Mr. YATES. You're talking about the upper Illinois River now? Mr. COHEN. Yes.

The chart shows the data collection points that we have put in place.

Mr. YATES. And the Fox River.

Mr. COHEN. The data collection points

Mr. YATES. Which are flood basins, aren't they. I know the Fox River is.

Mr. COHEN. I'm not sure how you're using the term flood basin. Mr. YATES. Well, I mean they flood every year.

Mr. COHEN. Yes, sir. [Laughter.]

As a matter of fact, in our jargon, we've decided by that definition that they flood every 2.2 years. We simply use some arithmetic to define that flow which occurs every 2.2 years as being the flood. What we've done in this basin is to install a number of data collection and monitoring points. These are the black triangles— gaging stations that are now in place. They're measuring the flows of these rivers and they're measuring the chemistry. This study is to determine what the chemistry of surface water is in the Illinois River basin, characterize it as good, bad or indifferent. Is it getting worse? Why? How can we monitor, in a cost-effective way, all the basins of the country over an extended period of time?

This is the concept envisioned in monitoring, and part of the scheme that we're now testing.

Additionally, we set up some stations that we call synoptic stations, shown in red here. These take a snapshot of what the chemistry is periodically throughout the year.

We monitor at the gaging stations and take snapshots throughout the year and make statements about them. What is the quality of the water, and the constituents? Are they getting better or worse? How do they vary seasonally?

We do have some results. These are very preliminary results for this basin. One of the major efforts-the earliest efforts involve looking at available data. What data are in the files, and what can be gleaned from that data?

[The information follows:]

Illinois

River

Mr. COHEN. Here we're looking at sulfur over the period of 1978 to 1986. Dissolved sulfur at all these various points collected by us and by others.

We've done some statistical analysis and it shows a very dramatic downtrend at virtually every station. We've seen this in the northeast and now we see it in Illinois. We would attribute these downtrends, at least in part and perhaps to a significant extent, to decreases in atmospheric deposition of sulfate.

That was one of the reasons that I responded as I did to an earlier question.

We have two other such surface water basins where we have interesting results, and we have several groundwater basins, where we're looking at contaminated groundwater, trying to understand its distribution. What are the contaminants? How did it become contaminated? What's going to happen ten years from now? Most importantly, what kind of monitoring system should be put in place to track this?

COORDINATION WITH ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

Mr. YATES. Now, insofar as trying to control the flooding in those areas, is your work important to the Corps of Engineers?

Mr. COHEN. Very much so. That was part of my attempted response to your earlier questions.

The Army Corps of Engineers does some of its own stream gaging, and they transfer substantial sums of monies to us to operate stream gaging stations in support of their activities.

Certainly most of the Corps stations which are used to operate the locks and dams and to control their reservoirs for flood control are operated by the Geological Survey on a reimbursable basis.

FISCAL YEAR 1989 BUDGET REDUCTIONS-NATIONAL MAPPING

Mr. YATES. Okay, let's look at budget reductions in Mr. Peck's wish list. If he has any.

We know that he has one for streamflow. We know he has one for earthquakes. What about-and we know he has one for EROS. What about maps?

Dr. PECK. Well, yes, we're concerned again. If we're talking wish lists, we're concerned about the cut in digital cartography. There is essentially rapid growth in needs and demands for digital cartography by other Federal agencies and a lot of State agencies.

Mr. YATES. So, what do you have to do as a result of the cut? Dr. PECK. I'll ask Mr. Starr to come up.

Mr. YATES. Mr. Starr? What will you have to do if the cut goes through?

Mr. STARR. I think in general we'll be slowing down our work on 1:100,000 digital line graphs. We have had a program for the last several years with the Bureau of the Census to produce a digital database throughout the country on a 1:100,000 scale. There will be some slowing in producing other land survey system data in digital form, and boundary information.

Mr. YATES. Will that affect the next census?

Mr. STARR. No, it will not.

Mr. YATES. You've collected that data?

Mr. STARR. Yes, right.

We've collected the information, essentially, except for some boundary information.

Mr. YATES. Well, what other Federal agencies will be hurt by that cutback? And the slowdown?

Dr. PECK. Well, more and more land management agencies are using digital cartography and building geographic information systems in order to manage their land, like the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Forest Service, and the Bureau of Land Management. The Soil Conservation Service are users of this data.

We're generating it as fast as we can. We're also working on cooperative arrangements so that other agencies can generate that data to our standards. So, we're having a lot of discussion, for example, with the Forest Service, about a really major program of digital cartography data gathering.

We're also working with the Bureau of Land Management to develop standards and exchange formats to compare data. We're also working with State agencies. We have a neat arrangement with the Idaho Department of Transportation. They'll generate data to our standards, and we'll generate some that they need, too.

All of a sudden, the importance of standards has become greater and greater. We all need this digital data, but we need it in some way that we can use it.

So, standards and exchange formats-

Mr. YATES. You're being shrunk by $30 million worth, your activities, aren't you?

Dr. PECK. Well, a little over $20 million. But we are being shrunk. That's about a five percent cut. Yes.

This reflects the constrained budgets of the Federal Government. Mr. YATES. All right. Is the mapping on your wish list, too?

Dr. PECK. Yes, high on my wish list is the restoration of the cut in digital cartography.

As we discussed earlier, we're concerned about the EROS Data Center and the EROS project.

Mr. YATES. All right, what other wish list items do you have?

Dr. PECK. Well, we're also concerned-it was a very trying budget-over major cuts made in the Water Resources Research Institute and the Water Research Grants Program. I think those programs are important in providing a focus in every State for water quality and water quantity concerns.

We've done a review of all of the institutes in the last several years, and I think they are contributing in a major way to the State and local expertise in water. So I think there's a shortage of money from any Federal agency for grants for research in the area of water.

Of course, very high on the wish list-and I hope on some others' wish lists-is the Coastal Erosion Program. We've got a good start in Louisiana in coastal erosion, as in the Great Lakes and in planning the execution of a program with the Fish and Wildlife Service looking at the wetlands.

I think actually, coastal erosion is a problem nationwide. There are a number of areas along the Gulf Coast, the Atlantic Coast, and Alaska where coastal erosion is a real problem. So I think more work needs to be done in that area.

Mr. YATES. How much money would you want?

Dr. PECK. Well, the program this year is at $3.5 million. That is zeroed out in next year's budget. It's focused on Louisiana and Illinois.

OIL AND GAS ESTIMATES

As far as the wish list, we did some discussion of oil and gas estimates. I learned this spring that there is a lot of interest in oil and gas estimates nationwide [Laughter.]

It's important to do a good job in preparing oil and gas estimates. I think it might be important to restore the cut in our oil and gas estimates program so that we can continue some of the work that we've started this year and build up a staff with expertise so that we can make estimates that nobody will criticize.

Mr. YATES. Well, would your estimates include expanding the reserve?

Dr. PECK. We are one outfit that makes the estimates without an ax to grind. That's why I think it's important that we make estimates. If they end up low, so they're low. We'll just do the best job we can, and make them

Mr. YATES. Well, somebody ground an ax for you.

Dr. PECK. Yes, and applied it liberally around the head and shoulders. [Laughter.]

Mr. YATES. Okay.

If you want to expand on your wish list, you may, and on any other things. We have a number of questions for you that we'll ask you to answer for the record.

Dr. PECK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[Questions and answers thereto follow:]