Laserfiche WebLink
<br />oocn~ <br /> <br />12 <br /> <br />"The incidental benefits to human life that result from <br />projects that are designed for the objectives of national economic <br />development and environmental quality, these incidental benefits <br />can be displayed but this is very different from designing a project <br />for the purpose. " <br /> <br />*'::**~r <br /> <br />"One can presumably design a project to save the lives of <br />fish and birds and moose under the environmental quality objec- <br />tive, but not the life of man. <br /> <br />"Gentlemen, this is madness, but the problem is not alone <br />this most dramatic example of human life, and it would not do <br />simply to add human life to the approved objectives. <br /> <br />"Let me give some other examples. Under the proposed <br />standards and criteria the Government can not plan a project for <br />the purpose of helping the poor or any group of the poor. . ." <br /> <br />* * * * * <br /> <br />"We should plan initially for all important objectives that <br />can be influenced significantly by water resources programs and <br />then debate the trade -offs that we want to establish among them. <br /> <br />"The result of such a debate could be that for water re- <br />sources programs we place such low value on saving lives and <br />on helping the Indians in comparison with the value that we place <br />on national economic growth and environmental quality, that the <br />first two objectives cannot influence project design. <br /> <br />"If this were the case, the decision would have been <br />reached with full information _on the potential benefits and costs <br />of all of these objectives. By contrast, in the proposed standards <br />and criteria the members of the Water Resources Council have <br />made the decision that in designing water resources projects and <br />programs benefits and costs of saving lives, of helping the <br />Indians, of many other objectives. should be valued at zero, <br />regardless of their potential size, and the Council members have <br />not stated either the data on benefits and costs, nor any other <br />reasons that have led them to adopt this important decision. " <br /> <br />****~}:: <br /> <br />~ <br />