| OCR Text |
Show suited engineers in many fields, including chemical, civil, electrical, hydraulic, mechanical, mining, and sanitary State, county, and local public officials and numerous national, State, and local associations devoted to irriga- tion, forestry, soils, flood control, conservation, and water- way developments were contacted, as well as business as- sociations such as State and local chambers of commerce. Private and public power associations and trade associ- ations in various industries were asked to give the Com- mission the benefit of their knowledge. The Commission had the active interest of farm groups-the Farm Bureau Federation, the National Grange, and the Farmers Union; and of labor unions-the national bodies of the Congress of Industrial Organizations and the American Federation of Labor, and numerous affiliated locals. The Commis- sion was fortunate in having consultations and conferences with Members of Congress who have had long and en- lightening experience in water resources legislation. The Commission wrote the governors of each of the States explaining its assignment and invited them or any of their State agencies to make suggestions and recom- mendations (see exhibit B) in the field of water resources policy. A letter was also sent to the attorney general of each State, asking that he furnish the Commission with a report on the water laws of his State and of the judicial decisions interpreting such laws. More specifically, the Commission prepared a general outline of the field to be covered and sent it to agencies throughout the country interested in water resources. This went to some 800 public and private agencies, in- cluding water users associations, municipal water depart- ments, public utility associations, State agencies such as water conservation boards and State engineers offices, in- terstate compact commissions, farm, business, and labor organizations, development associations, and many others. The Commission prepared a set of 18 major questions on various phases of water resources policy and sent it to the presidents of 80 universities and colleges (see exhibit C, "Questions Relating to Water Resources Policies"), including every land grant college or university in the Nation, and others both public and private where some of the departments or staff had shown special interest in water problems, or had given consideration to the subject in their teaching or research programs. The presidents were requested to refer the questions to members of their faculties interested in and qualified to consider them and to let the Commission have the benefit of their individual and group thinking. Some of these questions were also included in a. letter sent to the directors of each of the State agricultural experiment stations requesting their views and ideas. The Commission also sent the same set of questions to the Engineers Joint Council (Joint Com- mittee of the American Society of Civil Engineers, Amer- ican Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers, American Institute of Electrical Engineers, American In- stitute of Chemical Engineers, and American Society of Mechanical Engineers). More than. 600 returns, many of them running into hundreds of pages, were secured by the Commission, with numerous helpful suggestions, ideas, and recommenda- tions. The Commission asked a group of 15 leading economists and sociologists to consult with it for several days concerning the over-all program of work and the major phases of water resources policy which should be analyzed. Cooperation With Executive Departments and Federal Agencies The Commission requested personnel from certain Fed- eral departments or agencies to assist it in its work. A liaison staff member in each of these departments assisted in working out assignments with the Commission. Per- sonnel were assigned to the Commission's work by the Department of Agriculture: Office of the Secretary, Soil Conservation Service, United States Forest Service, Bu- reau of Agricultural Economics, Bureau of Plant Indus- try, Production and Marketing Division, and Rural Elec- trification Administration; Department of the Army: United States Corps of Engineers; Department of the Navy: Bureau of Yards and Docks; Department of Com- merce: Office of the Assistant Secretary, Bureau of For- eign and Domestic Commerce, Bureau of Public Roads, Transportation Division, Weather Bureau, and the Coast and Geodetic Survey; Department of the Interior: Office of the Secretary, Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Land Management, Oil and Gas Division, Bonneville Power Administration, Fish and Wildlife Service, and Geological Survey; Federal Security Agency; United States Public Health Service and Office of Education; Treasury De- partment: United States Coast Guard; Executive Office of the President; Bureau of the Budget and the Council of Economic Advisers; Department of Justice; Federal Power Commission; Interstate Commerce Commission; and Ten- nessee Valley Authority. The Commission requested these agencies to give it a statement of interpretation of their responsibilities under existing statutes for water resources development programs in the Nation. This request is shown in exhibit D, "Fed- eral Agency Responsibility for Water Resources Develop- ment." The Commission also requested these agencies to furnish it with reports covering their plans and pro- grams in 12 of the major river basins of the country. Getting Ideas From the People In addition to the opinion of the expert, the Commis- sion sought the opinion of the nonspecialist and the peo- ple generally. The Commission held public conferences in eight cities located in widely separated areas-Sioux City, Iowa; Spokane, Wash.; Berkeley, Calif.; Denver, Colo.; Fayetteville, Ark.; Columbus, Ohio; Springfield, Mass.; and Atlanta, Ga. More than 2,000 people attended the regional con- ferences and some 500 individuals expressed themselves on various phases of water resources development programs and policies. Everyone who wanted to talk had an op- portunity to do so, and all were invited to present written statements of their views. These conferences gave the people the opportunity to talk with the Commission mem- bers and gave the Commission members an opportunity to find out what the people in different sections of the country thought about water resources development prob- lems and policies. Out of these conferences came numer- ous suggestions, ideas, and recommendations which helped the Commission get a comprehensive picture of the Na- tion's water resources problems. 308 |
