BOARD00226

• Board Meeting Date: 4/1/1970
• Description: Agenda or Table of Contents, Minutes, Memos
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

MR. .THOMAS:

MR. STAPLETON:

MR. MOSES:

MR. THOMAS:

I do hope that if it is renewed and opened
up again that those considerations will receive
proper attention."

"This is an excellent point, Mr. Ten Eyck,
and I think it is quite obvious, and you stated
the case very well, that plans which were made
in 1954 before most of us had heard of the word
'ecology' - We might have heard or environment
hut we hadn't heard of ecology at that time -
certainly would have to be revised to get the
most acceptable and workable solutions, not only
from the standpoint of taking care of the water
in the channel, but also preserving the environ-
ment and the ecology along the stream and our
office has been increasingly aware of this. We
have been increasingly active in trying to work
with the ecological and environmental people
and we have people who have capability in these
areas so that this definitely would be a part
of the feasibility study that I am talking about.

I

We should not be under any illusions, how-
ever, that we could do this without some dis-
turbance of some of the ecological factors that
are probably evident in there now. It might
not necessarily damage all of them, it might be
that there would even be some improvements but
a definite effort should be made, as Mr. Ten
Eyck just pointed out, to make this compatible
with the environment and ecology down the
river and we would attempt to do this."

"Mr. Moses."

"It is my understanding and maybe Mr. '!'homas
can correct me, but under the (I don't know the
correct title) Environmental Control Act of 1969
that Congress passed, the effected agencies have
to, in their report, point out what disbu~bances
would be made, the alternatives, and pretty well
cover this in their reports."

I

"'!'his is correct and that act was passed in
late '69, I believe, and just about a month ago