel, peat and clay; Rhode Islandscien- the treatment of food processing wastes and tists have analyzed the economics of offshore the dissolution of dental plaque. sand and gravel recovery; and Hawaii researchers la Development by University of Rhode Island Sea have discovered shallow-water manganesenodule Grant scientists of a rapid, reliable chemical deposits within the Hawaiian archipelago with a test for the presence of toxins responsible for platinum and rare-earth content believed to be paralytic shellfish poisoning which enables high enough to make them commercially attrac- precise limits of infected areas to be deter- tive. The Hawaii program also has pinpointed mined, thus enabling shellfish beds that might offshore deposits of sand for replenishment of its otherwise be closed to be harvested. valuable beaches and, under technology research ES Identification by University of California scien- and development, has developed and tested a tists of 48 new marine algal extracts, including prototype of an underwater sand recovery device. the first natural terpene, an antifungal hydro- All of these accomplishments were realized quinone, an antibiotic active against Staphylo- under Sea Grant auspices. Table VI shows Sea coccus, and a possible system ofnatural (thus, Grant-supported marine minerals activities. biodegradable) agricultural insecticides. Table V provides a brief summary of Sea Grant- supported drugs and chemicals from the sea projects. Minerals from the Sea As landside resources of important rn:nerais continue to be drawn down and as environmental and political constraints limit access to those that do remain, the economics of marina minerals becomes more attractive. Significant reservesof many important minerals are known to existin the deep ocean, on the continental shelves and slopes, and under the Great Lakes. Sea Grant is mainly concerned with comparatively shallow water deposits. Though this category of effort is one of Sea Grant'ssmallest, it is an activity with excitingpotential and one in which industry sho NS considerable interest. One of the most active programs is at theUni- versity of Wisconsin, which includes: development of a hydrocyclone for underwater separation of magnetite (an iron ore) from sand; a microchemi- cal analysis system for isolating manganese, cobalt, copper, and nickel from other materials in manganese nodules; and more efficientunder- water survey and exploration techniques which have been used in both the Great Lakes and Alaska. Wisconsin Sea Grant researchers also have discovered and assessed both copperand manganese nodule deposits in LakeMichigan and Lake Superior. Elsewhere, New York scientists have discovered and evaluated vast deposits of construction aggregates in Lake Erie; California researchers Manganese nodules from the sea bottom. 39 28 Sea Grant Table V

Sea Grant-Supported Drugs/Chemicals Projects OKLAHOMA ALASKA Active Marine Compounds-Extraction Screening ARIZONA Testing

CALIFORNIA OREGON Marine Algae-Antiviral Extracts Radioactive Extracts From Marine Invertebrates Bacterial Fouling-Antibiotic Control Salmon Culture Antibiotic Seaweed Products-Mariculture Applications Antitumor Cardiovascular and Neurotropic Activity Agriculture Applications Marine Fungi-Function and Importance in Marine Environments CONNECTICUT PENNSYLVANIA DELAWARE Crab Chitin-Utilization RHODE ISLAND Red Tide Toxins-Isolation FLORIDA Characterization Sea Squirt Extracts-Anticancer Activity Protection lmmunosuppressants Marine Pharmacology GEORGIA SOUTH CAROLINA

HAWAII TEXAS Ciguatoxin-Detection in Marine Organisms Marine Pharmaceuticals - Development Origin Laboratory Simulation VIRGINIA Mechanism of Action WASHINGTON LOUISIANA Bioluminescent Substances-As Blood Serum Calcium Detectors MAINE/NEW HAMPSHIRE CONSORTIUM Marine Polymers-Production Characterization MARYLAND Utilization Bivalves-Byssus Studies MASSACHUSETTS Shellfish Exoskeletons-Utilization Chitin-Industrial Applications WISCONSIN MICHIGAN Bioactive Substances-Chemistry Pharmacology MINNESOTA DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MISSISSIPPI/ALABAMA CONSORTIUM Algal Blooms-Inhibiting Substances AMERICAN SAMOA NEW JERSEY GUAM Anticoagulant Drugs- Animal Sources Evaluation TRUST TERRITORIES Chitosan-Enzymatic Preparation Medical Uses VIRGIN ISLANDS

NEW YORK PUERTO RICO Sponge Extracts-As Antibiotics Industrial Enzymes-Marine Sources NOTE: This is not a complete list of all project Marine Weeds-Potential Uses areas undertaken during Sea Grant's first 10 years. Rather, it is intended simply to be repre- NORTH CAROLINA sentative of the nature and variety of activities under this r.:ategory. OHIO

29 Sea Grant Table VI Sea Grant- Suppor' 11 Minerals Projects NORTH CAROLINA Sounds and Estuaries-Erosion and Deposition ALASKA Estuarine Mineral Deposits Continental Shelf Mineral Deposits ARIZONA OHIO CALIFORNIA Shelf Sand and Gravel Inventory OKLAHOMA Coastal Oil and Tar Seeps OREGON CONNECTICUT PF:NNSYLVANIA DELAWARE Delaware Bay Sedimentary Structures RHODE ISLAND

FLORIDA SOUTH CAROLINA

GEORGIA TEXAS Submarsh Stratigraphy Galveston Island-Sediment Budget Coastal Aquifer-Confining Strata Sand and Gravel Deposits-Evaluation VIRGINIA Undersea Mineral Exploration WASHINGTON HAWAII Coastal Sand Resource Survey WISCONSIN Noble Metals Exploration-in Alaska Sand Recovery Systems . Superior Management Deposits-Economic Potential Lode Minerals Exploration-Copper in Lake Manganese Nodules-Lake Michigan LOUISIANA Sand and Gravel Assessment-Lake Michigan Power Plants-Influence on Sediment Transport MAINE/NEW HAMPSHIRE CONSORTIUM DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MARYLAND AMERICAN SAMOA MASSACHUSETTS Offshore Petroleu. 1 GUAM Assay of Marine Resources TRUST TERRITORIES MICHIGAN VIRGIN ISLANDS MINNESOTA PUERTO RICO MISSISSIPPI/ALABAMA CONSORTIUM NOTE: his is not a complete list ofall project NEW JERSEY areas undertaken during SeaGrant's first 10 years. Rather, it is intended simplyto be repre- NEW YORK sentative of the nature and varietyof activities Sand and Gravel-Great Lakes Survey under this category. Assessment Resource Management

41 30 - ,.4- ='; - r3>

. t 1/4 it

4, Ve, r311PA Le .- Socioeconomic and Legal from identification of potential resource-usecon- flicts and how they might be mitigatedto prepara- Research tion of draft legislation to permit, encourage,and projects regulate aquaculture, and pro formafinancial While Marine Resources Development in it. address the'science and technology ofexploiting projections to encourage private investment Oregon, fisheries, minerals, and energy, Socioeconomic Such studies have been supported in Florida, Rhode and Legal Research examines suchquestions as: Washington, California, Louisiana, What are the costs? Benefits? Are therecultural Island, Massachusetts, and Maine. constraints or impacts? What are thecontrolling Socioeconomic and legal fisheries research of spe- economic factors? Are there any specialmarket- projects may seek a better understEinding broad ing problems? Potentials? What are theinstitu- cific local fisheries, or they may tackle Thus, Rhode tional, legal, and regulatory needs?The nature of national and international problems. species-specific the concern may be local, national orinternational Island has produced several fine little book though the main emphasis is on thefirst. studies and also has published a characteristics of com- Table VII summarizes 1976 levels ofactivity under on the social and cultural mercial fishermenan often ignored aspectof this category. New York Research tasks supported under thiscategory commercial fisheries management. informational and seeks to understand and reversethe continuing range from providing better fisheries, analytical bases for decision-making todevelop- historical decline of its commercial for opening up new while Texas is studying the economicsof utilizing ment of "show-how" scenarios thrown away by requires not the tremendous tonnage of finfish markets for marine products. This analysis of the shrimpers. Florida has producea an only sound bases, but also elaboration of fisheries to the economic, legal, rind social implicationsinvolved. the contribution of its commercial the evolu- State's economy. It has alsoexamined the politics In this way, Sea Grant is contributing to and international tion of new levels of discipline in public manage- and economicsboth domestic of its shrimp and spiny lobsterfisheries, the last me,it processes. exclusion of Food from the sea draws considerable attention with special regard to the recent States Americans from the Bahama Banksfishery. both aquaculture and fisheries. In those studies have been where it is new, aquaculture seldom fitsneatly On a broader front, some 20 regulatory struc- completed and others are underway onthe mean- into existing administrative and fisheries and to a viable ing of extended jurisdiction to the tures. This may be a greater obstacle States. Because of aquaculture industry than lack of technology.Sea fishermen of the 23 seacoastal the 200-mile Grant assistance in removing this obstacle ranges these, when the President signed

Marine Socioeconomic and Legal Research Sea Grant Table VII (Fiscal Year 1976 Awards)

Active Projects Federal Funds Matching Funds Total Average Per Cent Per Cent Program Cost Per of Total of Total Project Subcategory Budget"' (9-million) (9-million) Number Project Federal Program (9-million) Budget"' (5) Sea Grant"

2.7 0.2 24 0.8 23 37,000 0.6 Marine Economics 0.3 44 0.7 17 41,000 0.4 1.7 Ocean Law 0.5 0.04 32 0.1 6 21,000 0.1 Marine Recreation 0.2 1.0 0.3 54 Sociopolitical Studies 0.5 11 44,000 37,000 1.3 5.9 0.8 38 Category Totals 2.1 57

(I) This includes NOAA Sea Grant fundsplus local matching funds. NOAA Sea Grant budget for all sevenmajor cat 'es of activity. (2) Thito is a nP.centage of the total budget In the far !eft column. (3) This the matching fund percentage of the total program

32 43 economic zoii t into law, many of the problems, ing marine activities; legal impediments to theuse needs, and opportunities of extended fisheries of interstate compacts in fisheries management; jurisdiction already had been identified. This is demographic characteristics of coastal popula- but one example of Sea Grant's ability to antici- tions; and the like. pate upcoming needs. In sharp contrast to studies such as these is the Many coastal States and the Federal Govern- Law of the Sea Institute founded at the University ment are better able to cope with the expansion of Rhode Island and now located at the University of oil and gas development to new parts of the of Hawaii. Sea Grant-supported from thevery Outer Continental Shelf because of 35 separate beginning, its annual meetings and periodic work- studies supported by Sea Grant in 14 different shops regularly bring together statesmen, poli- States. Similarly, Sea Grant has supported several ticians, and legal scholars from all over the world. studies of deepwater ports, including one, car- These meetings and Institute publications have ried out at the request of the Council on Environ- played a leading role in stimulating debate, mental Quality, which reported on the probable increasing understanding, and encouraging evolu- impacts of such facilities at 11 different coastal tion of common perceptions of the evolvingnew locations. international Law of the Sea. Virtually every Sea Grant State has one ormore A summary of projects under this category by recreation-oriented projects. Coastal recreation States can be found in Table VIII. is fraught with many dilemmas: opening a recreational resource to too many people might destroy the very environmental characteristics that draw them to it, for example. The economics of coastal recreation have been E-:^mined from several perspectives. Both Florida aid Rhode Is!?nd researchers, for example, have studied the noneconomic benefits of beach use and tried to develop monetary value schemes for rating inciividual beach experiments. Texas A&M has conducted a socioeconomic analysis of charter boat operators and consumers. while both Mississippi and New York have examined the economics of sport fishing. New York also has inventoried its Great Lakes marinas and surveyed their operators. Texas has classified its recreation areas, surveyed and projected recreation preferences, established a computerized recreational data bank with a predictive capability, inventoried recreation and tourism units in the costal zone, and computed the economic impact of coastal zone tourism on both the coastal zone and the Wistful visitor watches pleasure boat sail from marina State as a whole. Studies such as these are essen- in Portsmouth, Virginia. tial to sound coastal zone managementespe- cially as more and more coastal resource use decisions come down to tough "either-or" judgments. The range of activities under this category is wide and diversified, including in addition to the above: a comprehensive analysis and forecast of Great Lakes shipping; existing public rights in land and water resources; alternative offshore mineral leasing arrangements; methods and problems of public land acquisition; private vs. public provision and operation of recreational facilities; detailed compilations of existing State laws affect-

33 44 Sea Grant Table VIII Sea Grant-Supported Socioeconomic and Legal MAINE/NEW HAMPSHIRE CONSORTIUM Projects Marine Industry, Recreation and Fishing- Potential Interactions ALASKA Socioeconomic and Legal Studies Law of the Sea-Regional Application European Oysters-Potential in U.S.

ARIZONA MARYLAND

CALIFORNIA MASSACHUSETTS Aquaculture-Economics Georges Bank Fishery Public Regulation Extended Jurisdiction-Technology Regulation Limited Entry Fisheries-Assessment Sea Grant Technology-Decision Processes Public Policy-Impact Ocean Management and Policy

CONNECTICUT MICHIGAN Fisheries-Economics and Marketing DELAWARE Water Resources-Management Groundfish-Forecasting Model Economics Coastal Industries-Analysis Recreation Behavior Patterns Seashore Recreation-Sociology Environmental Decision Makers

FLORIDA MINNESOTA Seafood-Fishing and Marketing Economics BeachesProtective Ordinances MISSISSIPPI/ALABAMA CONSORTIUM Community Legal Services Coastal Zone-Legal Problems Marine Recreation-Assessment Sport Fishing-Demand and Supply Analysis Ocean Law Education NEW JERSEY GEORGIA Fishing Harbors-Economic Analysis NEW YORK Shrimpers-Occupational Analysis Coastal Law-Problems Aquaculture-Law Coho Salmon-Fishery and Community Impact Coastal Zone Planning-Mechanisms Coastal Recreation Supply of Rental Boats HAWAII Marina Businesses and Users Deep Sea Resources-Response toExploitation Siting Policy-Present and Future Tuna Fisheries-DevelopmentAnalysis Ports-Activities and Growth Coastal Zone Management-Methods Planning NORTH CAROLINA Legislation Fresh Seafood Marketing Channels Coastal Zone Management-Legal Aspects LOUISIANA Resource Exploitation-Legal Problems Crawfish Processiing-EconomicAnalysis Port, Waterway and PipelineDevelopment OHIO Site Selection Seafood Distribution and Marketing-Analysis Legal Aspects Policy Aspects OKLAHOMA Deepwater Port-EnvironmentalAnalysis Recreational Potentials OREGON U.S. Policy Goals-AlternativeMethods Seafood Markets-Structure and Performance Estuarine Land-RecreationalPotential Regional Law Development-Ocean and Coastal Maritime Labor-Instability Extended Fisheries Jurisdiction-Economics Coastal Resources-Economics Coastal Areas-Economics Urban Encroachment Industries and Public Policy Limited Entry-Impact

PENNSYI.VANIA

34 45 RHODE ISLAND WISCONSIN Marine- Oriented Activities-Economics Cold Water Fish Aquaculture-Economics Extended Fishery Jurisdiction-Economic Impacts Great Lakes Fisheries-Economics Law of The Sea Institute Water Management- Problems Coastal Marina-Ecological Impact Applications Narragansett Bay-Economics and Ecology International Cooperation-Institutions New England Petroleum-Assessment Recreation-Behavior and Attitude Patterns Waste Disposal-Economics Clam Resources Management DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Fisheries-Socioeconomics AMERICAN SAMOA SOUTH CAROLINA Cooperative Hull Insurance-Feasibility GUAM Marine Resources-Exploitation TEXAS Shrimp Industry-Costs and Returns TRUST TERRITORIES Finfish Marketing Systems Ocean Law Changes -Legal Implications VIRGIN ISLANDS Charter Fishing-Analysis Recreation/Tourism-Impact PUERTO RICO Needs NOTE: This is not a complete list of all project VIRGINIA areas undertaken during Sea Grant's first 10 years. Rather, it is intended simply to be repre- WASHINGTON sentative of the nature and variety of activities Puget Sound Recreational Fishery under this category. Commercial Fisheries-Economics Marine Environment of Puget Sound Florida and others are seeking better ways of Marine Technology Research controlling marine corrosion and fouling, while and Development Wisconsin studies freshwater corrosion, especially While other Sea Grant programs help to find and where heavy pollution and stray currents are define marine resources or establish their eco- presentas is common around major Great Lakes nomic and legal parameters, Marine Technology ports. Wisconsin has researched and reported on Research and Development projects tackle the technology's potential roles in Great Lakes water- machinery and methods needed to exploit these borne trade. Both Wisconsin and Michigan are resources, minimize their adverse environmental concerned with coastal erosion, while they and impact, conserve them, and control pollution asso- Alaska have problem-oriented projects in ice Hated with their use and taking. This is where engineering. ngineers and technicians shine as they seek to Engineering studies of alternative deepwater -Trove ocean, coastal, and seafloor engineering; port designs have been carried out by Delaware, ructures and materials; large floating platforms; Texas, and Louisiana. Aquaculture engineering artificial offshore islands; the human capability researchincluding waste engineering is under- to work and play beneath the sea; commercial way in Alaska, Massachusetts,Texas, Wisconsin, fishing gear and ships; aquaculture pens, ponds, Virginia, Hawaii, Florida, Delaware, and other and raceways; seafood handling, processing, States. Responding to the problems and perils of Island storage, shipping, and display; underwater dredg- its bold exposure to the open ocean, Rhode ing and pipelining; coastal and n irine recrea- Sea Grant has designed, built, and tested an tional gear and facilities; and marine transporta- effective, inexpensive "do-it-yourself" floating tion including high-speed commuter systems, breakwater made of old automobile tires which is ports, harbors, and offshore terminalsjust to easily deployed and removed. Its use is spreading mention a few. Table IX shows the 1976 level of to other areas both in the United Statesand activity under this category. abroad. California also has designed and tested Hawaii, a growing island State of small land but a floating breakwater composed ofclosely packed vast ocean area, has designed, built, and sea- arrays of tethered spherical floats. tested a large scale-model of a stable floating Humans-in-the-sea projects ccver a wide range platform which one day may support large, self- from underwater living and work experimentsin contained ocean communities. It has reported on Michigan and New Hampshire and computer the technical and economic feasibility of high- modeling of thermodynamic concepts of decom- speed interisland transport using hydrofoils, pression sickness in Texas, to development of hovercraft, or both, and has examined the prob- diver standards and training programs in Florida, lems and potentials of linking the majorislands numerical models of forces on working divers at with a centrally located thermal energy source via Michigan and Wisconsin ar d oil-field diver pro- and their high-voltage undersea cables. grams in Washington. Coastal structures

Marine Technology Research 'nd Development Sea Grant Table IX (Fiscal Year 1976 Awards)

Active Projects Federal Funds Matching Funds Total Average Per Cent Per Cent Program Project Subcategory Cost Per of Total of Total Budget"' (S-million) Program Number Project '3-million) Federal (S- million) Sea Grant(' ($) Sea Grant'

6.6 0.9 40 Ocean Engineering 2.2 56 39,000 1.3 5.6 0.8 38 Resource Recovery 2.1 58 36,000 1.3 and Utilization 0.3 0.04 33 Transportation Systems 0.1 4 27,000 0.07 11.5 1.7 39 Category Totals 4.4 118 37,000 2

'I) This includes NOAA Sea Grant funds plus local matching funds. (2) This is a percentage of the total NOAA Sea Grant budget for all sevenmajor categories of activity. (3) This is the matching fund percentage of the total program budget in thefar left column. 47 Artist's concept of a floating city.

37 48 New responses to water forces are beingstudied at compounds in sewage and other waste water. which show Hawaii, Oregon, California, and Wisconsin, while York has developed two methods Florida has produced a very practical report on promise in removing mercury from fish, while a how to build hurricane-proof structures. North continent away, in Oregon, a specially adapted Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and Florida are seismograph has proved its worth as a remote the bars found trying to improve beach stabilization technology, sensor measuring sea states over along that while Oregon has developed a technique for before the entrances to most harbors greatly extending the life of wooden pilings in the coast. marine environment. Massachusetts Sea Grant has There are many more projects under this cate- complete shown that high-energy electron beams cankill gory, both past and present. For a more harmful bacteria and break down complexorganic summary, see Table X.

Floating tire breakwater.

38 49 Sea Grant Table X Sea Grant-Supported Technology Research and PipelinesWave Attack Development Projects WavesReef Attenuation and Set-Up ALASKA Tropical Aquaculture Sub-Bottom Arctic Structure Human Performance in The Sea Sea IceDynamics Decompression Safety Aquaculture Development Floating PlatformsFeasibility PermafrostCharacteristics, Distribution Sealed ConcreteAdditional Strength Rapid TransitMarine Alternatives Marine OrganismsHeavy Metals Concentration Use of Marine Mammals LOUISIANA Harbor SealsBiology Antifouling Materials Cable Insulation Materials ARIZONA SeafoodQuality Control CALIFORNIA Superports and Offshore FacilitiesPlanning Salinity GradientsPower Source FisheriesProduct Development Concrete ConstructionElectrical Hazards MAINE/NEW HAMPSHIRE CONSORTIUM Wave Climate Modifications Beach SystemsManagement Options Diving Safety Program Acoustic SurveyingParabolic Reflectors Hake Fishery Development Dynamic Floating Breakwater Fish ProductsHistamine Toxicity Diver TelemetryPhysiological Data Seafood Technology Fishery Byproducts/n Animal Food Fishery Products Quality Assessment Black Cod FisheryImproved Methods MARYLAND Breakwater ModificationsReducing Harbor Surge Soft Shell ClamsViability After Being Caught Ocean ConstructionComposite Materials MASSACHUSETTS CONNECTICUT Foundation DesignIn Marine Soils Offshore StructuresAnalysis DELAWARE Undersea WorkTe/eoperators Beach ErosionAssessment Deepsea Joining, CuttingTechniques Control Ocean Wave Energy System Closed Cycle Maticulture Trawl Board Improvement Closed Cycle SystemsChemistry Side Trawl Hookup BlockImprovement MaricultureDevelopment Service Dogfish (shark)Skinning Process MaricultureWater Recycling Fisheries ProductsLipid Compounds FLORIDA SeafoodPressure Preservation Current SensorDynamics Metal CorrosionBridge Pier Cracking Canal and Lake FlushingHydrodynamics Water TreatmentHigh-Energy Electron Beam Florida Sand Budget MICHIGAN Oil SpillsMagnetic Recovery Fishing Gear Improvement Purse Seining Fishing Gear DesignModeling Diving SafetyResearch and Recreation MulletControlling Rancidity MINNESOTA GEORGIA Finfish Fishery Feasibility MISSISSIPPI/ALABAMA CONSORTIUM FisheriesProcessing and Maximum Utilization Raw OystersEnterovirus Detection Shrimp MealNutrient Quality Isoelectric FocusingApplications ChitosanProduction, Utilization Remote Underwater Fishery Assessment Shellfish Processing Underwater Reconnaissance Vehicle Fish and Shrimp Byproducts Fish Smoking Processes NEW JERSEY

HAWAII NEW YORK Deep Ocean Cosmic Ray Interactions Submerged VegetationSediment Stabilization Seaward Advancement Dredge Spoil Disposal Undersea Observation Structure Underutilized SpeciesConvenience Products Heat ExchangerBiofou/ing Experiment Clam Wash WaterUtilization

39 50 Saturation Diving-Maximum Depths Fish Product Qu&;ty-Lipids Hydrogen/Oxygen Decompression Tables Fish Filleting-Waste Recovery Industrial Fish-Mercury Removal Seafood Safety and Wholesomeness Intracostal Waterway-EnvironmentalImpact Offshore Terminals- Impact on Industry NORTH CAROLINA Control Seafoods-Microconstituents Fishery Products-Sanitation; Quality Crabmeat Processing-Quality Seafood-Pathogen Controls VIRGINIA Fish Muscle Tissue-Properties Protective Structures-Engineering Marine Structures-Reliability WASHINGTON Beach Control -New Method Fishing Vessel Safety Floating Breakwater Research OHIO Fish Stocks-Acoustic Counting OKLAHOMA Marine Acoustics Total Utilization Concept Chitin/Chitosan-Potential Utilization OREGON Tests Structure Design-Wave Simulation Floating Structures-Performance Wooden Structures and Boats-Improvements Crabs-Laser and Freeze Branding WISCONSIN Corrosion-Fresh (Polluted) Water Fishing Gear-Development Wooden Pilings-Preserve byFumigation Underwater Welding-Steel Seafood-Processing Sanitation Harbor Flushing MeJsurements Utilization Marinas-Lake Ice Mechanization Harbor/Offshore Water Exchange Nutritional Quality Fish ProductionWastewater-Treatment Underutilized Fish -ProductDevelopment Quality Control Quality Improvements Shellfish Waste-Agricultural Use Tuna-Safety Test Divers-Artificial Gills Sewage Discharge-Reduced Damage Diver Orientation Devices Bar Clearance Sensor-RemoteSeismometer Other Diver Aids Physiological Evaluation PENNSYLVANIA Great Lakes Water Transport Controlled Homing-OdorImprinting Salmon RHODE ISLAND St. Lawrence Seaway-Modeling Metal Reinforced Concrete-Degradation Predicting Water Closing Hard-Bottom Combination Net FatScuba Accidents-Analysis DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Crab Waste Use-In Salmonid Aquaculture Assessing Seafood Quality AMERICAN SAMOA Bay Watch-Engineering Services Scrap Tire Floating Breakwater GUAM Fishing Gear-Hydrodynamics Improvement TRUST TERRITORIES VIRGIN ISLANDS SOUTH CAROLINA Marine Turtles-Inventory PUERTO RICO Shrimp Heads-Automatic Removal Underwater Habitats- Diked Disposal Areas-Utilization Potential for Resource Management Aquaculture Mechanization NOTE: This is not a complete list of allproject TEXAS Sea Grant's first 10 Offshore Pipelines-Engineering areas undertaken during Coastal Processes-Numerical Models years. Rather, it isintended simply to be repre- Dredge Disposal-Trace Elements sentative of the nature and variety ofactivities Dredge Spoil Islands-Erosion under this category.

40 51 Marine Environmental Research The foundation of management isknowledge. When Sea Grantcame into being comparatively little information existedon the natural resources to be managed, and much that didexist was unuseable because of its form and thenarrow purposes (usually scientific) for which itwas developed originally. Demographic and other information on human activitieswas in pretty good shape, but how the human system andthe natural system interacted was only imprecisely known,the subject of frequent adversary confrontations,and totally inadequate for managementpurposes. The purpose of Sea Grant-supportedMarine Environmental Research is to try to fillthese gaps to gather data in a consistent anddisciplined manner and to define system in actions in terms which are meaningful to managementand can be subjected to computer analysis andtesting. The ultimate objective is to make reliablepredictive analysis a standard management tool. Thisoffers the academic community an excitingopportunity to strengthen intellectual excellence while greatly expanding public service capabilities. To theindi- vidual States, this research offers the opportunity to obtain a valuable adjunct of the governing process at a quite low cost. In the 13 Sea Grant College Statesnamely, Rhode Island,Massa- chusetts, New York, Delaware, North Carolina, Florida, Wisconsin, Texas, California, Oregon, Washington, Louisiana and Hawaiithis goal has been realized. Other States show varyingdegrees of progress. Table XI shows the levelof activity under this category. In general, Sea Grant-supported projectsunder this category address the followingtypes of activities: Baseline and inventory studies of coastal and marine areas and their resources and environ- ,mental features. including, quite frequently, ''Ithe incorporation of these data into published atlases of the physical, chemical, biological, and other characteristics of relevant bodies of water. Development of specific use-related baseline data banksincluding, where appropriate, evaluation of future impacts of decisional alter- nativeshitting such issues as power plant siting, public shoreline access, pollutioncon- trol, conflicting resource uses, dredge spoil disposal, and sewage outfalls.

41 52 go Study of important environmental processes, of To provide data bases and analyses inspecific such as nutrient flow through estuaries and support of legislative, regulatory and permit- marshes, coastal erosion, littoral transport, ting activities of local, State, and Federal subaerial dune erosion, and the scouring and governments. sedimentation in harbors, bays, and channels. The nature of individual projects varies widely, s Interactions within the environment, such as according to the most pressing needs of each part faunal and floral responses to changes in nu- of the country. Louisiana Sea Grant haspartici- trient balance, temperature, dissolved oxygen, pated in the environmental assessment ofthe and light. whole LOOP (Louisiana Offshore Oil Port)proj- IN Studies of pollution sources, pathways,resi- ect, including offshore facilities, tankfarm, and dence times, and fatesincluding heat, radio- pipeline right-of-way, while Texas A&M scientists quo !ides, mercury, and other heavy metals, have produced a significant four-volumereport on petroleum, polychlorinated hydrocarbons (DDT, "Water Quality Characteristics of Hazardous PCB's, etc.), and other municipal, industrial, Materials" and determine(' the feasibility of and agricultural wastes. aerating the Houston Ship Channel. System studies of major coastal and estuarine Rhode Island Sea Grant researchers have con- features such as Puget Sound, Green Bay, structed an elaborate series of interlocking com- Grand Traverse Bay, Saginaw Bay, Houston puter models of Narragansett Bay which are now Ship Channel, Biscayne Bay, Santee Estuary, used to support State coastal zone management Pamlico Sound, Albermarle Sound, Chesapeake efforts; it also has developed an infraredtech- Bay, Delaware Bay, Long Island Sound, .Narra- nique for identifying pollutants. New Hampshire gansett Bay, Massachusetts Bay, and a50-mile researchers are studying the long -term environ- stretch of Massachusetts, New Hampshire,and mental effects of dumping baled solid wastesinto Maine coastline. the ocean. Wisconsin Sea Grant investigatorsare to Development of numerical models for computer studying the environmental preferences ofcoho analysis and prediction of natural systems, salmon by means of telemetry devicesattached to human activities, economic systems, and their the fish; they are monitoring and researching a interactions. wide range of pollutants common to theGreat si Search for ways to detect, measure and remove Lakes; and they are exploring the effects onpri- pollutants, to reverse human-caused environ- mates (of which humans are one species)of mental damage and to convert wastes into chronic exposure to PCB's. harmless or profitable products.

Marine Environmental Research Sea Grant Table XI (Fiscal Year 1976 Awards)

Active Projects Federal Funds Matching Funds Total Average Per Cent Per Cent Program of Total Project Subcategory Cost Per of Total Budget"' (S-million) (S-million) Number Project Federal Program (S-million) Budget"' (S) Sea Grant"'

5.8 - 0.9 39 Research In Support of 2.2 68 33,000 1.4 Coastal Zone Management 0.5 2.2 0.4 42 Ecosystems Research 0.9 32 28,000 1.0 4.1 0.5 36 Pollution Studies 1.5 47 32,000 0.7 2.9 0.5 41 Environmental Models 1.2 22 53,000 0.3 1.2 0.2 41 Applied Oceanography 0.5 11 43,000 3.8 16.3 2.4 39 Category Totals 6.3 180 35,000

(1) This includes NOAA Sea Grant funds plus local matching funds. (2) This is a percentage of the total NOAA Sea Grantbudget for all seven major categories ofactivity. (3) This is the matching fund percentage of the total program budget in thefar left column.

42 53 10071.g.crs , .

;). g

0 A-

- A , br- .

13,

43 54 from Both California and Washington Sea Grant effects on baitworms of thermal discharges scientists have scientists are looking at the ecologicaleffects of electric power plants, while Florida radioactive large sewage outfalls discharging into largebays looked at the impact of thermal and marine and the open ocean. Hawaii researchers are pollution on shrimp and other important studying the effects of pollutants on thelarvae of species. needs and important species of fish, e.g., tuna. TheMissis- And so it goes. Responses to local of sippi program has developed techniquesfor opportunities are what determine the makeup in time. converting raw seafcnd wastes into fishfarming Sea Grant projects at any given point of rations and for using electrolysis to purifywaste Table XII provides a more complex summary water. Maine investigators have studiedthe activities under this category.

Sea Grant Table XI: Sea Grant -Supported EnvironmentalResearch FLORIDA Estuarine Environmental Study (1967-1976) ProductivityEnergy Flows and Patterns PesticidesEffect on Fisheries ALASKA Sewage Pollution AbatementImpact Resurrection BayHydrography, Chemistry Circulation and DispersionModeling Marine PlanningEducation Shoreline Evolution Prudhoe BayPrimary Production Thermal PollutionHearings Coastal Exchange Processes ARIZONA GEORGIA CALIFORNIA Oceanographic Atlas Series Coastal GovernanceIssues Marsh Condition Index Coastal DevelopmentManagement Estuarine HydrographyData Compilation Coastal PlanningMethods San Francisco BayBiology Estuarine Environments -Subtidal Sea Urchins FisheriesAssessment HAWAII Beaches and DunesVegetation Reef FishCommercial Exploitation Nutrient QualityEnhancement Legislative AssistanceEnvironmental Food ResourcesDynamics Coastal DecisionBaseline Data PlanktonInshore Food Source Coral Reef Management Kelp GrassMetabolism Oceanic PathogensViruses Waste Heet EffluentsEffects Extreme Wave ConditionsStatistics Stress Induced Fish Parasitism Chemical PollutionBioassay LOUISIANA Microbial PollutantsAnalysis Effects Marsh Recreational Dwellings Fish PopulationPollution Coastal ResourcesAnalysis Coastal PlanningCriteria Marine-Fresh Water Exchange Primary ProductivityOffshore CONNECTICUT Metropolitan MetabolismCoastal Heavy Meta'sOyster Uptake Distribution, and WetlandsSoil-Nitrogen Transformation Heavy Meta'sCirculating, Spar Transformation Concentt ation Patterns Cypress SwampChemical Ecology Long Island SoundCirculation ShellfishHydrocarbon Content Connecticut River Plume HydrocarbonEstuarine Carbon Flux Food Chain Concentration DELAWARE Wave DamagePrediction Water and SedimentChemistry Marsh-Estuarine SystemModels Coastal DevelopmentImpact Trace MetalsIn Shellfish IM EstuariesNutrients, Energy, Production MAINE/NEW HAMPSHIRE CONSORTII Destruction Land Use Planning BarriersStructure, Evolution, Reactor RadionuclidesIn Oysters Wetlands Vegetation and Sediments

44 55 Marine Worms-Thermal Pollution Effects NORTH CAROLINA Hydrodynamic and EnvironmentalModeling Coastal Management-Ecological Determinants Estuarine Nutrients-Distribution Dredge Spoil-Marsh Regeneration Oil Slicks-Remote Sensing Shore Environments-Classification Coastal Birds Populations MARYLAND Dune Stabilization Shellfish Viruses-Detection MASSACHUSETTS Onslow Bay-Physical Studies Fluviatile Salmonids-Interactions Beach Grass-Destruction By Insects Oil Slick Control Pest Control Analysis Bedford Harbor-Sediment Dispersal Pamlico Sound-Numerical Model Water Movement and Dispersion-Models Sediment Transport-Longshore OHIO Inlet Stability Red Tides-Trace Metals Role OKLAHOMA

MICHIGAN OREGON Shoreline Protection-Private Public Boating-Space Demands Erosion Damage-Analysis Sea Lions-Assessment Coastal Zone Engineering Marinas-Hydraulic Characteristics Fisheries-Great Lakes Clam Populations-Subtida/ Shore lands-Planning and Management Estuarine Plankton-Dynamics Lake Currents-Modeling Spit Erosion Sewage Treatment-Technology Water Quality-Regional Survey PENN,SYLVANIA Phytoplankton-Nutrient Enrichment RHODE ISLAND Coastal }Resources Center Menhaden/Sport Fish-Relationships MISSISSIPPI/ALABAMA CONSORTIUM Erosion linventory-Photogrammetry Marshes-Management Planning Ccastal Ecosystem Model Coastal Zone Capability-Analysis Phytoplankton Blooms-Causes Seafood Wastes-Marketable CommodIj1ies Bottom Community-Carbon Flux Shrimp Processing-Waste Treatment Hydrocarbons-/n Sediments Mobile Bay-Physical Environment In Seawater Gulf Coast-Environmental Simulation Cbastal Areas-Analytical Modeling Hydrodynamics/Salinity/Temperature-Mode/ NEW JERSE Estuarine Deposits-Three-dimensional Study Heavy Metals and Nutrients-Distribution Metal Pollutants Biological Effects SOUTH CAROLINA Mercury-Biomagnification Coastal Erosion-Inventory Coastal Waters-Numerical Simulation Dredge Spoil-Pest Management Plankton-Physiochemical Ecology Pollutant Transport Patterns- TEXAS By Sulfate Chlorinity Resource Management Newark Bay - Renewal Rate Channel-Harbor Complex-Environmental Management NEW YORK Industrial Wastes-Ocean Dumping Coastal Management-Institutions, Public Water Quality-Artificial Aeration Participation Estuaries and Shellfish-Virus Enumeration Coastal Waters-Management Coastal Canals-Water Quality Lake Ontario-Environmenta/ Atlas Bromine Chloride-Toxicity Erosion/Deposition-Balance Bulk Shipping-Hazard Rating System Coastal Zone-Visual Quality Oil and Tar Deposits Recreation Coastal Engineering Research Power Plant Siting Seafood Processing Effluents-Ultrafiltration VIRGINIA Plankton-Pollution Effects Wetlands Management-Alternatives Viruses -Surf /Atmosphere Transfer Wave Refraction-Synthesis Continental Shelf Bathymetry

45 56 Lake TroutPCB Effects WASHINGTON Coastal Resources Governance Air Pollution InputLake Michigan Methods SalmonidsPCB Metabolism Advisory Services Surface MicrolayerMicrocontaminants Infractions Ports Development and Operations Puget SoundEnvironment Organic MicrocontaminantsAnalysis Data Analysis, Applications PrimatesPCB Response Fish Ecology Fish Control Model Resource Management Salmon ManagementOdor Imprinting ResourcesTotal System Approach DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WISCONSIN Watershed Phosphorus Policy Implications AMERICAN SAMOA Power Plan.. Siting GUAM Coastal ResourcesCultural and Historic Tumon E iBathymetry Land Interest Information Coastal Coastal Zone Ecology Shoreline ErosionsLake Michigan Plant CommunitiesCoastal TRUST TERRITORIES Coastal SlumpsMechanics Shoreline MappingComputerized VIRGIN ISLANDS Coastal ZoneRemote Sensing Shrimp Population Dynamics PUERTO RICO Deep-Living Phytoplankton FishEnergy Requirements, Growth NOTE: This is not a complete listof all project Estimating Methods Fish PopulationsAcoustic areas undertakenduring Sea Grant's first 10 Pesticides In Food Chains years. Rather, it is intendedsimply to be repre- Sal monids Microcontaminants sentative of the nature and varietyof activities Thermal EffluentsDispersion, Effects Trace Metals Transport andDistribution under this category. Paper Mill EffluentToxicity

Marine Education andTrainingto undertake new programs. It isassumed that, :r graduates are New imperatives of coastal and marine resource there is a student demand and a its advantageously employed because of thateduca- exploitation and management require peoplewith self-supporting. new capabilities. Ten years ago,there were vir- tion, the program will become begins tually no programs offering the necessaryeduca- Thus, the proportion of Sea Grant support eventually tional opportunities. Sea Grant's MarineEducation diminishing from the beginning and that, and ends. If preprogram estimates ofdemand for the and Training initiatives soon remedied or if the 1,500 ocean skills thus provided prove to be erron lus in the 1972-76 period alone some Sea engineers, more than 4,000 technicians,and 300 market for that skill becomes saturated, Whereas lawyers, marine economists, andmarine affairs Grant support is terminated forthwith. Sea Grant once supported 20 differenttechnician specialists graduated from Sea Grant-supported down educational piogams. In the springof 1976 these training programs, by 1976 that number was students and 291 to 15. programs had.761 graduate of technician trainees, of whom 127 werein fish- As a rasult of rigorous controls, the record employment of graduates of Sea Grant-supported eries-related programs. This category's1976 programs is excellent. Many run100 percent con- level of activity is shown in Table XIII. Sea Grant, Sea Grant's mission is not to supporteduca- sistently year after year. For the life of mission is to the average for all programs is more than80 per- tional programs indefinitely. Its 20 percent choose provide financial help in starting a programfor cent. Many in the unemployed others pursue which there is a clear need. Theprimary criterion to go on to higher degrees, while graduates. Sea new careers. of need is the employability of has three Grant's role is to assist universityadministrations Sea Grant Education and Training

46 57 Sea Grant Table XIII Marine Education and Training (fiscal Year 1976 Awards)

Active Projects Federal Funds Matching Funds Total erage Per Cent Per Cent Project Subcategory Program Cost Per of Total of Total Budget"' Number (S-million) ($-million) Project Federal Program (S) Sea Grant"' Budget"'

College Level 0.8 31 27,000 0.3 1.2 0.5 65 Vocational 1.1 17 67,000 0.3 1.3 0.8 ',.4 Retraining ___ -- ___ Other Education 2.2 37 59,000 1.4 5.9 0.8 37 Category Totals 4.2 85 49,000 2.0 8.4 2.2 53

(I) This includes NOAA Sea Grant funds plus local matching funds. (2) This is a percentage of the total NOAA Sea Grant budget for all seven major categories ofactivity. (3) This is the matching fund percentage of the total program budget in the far left column. basic objectives: (1) To train specialistssuch as commercial divers, boat and ship handlers, commercial fishermen, marine andoceanographic technicians, natural resources agents, marine veterinarians, ocean and coastal engineers,and aquaculturists; (2) to produce interdisciplinary, mission-oriented professionals to fill the demand for coastal zone managers, marine resource economists, environmental and economicimpact analysts, and others who can understandand cor- relate different scientific and engineeringdisci- plines as well as a wide range of humanactivities for systems management purposes; and(3) to create a better public understandingand appreciation of the oceans, their challenges,and their opportunities. The need for educational programs such as these has catalyzed excitingchanges within the participating universities. The need to develop and administer interdisciplinary andinterdepart- mental degree programs has exposedfaculty and administrators alike to whole new perspectivesof the roles and techniques of highereducation. It also has provided the conceptualbase and administrative machinery for the SeaGrant multi- capability, team approach to problemsolving. in turn, the experience of such teammembers in the realities, complexities, deadlines, andrequire- ments for useable results gives them newpercep- tions and knowledge for use in theclassroom and, indeed, frequently suggests new courses and degree programs. The Sea Grantclosed-loop feedback process benefits the wholesystem. There is also an indirect butworthwhile payoff in the greater prestige and visibilitythe university enjoys in its community. Sea Grant Education and Trainingprojects include everything from single courses andsummer and graduate fV programs to two-year, four-year degree programs (See Tables XIV andXV). Among the earliest were the introductionof fisheries technology programs at OregonState Uni- versity, an undergraduate degree inOcean Engineering at Florida Atlantic University, the Master of Marine Affairs(MMA) program at Rhode Island, and the Masterof Laws in ocean law at the University ofMiami. During its first few years, Sea Grant alsosupported ocean technician programs at Cape FearTechnical In- stitute, North Carolina, and the SouthernMaine Regional Vocational Institute. Supportfor the last demand for Wisconsin pre- two institutions was halted when the Graduate student at the University of ocean technicians failed tojustify further support. pares for an experiment.

48 59 The MMA program at the University of Rhode problems of science and engineering in the Island in a way served as a prototype to the ocean, of ocean law, and of marine operations interdisciplinary approach to graduate education. generally; and to expose ocean scientists and Core courses were drawn from the Geography, engineers and, as it turned out, Naval officers to Oceanography, Economics, and Engineering the politics and economics of marine affairs. The Departments, while electives could be taken in all objective was to begin the process of providing departments. Many of the course offerings were the international negotiators, coastal zone mana- new to URIe.g., Marine Geography, Marine Re- gers, Federal and State administrators, and busi- source Economics, Ocean Engineering, Interna- ness executives who would be needed to manage tional Law. The purpose of the program was to America's coastal and contiguous marine re- expose administrators and policymakers to the sources and protect her interests world-wide.

Sea Grant Table XIV Sea Grant-Supported Education and Training ProjectsLOUISIANA Nautical Mathematics Textbook ALASKA Nautical Science-Vocational Program Fishing Technology Transportation Systems Modeling Seafood Processing High School Teachers-Marine Training Sea Grant Lecture Program Marine Science Public Television MAINE/NEW HAMPSHIRE CONSORTIUM Aquaculture-Graduate Study ARIZONA Ocean Projects-Undergraduate Marine Technicians Training CALIFORNIA Marine Training-For Teachers Commercial Diver Training Sea Grant Interns MARYLAND Coastal Decision-Making Marine Education Curriculum MASSACHUSETTS Marine Resource Management Ocean Engineering-Curricula Technology Assessment Training Laboratory Textbook CONNECTICUT Commercial Fisheries Program Deep Submersibles - Launch /Retrieval DELAWARE Stable Ocean Platforms Marine Education Public Schools Multidisciplinary Products-Marine Sciences Marine Environment Studies, Coastal Management Fisheries-Management Economics Systems Design FLORIDA MICHIGAN Ocean and Coastal Law Underwater Technology Education Underwater Technician Commercial Divers-Operating Standards Marine Technology Program MINNESOTA 4-H Marine Program MISSISSIPPI/ALABAMA CONSORTIUM GEORGIA Marine Law and Science Marine Resource Education NEW JERSEY HAWAII Oceanographic Technician Training NEW YORK Cruise Experience-Secondary Students Coastal Law Traineeships Marine Option Program Sea Grant Traineeships Aquarium Operations Public Service Legislation Marine Education Exposition Engineering and Marine Technology Marine Technology-Teacher Training Marine Industries Studies Marine Curriculum-Secondary Schools Elementary Schools NORTH CAROLINA Marine Pathology Courses Coastal Law Public School Marine Program-Teacher Training Teaching Materials Teaching Guides 49 6o Some programs, not necessarily degree Sea Grant Director. Projects may upgrade existing skills or fill the demand for quite new oriented, are quite innovative, serve the navigation training, interdisciplinary educational need, and produce a ones. To its seamanship and for example, Texas Sea Grant hasadded marine valuable service. Massachusetts Institute of of the Technology, for example, has since 1973 teamed firefighting. With an eye on the completion Alaska pipeline, the University of Washington up lawyers and engineers totackle a variety of vital current marine issues. They havelearned instituted a program in petroleum transportation Institute about and from each other and to work together and handling. Cape Fear Technical (CFTI) serves as a regional training centerfor as an interdi.,ciplinary teamwith a single of schools throughout North Carolina whichoffer objective. This program has produced a series the sea or research reports on such topics as offshoreoil marine programs but have no access to maritime traffic ships. CFTI ships and students regularly and gas, offshore nuclear power, expeditions. control, ocean mining, and deepwater ports. participate in major oceanographic Programs offered under Sea Grant auspices Technical and vocational training programs coastal and marine market-dependent. run the gamut, including are mission-oriented and law These determinations are madelocally by the recreation, wildlife management, marine

Underseas Technician Program OHIO Marine Science Technician OKLAHOMA Fish and Game Technology Commercial Fishermen's Education OREGON Petroleum Technician Program Marine/Maritime Studies Curricula DevelopmentInterdisciplinary Ocean Law Training Seafood Technology Marine Resources Management Marine Affairs Seminar Commercial FisheriesTechnician Advisory Service Educational Projects Marine Technician Program Seafood Technology WISCONSIN Problems in Oceanography PENNSYLVANIA Great LakesNatural History Basic Scuba Diving RHODE ISLAND Maritime Transportation Master of Marine Affairs Marine Communications Program Marine Resource Economics Ocean Engineering DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Fisheries and Marine Technology Ocean Engineering Marine Technology Training SOUTH GAROLINA Fisheries Scholarship

TEXAS AMERICAN SAMOA Ocean Engineering Programs Commercial Fisheries Development Crustal EvolutionsHigh School Oce-a"firdand Marine Technology GUAM Marine Recreation Specialization Manpower SurveyMarine-Related Marine Teacher Certification SeminarsCoastal Management TRUST TERRITORIES Aquatic Animal Health Marine Resource Management VIRGIN ISLANDS Marine Diving Training PUERTO RICO VIRGINIA NOTE: This is not a complete list of allproject WASHINGTON areas undertaken duringSea Grant's first 10 Marine Resource Economics years. Rather, it is intendedsimp!y to be repre- Coastal and International OceanLaw sentative of the nature and variety ofactivities Fisheries Education under this category. Ocean Systems Design

50 enforcement, commercial fishing, commercial programs in coastal law, coastal zone manage- diving, recreational diving, small boat and ship ment for local government officials, marine handling, navigation and command, marine elec- business management for industry, and marine tronics and mechanics, seafood technology, and transportation and communications. Course others. The employment rate is very high, with formats vary from regularly scheduled classes at many employers specifically seeking participants institutions of higher learning to traveling seminars in these programs. Many graduates are self- that take the courses to the studentswhichever employed, particularly fishermen and charter best suits the needs of the participants. boat operators. Sea Grant has not solved all the manpower Many Sea Grant institutions offer programs needs of coastal and marine resources manage- directed specifically to primary and secondary ment, but it has made a major contribution. school teachers who want to be able to expose While much of the earlyjeducational emphasis their students to coastal and marine subject- in Sea Grant centered on technical and profes- matter. In most of these cases, the Sea Grant sional training, the fundamental necessity of institution also develops course materials. creating a better public understanding about the The State University System of New York offers oceans has not been overlooked. Working with

Sea Grant Table XV Courses Funded by Sea Grant (As of July 1, 1975)

STATE COURSE INSTITUTION

ALASKA Aquatic Science and Engineering Program U. of Alaska Marine Technology Program Kodiak C.C.

CALIFORNIA Coastal Environmental Managerial Institute U. of Southern California Marine Technician Training Program Santa Barbara City College Practical OCeanography for Undergraduates U. of California, San Diego Transactional Planning Seminar for Coastal. Zone Decision-Makers U. of Southern California Sea Grant Scholars Program U. of Southern California Educational Training Assignments and Technology Assessments Program Stanford U. Sea Grant Trainees and Intern Program U. of California

DELAWARE Marine Education U. of Delaware

FLORIDA Economics of Living Resources Florida State U. Juris Doctor Specialization in Ocean and Coastal Law U. of Miami

GEORGIA Marine Resource Education U. of Georgia

HAWAII Marine Technician Training Program Leeward C.C. Marine and Freshwater Aquaria II: Public Education and Public Involvement U. of Hawaii Marine Option Program U. of Hawaii Blue-Water Marine Laboratory U. of Hawaii Planning for Coordinated Kindergarten-through- High School Marine Education Program U. of Hawaii

LOUISIANA Nautical Sciences Vocational Training Louisiana State U. Marine Sciences Education Louisiana State U.

626 51 system, Sea in the program. the colleges and universities in the of Grant has made major strides in introducing Sea Grant recognizes the significance schools in developing greater oceanic educationalopportun- oceanic studies to elementary and high that it can marine-related ities for all Americans and is hopeful the Nation and in providing studies to educational bring a wider introduction of oceanic courses to adults. The Sea Grant United States. effort has been one of rapidlyexpanding activities school systems throughout the

ea Grant Table XV-2 Graduate Course in Aquaculture U. of Maine IAINE/NEW HAMPSHIRE U. of New Hampshire ;ONSORTIUM Undergraduate Ocean Projects Course Massachusetts IASSACHUSETTS Ocean Engineering Curricula Institute of Technology Experiments) Massachusetts Student Foreign Laboratory (Engineering Institute of Technology Interdisciplinary Systems Design Massachusetts Institute of Technology

U. of Michigan IICHIGAN Underwater Technology Laboratory Recreational Scuba Diving Population/Safety U. of Michigan Survey and Public Education

Development of OceanographicInstrumentation 4ISSISSIPPI/ALABAMA Mississippi State U. ;ONSORTIUM Course for Local Officials State U. of New York ,1EW YORK Coastal Zone Management Training Aquabusiness Management TrainingSeminars SUNY/Cornell SUNY/Cornell Sea Grant Traineeships Public Service Legislative Studies byStudents SUNY/Cornell and Their Professors Pitfessional-Training in Ocean Law U. of Oregon )REGON Professional Training in Marine ResourceManagement Oregon State U. Clatsop C.C. Commercial Fishing TechnicianTraining Clatsop C.C. Marine Technician Training

Ph.D. in Economics Marine ResourceEconomics RHODE ISLAND U. of Rhode Island Option U. of Rhode Island Ocean EngineeringGraduateProgram U. of Rhode Island Master of Marine Affairs Fisheries and Marine Technology U. of Rhode Island Texas A&M U. Ocean Engineering Program TEXAS Texas A&M U. Aquatic Animal Help Institutional Seminar Series in CoastalZone Texas A&M U. Management Teacher Certification in MarineSciences Texas A&M U. Recreation Management/Development in the Texas A&M U. Coastal Zone Crustal Evolution Module for8th Grade Instruction Texas A&M U. Texas A&M U. Oceanic and Marine Technology

52 63 6

SCUBA class at the University of Maryland.

Sea Grant Table XV-3

WASHINGTON Marine StudiesMarine Resource Economics U. of Washington Law and Marine Affairs U. of Washington New Courses in Fisheries U. of Washington Interdisciplinary Ocean Engineering Systems Design Course U. of Washington Interdisciplinary Curricula Development and Research U. of Washington Alternative Impacts of the Law of the Sea on Organi- zation of PolicieS- iFiMirine Affairs U. of Washington Program and Marine Technology Affairs U. of Washington Underseas Technician Program Highline C.C. Ecological Baseline Monitoring Study for Central Puget Sound/Marine Technician Training Shoreline C.C. Petroleum Transportation and i iandling Program Seattle Central C.C. Marine Mechanics Career Training Clover Park Education Ctr. WISCONSIN Problems in Oceanography U. of Wisconsin Basic Scuba Instruction U. of Wisconsin Maritime Transportation U. of Wisconsin Special Education Program U. of Wisconsin Marine Communications Training Program U. of Wisconsin

AMERICAN SAMOA Commercial Fisheries Development Grays Harbor C.C. (Washington)

GUAM Marine-Related Manpower Survey U. of Guam

53 1A Marine Advisor;) Services The Pell-Rogers Act called for the establishment and operation of a Marine AdvisoryService (MAS). Not only would MAS draw on theexperi- ence and philosophy of theAgriculture Coopera- tive Extension Service, but it also wouldaddress a broader range ofinterests and, of course, would concern itself with coastal andmarine matters. Still underscoring the principle oflocal response to local needs, it would be operatedby the Sea Grant institutions themselves. TableXVI summarizes the 1976 level of activity underthis category. MAS's basic role is to provide effective two-way communications between the users and producers of knowledge. Though not the only one, MAS should be a main source of information for the Sea Grant Director on the needs and opportunities the institution should address. On the otherside of the loop, once the Sea Grant scientists and engineers have done their jobs, the MAS jobis to pass the information on to thosewho need it. Actually, a properly functioning and fully utilized MAS is integral throughout the loop. MAS uncovers and defines the problem.It communi- cates this to the eta Grant Director. It workswith scientists and engineers or puts them in touch with one or more of the user groups who willwork with the Sea Grant team while the team seeks an answer. This helps to keep the effortrealistic and on track. Then, once MAS personnelhave passed the information, technology, gear,whatever, on to those who need it, they will stickwith it through its initial application to help clear any snagsthat may develop. The core effort of the Marine AdvisoryService is the Marine Extension AgentSeaGrant's man or woman on the spot. Usually,the agent is a member of the community he or she serves. Depending on the character of that community, the agent works closely with commercialfisher- ment, fish farmers, sport fishers,charter boat captains, marina operators, boatyard operators, port managers, other marineindustry, primary and secondary school teachers, civic groups, municipal and county governments, andState and Federal agencies. He or she is a participant as well as observer. The agent becomesknown and trusted and develops a reputation forbeing on hand when needed, for understandingthe problem, for being sympathetic, and formaking a real effort to help.

54 65 Sea Grant Table XVI Marine Advise y Services (Fiscal Year 19/6 Awards)

Active Projects Federal Funds Matching Funds Total Project Subcategory Program Average Per Cent Per Cent Budget'" Cost Per of Total of Total Number (S-million) ($-million) ($-million) Project Federal Program ($) Sea Grant"' udget(3)

Marine Extension Service 5.2 53 98,000 3.3 14.3 1.8 36 Other Advisory Services 3.4 60 56,000 2.2 9.6 1.1 34 Category Totals 8.5 113'. 76,000 5.6 23.9 3.0 35

(1) This includes NOAA Sea Grant funds plus local matching funds. (2) This Is a 'Percentage of the total NOAA Sea Grant budget for allseven major categories of activity. (3) This is the matching fund percentage of the total program budget in the far leftcolumn.

In this capacity, the Marine Extension Agents new methods and processes, and announcing not only become familiar with problems, but, with new regulations or services aimed primarily at the broader perspectives they bring to the job the local user but available to anyone. and, with their knowledge of theresources available, they are able to recognize opportunities si Establishment and operation of coastal and which others may overlook and to anticipate marine information centers for local, State, problems in time to avoid them. Clearly, the Sea regional, national and general public use. Grant Director relies heavily on the MAS in developing the program to be submitted to the si Demonstration projects, usually in cooperation NOAA Office of Sea Grant each year for approval. with the private sectorfloating breakwaters, While Marine Extension Agents play a vital role, pair trawling, aquaculture, and others. they alre nevertheless only a part of a much broader mandate to serve the whole Sea Grant si National conferences on domestic .and interna- constituency. This mandate includes keeping the tional ocean law, fisheries issues, ocean mining, general public aware of coastal and marine coastal zone management, 200-mile offshore resource issues and alternatives. It includes the economic zone, and onshore impact of offshore establishment and maintenance of liaison with oil development. State and local governments. And, it includes the organization and publication of the results of Sea ita Museums, exhibits, lectures, and other activities Grant research in such form that they are made providing high-volume exposure of the general available quickly and usefully to anyone with an public to marine knowledge and issues. interest in the topic. In carrying out this mission, the Marine Advisory Service employs a variety of sti Continuing education programs both in the field tools, media, and techniques, such as: and in the classroom and addressing a wide range of subject matter. Seminars, workshops, town meetings, and short Newsletters and other periodic and serial courses. publications. iiRegional information programs geared more to NI Press releases and articles for local and "use-me" than to "love-me" objectives. national publications. m Continual flow of booklets, pamphlets, and mi Radio, television, and movie public service technical bulletins discussing issues, describing announcements and documentaries for public and commercial broadcast media and for community and private showings.

55 66 Development and guidance of coastal and marine programs for 4-H Clubs, Boy andGirl Scout Troops, civic, and other groups.

And, provision for prompt responsesto inquiries.

This may sound like a recipe for a massive bureaucracy, but it has not worked out that way. The entire MAS, including Marine Extension Agents, totals only about 200 people. This contrasts with some 17,000 County Agentsin the Agriculture Cooperation Extension Service. In addition to those serving within States,two cooperative regional Marine AdvisoryServices have been established: (1) PASGAP(Pacific Sea Grant Advisory Program) including California, Oregon, Washington, British Columbia,Alaska, Hawaii, and the regional office of the National Marine Fisheries Service; and (2) NEMASNew England Marine Advisory Service) including Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts,Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New York. A third regional MAS operation, the Great LakesSea Grant regional MAS operation, the Great LakesSea Grant Network, is being planned. It will includethe States of Michigan, Minnesota, NewYork, and Wisconsin. Additionally, other regions arecontem- plating similar associations. Theseorganizations handle projects and publications ofregional, rather than strictly local interest andshare unique facilities and resources. Though they arein addition to, rather than in place of,local Marine Advisory Services, they are operatedin such a manner that they providesuperior service at less cost than if the indivdualMAS's tried to do it all themselves. Professional fishermen listen to explanationabout The nationwide Sea Grant networkcurrently taxes from Internal Revenue Servicerepresentative. produces about 50 informationalproducts a month project reports, technical bulletins,atlases, and other printed materials. The cumulativetotal exceeds 3,000 publications. As they areissued, these are noted and briefly reviewedin SEA GRANT '70sa monthly newsletterproviding national Sea Grant coverage and nowbeing published by the Sea Grant program atVirginia Polytechnic Institute and StateUniversity. They are also listed in the annualSEA GRANT PUBLI- CATIONS INDEX. Sea Grant publicationsusually can be obtained from theissuing institution, or they may be examined at or obtainedthrough interlibrary loan from the National SeaGrant Depository, Pell Memorial Library,University of Rhode Island, Narragansett, RI 02882.

56 67 In addition, Sea Grant institutions publisha large number of newsletters. Most of theseserve local or regional audiences, andsome of them are quite restricted in their audience appealsuchas primary and secondary school teachers, local commercial fisheries, and recreational audiences. As a result of Sea Grant, coastal and marine information centers have been established in Rhode Island, New York, Delaware, Virginia,North Carolina, Florida, Louisiana, Texas, California, Oregon, Washington, Hawaii, Wisconsin, and Michigan. Some of these employ computer archiving, indexing, and cross-referencing andare programmed to interface with various analytical, ecologic, and economic models. The MAS works directly with people. Its activities are extremely varied. In the northwest, ternpers were flaring as towboats carried away surface markers and other gear of dungeness crab fishermen. MAS avoided a serious confrontation by bringing the two opposing groups together for face-to-face talksresulting in a sharing of their waterspace rather than warring over it. Similarly, North Carolina Sea Grant is working tc reduce the friction between commercial and sport fishers along the Outer Banksagain simply by bringing the two groups together to talk over their needs and concerns. Basically, the MAS isa people-to- people effort involving hundreds of thousands of direct contacts with the public eachyearmore than 50,000 with fishing people aloneand literally millions of contacts through its media efforts. MAS activities range from a shark workshop in Florida to defuse the ignorance and fear generated by the movie "Jaws," a cobia sportfishing clinic in South Carolina, and a telephone "hot line" for sport fishers to call in Delaware to learn where "they're biting today," to technical assistance to Texas shipyards in controlling waste discharge,a survey of the elver (young eel) resource in Maine, 2-week visits between Oregon and Michigan charter boat operators (funded by two tackle manufacturers) for an exchange of ideas and experiences, series of radio broadcasts in Alaska in the Yupik language, advising Alaskan natives in their own tongue about new developments in fishing and about significant questions affecting their survival and, at Wisconsin, a continuing MAi4r' .'Ii°"1' FI5V A DIVING let program of weekly, 2-minute "Earth Watch" radio WLIGI11tif spots covering ecological and environmental 41or matters and regularly used by over 100 radio Lott %5 stations in the Midwest. Table XVII provides a Sea Grant-sponsored diving exhibit at the University broader summary of MAS activities. of Hawaii captures the attention of a future diver. 57 68 Sea Grant Table WI Sea Grant-Supported Marine Advisory MAINE/NEW HAMPSHIRE CONSORTIUM Services Projects Fisheries Extension Service (1967-1976) Public Education Advisory Services-Publications Seafood In ''ustry-Development ALASKA Communic -itions and InformationServices Advisory rield Program Public Participation Workshop Ocean Engineering Coastal Zone Management Alaska Seas and Coasts MARYLAND ARIZONA Advisory Service Report Balance of Payments-Ocean CALIFORNIA Advisory-Extension Program Marine Extension Program MASSACHUSETTS Advisory Services-Development, Operation, Ocean Education for the Public and Management Publications and Advisory Services Directory-Services for Mariners Marine Extension Service Fishermen Advisory Service-Marine Industry Finance Workshop-Commercial Conference-Marine Careers Sea Grant Lectureship CONNECTICUT Advisory Services Program Public Education and Training Communications/Information Project DELAWARE Advisory Services Program MICHIGAN Public education Program Marine Advisory Service Artificial Reef Project Communications Program Conference-Shore/ands Management Coast Guard-Mariner Liaison Sea Grant Activities-Visual Display FLORIDA Marine Advisory Program MINNESOTA Research Conference-Game Fish Marine Advisory Services Public Conference-Sharks MISSISSIPPI/ALABAMA CONSORTIUM Mississippi Advisory Services GEORGIA Advisory Services-Fisheries Alabama Advisory Services General Specialists Support Mississippi Sea Grant Newsletter Fishery Cooperative-Feasibility Study

HAWAII NEW JERSEY Marine Advisory Program Marine Advisory Service Publication Program Education NEW YORK Planning Services-Research and Marine Advisory Service-NewYork State Marine Atlas-Hawaii Eastern Lake Erie Information Center-Ocean Science Legislative Workshop-Marine NORTH CAROLINA Continuing Education-Fishermen LOUISIANA Advisory Services-MarineIndustry Marine Extension Service Seafood Science Publications and InformationDissemination Coastal Land Use IS Advisory Services-FisheriesInter:1 Coastal Recreation Advisory Services-legal Electric Shrimp Trawl-Tests Fnod Studies .Marine Marine Advisory Newsletter Cooperative Marketing Information

69 58 OHIO WASHINGTON Advisory Services-Coastal OKLAHOMA North Sound Field Activities Support OREGON Advisory Field Program Seafood Technology Support Puget Sound Fishermen Support Advisory Education-Oceanography Sea Search and Engineering Communications Program Seafood Te.c.tnology Marine Economics Industry-Student Problem Solving Public Education Workshop-Artificial Bait Communications-Marine Advisory WISCONSIN Diseases-Fish and Shellfish Seafood Science-Information Transfer Food Science and Fish Program M- 'ne Data Display Lake Recreation Development Advisory Services-Aquaculture OCC,111Law Business Management- Fishermen Great Lak,LHeritage Bicentenniar Guide-Great Lakes PENNSYLVANIA Shore Erosion-Radio Program Newspaper Column RHODE ISLAND Radio Programming Ocean Soundings Marine Advisory Service Sea Grant Communications National Sea Grant Depository Data File Demonstration-Midwater Trawl Small Marinas-Ecological Study DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Workshops-For Public School Teachers AMERICAN SAMOA Workshop-Maritime Transit GUAM SOUTH CAROLINA Marine Advisory Service Marine Advisory Program Marine Pr oducts Marketing-Feasibility TEXAS Guam-Microneseian Marine Bibliography Institutional Advisory Services TRUST TERRITORIES Advisory Services-Business Management Fisheries and General Extension VIRGIN ISLANDS Marine Education Program Marine Resources Information PUERTO RICO Sea Grant '70s (Now Published at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University) Coastal Resources Management

VIRGINIA NOTE: This is not a complete list of all project Advisor! Program-Food Science and areas undertaken during Sea Grant's first 10 Technology years. Rather, it is intended simply to be repre- E.Lension Agents and Publications sentative of the nature and variety of activities Business Management-Seafood Industry under this category. Sea Grant Professionals Lending Institutions Engineering Advisory Program Public Education Aquaculture Information lk.

and goal, however, is consistent: todevelop and Program iManagement operate a structure which functionswell within Development the institution and which produces aprogram which is responsive to the needsand opportunities Program Management and Developmentis concerned with Sea Grant programmanagement, of the community it serves. Ancillary goals include: a broadparticipation, exploring and implementing new management campuses and techniques, expanding participation inSea Grant not only by as many academic departments as possible, but alsoby industry and efforts, preliminary exploration of proposedmajor State and Federal agencies; attractionof top new projects. and meetingunforeseen contingen- talent to the program; marketingthe Sea Grant- cies. Table XVIII shows thelevel of activity under developed capability to industriesand agencies this category. expanding both have a outside of the Sea Grant program; Tne NOAA Office of Sea Grant does not matching funds; and, Grant management the volume and sources of set formula for the local Sea performance, establishing organization. and thus these vary amongthe on the basis of proven Sea Grant as a vital and relevantelement of the several Sea Grant institutions. Themanagement

60 71 Sea Grant Table XVIII Program Management and Development (Fiscal Year 1976 Awards)

Active Projects Federal Funds Matching Funds Total Project Subcategory Program Average Per Cent Per Cent Cost Per of Total of Total Budge" Number ($-million) ($-million) (S-million) Project Federal Program (5) Sea Grant"' Budget"' Program Administration 4.1 30 138,000 2.3 10.1 1.8 43 Program Development 0.7 14 53,000 0.6 2.4 0.2 24 Category Total 4.9 44 111,000 2.9 12.5 2.0 40

(1) This includes NOAA Sea Grant funds plus local matching funds. (2) This is a percentage of the total NOAA Sea Grant budget for allseven major categories of activity. (3) This is the matching fund percentage of the total program budget inthe far left column.

coastal and marine resource development and being served, State and Federal agencies. They management effort. help to keep research pragmatic, technologically Keeping in mind that no two Sea Grant manage- sound, responsive, and on track. ment structures are exactly alike, a typical and As noted, no two Sea Grant management effective system might work as follows. There is a structures are the same; thus, there are many Sea Grant Director who is in charge of, and variations. All, however, feature both internal and responsible for, the whole program. The Directors external input, peer review, and constant report directly to the institution's (or State interaction with the user groups. university system's) top management. There is an Program Development serves two basic func- internal advisory body with the Director serving as tions. It enables Directors to carry out or authorize chairperson and the membership consisting, exploratory work (a) to see if a project is worth variously, of institutional department heads, Sea pursuing without initially having to make a major Grant principal investigators, coordinators at commitment, and (b) to develop sound project various campuses, and other administrators of the design in order to produce proposals which are institution, both relevant and efficient. The philosophy here is For external advice and counsel, heavy reliance to spend a little money first in order to save more is placed on the MAS with its broad and money and avoid possible project failure later. continuing contact with the user public. There The second principal function of Program frequently is also a Sea Grant Advisory Council, Development is to provide for contingencies. This sometimes chaired by the Director and sometimes enables Directors to respond to crisis needs, the with an elected chairman. The membership resolution of which cannot await the completion of consists of representatives of user groups and the annual cycle of proposal writing, review, and community leaders outside of the Sea Grant approval. It also permits directors to take institution. New York, for example, has two such advantage of special opportunities which might advisory councils o.ie for the Great Lakes which not be around six months or a year later. Such includes two Canadian members, and one for the opportunities include: the chance to participate Atlantic marine district. jointlytherefore, less expensivelyin a particu- There also may be a series of panels or commit- larly desirable project, or the occurrence of teesat Rhode Island called WAGs (Work Area unusual or unique sittr4tions (environmental, Groups)to provide review and advice on perhaps) which are transient but nevertheless of specific projects and proposals in the area of their significance to Sea Grant interests. specialty (e.g., fisheries, recreation, ports and Table XIX summarizes the nature of the harbors, wetlands). Membership in such groups projects supported under Program Management may be from the institution's Sea Grant investiga- and Development. tors, marine extension agents, outside groups

61 72 Sea Grant Table XIX Sea Grant-Supported Program Administration and MAINE/NEW HAMPSHIRE CONSORTIUM Administratio'n and Development Development Projects ( 1967-1976 ) New Hampshire ComponentManagement Sea Grant Library/Computer Index ALASKA Advisory Service DevelopmentNewHampshire Program Administration University-Petroleum Industry Cooperation MARYLAND ARIZONA MASSACHUSETTS Program Management and Development CALIFORNIA Alternatives Program Planning and Development International TechnologySharing Project Development Opportunities Program Administration Administration and Management Ocean Utilization ProfessorshipsEstablishment Rapid Response Capability MICHIGAN Fish Industry Advisory Committee Program Administration

CONNECTICUT MINNESOTA DELAWARE MISSISSIPPI/ALABAMA CONSORTIUM Program Management Program Management andDevelopment

FLORIDA NEW JERSEY Program Administration Program Planning and Management Management-Administrative Functions Contingency Funds NEW YORK Program Development Program Mandgement Communications and Publications GEORGIA Initiative Management and Development Sea Grant InstituteNew Sea Grant Consortium Coordination Local Input Development HAWAII Dissemination Program Management Food Science SeminarTaping, Framework Sea Grant CollegeManagement NORTH CAROLINA Publications OfficeDevelopment Management and Development LOUISIANA Program Administration OHIO Field Logistic Support OKLAHOMA Environmental StudiesMatchingFunds OREGON Administration and Development

62 73 PENNSYLVANIA "To my mind there are two extremely important areas for Sea Grant in the future: First, working RHODE ISLAND with industry, government, and the people at Management and Development large in making extended fisheries jurisdiction SOUTH CAROLINA work. If there is something the ideal Sea Grant Administrative Project institution knows how to do, it is how to make things work. It has the local routes. It has access TEXAS to the academia community, to local and State Sea Grant CollegeIndustrial Activities government, and !o the Federal government Program Direction and Administration and several of the operating agencies without being a direct part of those agencies; thus, the VIRGINIA stigma of big brother looking over your shoulder Administration, Planning, Coordination does not attach to Sea Grant if it works right. WASHINGTON "Secondly, Sea Grant institutions can serve in a Program Management similar role in making coastal zone management Contingency Funds work and making it phase in smoothly with WISCONSIN broader based land use as it must in the future. Program Administration and Development Here are two resources: One, the traditional common property resource of fisheries which DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA we want to manage in what are traditionally international waters with all the 'freedoms' this AMERICAN SAMOA implies. The second resource, our coastal GUAM environmentat the interface of land and sea Program Management and of private and public property rightsis also an extremely difficult area to manage. This TRUST TERRITORIES is a tremendous undertaking, and if it is going to be done without excessive fractures in VIRGIN ISLANDS State-local relations and in State-Federal relations, it is going to take some very careful PUERTO RICO and dedicated work in the localities and the regions." NOTE: This is not a complete list of all project areas undertaken during Sea Grant's first 10 years. Rather, it is intended simply to be repre- Niels Rorholm, Coordinator sentative of the nature and variety of activities Sea Grant College Program under this category. University of Rhode Island

63 74 0 4 4 S 4 Sea Grant Benefits part e)

When a $2,400 demonstration of pelagic pair of a universally better informed and moreaware, 'trawling enables half a dozen U.S. fishermen to involved public. increase their monthly receipts by $40,000, and While some Sea Grant activities produce the technique is quickly adopted by others... measurable benefitsusually where specific When a $2,820 proof that "pink oysters" are technologies are applied to specific tasks (See safe and nutritious results in the sale of $500,000 Table XX)the majority does not. In the final worth of oysters which otherwise would have been analysis, the Sea Grant goal is to help to producea rejected... society which is more competent, more confident, When a 5116,000 underwater survey finds and and more optimisticor, to resurrect an old describes economically recoverable sand deposits cliche, healthier, wealthier and wiser. worth more than $100 million... This means crises and conflicts which might When a 4-year Sea Grant investment of $150,000 have arisen but did not; opportunities which might attracts $300,000 of State and industry funding, have been missed but were not; irreplaceable and when the combined efforts produce increases resources which might have been destroyed but in retail sales of precious coral from $2.6 million were not; new efficiency and foresight in govern- in 1971 to $11.4 million in 1975 and hike ment and greater confidence in its decisions employment from 200 to 500 which might have been lacking but were notall ... with track records like these, it is not difficult because of the Sea Grant process. The worth of to show that these were worthwhile efforts with benefits such as these is no more computable than beneficial and specific cost/benefit ratios. are the differences between American agr;Lulture The Sea Grant tally of quantifiable benefits such because of Land Grant and what it might have as these is growing. Frequently, the Sea Grant been without it. project results in an expansion of the tax base Many benefits, though unmeasurable, are which produces tax revenues in one year which identifiable. They are numerous and variedfre- are greater than the public investment cost of the quently of an ul.inticipated, secondary, or fallout project responsible. And, while that cost is in nature. Derived mostly frOm the Sea Grant effect, a one-time thing, the added tax revenues Directors' own perspectives, Table XXIV continue, and usually expand, year after year. summarizes some of these immeasurables. None Under such circumstances it is easy to say: of them is entirely abstract. They produce tangible "That's good stuff; let's do more of it." benefits for the institutions, the faculty, the It is not so easy, however, to place a specific students, the local communities, and the Nation. dollar benefit tag on Sea Grant's contribution to The payoff is mostly in futures, and so it the creation of a broad base of aquaculture probably always will befor whatever Sea Grant's technology, on the education of interdisciplinary current level of accomplishment, it will always specialists in coastal zone management, marine have new and challenging horizons in view. This affairs, and ocean laws, or on the development of does not mean an ever-expansive, runaway bud- sounder data bases and predictive analytical get. Rather, it is the straightforward process of techniques for better decision-making in undertaking new tasks as old ones are completed. government. All of them have as goals: people who are better is even more difficult, in fact quite impossible, off economically; government which is less to compute specific dollar benefits from the divisive, less abrasive, and more responsive; introduction of institutions of higher learning to resources that are used, taken, and managed new and exciting concepts of adaptive education more wisely, and a quality of life that constantly and to new and challenging roles of community improves. service; or from the establishment of a direct In brief, the ultimate benefit from the Sea Grant communications link between the producers and process is a better America. users of knowledge; or from the gradual evolution

65 76 Sea Grant Table XX Examples of Specific Benefits

GEORGIA Challenge Cut 10 percent product ioss from sawing frozen fish blocksinto smaller pieces for breadingsome 400 pounds a day in a small plant. Solution Collect, reconstitute and bread fish sawdust. Benefit Once-wasted product sells for 5J .,a pound. I nvestrrir-* $93,900.

GEORGIA Challenge Improve economic efficiency of Georgia shrimp fishermen. Solution Debug and adapt Gulf of Mexico twin trawl (two small,side-by-side nets replace one larger one) with fishermen's cooperation, demonstratemethod. Benefit Increase trawling efficiency by 60 percent. Technique isadopted by others. Investment* $290,500. HAWAII Challenge Expand domestic sources of precious coral.Increase harvest efficiency. De- velop sound resource management program. Solution Use modern Scuba gear and submersibles(STAR-II) to discover and survey resources. Employ same gear forselective harvesting to 1,200-foot depth. Benefit Import dependence reduced from virtually 100percent to less than 25 percent. Retail sales increased from $2.6 million to $11.4million a year. Employment up from 100 to 500 people. Federal andState tax revenues up by $500,000 a year. Investment* 148,522 over a 4-year period; matched by$294,277 State and industry funds. HAWAII Challenge Find offshore sand deposits for restoringand maintaining beaches. Solution Conduct survey and assessment. Benefit Location of six recoverable deposits of 20 to 70million cubic yards each. Investment* $290,500. LOUISIANA Administration (FDA) ban on interstate Challenge Find way to reverse U.S. Food and Drug shipment of baby green turtles because ofdanger of salmonella infection. Solution Dip eggs in terramycine before incubation. Benefit Will restore $2.5-million market for 150growersif FDA can be convinced of the safety of the process. Investment* $30,600.

MASSACHUSETTS Challenge Reduce bacterial and viral load in sewagedischarged into coastal waters. Solution Develop and test high-energy electron irradiationpurification technique. Benefit Sea Grant-supported work led to a $113,000National Science Foundation grant and a subsequent grant of $198,000 tobuild full-scale pilot plant in cooperation with the Metropolitan DistrictCommission. Investment* $19,300.

66 77 NEW YORK Challenge Find new sources of construction aggregate for concrete. Solution Survey the underwater resources of Lake Ontario. Benefit Found several sand deposits, includingone worth $90 to $150 million. Investment* $115,766.

NEW YORK Challenge Find way to recover and market some of the 8,000,000pounds a year fish filleting wastes produced in New York City alone. Solution Use poultry deboning machines torecover 60 percent in form of white meat left on racks (what's left after fillets are removed); reconstituteand bread it. Benefit Marketable at 50(' a pound compared to 30a pound as mink food. Investment* $26,200.

NEW YORK Challenge Enable marinas forced to close when rising Lake Erie waterlevel covered breakwaters to reopen. Solution Install a 900-foot floating breakwater using Rhode Island SeaGrant developed "old-tire" design. Benefit Marine revenues of $75,000 a year restorid. Investment* $5,000. NORTH CAROLINA Challenge Improve fishermen's ice-holding and fish-keeping capabilities. Solution Sprayed-in-place polyurethane insulation of fish holds. Benefit $100,000 saving in first year for six vessels and two ice-holdingfacilities. Investment* $6,500. NORTH CAROLINA Challenge Increase earning opportunities for commercial fishermen. Solution Help develop local fishery and export market for eels. .Benefit In first year 29 fishermen earned $75,000 harvesting eels. Investment* $10,000.

OREGON Challenge Improve fishing efficiency Solution Modify Atlantic Western trawl to increase catching efficiency. Benefit Catch efficiency up 30 to 100 percent; local catchup by over $2.5 million a year. Investment* $14,000.

OREGON Challenge improve landed quality of fish. Solution Develop superior fish hold liners; also less expensive than old method. Benefit Higher quality landed product and $290,000 direct cost saving for 129 vessels. Investment* $5,000.

67 78 OREGON by urbanization and otherchanges. Challenge Restore chum salmon fishery depleted when they Solution Raise salmon in hatcheries; releasethem to sea; and harvest them return as adultscalled ranch farming. private hatcheries in operation; 15 addi- Benefit Investment by private industry. Four tional license applications in. Anticipate2 to 3 million-pound harvestin 1980 and with $3 to $5 million to farmers, withadditional take by offshore commercial sport fishers of 3.5-5.5 millionpounds, and State and Federal tax revenues increased by more than $1 million a year. Investment* $93,500. RHODE ISLAND Challenge Improve fishing efficiency. European pelagic pair trawling. Solution Bring Irish fisherman over to explain in first three iionths of its adoption Benefit Increased local catch by 6,000,000 pounds and trial. Practice now spreading upand down Atlantic coast. Investment* $2,400. RHODE ISLAND installed and Challenge Develop an effectiv,,-; breakwater thatis inexpensive and easily removed. breakwater made of old car tires. Solution Design, produce and proof-test floating put in place for less than $6 afoot, and Benefit A breakwater that can be built and which is enjoying wider and wider usee.g.,Rhode Island, New York, and Washington. Also helps with the tiredisposal problem. Investment* $54,000. VIRGINIA refusal to accept shipments. Challenge Outbreak of "pink oysters" and customer cooking eliminates color. Solution Demonstrate safety, nutrition, and that Benefit $500,000 shipment accepted. Investment* $2,820. VIRGINIA pasteurizing crabmeat. Challenge Improve methods and reduce cost of Solution Develop flexible film containers toreplace cans. 551,000 on 300,000 pounds in first year. Benefit First firm to adopt process saved Investment* $3,350. WASHINGTON of NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Challenge Demonstrate commercial feasibility Service, a NOAA agency)-developedtechnology for pen-rearing of pan-size salmon. conduct full-scale experiments. Solution Join with Domsea Farms, Inc., to Production of pen-reared, salmon broughtfrom nothing in 1970 to some Benefit attracted private 1,700,000 pound. i 1975 at a market price of $1.50 a pound; investment and increased tax revenuepotentials by more than $700,000 a year. Investment* $100,000. Investment represents the total of NOAASea Grant funds committed to the project. It does not include matchinj funds or privateinvestment. 68 79 xampleR of Immeasurable 'Benefits Primary Beneficiary r6i,A How Sea Grant Benefits the University

Augments roles, missions, and stature ofthe university in the community itserves.

MIEncourages mission-oriented, interdisciplinary progrkns of higher education whichare responsive andclap table to ffi e changing needs of society. Fosters the evolution of dynamic, interdisciplinary team approaches to the fulfillment ofa broad range of community needs and aspirations. A Capabilities thus produced attract demands for services and grant and contract funds from

sources other than Sea Granti.e., Federal and 1.. State agencies, industry. Opportunity for college-based researchers to work on marine-oriented problems with a practical short-term payoff convinces many who at first opposed Sea Grant, that good research can be done within the boundary conditions of applied goals. n Starts university faculty and administrators alike thinking in terms of overall marine objectives and of the value of being the State marine university. 4 This marine commitment attracts capable faculty and motivated students. Interdepartmental and interinstitutional cooperation favors development of complementary, rather than competitive, courses, service:,I, and capabilities. u Continuous feedback loop between faculty and Marine Advisory service personnel keeps the faculty and the university administration in touch with the changing needs of society. El Sea Grant fosters interinstitutional transfer of information and services. /3 Provides the university with research opportunities which, without Sea Grant, would not have been possible.

So 69 with the a Matching fund requirement fostersbeneficial it serves and agencies concerned citizen and State involvement in theuniversity marine environment. function, and vice-versa. as Catalyzes beneficial, cooperative,and working Federal a Gives the university, thepublic, and the State contact among the institution, State and new perspectives on themarine environment agencies, industry, and other groups. which otherwise would not have beenpossible. a Provides specialized assistance inadvance a Permits presentation of marineaccomplish- planning for the management of coastal and ments as selling points for theuniversity before marine resources and for the implementation - the State legislature. of those plans. a Provides the governor,legislature, agencies, How Sea Grant Helps the Student and others with a quick-response,specialized with critical or a Presents the students with an excitingdiversity source of expertise for dealing of courses and degree programs which unusual problems. previously did not exist. a Offers an independent, objective sourceof advice and counsel which is outside of both a Encourages competence amongthe students and enables them to realize diversity intheir the State and Federal government systems. academic experience which greatly enhances a Primes the pump for a greaterconcentration of their subsequent value to society, including State funds in the area of coastal andmarine prospective employers. research and education. E Gives students the opportunity toparticipate in im Contributes, through itsknowledge of and close projects and to travel to places which otherwise association with the marine community, to would not have been possible. greater efficiency in the execution ofother Gives students early exposure to the practical Federal programs. aspects of their academic learning through to Demonstrates how Federal-localpartnerships

.problem-oriented research, work-study, and can be made to functioneffectively. internships with both government andindustry. ca Shows how a minimumFederal input can as Helps interest students,faculty, and community produce maximum local benefits. in applied marine work. By virtue of its chain store characteristic, a Provides the financialincentive to university provides one-stop shopping center fordisplay- administrations to try totally new courses, ing a broad inventory of talents andcapabilities. degree programs, and other innovationsin Matches local involvement to localresponsibility contemporary education. a major benefit of thematching fund AIIDWS and encourages the universityeduca- requirement. adapt to tional process to grow, adjust, and genuine needs of changing techno!ogic, economic, and societal ia Predicates activities on the needsthus assuring continued educational the States. relevance and more and better job opportunities o! Fulfills critical and emergingneeds for special -,for the institution's graduates. professional and technical skills through adaptive curriculum development. Sea Grant's Role in the Community Promotes manpower sharing for greater is Enables thecomprehensive and diversified productivity and lower costs. marshalled into a resources of universities to be Contributes to sound economic growthand variable-response capability to serve vital expansion of the tax base. community needs and opportunities. Provides its benefits at a minimum netadded of communications as Opens effective avenues cost to the taxpayer because itlargely utilizes between the university and both thecommunity existing personnel and facilities.

70 81 Sea Grant Benefits Extend to Business and Industry

al Upgrades efficiency in existing marineindus- tries through positive contributions in technology, methods, resource management, marketing, and bookkeeping. Expedites technology transfer within marine industries, from one industry to another, from one part of the country to another, and from abroad. a Identifies, evaluates, and, if appropriate, deter- mines maximum sustainable yield of previously unknown or underutilized resources andpro- vides basic guidance for their exploitation and marketing. Generates and stimulates new marine industries as new resources are discovered and as new technologies and markets are developed. Discourages new marine industries where, even though the potentials exist, the technologies and basic marketing infrastructure do not. Encourages the development of new domestic and export markets for marine products and services. Fosters the creation of new marine job opportunities. Helps to assure an adequate and timely supply of trained professionals and technicians. Assists in power plant and other industrial siting so as to minimize adverse environmental, economic, and other impacts. Contributes to improve management of wastes from marine industries, including conversion of wastes into secondary sources of income. Serves as a reactive communications link between the marine constituency and those State and Federal agencies and others which regulate or otherwise may impact upon it.

71 82 Sea Grant Meets unemployment and fosters economic growth. This expands the tax base, yielding greatertax National Needs revenues at no increase in tax rates. Sea Grant responds to national needs both a It produce:. greater knowledge of resources,the broadly and specifically. To the extent that it environment, economics, and activitiesand helps localities and regions of the country to how they interplay. ['his permits sounder, more greater economic wealth, sound economic growth, efficient management by both government anc better natural resources management, better gov- industry. Errors of judgment are fewer, andthe ernment, and more relevant ed*icational oppor- costs therefore, are diminished. Thisleads to tunities, it provides a broad contribution to the better government without a proportionalrise in national well-being. To the extent that it supports the cost of government. This contributesto a studies of specific naional issuessuch as ex- balanced budget. Sounder business manage- tended fishery jurisdiction, offshore mineral devel- ment contilloutes to economicefficiency and opment, deepwater ports, ocean dumping, Law of growthmore jobs, higher personal and cor- the Sea, and other significant topicsit directly porate incomes, a broadened tax base,greater tackles national problems. This is also true to the tax revenues (and/or lower taxrates), a exte.it that Sea Grant-developed capabilities are sounder, more attractive and healthierenviron- called on to satisfy the issue-oriented needs of a ment. number of other Federal agencies. A survey by the Office of Sea Grant showsthat Once begun and allowed to proceed,the cycle for every four projects concerned mainly with is self-perpetuating. The only requirementis the local matters, there are two that concentrate on continued input of knowledge as newproblems, national problems and three which fall in between. needs, and opportunities arise. It is acycle of Another analysis shows the allocation of Federal improvement rather than of degeneration.By Sea Grant funds thus: aquaculture, 23 percent; many different means, in manydifferent areas of coastal zone management, 24 percent;fisheries, activity and in many different parts of thecountry, 12 percent; engineering, 21 percent; andsocio- this is what Sea Grant does. It helps to reverse economic and legal research, 12 percent. Yet the downward trend and to get theupward cycle another shows research of all types at 61.5 per- moving. then, it continues to support thatnational cent, education at 6.2 percent and advisory "upward mobility" in the economy, theenviron- services at 20.8 percent. No doubt all of these are ment, the population, the ,ocality, theregion, and statisticians' delights, but not only are theyof the Nation. And, it is based on themost proven little more than transient interest, they missthe and fundarnenai principles of theAmerican com- basic point. petitive free enterprise system. In the final analysis, Sea Grant's greatestcon- The basic point is: so long as the Nation is the that it iseverything Sea tribution to the Nation simply may be sum of its localitieswhich it proved itself. Except perhaps that theneed was Cant does contributes to the national well-being. greati... there, that it began inAmerica's coastal Look at w1 it does: States is irrelevant. As a means ofachieving wiser confidence and disci- se It fosters greater economic efficiency. This use of resources and more yields greater productivity (output per unit pline in critical decision-making, it is a process effort). This fights inflation. that is responsive wherever the convergenceof man and nature createsvital problems of °emend, a It provides for greater utilizationof domestic equity. Sea reduces allocation, use, conservation, and resour-:es. This increases supplies, Grant philosophies, tools, and methods areas import dependence, and increases exports. applicable inland as they arealongshore. The This contributes to a favorable balance of pay- university systems are there, and so, moreor less, ments in internationai trade. This also makes are the problems, the needs,and the opportuni- the dollar worth more abroad, making imports ties. This inherent universality ofthe Sea Grant cost us less and ... fighting :,:lation at home. idea, of itself, may hold the greatestpotential for It contributes to he expansion of existing, and national benefit. the introduction of new industries. Thiscreates jobs and investment opportunities, whichfights

72 83 Sea Grant Future directly analogous to the manner in which the in- Sea Grant's future can be described briefly as dividual institutions now serve their respective "more of the same and better"concerned with States. One can see the start of thisprocess in growth and fine-honing of its public service role. the mounting use of "pass-through" funds By growth is meant neither galloping bureauc- other Federal agencies o hz.ve Sea Grant nr racies nor runaway budgets. Leaness should projects of special importance to their mir_ always be a characteristic of Sea Grant in terms It is also apparent in the increasing extenttc. of both people and money. Rather, by growth is which other agencies and industry make use of Sea meant development to its full-service potential in Grant-developed capabilities on a direct grant or those States where it already exists, its initiation contract basiswithout going through OSG at all. in those coastal States where it does not exist Greater cooperation and coordination and better and, throughout the network, constant improve- communications among the Sea Grant institutions, ment of the organizations and methods by which the encouragement of more multistate Sea Grant Sea Grant institutions perceive and pursue their projects, the evolution of a 5-year planning cap- missions. ability at the instit!..ional level, and themore By growth also is meant the natural extension direct involvement of representatives from the Sea of Sea Grant responsibilities commensurate with Grant network in Federal marine policy and plan- the growth of its capabilities. This already takes ning activities ail current OSG program goals the form of a greater cooperativeness and co- will strengthen Sea Grant's national response hesiveness among the Sea Grant institutions, capabilities. automatically moving them toward a capability to In a small way and in direct support of its respond effectively as a unit to national and even domestic missions, Sea Grant is already operating international needs. More specifically, in its internationallythe transfer of European fisheries second decade the Sea Grant network will begin technology to U.S. commercial fishermen, the to serve the Feoeral government in a way that is 4'ansfer of U.S.-developed plant mariculture know-

-(1c41-1+,

Arr'sr,

cri.;111

73 how to the western Pacific Rim countries, the New and acceptable strategies for solid waste broad international involvement of the Law of the disposal. Sea Institute, PASGAP and the New England E.' Key participant roles in the design,'demonstra- Fishermen's Forum which regularly brings to- tion, and evaluation of major and innovative gether U.S. and foreign (mainly Russian) fisher- ways to expand the productive capacityof our men operating in the northwestAtlantic area. Sea coastal and marine resources without further Grant's international involvement will almost cer- destroying the natural environmente.g., tainly grow with emphasis on the two-waytransfer multiple use offshore pletforms and artificial of knowledge and technology between theUnited islands for waste disposal and recycling, indus- States and other nations. The most importantof trial siting, energy production, deep-draft and these transfers may well be the introductionof other berthing, aquaculture, integrated com- the Sea Grant process itself to othercountries. mercial fisheries complexes, high-intensity Informally, at least, this last has already begun marine recreation, and other activities for which among some of the Pacific Rim countriesand in a natural environment is not aprerequisite. the Soviet Union. aFloating cities and underwater factories. As for specific tasks, many of the keyissues of Ca Novel and innovative approaches tomarine today will demand Sea Grant attention for some recreation. ;ears to come. New issues arealready emerging, ro Improved energy economics for the whole and others are in the wings. Some can beantici- spectrum of marine activities. pated; some cannot. However, among thetasks Et Man in the sea, including bothunderwater Sea Grant is tackling and will betackling in the recreation and underwater work. future are: lig And, in general, smoothing theaccelerating extension seaward of many traditionally land- m Survey, assay, and bases forallocation of con- based activities, as well as new andpreviously tinental shelf resources. untried ventures inspired by civilization'sin- off- aEnergy from the sea, including not only the creasing familiarity with the marine environ- shore siting of thermal electric power plants, ment and its growing dependence onthose from but also the direct extracticn of energy resources. ocean currents, vertical thermalgradients, winds, tides, and perhaps others. Different Needs In Different States m Technology and environmental aspectsof offshore mining of minerais and construction There is no standard size, structure, or spending level to which all States are expected toaspire. aggregates. differ- vit Optimum development andmanagement of There are too many variants. Each State is ent, and so are the needs andopportunities which fisheries. addresses. Size and go Establishment of aquaculture as anacceptable, eac.i Sea Grant institution compatible, and profit2:,le activity offshore, activities are established by local requirements. these alongshore, and in America's heartland. Success is measured by the extent to which aDetermination of coastal and ocean engineering requirements are met. criteria suitable for establishment ofstandards, When th- local Sea Grant program is turning chang- insurance risk tables, permitting, and other out professionals and technicians to meet ing constituent needs, when it is providingthe regulatory activities. aTechniques for restoration of natural environ- knowledge and tools to solve problems and take advantage of opportunities, when it operates an ments both alongshore and-offshore. and ci Design and testing of novelhuman-made "nat- effective alert system for crisis avoidance its ural environments" (Le, once establishedthey resolution, when it provides useful input to planning function in a natural manner with little or no State's coastal and marine resources human intervention; artificial reefs are as!m- and management efforts, when it work',in coop- local, State plistic example) to achieve special local eration with industry, individuals, and and Federal agencies, when it operates aneffec- objectives. communi- Resolution of the rising number, variety, and tive program of public education and a accepted, intensity of conflicts between public andprivate cations, and when it has become an community rights in the coastal and marine environments. valued, and integral part of the total

74 it serves, this is readily apparent and marks the industry, government and other Sea Grant institu- maturing of Sea Grant. The size and complexity of tions and involving both students and faculty. It a particular Sea Grant program is quite secon- will continue and expand the process of produc- dary. What is of primary importance is that it be ing an informed electorate. It will keep building appropriate to the need. economic efficiency with technology research and In some States, Sea Grant already approaches development and new market exploration. And, it this level of service. In others, it does not. To will continue to work strongly and directly in achieve this level of service in all States which support of the States' coastal zone management need and want it is one of Sea Grant's most im- efforts. The Sea Grant process already has proved portant second-decade tasks. Responsibility for to be effective, low in cosi, and highly beneficial. this effort rests primarily, though not entirely, It is not in need of changing, only of fide honing. wtih each State. Congress must appropriate the In short, the overall role of Sea Grant in the necessary Federal funds, and OSG must continue future, as now, is to maintain and develop the to guide and -;dvise. If the States themselves do processes whereby needs and opportunities are not seize the initiative, however, no one is going recognized and the talents, technologies, institu- to drag them into the fold. tions, and laws necessary thereto are provided. By definition, this is a continuous process in Future Tasks which a goal realized is not an end-attainment, Much of what Sea Grant is doing now it will be but merely the clearing of an obstacle, beyond doing for some years to comeresponding to the which new opportunities beckon to contribute to needs of its constituent communities. There will higher returns on both individual and community always be changes of emphasis, of course; as investments of time, thought, energy, and wealth. programs progress, one set of needs is met and If Sea Grant had a motto, it might well be: to others emerge. Aquaculture, for example, un- realize the greatest gain from, with the least harm doubtedly will progress to the commercial feasi- to, marine and coastal resources. bility demonstration phase. Perfection and adaptation of existing environmental models, VP3'11. rather than the development of new ones will be stressed. Recreation will get more attention, as will social, cultural, and economic aspects of coastal and marine resources management. Throughout the entire spectrum of tasks, there will be a special concern with new and innovative ways to take and use coastal and marine resources-ways which are not only economically efficient but whicn provide more benefits with fewer adverse impacts and fewer conflicts. Basically, however, Sea Grant will continue to do just what it is doing now. It wi'l continue to develop the informaticn and tools to reduce the element of doubt in critical management decisions. It will seek valuation schemes for rating those aspects (e.g., aesthetic) of coastal and marine resources not customarily priced by market processes. It will continue to expand the number and diversity of user groups with which it has beneficisi contact. In education it will work to keep c,-irses up to date and rele /ant and to encourage the introduction of innovative programs in marine affairs, the humanities, the arts, science and engineering, including new emphasis on exchange programswork-study, internshipswith

75 Co Sea Grant is a process for realizing more efficient fi- utilization of human, economic, andnatural resources. It is a process for applying wisdom and foresight to management. It isa process through which institutions of higher learningcan adapt and respond to changing needs at boththe educational and public service levels of theircommun- ity responsibilities. Sea Grant in actionenables people to realize more from their efforts. Ithelps to achieve an acceptable balance in theuse and conservationboth short- and long-termof natural resources. Sea Grant embodies the concepts ofdynamic, interactive investigation, andresponse, of adaptive programs of education, of flexibilityand functionalism in university approaches to their operations without in any way sacrificing the intellectual and disciplinary integrity of academic standards. Sea Grant marks the difference between the institution which serves traditional approaches to education only and the institution Though Sea Grant was founded on the original which also systematically seeks betterways to Land Grant triad of education, extension and serve the whole of its constituent community. experiment, in practice it has expanded and This intermingling of Sea Grant educational improved on the concepts to apply the meth- efforts with Sea Grant community service roles odologies to a much broader spectrum of the and missions is a mutual relationship which challenges and obligations of contemporary benefits both. And, of course, themore the insti- society. The specific nature of needs and oppor- tution successfully addresses and helps to solve tunities in different localities may vary, but the community problems and the more it contributes methodology of their treatment is the same, as is to sound growth and better management, themore the potential role of the university. Thus, it may meaningful the institution becomes to its State. be that Sea Grant, itself founded on the lessons While Sea Grant is concerned with the coastal of Land Grant, may already have pointed the way and marine regions of the Nation, the Sea Grant for Land Grant and other institutions of higher process and the benefits it produces are appli- learning to make their educational and public cable anywhere the meeting of people, tech- service roles more directly responsive to the com- nology, and nature creates problems of allocation, munities they serve,;herever their location and exploitation, conservation, and management. In whatever their cultural, environment, and resource essence, Sea Grant is simply a process for the orient,tions. After all, Sea Grant is nothing more full and relevant utilization of the intellectual and than a more effective way to use that singular other resources of a large university system in a human quality, the ability to reason. broad and adaptable program of public service. It works as well inland as it does by thesea, as well in any part of the world that has orcan build the necessary intellectual base as it has in America.

77 Sq Photo Credits Page Page

Exxon vix National Oceanic and AtmosphericAdministration 31

Jim ElliottOffice of Sea Grant x Seabrook Hull 33

3 Scripps Institution of Oceanography 35 Dick Clarke

37 University of Hawaii 1 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

4 Jim ElliottOffice of Sea Grant 38 University of Rhode Island

7 Mort Kaye Studies, Inc. 41 Texas A&M University

8 Top. University of Rhode Island 43 Environmental Protection Agency

8 Bottom. Scripps Institution of Oceanography 47 University of California (San Diego)

9 University of Rhode 'sland 48 University of Wisconsin

10 Jim ElliottOffice of Sea Grant 53 Anita George

13 Seabrook Hull 54 Jim ElliottOffice of Sea Grant

16 Seabrook Hull 56 Oregon State University

17 University of Wisconsin 57 University of Hawaii

19 Seabrook Hull 60 Jim ElliottOffice of Sea Grant

21 Top. Jim ElliottOffice of Sea Grant 71 Alvin Char Bottom. Jim ElliottOffice of Sea Grant 21 Administration 73 National Oceanic and Atmospheric

22 Seabrook Hull 75 University of Wisconsin

28 Deepsea Ventures, Inc. 77 Seabrook Hull

89 78