Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~"'''~' <br />,.~~<A <br />-;-:i~-i <br /> <br />00""'''''' <br />. (..1) t.) <br /> <br />fnW> <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />- 8 - <br /> <br />-. <br /> <br />expansion of facilities to bring the capacity to collect and interpret <br />data into balance with expanding needs.* Certainly, additional attention <br />needs to be devoted to the coordination, analYSis and interpretation of <br />data. The usefulness of available information is thereby immeasurably <br />enhanced, more uniform techniques for collecting generally comparable <br />data by a number of different agencies can be developed and further ex- <br />pansion of facilities can be related to expanding needs. <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Much of this activity will inevitably, and should, take place <br />within the framework of the existing federal-state cooperative program <br />for water resources investigations. However, the states may find that <br />they will increasingly want to develop additional data reflecting their <br />own particular needs. As broad state water planning expands, as state <br />attention to the construction of needed water facilities increases, and <br />as state pollution control programs are broadened, the need for data re- <br />lated speCifically to these activities will have to be met. There is no <br />reason why, lacking the kind of collection and analysis of information <br />to meet their particular damands from other sources, the states should <br />not take the initiative in developing it. This does not necessarily <br />mean that all data gathering facilities should be consolidated into one <br />state agency, It does mean, though, that it may be necessary to give <br />one state agency the responsibility for collecting existing data from <br />the various sources, for establishing standards to the extent possible <br />so that data will be comparable and serve more than immediate, specialized <br />needs, for analyzing all available information in the light of current <br />needs and for developing the selective, imaginative approach to future <br />expansion of facilities already referred to. <br /> <br />Comprehensive Plannin~ and Coordination <br /> <br />One of the vital aspects of water resource administration in <br />which not only intrastate, but also federal-stat~ relations are of con- <br />cern is that of the formulation of coordinated and related programs of <br />water development. If the states are to meet the new demands placed on <br />them, they must make the best use possible of existing resourc~a. facili- <br />ties and organization. The activities of the atate agencies which have <br />an interest in some phase of water resources development need to be cor- <br />related. Water development programs and projects are closely related <br />and have. an impact on one another regardless of the state agency to which <br />they happen to be assigned. As the states enter more actively into the <br />water resource field, conflicts among these various elements of state <br />activity must be minimized. <br /> <br />For example, one state agency may be engaged in encouraging and <br />supervising the drainage of farmland, thus eliminating wildlife habitats, <br />while another agency is expending funds for the creation of wildlife habi- <br />tats. Decisions on pollution control affect total water supply and should <br />be related to over-all needs. In some watersheds where industrial devel- <br />opment is relatively high, it may not be desirable to maintain maximum <br />standards, considering the increased operating costs involved. However, <br /> <br />*This approach is developed in "Questions for Designers of Future Water <br />Policy," by Edward A. Ackerman, Journal. of Farm Economics, November, <br />1956, pp. 971-980. <br />