OCR Text |
Show and local flood protection projects downstream must be recognized. While there has been coordination and coopera- tion among agencies, more is needed. This is par- ticularly true because there is need for clearer de- lineation of many phases of the plan. Aspects such as trends in economic development and how they will be affected by and affect future water develop- ments, fish and wildlife, social needs, and other phases of both State and Federal interest have not yet been clearly defined. As these factors become available and more and more projects are con- structed the need for coordination will become greater. Neither of the construction agencies is charged with responsibility for keeping production from the land in balance with our national economy. Full coordination is needed, with the Department of Agriculture as the primary and responsible agri- cultural agency of the Federal Government directly concerned with the effect of agricultural produc- tion, whether high or low, on the national economy. One of the deterrents to coordination is the lack of funds. One example is cooperative work be- tween the Corps of Engineers, Department of Agri- culture, and local interests in the flood control plans for the lower Missouri which concerns planning facilities for internal drainage behind the agricul- ture levees. This involves not only care of surface runoff, but efficient land use. The Department of Agriculture has rendered some assistance, but its funds are now exhausted. This program is in- cluded in the proposal of the Department of Agri- culture now being considered by Congress, but under present authorizations no further work can be undertaken. However, in many instances, the necessary au- thority exists for further coordination, if budgetary needs for such work could be met and forthcoming appropriations were adequate. A complication in some Federal agencies is the inability of States to finance their own responsible agencies adequately. It has been suggested that the Federal Government may have to assist in financing necessary work, thereby allowing logical coordinated progress and fuller returns. One further means of coordination is the use, as in the Columbia Basin Inter-Agency Committee, of standing subcommittees to coordinate and exchange information on special phases of the work. Such committees might be used in the Missouri Basin to collect data on rainfall, stream flow, and other aspects of hydrology, correlation of various investi- gations on sediment, studies of alternative uses of water, particularly consumptive uses, and for other purposes. The Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Com- mittee has considered the use of such standing subcommittees, but has not adopted them. While coordination of some phases of the land and water development program has been ade- quately provided for, others apparently have not received sufficient consideration. Examples are the proper management of grazing lands and coordina- tion of public lands policy, integration of reclama- tion programs for expanding forage production with plans for reduction in grazing, development of middle-sized irrigation projects, effective use of incentive payments and price supports, and integra- tion of highway programs with various water de- velopment programs. Conclusions Coordination and integrated action in planning, construction, and operation are essential to maxi- mum development of water resources of the basin. Thus far coordination of planning has been by direct cooperation among agencies responsible for the several phases of development, and through the Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Committee. While the accomplishments of the past and pres- ent means of coordination and integration have been definite and helpful, full integration of all phases and units of the basin development program with its many and complex facets will require con- tinuing measures. Among the many things that should be continued or accomplished, the following measures are considered the more important: (1) Participation by all agencies and interests concerned with basin development, Federal and non-Federal, to the full extent of their interest, in the coordination of all phases of the program, in- cluding the operation of stream regulation and storage structures. (2) Coordination of preparation of budgets for all agencies in planning and construction activities in connection with basin development to encourage, to the maximum extent possible, the proper balance between phases of the development program, tak- ing into full account the local, regional, and na- tional needs. (3) Proper coordination of various specific tech- nical aspects of the development program such as: alternative uses of water in water-deficient areas, construction of middle-sized irrigation projects, controls on grazing, measures which might be un- 247 |