Laserfiche WebLink
<br />dUIJSgg <br /> <br />At this point, a pertinent question might be: Is there a need for <br />enactment of S. 1111 from the standpoint of the States? As a matter of <br />opinion, it seems to me that the answer for many of the States would be <br />affirmative. It should be remembered that the proposed Water Resources <br />Planning would be for all of the 50 States plus Puerto Rico and the Virgin <br />Islands--not for the Western States alone. <br /> <br />As pointed out by the Senate Select Committee on National Water <br />Resources, in spite of all of the steps that have been taken in the past at <br />the National, State and local levels to improve water resources planning, <br />there is still much to be desired. The State and local agencies still play <br />minor roles in many important water resource decisions. Many States have <br />poor organizations for long-range planning, and their water resources <br />agencies lack financial support. Some States even appear to lack the <br />proper agencies that can do their share in the over-all planning job. In <br />many instances, initiative in planning rests with the Federal agencies. <br />States and local governments are often in the position of having to approve <br />or disapprove plans without having made adequate studies needed for major <br />decisions in the field of water resources. <br /> <br />Lack of organization, etc., are not true in all instances. For <br />example, many of the States in the West .are keenly aware of their water <br />problems and are striving actively to improve their water resources planning <br />procedures. <br /> <br />S. 1111 is predicated upon the idea that a major improvement in <br />State participation can be fostered by making Federal funds available to the <br />States for a limited period of years to assist them in participating in develop- <br />ing comprehensive river basin plans. Whether S. 1111 provides the machinery <br />for effectively increasing State participation, or not, it is becoming more and <br />more evident that States must recognize their water problems, must actively <br />participate in their solution more than they have in the past, or, due to our <br />rapidly changing social and economic conditions, the Federal Government is <br />going to step in and take over the duties and responsibilities inherent in <br />comprehensive river basin planning. <br /> <br />Perhaps S. 1111 should be regarded as a medium through which States <br />may be able to stimulate their own people and their own agencies to participate <br />more vigorously in planning. A comparable precedent in this regard can be <br />observed in the results that have been achieved under the Water Pollution <br />Control Act of 195(, which provides for similar grantS-in-aid to the States for <br />their participation in public health programs--or in the field of urban planning <br />under the Housing Act of 1954. In almost every State. grants have been <br />helpful in stimulating the development of State agencies to the point where <br />they have been able to command increasing State financial support. <br /> <br />- 8 - <br />