| OCR Text |
Show This part of the report should also contain an analysis of how these principles and practices are working out in the particular basin. Part III.-More extensive discussion of specific policy problems which are of particular signifi- cance in the basin covered by the report. The discussion in this part of the report should be under the general captions of the problems themselves and should set forth all the facts in the particular basin necessary to understand, and to work out a solution of the problem so far as the basin is concerned, and to test tentative policy conclusions in terms of their effect on the development of its water resources. The Commission staff is available for consultation on the matter of problem selection. Some of the problems which we would like to have covered in this part of the report, to the extent that they are significant in the subject basin, are: (1) Application of the principle of acreage limi- tation for lands benefited by Federal expenditure, as in the Central Valley, Calif,, Columbia and Missouri Basins; (2) Application of principles for determination of economic feasibility in cases where project costs appear very high in terms of that portion of the benefits which can be readily expressed in monetary terms, as in the Colorado and Columbia Basins; (3) Use of basin account and interest compo- nent to assist in establishing economic justification for specific program objectives which separate feasibility determination do not show to be self- supporting, as in the Columbia Basin; (4) Resolution of apparent conflicts between upstream a.nd downstream interests in the use of the water resources of the basin; (5) Resolution of the conflict between plans for conservation storage reservoirs and regional or local interests in preventing land inundation, as in the Missouri, Connecticut, and White River Basins; (6) Resolution of conflicts between multiple- purpose planning and advocates of single-purpose projects, as in the Arkansas Basin; (7) Resolution of apparent conflict between urban water supply and other water resource val- ues in the basin, as in the Delaware Basin; (8) Resolution of possible conflict between con- servation storage and recreational interests, includ- ing preservation of National and State parks and monuments^ as in the Columbia, Colorado and Ohio Basins; (9) Resolution of conflicts between general river basin programs involving storage of floodwaters and development of hydroelectric power and fish and wildlife interests, as in the Columbia Basin; (10) Resolution of conflicting theories govern- ing the marketing of power from Federal river basin projects, as in the Colorado Basin; (11) Sediment problems, as in the Colorado, Missouri, and Rio Grande Basins; (12) Adaptation of projects and programs to take account of existing improvements and pro- grams, as in Columbia, Missouri, and Alabama- Coosa Basins; (13) Specialized problems involving project and program plans, including that of coordinating the interests of the several agencies of the Commission within the basin; (14) Problems of securing adequate basic data for planning and programing, whether for lack of sufficient appropriations or other reasons; (15) Problems of securing local participation; (16) Problems of international coordination, as in Columbia and Rio Grande Basins. Those preparing the reports should not feel lim- ited by the above suggestions as to the problems we would like to have discussed or as to the river basins in which these problems occur. They are offered merely as illustrations. The problems sug- gested should be dealt with in the report on any river basin where they are significant and any other problems of similar importance in any river basin should be dealt with; for we are seeking the facts necessary to enable us to formulate policy conclu- sions covering the control and use of the country's water resources. Furthermore, we are not asking that these reports propose solutions of the problems, although any observation those preparing the reports may wish to bring to our attention will be welcome. What we are looking for particularly is a complete state- ment of the basic facts required for an understand- ing of the effect of policy determinations on the plans for basin development. In general, and without limitation, the report should take into consideration all the purposes which water resources programs can serve, includ- ing domestic and industrial water supply, livestock watering, pollution abatement, flood control, wa- tershed management, reforestation, ground-water recharge, irrigation, navigation, hydroelectric pow- er, fish and wildlife, and recreation. Where such purposes may best be served by a coordinated ap- proach to portions of two or more rivers, this should be noted. We will appreciate receiving 25 copies of each report, prepared on letter-sized paper (8 by 10^2 inches). We would like the report single-spaced, with a short introductory resume, and such maps, profiles, and pictures as may serve to illustrate the program. Similar requests are going to other departments and agencies concerned with development of water resources. We would like to have the data pre- pared for the separate basins in the order in which 800 |
