practicable, seem to be indicated. Village parks and playgrounds are covered in problem No. 18. Investigators: Bureau of Reclamation: Mr. F. A. Banks, supervising engineer, Bureau of National Park Service: Mr. C. E. Greider, State superintendent, National Washington State Department of Highways: Mr. C. E. Fritts, State department of highways, Olympia, Wash. Washington State Planning Council: Mr. P. Hetherton, executive officer, State planning council, Old Capitol Building, Olympia, Wash. Washington State College: Dr. Paul H. Landis, head of division of rural sociology, State College of Washington, Pullman, Wash. University of Washington: Prof. H. H. Martin, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash. Washington State Parks Committee: Mr. W. G. Weigle, superintendent of State parks, Seattle, Wash. Problem No. 26.-To formulate plans to promote the recreational use of the reservoir above Grand Coulee Dam and its shorelands, not in isolation but in effective interrelationship with the other diversified recreational assets of the Inland Empire and of contiguous areas, from all significant local, regional, and national points of view. Investigators: National Park Service: Mr. C. E. Greider, State superintendent, National Park Service, 712 Spaulding Building, Portland, Oreg. United States Forest Service: Mr. F. V. Horton, United States Forest Service, Portland, Oreg. United States Bureau of Biological Survey: Dr. Victor B. Scheffer, 105 Anderson Hall, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash. United States Bureau of Fisheries: Mr. Fred J. Foster, United States Bureau of Fisheries, 2725 Mont Lake Boulevard, Seattle, Wash. Corps of Engineers: Col. Richard Park, division office, Corps of Engineers, Portland, Oreg. Office of Indian Affairs: Mr. Melvin L. Robertson, Office of Indian Affairs, Colville Indian Agency, Nespelem, Wash. Pacific Northwest Regional Planning Commission: Maj. R. F. Bessey, counselor, National Resources Planning Board, Federal Courthouse, Portland, Oreg. Washington State Parks Committee: Mr. W. G. Weigle, superintendent of State parks, Seattle, Wash. Washington State Department of Conservation and Development: Mr. Edward Davis, director, department of conservation and development, Olympia, Wash. Washington State Land Commission: Mr. Jack Taylor, Washington State Land Commissioner, Olympia, Wash. Washington State Game Commission: Mr. Bernard T. McCauley, director, State game commission, 1320 Smith Tower, Seattle, Wash. Washington State Planning Council: Mr. P. Hetherton, executive officer, State planning council, Old Capitol Building, Olympia, Wash. Washington State Department of Health: Mr. Donald G. Evans, M. D., State director of health, Seattle, Wash. Washington State Department of Highways: Mr. C. E. Fritts, State department of highways, Olympia, Wash. Representative chambers of commerce: Mr. James A. Ford, managing secretary, Spokane Chamber of Commerce, Mr. W. G. Mathews, president, Ephrata Chamber of Commerce, Ephrata, Bureau of Reclamation: Mr. F. A. Banks, supervising engineer, Bureau of XV. Rural community centers. Problem No. 27.-To plan the location (first for the northern and the southernmost parts of the area), and, insofar as practicable, the improvement of sites for 69725-42-9 rural schools, churches, community halls, market centers, athletic field (compare problems No. 18 and No. 25) and the like. Selections might well be made of more sites than are likely to be utilized, with the idea that some of them will be released as unneeded after the settlement of the sections involved. Bureau of Agricultural Economics: Dr. Carl C. Taylor, Bureau of Agri- Washington State Planning Council: Mr. P. Hetherton, executive officer, Washington State Board of Education: Pearl Wanamaker, superintendent Washington State Department of Highways: Mr. C. E. Fritts, State depart- Bureau of Reclamation: Mr. F. A. Banks, supervising engineer, Bureau of Washington State College: Dr. Paul H. Landis, head of division of rural University of Washington: Prof. R. G. Tyler, University of Washington, XVI. Governmental organization, public works, programming and financing. Problem No. 28.-To develop, in the light of all relevant factors, the most advantageous pattern of local governmental units to meet prospective public needs. This should be done with due regard to programming and financing public improvements in such a way as to eliminate or minimize the possibility of an excessive tax burden. Investigators: Washington State Planning Council: Mr. P. Hetherton, executive officer, Washington State Department of Conservation and Development: Mr. Ed- Federal Works Agency: Mr. John M. Carmody, Administrator, Federal Works Bureau of Agricultural Economics: Mr. M. M. Kelso, Bureau of Agricultural Pacific Northwest Regional Planning Commission: Maj. R. F. Bessey, Coun- Adviser: National Resources Planning Board: Col. Henry M. Waite, chairman, public works committee, National Resources Planning Board, North Interior Building, Washington, D. C. NOTE. The study of this problem should be closely correlated with the work of investigating agencies dealing with various other problems, especially No. 18 and No. 27. Mr. DWORSHAK. I want to say that I have the greatest confidence in the Bureau of Reclamation. Mr. WARNE. The Department of Agriculture, as I have said, has had an important part in this work; the Department of Conservation and Development of the State of Washington has participated; the Washington State Planning Board; the Northwest Regional Planning Commission, the University of Washington has cooperated, the Agri M cultural College of the State of Washington has participated, and the directors of the irrigation districts have participated. Mr. Davis has said that he would not present a plan for this development without careful study. The Bureau of Reclamation has not done so without such study. We have been working with this problem about 3 years. Mr. DWORSHAK. Are we to understand that 40 agencies have compositely been responsible for this proposed legislation which is now before the committee? Mr. WARNE. What 40 agencies have developed in the study of the 28 problems has resulted in the drafting of this bill. The investigation will go further than that and will eventually result in the drafting of the repayment contracts. The planning is not through when the plan is outlined in the bill. It must go on until you get repayment contracts, and then it must go on into the production of the program described in section 4 (e) of this bill by which the Bureau of Reclamation, the Department of Agriculture, and other agencies, including the State of Washington, if you adopt Congressman Knute Hill's proposed amendment which we approve, and the irrigation districts, will draft an actual program for the settlement and development of this project. That program will be submitted by the Secretary of the Interior, because it has to be submitted by somebody and he is the chief administrative official of the responsible executive department. The program will result from the collaboration of the irrigation districts, the Department of Agriculture, and other agencies concerned, including, perhaps, the housing authority. The program will go from the Secretary to the President, who will approve or disapprove it. If the President approves it, each one of us will take his allotted part in the job of settlement and development of this project. It is an orderly method which should give all shades of opinion a fair hearing, and remove all cause for fear of conflicts between agencies. Mr. DwORSHAK. Is not this a new, scientific approach to the orderly development of a reclamation project; is it not a radical departure from the practices and policies of reclamation during the last 40 years? Mr. WARNE. Let us say that it is a conservative departure. Mr. DWORSHAK. My questioning of the last three days has not been inspired by a desire to retard the full and successful development of the Columbia Basin project. Having lived on one of our outstanding reclamation projects for almost 20 years, I know what reclamation means to the arid sections of the West. As a member of this important committee, I want to be assured that we are not proposing a departure from the recognized program of the last 40 years to the extent that, if serious colonization and financial problems are encountered, the responsibility then will devolve upon the Congress to provide financial relief. It should be made clear that the full responsibility rests upon the agencies in Washington and the various groups represented here by Senator Davis; so that, in the event of subsequent difficulty and problems, they will not say it is our problem. They should understand that it is their job to solve those problems, rather than to ask for a moratorium or to point out some of the illogical policies that have been placed in operation with their consent. I want them to realize that. I think Senator Davis should take that message back home. Re gardless of what takes place in connection with H. R. 6522, it is their problem. We want the project to be very successful; we know that other reclamation projects have been successful, and we see no reason why this one should not be successful if handled properly. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Warne has something further here. Mr. WARNE. The local people, the present landowners, want the bill as it is here proposed. They have participated in the planning which preceded the drafting of this legislation. They want no unnecessary delays, and they want no further amendments than those which have been proposed, judging by the statements of their representatives. This telegram from Mr. James O'Sullivan, secretary of the Quincy-Columbia Basin Irrigation District, carries those thoughts: Directors of Quincy-Columbia Basin Irrigation District directed me at their meeting today to wire you that they are in favor of early and favorable action by the House Committee on Irrigation and Reclamation on H. R. 6522 with only such minor amendments proposed by Ford and Cunningham which they understood are agreeable to you. Directors oppose any further amendments or attempts to postpone or extend the hearings. This telegram was sent on March 4, 1942, from Ephrata the headquarters of Mr. O'Sullivan. The amendments to which he referred as "proposed by Ford and Cunningham" are those which have been included in the memorandum which Mr. Stinson submitted to the committee. The "Ford" referred to in the telegram is Mr. James A. Ford, of Spokane, who was before the committee and is now here. The "Cunningham" is Mr. Fred J. Cunningham, of Spokane, the counsel for the three districts. I have placed Mr. Cunningham's endorsement of the bill in the record at another point. Like Mr. Davis, of Olympia, I am interested, as are all of those of us in the Bureau of Reclamation, in the people who will in the future make their homes on this project. Some of them will be found among the members of these irrigation districts. Many will be gathered during the next 20 or 30 years from far and wide and from many stations. This bill has been drafted to the best of the ability of those who are responsible for the successful development of the project to serve well the future residents of the area and at the same time to be just to the present landowners and residents. It is our belief that it will aid in stabilizing the project development and in increasing the security of the Government in its investment, its large investment, in the project. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Ford, would you like to be heard further? Mr. FORD. In view of the telegram that has been read, I believe I should say that it is the desire of all interested in this proposal, all in the State of Washington at least, to have action on this bill as soon as practicable, and in effecting that action we believe it would facilitate matters if the committee should not hold hearings in the State of Washington. I believe that has been ironed out and it has been concluded that the committee will not hold hearings in our State. If this bill is passed, there is much to be done among the settlers and landowners by way of getting contracts so that the project may be ready for habitation when the war is over. THE COLUMBIA BASIN PROJECT ACT 129 t I am trying to say is that we in Washington are extremely s for action in connection with this bill as soon as practicable, er that the thing may be started. Mr. Davis, is that a correct ent? DAVIS. Yes; that is true. CHAIRMAN. I believe we have now completed the presentation esses from a distance. Is there anybody here who wishes to be this morning? [After a pause.] Apparently not. That bee case, and it being later than 12 o'clock, the committee will -n, to meet at the call of the chairman. ereupon at 12: 10 p. m., Friday, March 6, 1942, the committee ned, to meet at the call of the chairman.) |