|
<br />(4) Federal participation in water-based outdoor recrea-
<br />tion, including fish and wildlife; and (5) Federal par-
<br />ticipation in comprehensive rive.r-basin planning for
<br />water and related land resources development, conser-
<br />vation, and management.
<br />Senate Document 97, 87th Congress, 2d Session,
<br />represents a response to a request by the President of the
<br />United States in 1961 to the Secretaries of the Army,
<br />Interior, Agriculture, and Health, Education and Welfare
<br />to establish uniform policies and procedures for formu-
<br />lating plans for use and development of water and
<br />related land resources. Thus, it is founded on the policies
<br />established by Federal legislation, but prescribes uniform
<br />interpretation of this legislation by the Federal Depart-
<br />ments concerned with the development of water and
<br />land resources, and by the Bureau of the Budget in its
<br />review of the recommendations of these Federal Depart-
<br />ments. Formally, it is a joint statement by the Secre-
<br />taries of the above-named Federa] Departments,
<br />entitled: "Po]icies, Standards and Procedures in the
<br />Formu]ation, Evaluation and Review of Plans for Use
<br />and Deve]opment of Water and Related Land Re-
<br />sources" which was submitted to the President for
<br />approval. ]n May ] 962, the President approved the
<br />statement for application by the Federal Departments
<br />concerned, and although not formally approved by the
<br />Senate, it was published as a Senate document. These
<br />procedures and standards are recognized in water re-
<br />sources planning by all agencies, but full implementation
<br />of plans formulated in accordance with the concepts in
<br />the document has not been achieved. The importance of
<br />this statement to comprehensive basin planning is
<br />illustrated by the fundamental policy expressed that ". .
<br />the basic objective in the formulation of plans is to
<br />provide the best use, or combination of uses, of walt:!'
<br />and related land resources to meet all foreseeable short-
<br />and long-term needs." -
<br />A general summation of the significance of Federal
<br />law to water resources planning would be incomplete
<br />without some mention of a significant aspect of the
<br />] 944 Flood Control Act. Section I (b) of the Act,
<br />applicable to all western basins including the Missouri
<br />Basin, states:
<br />"The use for navigation, in connection with the
<br />operation and maintenance of such works herein
<br />authorized, of waters arising in States lying wholly
<br />or partly west of the 98th Meridian shall be only
<br />such use as does not conflict with any beneficial
<br />consumptive use, present or future, in States lying
<br />wholly or partly west of the 98th Meridian, of
<br />such waters for domestic, municipal, stock water,
<br />irrigation, mining, or industrial purposes."
<br />Since enactment, Section I(b), also referred to as the
<br />O'Mahoney-Millikin amendment, has been the subject of
<br />controversy and uncertainty regarding its effects and
<br />implications on navigation. The issue relates to the
<br />
<br />40
<br />
<br />precedent of Congressional legislation and Supreme
<br />Court decisions that, on navigable streams, the primary
<br />objectives of improvements must be navigation and
<br />flood control, and that other beneficial uses, except for
<br />the improvement of public lands, were subordinate to
<br />these primary objectives. However, the su pporters of the
<br />amendment sought an expression of Congressional
<br />policy which would limit the authority of the Federal
<br />Government in the western basins to utilize for naviga-
<br />tion such water resources as may be necessary for
<br />current or future domestic, agricultural, and municipal
<br />and industrial uses.
<br />
<br />Institutional Arrangements
<br />
<br />It has been a characteristic policy of Federallegisla-
<br />tion on water resources development that the planning,
<br />construction, and operation of improvements be carried
<br />out "in cooperation with states, their political sub-
<br />divisions, and localities thereof." Moreover the various
<br />cost-sharing requirements specified in Federal legislation
<br />for water resources development have emphasized the
<br />partnership role of State-Local-Federal relationships in
<br />the area of water resources. The States have fostered
<br />cooperation by adjusting their institutional policies to
<br />changing requirements and by enacting legislation to
<br />provide the cooperation and cost-sharing essential to
<br />cooperative planning and development of water re-
<br />sources. A number of institutions at all ]evels of
<br />government operate within the legal and policy frame-
<br />work thus developed.
<br />At the State level, various institutions ranging from
<br />organizations at State level to political entities formed
<br />under State laws have varying responsibilities and legal
<br />
<br />powers in the field of \vater resources development and
<br />
<br />management. As mentioned above, State legislation
<br />provides one means for adjusting institutional arrange-
<br />ments to meet the needs ~)revai1ing at any specific time.
<br />While there are a number of Federal agencies involved
<br />in water resources development, three have primary
<br />responsibilities for planning, construction, and/or opera-
<br />ting federally financed water resources programs and
<br />projects. These are the Corps of Engineers, the Bureau of
<br />Reclamation, and the Soil Conservation Service. While
<br />their roles are similar in the general context of planning,
<br />construction, and/or operation, the distinctions between
<br />them have been in the historic specialization of roles
<br />assigned by Federal legislation and in the agency
<br />expertise which has developed as a result of these
<br />historic roles. These roles have, to some extent, inhibited
<br />complete comprehensive planning. In carrying out their
<br />responsibilities, each agency attempts to overcome this
<br />handicap through close cooperation with the other
<br />Federa] agencies and with State water agencies, counties,
<br />municipalities, and the conservancy, irrigation, water-
<br />shed, drainage, flood contra], and other districts
<br />
|