Laserfiche WebLink
<br />11 <br /> <br />Mondale, made it very clear dudng several trips to the West that the ). <br />Federal government would not interfere with State water law. <br />I do not want to take time tonight to review the various deficiencies <br />in State water law where they occur, but the point is that if these State <br />water laws are to adequately recognize instream flows, the States must <br />take responsibility for change. <br />I'd like to spend a little time talking about efforts at the Federal <br />level to insure that a more realistic planning procedure is in place which <br />can accommodate the procedures which you are developing for purposes of <br />considering instream flows. Without a solid water resources planning system, <br />the procedures that this workshop is concerned with -- will simply not be <br />used. <br />As I indicated earlier, existing water 'resources planning procedures at <br />the Federal level are not adequate and many problems exist. For example, <br />the Principles and Standards for the planning of water and related land <br />resources development do not cover a number of Federal actions. Per <br />direction of the Water Resources Council, the Principles and Standards <br />really only cover direct Federal actions; that is, the construction programs <br />of the Corps of Engineers, the Soil Conservation Service, the Bureau of <br />Reclamation and TVA and do not cover the so-called "indirect Federal programs" <br />such as the grants program of U.S. EPA for construction of sewage treatment <br />facilities. <br />Another deficiency is the fact that the plans produced by river basin <br />commissions, interagency coordinating committees, and other entities can be <br />presently ignored by the Federal agencies and States without any kind of <br />penalty. Another area of deficiency in the existing planning process is the <br />almost complete lack of integration of water quality and water quantity <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />9 <br />