OCR Text |
Show Appendix 1 Procedure Followed by Commission In completing its report the Commission outlines in this appendix its assignment by Executive order of the President on January 3, 1950, and the means it has fol- lowed by communication and conference to obtain the best thinking on the subject of water resources. To this end the Commission has consulted with laymen, scientists, professional and business men, legislators, and administrators, and held a number of field conferences. In establishing the Commission, President Truman in a letter to Chairman Morris L. Cooke, dated January 3, 1950, said in part: Within the past several years the need for careful review and reappraisal of our national water resources policies and related land use problems has become increasingly apparent. On several occasions, during the recent ses- sion of Congress, I called attention to the need for developing a consistent and comprehensive policy with regard to our whole water resources program. In many cases, piecemeal or partial approaches to a problem as broad as water resources development tend to confuse, rather than clarify many of the basic, underlying issues. It is essential in my judgment that a comprehensive study and review be made of all existing water resources legis- lation and policies and that recommendations be made in the full knowledge of national needs and objectives. Therefore, I am creating by Executive order a tem- porary Water Resources Policy Commission of seven members to study and to make recommendations to me on the policies which should be followed by the Federal Government in fulfilling its proper responsibilities for the development, conservation, and use of the Nation's water resources. The Commission's Assignment Executive Order No. 10095 (see exhibit A), establishing the Commission, directs that it- . . . shall give consideration in particular to (a) the extent and character of Federal Government participa- tion in major water resources programs, (b) an appraisal of the priority of water resources programs from the stand- point of economic and social need, (c) criteria and standards for evaluating the feasibility of water resources projects, and (d) desirable legislation or changes in exist- ing legislation relating to the development, utilization, and conservation of water resources. By the terms of the Executive order, the Commission was to confine its studies and recommendations to policies which should be followed in the water resources field. The proper allocation of functions among agencies, or who is to do what, and related problems of organization, while. admittedly closely related to the development of consistent policies in the field of water resources, had been studied by the Commission on Organization of the Execu- tive Branch of the Government (Hoover Commission) and are now under active consideration in the executive branch and in Congress. The President therefore re- quested this Commission to confine its recommendations to questions of policy under the four main headings in- dicated above, together with related legislation. But aside from matters of organization, the Commission's as- signment is as broad as water resources and necessarily includes consideration of related land uses. Consequently, the Commission had to come to grips with many major land economic problems. The Commission's Activities The Commission worked out a broad program of activ- ities to fulfill its assignment. Obviously, the short time available for preparation of its report precluded any pos- sibility of conducting extensive new research or studies. Even were adequate time available, it is doubtful that this would have been as productive of desired results as were the techniques and procedures which the Commission fol- lowed. After all, numerous Federal, State, and private agencies have studied many water resources problems in- tensely in recent years. But no one agency has brought the various studies, problems, and recommendations to- gether to develop an over-all picture covering the diverse phases of water resources policy involved in an adequate national program. At its first meeting the Commission decided to open the doors of its discussions to every available angle of public and private opinion. While each of the members of the Commission had professional training and experi- ence bearing on one or more phases of water resources use, it was clear that no seven men could possess all the definite physical and economic information, and the social impli- cations, or marshal the legal capacity required for meeting the President's request. Consequently, the Commission sought to tap technical, economic, and social knowledge by establishing relations with a great variety of sources. These included the facul- ties of many colleges and universities, departments of the State and Federal Governments, and their bureaus and specialized agencies. Authorities in physical science, in- cluding agronomists, chemists, entomologists, ecologists, geologists, and hydrologists were brought into the councils of the Commission. Outstanding individuals in the social sciences, including economists, political scientists, and sociologists, were consulted. The Commission also con- 307 |