Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Arizona Water Res.!ces Committee has built-in Aocratic "checks and <br />balances" against the dominance of anyone special interest group. But <br />members are so dedicated to maintaining the Committee's reputation for <br />serving the general public, that in no case has the Committee been asked to <br />support legislation and programs solely aimed at benefiting anyone special <br />interest. <br /> <br />Being made up of citizens, the Arizona Water Resources Committee serves <br />as an important instrument of democracy, where, in our form of Government <br />"the people" are sovereign. Working closely with the State's Congressional <br />Representatives, the Committee ex e r cis e s its mo s t important function <br />through the legislative branch of Government. After careful scrutiny, the <br />Committee submits its recommendations to the State's Congressmen in sup- <br />port of watershed projects of the various Federal and State agencies. When <br />additional support is needed, the parent Committee may call upon its sub- <br />committees for expressions of the separate interest groups. Ever conscious <br />of its reputation, the Arizona Water Resources Committee directs its actions <br />towards best serving the general public. <br /> <br />l <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />The Arizona Water Resources Committee is at liberty to work with many <br />State and Federal agencies, unlike a citizen's group that may be more speci- <br />fically identified with a program of a single agency. Agencies with which the <br />Committee is involved in the Arizona Watershed Program include: the For- <br />est Service, Bureau of Indian Affairs, G e 0 lo gi c a I Survey, Agricultural <br />Research Service, Soil Conservation Service, Bureau of Land Management, <br />Bureau of Reclamation, Army Corps of Engineers, State Land Department, <br />State Game and Fish Department, and state schools including the University <br />of Arizona, Arizona State Univer sity and Arizona State Colle ge. Although <br />the Committee was at first regarded with considerable suspicion by agencies <br />anticipating interference with their programs, these initial fears have been <br />displaced with confidence. Now, agency officials frequently consult the Com- <br />mittee to determine ifchanges in policies and programs are in the best inter- <br />est of the public. <br /> <br />The Arizona Water Resources Committee also enjoys the confidence of indus- <br />try. An expression of this confidence is best illustrated by the fact that some <br />30 contributors made possible the production of "The Cibecue Watershed" <br />film. Contributions were received from irrigation districts, livestock asso- <br />ciations, mining corporations, lumber companies, ban kin g associations, <br />distributors of heavy equipment and public utilities. <br /> <br />The Arizona Water Resources Committee provides an example of how citi- <br />zens can participate in a natural resource program, an example which other <br />States may wish to consider. But there is a word of caution handed down by <br />Professor Merle Fainsod of the Harvard Graduate School of Public Adminis- <br />tration that needs to be stressed. In support of his experiences, a commit- <br />tee or citizen's group can be effective only as long as it is given purposes <br />and objectives to accomplish. Without continuing assignments, a committee <br />can "die on the vine". <br /> <br />J' <br /> <br />DEMANDS ON EDUCA TrONA [, TNSTTTIJTTONS <br /> <br />As the various agencies have become more and more involved in the Arizona <br />Watershed Program, they have created increasing demands for hydrologists, <br />foresters, range conservationists, soils specialists, geologists, engineers, <br /> <br />- 6 - <br />