OCR Text |
Show Toward Effective Planning At the Commission's invitation, State and local agencies, as well as a wide range of educational institutions and other organizations, gave their views as to the elements of a sound national water resources policy. Among these, many supported the principle of comprehensive mul- tiple-purpose basin programs. In fact, there was considerable support for the creation of a review agency for evaluation of river basin pro- grams and projects to assure this more unified approach. The need for better coordination of Federal planning was recognized by a working committee which assisted the Commission in its analysis. The committee included members from all of the responsible Federal agencies. The committee felt that the entire job of preparing basin pro- grams might be divided into a series of distinct tasks, with the primary responsibility for carrying out any task ordinarily assumed by the agency having the dominant interest in that particular phase of river basin development. This might result in particular phases of basin planning being assumed by State or local agencies. However, the committee found it almost self- evident that there must exist some form of co- ordinating body with representatives from Fed- eral and State agencies on an appropriate basis. This, they thought, would be necessary to assure proper assignment of tasks and satisfactory articu- lation of the various segments of the plan when completed. The committee in its report continued: This body would be responsible for laying out the entire planning effort, dividing it into segments or tasks, and arranging for the assignment of these tasks in the manner outlined above. While the planning tasks were being carried out the coordi- nating body would meet periodically to review progress and make any necessary changes in the assigned tasks. When the various parts of the plan are completed it would be the responsibility of this body to weld them into a unified whole. This recommendation would carry coordina- tion of river basin planning on a multiple-pur- pose basis a step forward, but it would be fully effective only to the extent that authorization of such comprehensive programs and the appro- priations covering the necessary studies could be brought under legislation extending to river ba- sins as a whole rather than to separate functions and projects in river basin work. Regional Planning Planning for water resources cannot be dis- sociated from planning for all resources. Nor can it be dissociated from those fields of economic activity which give rise to the needs to be met by water developments. This leads to the fur- ther conclusion that water developments should be planned as integral parts of basin programs. Flood control on the Connecticut, for instance, is not separable from the problem of employment opportunities in New England; nor is irrigation on the Rio Grande separable from certain social conditions in the basin. In other words, sound principles and proce- dures for the planning of water resources under- takings should be such as to assure proper co- ordination of water developments with the re- gional and national economies as well as with the development, use, and conservation of the other resources of the region. The need of the principle is illustrated further in the Missouri Basin, where planning cannot be undertaken in- telligently without a full exploration of the char- acteristics of agriculture in the subregions of the basin, understanding of the industrial potential- ities of the region, or taking account of its min- eral deposits. It becomes further apparent that the whole task must be divided into manageable parts. Considering the Nation's size, and its variations in physical characteristics, institutions, and tra- ditions, it seems essential that in the United States planning for resources development and use should proceed by major regions. To do other- wise is to make our development more complex, less timely, less ordered, and less effective than it should be. 46 |