The United States has a stake in that as well. We can go on and make for this expanding economy if we adopt these cooperative, basinwide, riverwide programs.

Some of them may look big, and some people would say, "What a whale of a subsidy for that project." But it has been determined that the project is feasible even though the people 10 miles from the river may be heavily subsidized by the people close to the river.

It has never occurred to us that we should not make that kind of a subsidy, even when it came to considerable money, and we have all gone along on it.

Mr. MILLER. I contend, Senator, your logic or theory is all right if it is applied to projects which can be considered feasible, as I say, and economic, and that will in the end pay out and really make a net addition to the general economy.

I contend that these participating projects will not. At this point, because of your reference to compounded interest and the figure that can be built up, my understanding is that that is the way the Treasury operates on these costs. They use a compounded interest calculation.

I want to insert in the record here two tables which will give the per acre cost and the cost per 160-acre farm under these participating projects, which has no reference to interest. It deals only with the construction costs and deals with the full supply and the supplemental supply.

I offer these for the record in order that those who study this can ascertain the costs of these projects.

(The documents are as follows:)

TABLE 2.-Participating irrigation projects (H. R. 4449) weighted capital costs, interest excluded (supplemental acreage allocation assumed at one-third that of new acreage)

Mr. MILLER. I have to run in a few minutes, but in the meantime I am glad to answer questions.

I don't want to take anybody's time, but if you have further questions, may I listen?

Senator WATKINS. I have one observation to make in response to your statement that you were expressing the view of the Water Resources Commission of the United States and that this project should not proceed without further study by you. Is that what I understood you to mean?

You made a remark at the beginning that you were speaking for the Water Resources Commission.

Mr. MILLER. Yes.

Senator WATKINS. What was that, again? We don't have a copy of your statement. I want to be sure not to misquote.

Mr. MILLER. What I said was that as a participant in the studies of the Hoover Commission that I deem it unwise that legislation which touches as it does upon so many broad policies in the field of water administration as is encompassed in this project, should not be entertained by the Congress pending the making of the Hoover Commission report, with its recommendations with respect to long-range policy. Senator WATKINS. Now may I inquire as to seeing what validity there is to that? There may be some. How long do you think it will be before you give that overall report for the United States? Mr. MILLER. It is due the 31st of May, next year.

Senator WATKINS. Have you studied this legislation?
Mr. MILLER. This legislation?

Senator WATKINS. Yes.

Mr. MILLER. I read it very carefully.

Senator WATKINS. You note that it requires, at least the proposal by the Bureau of the Budget and I think it will be adopted in this bill-this bill was drawn before we heard from the budget, before we had heard from the Secretary, as a matter of fact-that there will be a study of the economic situation, the economics of the project, I will put it that way, and it will be authorized upon the certification of the Secretary of the Interior that it is satisfactory from the standpoint of its economics.

If that is going to have that recommendation in May it will be quite a long time before we could get anything rolling on an authorization. Congress would have to meet again. There would be no money to start work on any of these projects, Glen Canyon, or Echo Park, or any of the rest of them, for some time.

Mr. McKay will have that opportunity, and the Congress will have that opportunity, if and when they get to the appropriation stage. We have come to the conclusion in the Congress that we simply can't wait on commissions ordinarily to make the next studies and make their recommendations, because on the whole the commissions go a long, long time before they make a report. If you make your report in May, that is going to be a record. I mean next May.

Mr. MILLER. Well, I am sorry. I would like to visit with you longer. Maybe I will have another opportunity.

Senator WATKINS. We will be in short recess.

(A brief recess was taken.)

Senator WATKINS. The subcommittee will now be in session. Mr. Packard, you are one of the representatives of the conservation group, are you not?

Mr. PACKARD. Yes, sir.

Senator WATKINS. I understand that the witnesses who were going to testify with you in that group will be satisfied to have their statements placed in the record in large type in lieu of oral presentation. Mr. PACKARD. As far as I am concerned, sir, that is definitely true, providing that all of the documents we have submitted are also published. I think you should call on the others, though, to check that. Senator WATKINS. I think, for economy, we cannot print all of the material. But we want to be fair about it, and print it in condensed form such as we can print in the record. We will agree to that. Mr. PACKARD. I will agree to that, but I wish you would call the others.

Senator WATKINS. I will call the others.

Mr. Zahniser, do you agree to that?

Mr. ZAHNISER. I didn't hear all that was said, Senator Watkins. I have a statement.

Senator WATKINS. You are not the next witness. I merely want to know if you would agree to what Mr. Packard said.

Mr. ZAHNISER. I didn't hear what was said.

Senator WATKINS. He proposed that we place in the record in large type the statements of the conservation group.

Mr. ZAHNISER. My full statement as submitted will be printed in the record in the large type?

Senator WATKINS. That is right.

Mr. ZAHNISER. That is agreeable to me.

I wished also to file with my statement a couple of reprints to which I made reference in my statement.

Senator WATKINS. They will be filed with the committee.

Mr. ZAHNISER. But not necessarily made a part of the record? Senator WATKINS. That is right. We don't ordinarily take those exhibits and put them in unless they are very pertinent to the

statement.

Mr. ZAHNISER. My full statement would be published as submitted? Senator WATKINS. That is right.

Now we have Mr. Claggett. Are you willing to do the same thing? Mr. CLAGGETT. Yes, sir.

Senator WATKINS. That will be the same with you.

Mr. Charles H. Callison, is he here?

Mr. CALLISON. That is agreeable to me, Senator, and if I may have your permission also to place in the record a resolution for the National Council of State Garden Clubs.

Senator WATKINS. Of which date?

Mr. CALLISON. Pardon?

Senator WATKINS. A national organization is it?

Mr. CALLISON. Yes. I represent the National Wildlife Federation, but I have also a resolution adopted by the National Council of State Garden Clubs with me. They asked me to present that for the record. I should also like to have that in the record, and your assurance that it will be in the record.

Senator WATKINS. That is right.

Mr. Gutermuth?

Mr. GUTERMUTH. Yes, that would be perfectly agreeable with me. Senator WATKINS. All right. You submit your statement, then, and we will print it in the record.

Mr. PACKARD. Also since I have not given these to you here are copies of my statements. The only other document was a letter and memorandum attached to this, and there is also this one document that clarifies very expertly by an outstanding attorney the meaning and intent of the Federal Power Act, and other laws, relating to the national park in relation to this problem. It is signed by Manly Fleischmann.

There are also two documents from the Solicitor of the Interior Department.

That is all I wish to place in the record.

Senator WATKINS. These briefs will be filed with the committee. Mr. PACKARD. I suggest you study them. I think they would be very useful to the Senate.

(The statements referred to are as follows:)

STATEMENT OF HOWARD ZAHNISER, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY AND EDITOR OF THE LIVING

WILDERNESS

THE ECHO PARK QUESTION

A statement by Howard Zahniser, executive secretary of The Wilderness Society and editor of the Living Wilderness, at hearings held by the Subcommittee on Irrigation and Reclamation of the Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, in the Congress of the United States, on a bill (S. 1555) to authorize the upper Colorado River storage project, including the proposed Echo Park Dam in the Dinosaur National Monument in northeastern Utah and northwestern Colorado, July 2, 1954.

Last summer, on a trip through Colorado and Utah, my wife and I, with our 15- and 7-year old sons and our 12- and 10-year-old daughters, camped at the mouth of Split Mountain Canyon, in the Dinosaur National Monument, motored and hiked on to Harpers Corner, and then returned and motored on down into Echo Park. There, along