Laserfiche WebLink
<br />- <br /> <br />ft""..... <br />!Tv <br /> <br />advocate a unified. regional position on a water issue. Examples of <br />this include having the Vice Chairman teslify before congressional <br />commillees. helping to draft nalionallegislation, selling up meetings <br />10 advocate a position on pending national water policy, and sending <br />letters over the Vice Chairman's signature concerning funding of Title <br />III of P.l. 89-80 and DIner concerns. <br /> <br />At Commission meetings. every reasonable effort was made to arrive <br />at a consensus of members on substantive issues. When consensus <br />could nOI be achieved, a majority vote by both state and federal <br />members was required fOf Commission action. <br /> <br />In addition 10 the preliminary work of the Commission carried out <br />in the caucuses, standing and special or ad hoc committees were <br />formed by the Commission to develop recommendalions on numerous <br />issues and programs. The committees frequently met between regular <br />Commission meE>!ings 10 develop recommendations on such subjects <br />as priorities, Commission policy, flood plain management, waler <br />and energy, and the planning process of the Commission. Commit- <br />tees were also formed to plan and direct Commission-sponsored <br />studies. <br /> <br />The Commission sponsored special conferences or workshops on <br />water related topics of concern in the basin. Several such events were <br />held preceding or following regular Commission meetings. Special <br />conferences or workshops were held on matters such as federal ground <br />water management strategy, drought management, remote sensing, <br />the Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program, and water conservation <br />planning. <br /> <br />All regular meetings, special meetings, conferences, and workshops <br />held by the Commission were open to the public. <br /> <br />State-Federal Program Review <br /> <br />In a special effort 10 coordinale and avoid duplication among state <br />and federal wafer resource management activities, the Commission <br />prepared summary reports of federal water management activities <br />and state waler management activities in the Missouri River basin <br />in 1973 and 1974. In 1975, these separate reports, compiled and pro- <br />duced by Ihe Chairman and Vice Chairman, were combined for the <br />first time in one coordinated document commonly referred to as the <br />state-federal program review. <br /> <br />The Commission's Slate-federal program review was produced five <br />times beginning in 1975, growing in size from about 200 entries <br />to over 1,000 entries in its final edilion in 1981. The task of managing <br />information concerning the large number of proposed and ongoing <br />water resource planning and management activities in the basin eventu- <br />ally led to computerizing the data for ease in storing, editing, and <br />publishing lhe program review. <br /> <br />A survey of state-federal program review users conducted when the <br />final edition was published revealed lhe usefulness of the document- <br />the single source of such information from a basinwide perspective. <br /> <br />Water Program Informalion System <br /> <br />The Commission's continuing need for current information on existing <br />and proposed water planning and management activities in the basin <br />soon resulted in a voluminous manual filing system of data on over <br /> <br />------ <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />23 <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />- <br />