the need for a variety of talents ranging from the sciences and engineering to the legal and economic disciplines is also noteworthy. Although recognizing these needs and concurring in the general forwardlooking objectives the association cannot recommend approval of Senate bill 2 because it is not realistic in meeting the needs particularly in the area of training, and because there is no provision for interdisciplinary, non-Government consultation and review of the programs and of the proposals for grants, contracts, and other arrangements. The objectives of this bill can be approached equally well and with a much broader base, through the National Science Foundation; however, it is not inconceivable that the Department of the Interior may also properly stimulate training and research in the area of water resources related to its mission. The problem is as much to develop talent to conduct research as it is to provide funds for research. Establishing centers where such talent is not present demands removal of talent from institutions currently engaged in training as well as research. From the narrowest to the broadest definition of scope, water resources is comparable to sanitary engineering. All universities do not have and cannot justify a broad-based teaching and research program in sanitary engineering because there are not enough students nor enough qualified instructors to staff such an effort without weakening the good schools and diluting the overall effort. This would be equally true of any attempt to develop 50 or more water resources research centers. It seems obviously more appropriate to strengthen the few strong centers currently supported by student registration, and to develop and broaden others gradually from the promising smaller training and research cores. The bill takes no cognizance of the States in which more than one active qualified institution exists, and appropriates an equal sum to such States and to others which have only one or no institution qualified for the purpose. Again, the dilution of effort to meet the objectives is unfortunate. Therefore an approach to the problem based on institutions in existance rather than on political boundaries would better accomplish the objectives for which the bill is designed. STATEMENT OF LOUIS S. CLAPPER, CHIEF, DIVISION OF CONSERVATION EDUCATION, NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION Mr. Chairman, the National Wildlife Federation is a private organization which utilizes educational means to attain conservation objectives in the public interest. The 51 independent affiliates of the National Wildlife Federation are conservation organizations located in all States and the District of Columbia. These affiliates and other supporters of the National Wildlife Federation number an estimated 2 million persons. We appreciate this opportunity of commenting upon S. 2, the proposed Water Resources Research Act. The National Wildlife Federation was pleased that the Senate Select Committee on National Water Resources, after exhaustive study, saw fit to recommend additional research on water resources. Our organization believes there is a definite need for additional research into a wide variety of water resource problems to which the Federal Government can contribute profitably through grants to appropriate institutions of higher learning. S. 2, as passed by the Senate, would implement this research and we are in accord with its principles. As we envision it, this should be a counterpart program to that provided by agricultural research stations at land-grant colleges and State universities. Work at these stations has contributed much toward our Nation's world leadership in agricultural production. There is every reason to believe that a program of water research along the same general lines also would pay rich dividends, both in more efficient management of the resource and in the training of persons with professional competence. It is our belief and hope that research should encompass fish and wildlife and recreation as well as the other beneficial uses of water: domestic supplies, agriculture, industry, power generation, and navigation. In fact, these uses have been mentioned by the Interior Department as areas of study. We are hopeful that the committee may see fit to authorize and direct work in fish and wildlife and recreation which, in most cases, are nonconsumptive and do not damage or impair water for other purposes. Recreation can include boating, swimming, hunting, fishing, etc. An example might be the large Federal impoundments which could offer many additional public recreational opportunities if the production of game fish was increased. While progress is being made, the simple fact is that much remains to be learned about fish management in large impoundments. If correlated properly with other water resources planning, this would appear to be a proper area of research. Mr. Chairman, we hope that early favorable consideration may be given to this proposal. Thank you for the opportunity of making these observations. STATEMENT OF HON. SPARK M. MATSUNAGA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF HAWAII Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I appreciate the opportunity to be heard and to make this statement in support of the water resources research legislation, a bill which is of extreme importance to the State of Hawaii. Water is more than an economic resource. It is one natural resource without which there will be no economy. The economic growth of any nation has been linked directly, inseparately, and dramatically with the hydrologic picture the availability, utilization, conservation, and research development of man's greatest need. Hawaii's economic growth has been determined to a large extent upon water as the fundamental ingredient. Hawaii is characterized by recent geological topography, relatively low retention of rainfall as surface water, lack of natural damsites, and hydrologic conditions of great extremes, and considerable variability over the eight islands so that the water problem is particularly challenging and vital to the economy of the State of Hawaii. The rainfall of the State of Hawaii is relatively high, averaging better than 70 inches annually. This represents an amount more than double the average of the rest of the States. Water problems in Hawaii are not problems of inadequacy or impending inadequacy but rather problems which require planning, proper management, conservation, and water research for the maximum use and development of our water resources. Governmental agencies and private organizations have pressed for water research to cope with our unique water needs and problems. It is not the lack of interest or the lack of problems that hampers the research but rather a limitation of funds. The University of Hawaii has a committee on water resources research, consisting of members both from the campus and off the campus, including individuals who represent the different facets in water development and management efforts. This committee recently summarized Hawaii's water resource research efforts over the past 5 to 6 years, confirming my opinion that far too little research efforts have been expended in comparison to the size of the problem. The committee unanimously recommended additional resources including funding be developed and a permanent research center in this area be established at the University of Hawaii. I urge a favorable report on the water resources research legislation for it opens intensified research into man's greatest need, water. STATEMENT BY J. W. CORNWALL, FAIRFIELD, WASH., CHAIRMAN, RESEARCH COMMITTEE, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICTS There is virtually unanimous agreement by all the responsible agencies and authorities in the field of water that the water supply needs of the United States are going to increase sharply and continuously in the years ahead. Conservation and wise management of the available supplies are imperative if we are to have enough water for our essential uses during the remainder of this century and in the period thereafter. Potential additions to the available supply need to be developed, waste must be materially reduced, and capabilities for reuse substantially increased. The attainment of these vital objectives will require improved knowledge in many fields-economic as well as physical, social as well as political. The need for research of all of these fields bearing on the water problem has been amply justified by extended analysis and hearings by competent authorities. The in vestigations of the Nation's water problems have also made clear the oncoming need for a larger body of well-qualified personnel in the various key areas of water resources conservation, development, and use. The enactment of S. 2 would contribute in an important way to the accomplishment of these necessary water knowledge, research, and personnel objectives. The National Association of Soil and Water Conservation Districts (NACD) is vitally concerned with the conservation, development, and use of water supplies and with those disciplines which can contribute to the quality, quantity, and availability of supplies. This association, jointly with the National Reclamation Association, sponsored a national water research symposium in Washington, D.C., March 28-30, 1961, for the specific purpose of acquainting the general public with the seriousness of the problem and to help focus attention upon the need for a more adequate research program. At that time we pointed out that "research is the key to the solution of the water problem, but it is generally agreed that our present water research program is entirely inadequate to meet the many and diverse water situations which are developing so rapidly." The symposium, participated in by many of the Nation's most distinguished water authorities, underscored again the increasing dimensions of the total water problem, and the critical need for moving ahead with an enlarged and comprehensive program of water research. The last annual convention of the National Association of Soil and Water Conservation Districts in Denver, February 3-7, 1963, endorsed in total the five basic recommendations of the Senate Select Committee on National Water Resources. This, of course, included the third recommendation, which is most pertinent to S. 2: "Third, a greatly expanded and comprehensive Federal program of scientific research on water, probing ways both to increase our supplies and to increase the efficiency of our use of available supplies." The 2,930 soil and water conservation districts of the country-in all 50 States, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands-represent the first custodians of the Nation's annual replenishment of water. These districts with their cooperators— now numbering in excess of 1,800,000 farmers, ranchers, and other landowners and operators-are in a position to make a major contribution to the conservation, development, and improved management of water supplies. Indeed, they are now doing so. In the years ahead they will do even more, for water is a critical element in their operations. All of them are water users. At one time or another each year, most districts face too much or too little water. They engage in drainage, irrigation, water storage, flood prevention, and other forms of water management and control. Across the landscape of America, districts are uniting in common cause the largest body of conservation-minded citizens owning and operating land-the first catchment for most of the annual replenishment of our water supply. We in the NACD are impressed by the merits of S. 2. It constitutes an important improvement, in its language and provisions, over S. 3579 (of the 87th Cong.), which was widely circulated for the purpose of review and comment. It is plain in S. 2, for example, that the work to be undertaken would be a part of a comprehensive, expanded program of water research. It is intended to supplement existing and future water research efforts-including those by appropriate Federal agencies and private institutions-and is not intended to serve as a complete program. The dimensions of water research needs in the United States are so large and diverse, it would have been a serious mistake to centralize administration, or to limit the opportunities for Federal participation in water research, through narrowly drafted or interpreted legislative provisions. We believe S. 2 has beneficially clarified questions raised last year about the relationships of the various Federal agencies and programs involved in water research. Nothing could be plainer than section 301, which declared that "nothing in the foregoing section nor in this act is intended nor shall be construed as giving its Secretary or the Department of the Interior any authority or surveillance over water resources research conducted by any other agency of the Federal Government, nor shall it be construed as repealing, superseding, or diminishing existing authorities or responsibilities of any agency of the Federal Government to plan and conduct, contract for, or assist in research in its areas of responsibility and concern with water resources." We are pleased to note the provisions in S. 2 which call for an annual review of the various water resource research and investigations projects underway— and the protections against low priority or duplicating research. One might readily argue for the authorization of larger or smaller sums of money in support of the research work contemplated by this bill. Our position, however, is that the initiation of the cooperative research program-with the presently indicated breadth of institutions, foundations, firms, and individuals— is much more important than the precise number of dollars allocated for the work. Further, a program of this character and size cannot be launched imme diately. After the authorization, there must be appropriations. Even after these steps time must elapse before the intent can be translated into the fact of research underway. We could comment on many other provisions of S. 2. Our purpose is probably best served in this instance, however, by observing that the soil and water conservation districts of America need and will be able to do a better job in connection with the water supplies coming under their management if they have the benefit of the added research. As district supervisors, as district cooperators, and as citizens, we in the NACD believe the prospective water requirements of the United States demand the kind of water research efforts proposed in S. 2— in addition to existing and other efforts which may also be undertaken in this field. The danger in the water resources situation is not that we will do too much, but that our attention to it will be too small and come too late. Hon. WAYNE N. ASPINALL, THE IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE OF AMERICA, INC., Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Izaak Walton League of America would like to go on record with your committee in support of S. 2. Since its establishment, the league has had a profound concern for proper management and utilization of water-not only because water is so important to fish, wildlife, and outdoor enjoyment, but primarily because water in ample supply and usable quality is vital to man's existence. The basic purpose of S. 2, as we see it, is to assure the abundance of water in both quantity and quality necessary to meet our increasing requirements. To accomplish this purpose, the bill would stimulate, sponsor, and provide for research, investigation, and experiment in the fields of water and related resources as they affect water. It would thereby supplement present programs, and encourage the training of scientists by assisting colleges and universities in their development of water resources research programs. The Izaak Walton League strongly endorses this approach. Mr. Chairman, we claim no special competence in determining the ways and means by which Federal research dollars should be distributed to achieve maximum results. Nonetheless, the proposal to encourage the land-grant colleges, or other universities as specified by the States, to establish water resources research programs on permanent bases appears an essential first step. This method will assure most effective handling of water problems peculiar to individual States, while at the same time building the nationwide store of knowledge necessary to broad public understanding of water resource issues. The league takes special note of the bill's important provision that these water resource research programs be universitywide, that they cut across all disciplines to include the social sciences as well as the physical. Water engineers can no doubt continue to develop more efficient ways of managing water, but, without consideration of social needs, such purely scientific advances might well contribute nothing meaningful to man's total environment-indeed could easily detract from it. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, we emphasize a point made by Senator Anderson when introducing S. 2 last January. He noted that, as a result of a University of New Mexico water economics study, "traditional social and economic concepts about water have been shaken not only in New Mexico, but in all water-short areas ***." We are sure that we shall be shaken still further, as research brings us a whole body of new facts about water, its use, and actions necessary to meet our future needs. We do need more facts about water-and the Federal-State approach, with universities the core of the effort, makes the best kind of sense. Respectfully, ROBERT T. DENNIS, Assistant Conservation Director, IWLA. Hon. WAYNE N. ASPINALL, RUTGERS THE STATE UNIVERSITY, COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, New Brunswick, N.J., September 26, 1963. Chairman, Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, DEAR CONGRESSMAN ASPINALL: I am writing to express to you our sincere interest in the passage of H.R. 2689 or similar legislation to establish water resource work in the land-grant or other universities. The progression of discovery-placing the facts before the public-public action is a heritage of the land-grant system. In addition to this progression, men and women are trained in formal educational programs who can serve the public as technicians. The developments in agriculture resulting from work in the land-grant colleges show parallel opportunities in the environmental sciences, including water as a resource. For over 50 years the New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station has been working in water management for mosquito control. For over 40 years we have worked on water quality as a public health matter. This work has been the basis for solid fact-based legislation and social action. Benefits to the people by support of the university's effort in this field through progressive legislation will be assured on the basis of this past experience. Hon. WAYNE N. ASPINALL, Chairman, Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, DEAR SIR: The following statement portrays the attitude of the Office of Research of the Ohio State University toward the Anderson bill, S. 2, now before your Subcommittee on Irrigation and Reclamation for consideration. This office endorses the precepts of the Anderson bill, S. 2, for appropriation of funds to establish water resources research and training programs in the land-grant colleges. I am certain that this university endorses those provisions of the bill which provide for a broad interdisciplinary approach to the problems of water supply and wishes to call the attention of the committee to the many disciplines in the land-grant colleges which are prepared to make contributions to the solutions of water supply problems. Furthermore, these institutions have well-established working relations with Federal, State, and local agencies in the water resource field. Through these working relationships a means exists for (1) identification of water resource problems requiring research; (2) dissemination of the results of such research; and (3) avoiding duplications of effort. The Ohio State University as one of the land-grant institutions is especially well equipped to handle this type of program through its organizational structure and its numerous facilities and experienced staff associated with water resource problems, and is, therefore, vitally interested in the furtherance of this proposed legislation. Cordially yours, ALFRED B. GARRETT, Vice President for Research. 24-494-63-10 |