WSP07146 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

WILLIAM T. DA VOREN people present represented States. 3. I think it is clear that there must be a "Big Two" in the future of Western water development _ the Federal government and State governments. This is already spelled out loud and clear in recent national water legislation. I refer particularly to PL89-80 - the Water Resources Plan- ning Act - and to the new water quality legislation. You see the same trend in the legislation administered by the Office of Water Resources Research and the Bureau of Outdoor Recrea- tion. This is so obvious you may ask yourselves why I am calling attention to it. The reason is that I firmly believe that most State Legislatures in our region have not yet been impressed enough with the money and manpower needs of their own water and resource agencies. For instance, it doesn't take much money, really, for a State to play in the Framework study ball game - at least not much when compared to the total State budgets for all purposes, and to the total Federal investment in these studies. Some States - - Wyoming, Colorado and Utah are the best examples in our region - - have to keep up with this new era of cooperative plan- ning in several major river basins, and this is difficult. Their water and resource agencies cannot afford to be left out of this work, yet present budgets do not afford them the opportunity to do a really adequate job of representing their States interests. Wyoming has the most bases to cover - - a commission on its Columbia drainage and Framework studies on the Colorado and Missouri. Incidentally, Wyoming is getting going with a State water planning approach to meet this situation and to profit from the studies. Wyoming may show what a so-called "small" State can do. I certainly hope so. 4. The blending of Federal and State interests in the Framework study is fascinating to observe. It has come a long way in the one year we have been working together. Anyone who has doubts about this can read the letter that PSIAC approved Wednesday, here in Las Vegas, criticizing the Water Resources Council's draft for the first national assissment. The relationships among the Federal agencies themselves have improved greatly, too. You might say we have moved from a kind of collective uneasiness to a condition of nervous friendship. Four more years at this rate and we'll wind this study up as a mutual admiration society. 5. Our region's water: policies have grown out of the needs for specific projects at specific loca- tions for specific purposes at different time stages in our development. We, pragmatically, have been "project oriented." No one need apologize for this, and I am not criticising any individ- ual, state or agency. That is our history, in my view. Other regions are breaking away from the project-by-project approach. We can, too, and the Framework studies are a step in this dir- ection. 6. Another interesting aspect of our region, and of its geopolitics, is that it shares hundreds of miles of boundary with another nation, the Republic of Mexico. In our concentration on our own problems, we tend to overlook this. It cannot be overlooked anymore. The Pacific Southwest is no longer Daniel Webster's "Vast worthless area"; people, millions of them now, and time, have changed all that. They have also changed our water politics to geopolitics. It's time we started looking at our- selves in the light of this new world we live in - - and not in the light of that mythical world built on the prejudices, promises and lost projects of the past. Thank you. -36-