You might describe all of those existing programs briefly in the hearing at this point and again describe in the record such information as presently exists and give us some indication of what you hope to do in the first year, the second, third, and fourth. I note you point out that several departments and agencies will be interested in this matter. WATER POLLUTION I digress at the moment to point out that we have been having some controversy between committees on the House and Senate sides on water pollution. There has been quite a bit of argument between some of our colleagues on each side as to who should set standards, and so forth. I was on a program myself recently with Dr. Stayer of Harvard and Dr. Strain and Dr. Harris of Florida. I was there as a representative of the public, I presume. In trying to get ready, I came to the realization that whoever sets standards for water in our rivers and other sources of water have a great amount of control over the economic well-being of people, businesses, and communities, and over life itself. This all comes back to the fact that I think you have to have each agency represented and each use considered in connection with any control of the program. It stands to reason that in planning as to how you are going to save water, utilize water, reuse water, that each department and agency you have listed should be in on the planning so that all needs will have adequate consideration. Do you care to comment on any of your own studies in that area? INTERDEPARTMENTAL RIVER BASIN PLANNING EFFORTS Mr. YOUNG. What you have described is a good description of the interdepartmental effort at river basin planning, including not only the source of supply, but including the uses of the water represented by interests, not only of Federal agencies, but in cooperation with the States and their interests. The Public Health features, for example, are all to be made a part of this overall plan. We have worked for a good many years to get a coordinated effort within the Federal Government on overall river basin planning. We look with a good deal of pride to the success we have had in getting a coordination of our budgets to take before our separate committees to permit us to all be geared at the same time at the same place to carry out a coordinated study. This little item that we have here is a part of an initial step-a Department of Agriculture part of an initial step to initiate this survey 2 years in advance of its previous schedule. We hope it will turn out to provide guides and a basis for our Public Law 46, our Public Law 566 act, together with whatever additional water facilities authorities may come to the Department. We believe it will be useful in giving us an overall guide for the additional water resource developments. Mr. WHITTEN. I think it would be well to have this record fairly complete. I would like the record to show a list of problems, solutions, and programs needed to meet the future need for water in this area. I would like for you to describe the water resources studies made in various regions to date and describe the cooperative relations with the various departments and agencies in this work-with particular reference to the responsibilities of the Soil Conservation Service, the Economic Research Service, the Farmers Home Administration, and the Forest Service in these studies. I also would like to have you provide for the record a detailed breakdown on the use of the approximately $4 million that we appropriated in 1965 for river basin studies. The 1966 bill carries $5,640,000. We would like a breakdown in this hearing as to what you expect to do with that. (The information requested follows:) TYPES OF RIVER BASIN SURVEYS The Senate Select Committee on National Water Resources recommended and the administration has adopted the objective that surveys and investigations be made of the major river basins of the country by 1970. The Department of Agriculture is participating with the Departments of the Army, the Interior, and Health, Education, and Welfare in coordinated comprehensive surveys of water and related land resource development needs of certain water resource regions and river basins in the United States. The surveys in which this Department is participating are of several different types. There are "framework" or "type I" surveys, "comprehensive detailed" or "type II" surveys, and "cooperative" or "type IV" surveys. A framework or type I survey is a general appraisal of the overall water and related land resource problems and development potentials of a major region. The Nation (except for Alaska) has been divided into 18 water resource regions proposed for type I comprehensive surveys. The comprehensive plans developed from these studies will provide economic projections of economic development, translation of such projections into demands for water and related land resource uses, hydrologic projections of water availability, both as to quantity and quality, and projections of related land resource availability so as to outline the characteristics of projected water and related land resource problems and the general approaches that appear appropriate for their solution. Framework plans will be based on initial planning steps using general relations, reasoned approximations and available data. While potential sites may be identified, project formulation studies will not be undertaken at any stage of framework planning. The framework studies will provide general guides to future water resource development. The plans will indicate which regions or subbasins within them have water problems calling for prompt detailed planning efforts as well as those where no such problems are current or looming. In addition, these studies will provide a substantial contribution of fact and analyses to subsequent detailed plan formulation. A comprehensive detailed or type II survey provides for a general appraisal of overall water and related land resource development involving long-run projections of economic development, translation of such projections into demands for water and related land resource uses, hydrologic projections of water availability, both as to quantity and quality, and projections of related land resource availability similar to type I surveys. In addition, the type II studies define and evaluate the Federal or federally assisted projects for which Federal authorization will be required to permit necessary construction to be initiated in the next 10 to 15 years in sufficient detail to comprise a basis for authorization. Type II surveys are made on the smaller river basins or on subbasins of the major rivers. Type III surveys are surveys for specific project development such as a Public Law 566 watershed protection project or a flood control project. These surveys do not involve interdepartmental coordination in the same sense as the coordinated comprehensive river basin surveys, but are coordinated on an individual basis. The cooperative river basin or type IV surveys are those being made by a State water resource agency with which the Department of Agriculture is cooperating. In a few instances the cooperation is with another Federal agency. Many States are developing statewide plans for use and management of their water resources. They need information about the agricultural, rural, and up stream aspects of water and related land resources in river basin wholly or partly within their boundaries. This Department needs such information in connection with administration of its Public Law 566 watershed program. Development by this Department of such information by participation in State water resource surveys serves both needs and contributes to coordinated upstream and downstream water and related land resource development. WATER RESOURCE PROBLEMS The water resource problems in the various regions of the United States are quite varied, especially from East to West. The specific nature of these problems, their possible solutions and future program required to meet needs will be determined by the comprehensive surveys. The general water resource problems in the various regions are: 1. North Atlantic region.-Flood damages to urban, industrial, and agricultural values; shortage of water supply for rural, municipal, industrial, and irrigation uses; pollution of streams; shortage of facilities for water-based recreation and fish and wildlife; need for increased supply of hydroelectric power, improved navigation; and improved drainage of agricultural lands. 2. South Atlantic-gulf region.-Flood damages to urban, industrial, and agricultural values; shortage of water supply for rural, municipal, industrial, and irrigation uses; control of pollution in streams; shortage of facilities for waterbased recreation and fish and wildlife; need for improved navigation and increased supply of hydroelectric power; and improved drainage of agricultural lands. 3. Ohio region. The problems are basically the same as in the North Atlantic and the South Atlantic-gulf regions. 4. Great Lakes region.-Flood damages to urban and industrial values; shortage of water supply for municipal and industrial use, water quality control, shortage of facilities for water-based recreation, and improved drainage of agricultural lands. 5. Upper Mississippi region.-Flood damages to agricultural, urban and industrial values; shortage of water supply for rural, municipal, industrial and irrigation uses; pollution of streams; shortage of facilities for water-based recreation and fish and wildlife; need for increased supply of hydroelectric power; improved navigation, and improved drainage of agricultural lands. 6. Lower Mississippi region.-Flood damages to agricultural, urban and industrial values; pollution of streams; water-based recreation; improved drainage of agricultural lands and water management for fish and wildlife improvement. 7. Souris-Red region.-Flood damages to agricultural and urban values, proper management of water resources for fish and wildlife habitat and for water-based recreation, improved drainage of agricultural lands. 8. Missouri region.-Flood damages to agricultural, urban and industrial values; shortage of water supply for irrigation, municipal, industrial, and rural uses; pollution of streams; shortage of facilities for water-based recreation; management of water resources for fish and wildlife habitat; need for increased supply of hydroelectric power; and improved navigation. 9. Arkansas-White-Red region.-Flood damages to agricultural, urban and industrial values; shortage of water supply for irrigation, rural, municipal and industrial uses; pollution of streams; shortage of facilities for water-based recreation; management of water resources for fish and wildlife habitat; need for increased supply of hydroelectric power; improved irrigation; and improved agricultural drainage. 10. Texas-gulf region.-Flood damage to agricultural, urban and industrial values; shortage of water supply for irrigation, rural, municipal, and industrial uses; shortage of facilities for water-based recreation and fish and wildlife; improved navigation; and improved agricultural drainage. 11. Rio Grande region.-Shortage of water for irrigation, rural, municipal, and industrial uses; water quality control; flood damages to agricultural, urban, and industrial values; shortage of facilities for water-based recreation and fish and wildlife, and improved agricultural drainage. 12. Upper Colorado region.-Shortage of water supply for irrigation, rural, municipal, and industrial uses; flood damages to agricultural, urban and industrial values; management of water resources for fish and wildlife habitat; shortage of facilities for water-based recreation; need for increased supply of hydroelectric power. 13. Lower Colorado region.-Shortage of water supply for irrigation, municipal and industrial uses; flood damages to agricultural values; shortage of facilities for water-based ecreation and fish and wildlife; need for increased supply of hydroelectric power; improved drainage of agricultural lands and water quality control. 14. Great Basin region.-The problems in this region are similar to those in the Lower Colorado region. 15. California region.-Shortage of water supply for municipal, industrial and irrigation uses; flood damages to urban, industrial and agricultural values; shortage of facilities for water-based recreation and fish and wildlife; need for increased supply of hydroelectric power; and water quality control. 16. Columbia-North Pacific region.-Flood damages to municipal, industrial, and agricultural values; shortage of water for irrigation, urban, and industrial uses; management of water resources for fish and wildlife habitat; shortage of hydroelectric power; and shortage of facilities for water-based recreation. 17. Hawaiian region.-Flood damages to municipal and agricultural values and shortage of water for irrigation, urban and industrial use. 18. Caribbean region.-Flood damages to agricultural, municipal, and industrial values, improved drainage of agricultural lands, and shortage of water for irrigation, urban, and industrial use. POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS OF PROBLEMS The possible solutions to these problems involve a combination of many types of projects and programs. The objective of comprehensive river basin surveys is to determine which combinations will be most effective in meeting the needs and to identify alternative combinations. Since all floodwaters and all surface runoff which can be used to provide needed water supplies originates on agricultural or public lands, the treatment and management of these lands is of primary importance. The installation and maintenance of soil conservation district programs and comparable conservation programs on public lands are essential first steps to proper water resource development in any region. Watershed protection and flood prevention projects can be formulated to meet flood protection needs on agricultural lands and in towns and industrial areas in the upstream reaches of river basins. These projects also can provide municipal and industrial water supply, irrigation water supply, water storage for recreation, water management for fish and wildlife habitat improvement, and agricultural drainage. Water storage for water quality control can be included in such a project, but since the benefits usually occur outside the boundaries of the sponsoring organization and there is no Federal cost-sharing, this potential has not been utilized. Legislation authorizing Federal cost-sharing for this purpose would permit fuller development of the potentials of these projects in many areas. In the West, projects developed under the provisions of the Small Reclamation Project Act can provide irrigation water to small developments. The needs of mainstem flood plains, large cities, and industrial complexes can be met more efficiently by large developments such as those normally installed by the Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation. Such developments can provide flood control benefits, municipal and industrial water supply, storage to meet recreational needs, storage for hydroelectric power development, storage for water quality control, storage for navigation, and storage for fish and wildlife enhancement. Major drainage outlets also can be provided. In some instances potential project developments in upstream areas may provide comparable benefits to a mainstem development. In other instances potential upstream developments are completely competitive with a mainstem development. In still other instances potential upstream developments and a mainstem development are completely complimentar basin surveys identify these conditions. Decisions b tives then can be made rationally through the politi projects can be considered for planning and install to provide maximum benefits. amb bool lovic Existing programs do not provide adequate supply needs. The proposed amendmen Home Administration which will provide rural water supply and waste disposal conservation district and the wat assurance of farm owners and oper to install needed land treatment many of these needed measures of such measures would expec storage capacity in individual use of other Federal funds for land rights often delay, or prevent, the instaJETE of needed project works of improvement. Cost-sharing for municip. ALD industrial water supply and for storage for water quality control w be needed to assure full development of the upstream water resources to meet future needs Those changes in authority will be needed to meet future water and reistes int resource development needs. WATER RESOURCE STUDIES Watershed protection and flood prevention projects are being pianet and developed in all the water resource regions of the Nation. All interested Fegema State and local agencies are kept informed of proposals and attempts are m work out any conflicts of interest between them and the local sponsors of the watershed projects. Water resource studies being made in the various regions are: 1. North Atlantic region: (a) Coordinated comprehensive detailed surveys: (1) St. John River Basin. (2) Connecticut River Basin. (3) Susquehanna River Basin. 2. South Atlantic-Gulf region: (a) Coordinated comprehensive detailed surveys: (2) Pascagoula River Basin. (b) Cooperative surveys: 3. Ohio region: (1) Florida Rivers. (a) Ohio River Basin coordinated comprehensive framework su ve (1) Genesee River Basin. (2) Kanawha River Basin. (3) Wabash River Basin. 4. Great Lakes region: (a) Cooperative comprehensive detailed surveys: 5. Upper Mississippi region: (a) Upper Mississippi River Basin coordinated comprehener. survey. (b) Cooperative comprehensive detailed surveys: (1) Big Muddy River Basin. (c) Cooperative surveys: (1) Meramec River Basin. 6. Lower Mississippi region: (a) Coordinated comprehensive detailed surveys: (b) Cooperative surveys: (1) Mississippi River independent streame 7. Souris-Red region: None. 8. Missouri region: 9. (a) Missouri River Basin coordinated compreiser. (1) James and Big Sioux River Basing prehensive detailed surve (below Denison Dam, |