CONNECTICUT STATE OF CONNECTICUT, Hon. CLINTON P. ANDERSON, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR ANDERSON: I appreciate very much your letter notifying me of the hearing on S. 1629 which is scheduled for Monday morning. Unfortunately, it is not possible to send a Connecticut representative to testify on that date. I will, however, be most grateful if the following statement which I have prepared can be made part of the record of the hearing: The State of Connecticut is most hopeful that S. 1629 will receive the approval of the Congress. We feel that its provisions will have a wholesome effect on the future growth of this Nation. It seems obvious that the benefits Connecticut would realize from the passage of S. 1629 would accrue also to the other States. In Connecticut we regard comprehensive planning for the conservation and development of our water resources as a vital necessity for economic and social development. Such planning, however, cannot be conducted efficiently or effectively if done on a piecemeal basis or as an isolated State project because Connecticut is an integral part of the Nation's northeastern region. The beneficial results to be achieved through planning water resources conservation and development depend, as far as Connecticut and its neighboring States are concerned, on the degree of coordinated and integrated action taken by the various political and governmental units comprising the northeastern region. For many years Connecticut has been represented on, and has participated in, the actions of various interstate agencies and assemblies concerned with the problems of water resources planning and development. Throughout, this State has consistently advocated the strengthening of the various State water resource agencies as one of the first essential steps toward the solution of these problems. Through State water resource agencies, peculiar local needs and conditions can best be evaluated and measures adopted to fit into the needs of an area or region. For the committee's information, I will list some of the steps Connecticut has taken to implement and strengthen its water resource agencies. It has: 1. Established a water resources commission to administer comprehensive programs of pollution control and all other related water resource projects. 2. Enabled the commission to initiate flood control, hurricane protection, and navigation programs and construct necessary remedial works. 3. Pioneered in an important phase of flood plain zoning in river valleys subject to intermittent damaging floods. 4. Established programs for controlling shore and beach erosion. 5. Assumed supervision over the safety of dams and similar structures and the building of structures in navigable waters. 6. Endeavored to control orderly dredging in navigable waters. 7. Conducted cooperative programs with the U.S. Geological Survey on surface and ground water studies. 8. Authorized a complete inventory of all surface and ground water resources in the State. Connecticut is doing these things in the belief that there is a growing urgency to take a realistic thorough and sound look at its water resources problems and the way in which they are affected by the studies, planning, and programing of the various Federal agencies concerned with the same and similar problems. An organization beyond the financial ability of the State alone is required, however, to support an undertaking of such scope. Connecticut stands ready and willing to share its share of the financial and administrative burden, but if a worthwhile goal is to be achieved other States in the region must undertake similar responsibilities. By helping the States to help themselves, the provisions of S. 1629 appear to be directed toward this end. The funds proposed to be allocated to the States would serve to strengthen the respective State agencies and provide the stimulus to undertake planning on a comprehensive basis in conjunction with other appropriate regional agencies. In allocating funds, consideration should be given to the amount of interest displayed by the respective States and to evidence of participation by the individual State. The funds should be allocated, not on a carte blanche basis, but under appropriate procedures assuring a reasonable degree of accuracy, completeness, and uniformity in the comparisons of data and information and in the formulation of sound programs for an orderly development of the Nation's water resources. The policy set forth in S. 1629 recognizes the responsibilities and the rights of the States in planning the conservation and development of their vital resources. It recognizes also the need for Federal assistance in the tremendous program facing the Nation. A cooperative undertaking such as is proposed by S. 1629 is necessary for the States and the Nation to achieve the goal required in the development of the Nation's water resources. I strongly urge that the committee give its early and unanimous approval to S. 1629 to permit early action by the Congress toward implementing this most important program. Sincerely, JOHN DEMPSEY, Governor. DELAWARE1 STATE OF DELAWARE, Dover, May 16, 1961. Hon. CLINTON P. ANDERSON, Chairman, Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, DEAR SENATOR ANDERSON: Governor Carvel has received your letter of May 10, 1961, concerning S. 1629. Your request has been referred for study and recommendation to our local authorities on water resources development. As soon as this report is returned Governor Carvel will submit his recommendations to your committee. Thank you for your thoughtfulness in calling this matter to the Governor's attention. Cordially yours, F. EARL MCGINNES, Administrative Assistant. Hon. CLINTON P. ANDERSON, STATE OF FLORIDA, FLORIDA OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, Tallahassee, May 23, 1961. DEAR SENATOR: Reference is made to Senate bill No. 1629 regarding assistance for comprehensive water resource planning to the various States. I have asked my various engineering staffs to review this bill in light of our current needs. They advise me that the subject legislation has the prospect of fulfilling a need at the State level. I therefore suggest that your committee give this measure your favorable consideration. Sincerely, FARRIS BRYANT, Governor. See testimony of Gen. Norman B. Lack for the State of Delaware. HAWAII Hon. CLINTON P. ANDERSON, STATE OF HAWAII, Chairman, Senate Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, DEAR SENATOR ANDERSON: Thank you for your letter of May 10, 1961, relating to the legislation you have introduced into Congress to provide Federal assistance to the States for comprehensive planning for water resources development (S. 1629). The State of Hawaii is keenly interested in this subject, and we appreciate the opportunity to comment on this legislation. Here in Hawaii we have just embarked upon a comprehensive program to establish long-range water development plans for each of the major islands in the Hawaiian chain. The need to provide adequately for the State's water requirements has become obvious in the face of the rapid growth in population and industry we are now experiencing. As in other States, however, the full implementation of our program for water planning has been impeded by the lack of sufficient funds to carry it out. Hence, Federal financial assistance would be highly beneficial to Hawaii because it would enable us to accelerate our water resources development program. For this reason, I wish to advise you that both I and the State department of land and natural resources (the agency responsible for water development in Hawaii) strongly support the legislation contained in S. 1629, and hope that it will be favorably considered by the Congress. Sincerely, WILLIAM F. QUINN, IDAHO Hon. CLINTON P. ANDERSON, STATE OF IDAHO, Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, DEAR SENATOR ANDERSON: We have studied the provisions of S. 1629 and now have these comments which may be included in the committee's records. The bill is introduced as a followup of recommendations by the Senate Select Committee on Water Resources, and may be known as the Water Resources Planning Act of 1961. We are in accord with the purposes of the act. Certainly it is time to get moving on sound plans for the ultimate development of our water resources. The problem is so beset with uncertainties as to what eventually may be deemed the most profitable use of water that the allocations which may become irrevocable must be based on the soundest judgments after consideration of all the facts. With all of this it will still be necessary to forecast and project into the future. If I understand correctly the bill is designed to stimulate intrest on the part of the States in their planning for the best use of this water resource. I believe you stated when introducing and explaining the bill that you expected some $200,000 per year average for 10 years would be available to the States. According to the formula for allotments to the States we can expect some deviations from the average. In general I think the bill is good; however, I have a little misgiving as to how far the Secretary's staff will, or might, go in dictating to the States what their planning programs should comprehend. Section 6(1) might be somewhat arbitrarily construed by an administrator. I fear that there might be an effort to fit these several State planning programs into a single groove when the various States' interests are usually quite diverse. In the case of Idaho it would be necessary to set up a planning agency to administer the program. There is none now although I have asked two successive legislations to take such action. I would hope that if Federal funds are to be made available, Idaho would move legislatively to take advantage of the act should it find favor in the Congress. I have the honor to be, Sincerely yours, ROBERT E. SMYLIE, Governor. ILLINOIS Senator CLINTON P. ANDERSON, OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, DEAR SENATOR ANDERSON: In reference to S. 1629 relative to comprehensive water resources planning, comes at a time when we in the State of Illinois are attempting to put together a plan within the boundaries of the State as well as asking for cooperative action among the States bordering the Great Lakes and the Provinces in Canada. This natural resource without which life cannot exist and becoming so extremely hard to find, requires planning at high level of government in order that we may utilize it more efficiently and have adequate for both domestic and industrial uses. We in the State of Illinois are interested in water resources planning and would favor any legislation which would make it an accomplished fact. Sincerely yours, INDIANA OTTO KERNER, Governor. Hon. CLINTON P. ANDERSON, STATE OF INDIANA, Chairman, Interior and Insular Affairs, Committee of the U.S. Senate, DEAR SENATOR ANDERSON : Your communication of May 10, 1961, on the subject of S. 1629, as introduced by you and other Senators, has been received with much interest. I appreciate greatly your kind request for comments on this legislation. First, I wish to say that I agree entirely with your aims. There is a definite need for the stimulating of State water resources programs, as you so ably pointed out, and as listed in the historic report of the Senate Select Committee on National Water Resources. You, of course, desire a frank discussion of the various aspects of the proposals as they would affect Indiana. I know you will recognize fully my position in seeking the best interests of our State in any water resources legislation. Therefore, it is necessary for me to designate some points on which Indiana desires a most thorough study to make certain that the interests of States east of the Mississippi River will receive their proper consideration in all water resources works. In Indiana, all construction projects in water resources, conducted by Federal departments, are directed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under authorizations from the Congress and under approval of the State. Or they are directed by the Soil Conservation Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture under the small watershed program of the Hope-Aiken Act. The Department of the Interior has an excellent service for Indiana in its Geological Survey data-collecting activities, but it does not handle actual construction projects in water resources, such as it directs in the Western States. Because of this situation, I wish to suggest that a board consisting of the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Agriculture, and the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare be substituted in place of the Secretary of the Interior alone for the direction of this program and that acts of this board be made subject to review by the Appropriations Committees of the U.S. Senate and the House. In section 5, certain points involving the regulations for State qualifications for these funds are listed. May I suggest that density of population, as related to land area of a State is a very important factor in creating the urgency for action on water resources projects and that such a condition should be inIcluded in some manner in this section. We, in Indiana, always have counted on you as a good friend of the State during your exceptionally fine term as Secretary of Agriculture and your extensive experience in the Senate. You will understand the importance that farming holds in the economy of our State. We are 39th in area among the 50 States, yet rank among the first 8 in annual agricultural production. Water resources management for both farming and industry-as well as for all other uses-calls for the most detailed planning. We would appreciate an opportunity to participate in such a plan as you recommend, with the provision that the long-established Federal departments for water projects in this region be included on an equal basis with any other department. We have the Indiana Flood Control and Water Resources Commission, which is working closely and regularly with the Corps of Engineers, with the Department of Agriculture, and with the Department of the Interior, in their respective fields of service. The State commission has formulated extensive plans for basinwide projects. Some of these projects are completed, others are under construction, and we respectfully request that you help obtain funds for the start of several other major works of this kind, as now included in the Federal budget which is before the Congress for action. We find that one of the most difficult problems for the future planning of such programs is the need for clarification of guides for determination of feasibility of projects, especially for multiple-purpose reservoirs. We hope, sincerely, that means will be found to permit more comprehensive inclusion of future benefits in engineering surveys by Federal departments. The matter of low-flow augmentation benefits is an example. We wish to suggest that Senator Robert S. Kerr has given this much attention and I am sure has very sound opinions on improvements needed in this area of legislation. This letter is written with the intent of assuring the utmost water resources development for Indiana and the entire country. Sincerely, MATTHEW E. WELSH. IOWA STATE OF IOWA, Hon. CLINTON P. ANDERSON, DEAR SENATOR ANDERSON: Thank you for sending me a copy of S. 1629 and the additional material pertinent to it indicating your position in this important phase of water resources activities. The program incorporated in S. 1629 has considerable merit and in large part is in keeping with our thoughts here in Iowa regarding the desirability of comprehensive water resources planning. The Iowa Natural Resources Council has had this responsibility since 1949 through State legislative action. There are several suggested changes in S. 1629 presented in the following paragraphs for your consideration. We believe that under certain circumstances close cooperation between the State and Federal Governments is highly desirable and suggest that the following section be added, "The Secretary of the Army, the Secretary of Agriculture, and the Secretary of the Interior are each authorized, at the request of any State agency, to provide technical assistance in the preparation of such State's program to be submitted under the provisions of this section." In many States the role played by the Department of the Interior in water resources planning, although highly important, is minor to the role of other Federal departments. I suggest, therefore, that you and your colleagues consider the possibility of having the responsibility of administering S. 1629 placed in the hands of a board rather than entirely under the Secretary of the Interior. |