of Needles against the United States, not for damages, but with a request, a request that a temporary restraining order be issued so that they could find out what was going on and have adequate time to plan. After doing this for a short time, the court having granted the temporary restraining order, we agreed because of the representations of the Government at the time that we would stipulate that the restraining order could be dissolved. Then we proceeded to try to gather facts.

Thereafter I went to the city of Needles and to Parker to make a report on the legal status, and what I think is most important to you as Members of the Congress is that consistently people said, does not a lawsuit take a long time? If you are contemplating a lawsuit to compensate us for damages, is not the lawsuit an unquestionable result? In other words, gentlemen, what they were saying was that the lawsuit we have filed, which was merely to bring the Government to heel in a sense, was not what they wanted. They were also saying they were not seeking to be vindictive or to sue the United States or anybody else. What they wanted was relief. They wanted two things basically. They wanted some type of compensation that would make these people who were innocent victims whole, and second they were hoping something could be done that would make certain that this would not reoccur in the future.

With that in mind, we proceeded to examine the history of certain legislation that I am sure is familiar to most of you, and that is the legislation dealing with the Teton Dam disaster, where there the Congress in its sympathetic attitude and in its understanding of a problem determined to help the people. In this record there will be a copy of a proposed bill which is merely given by these people as assistance to you, the Members of Congress, because what they ask of you today is that there be an endorsement of legislation which would compensate.

Mr. Harvier in emphasizing the point met with his tribe. There was an endorsement of it. Yesterday the Colorado River Tribes at Parker endorsed such action. In addition to that, many of the witnesses who will testify here today from Parker and later on you will find the same at Needles, strongly urge that prompt and efficient expeditious action be initiated by you gentlemen to see that something is done to compensate.

We have heard explanations here, and we are not here to attack anybody. We can sit here and we can argue about what is right and what is wrong. The purpose of the people that I represent is to secure relief, not to throw stones. The objective they have in mind as they come here today is to tell their story to you hoping that in your hearts you will understand that they need relief, that they are innocent, and that the Congress of the United States has a record of helping.

One person said-in closing, I make this observation-we are in an age where it is difficult to ask the Congress to spend money. We have heard testimony here about the difficulty of getting money even to handle the mosquito problem.

Gentlemen, I suggest to you that there was no problem at all in my hometown of Long Beach, Calif., when they wanted to take the New Jersey out of mothballs and refurbish that ship for many,

many millions of dollars in excess of what it would cost to again make these people whole.

We don't say we are against defense; we say that the first line of defense is a content, happy citizenry. These people seek your help. They implore you for assistance in enacting something which might be termed the Colorado Disaster Assistance Act of 1983.

Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. Our next panel is Philip Younis, Gwen Robinson, Gerald Hunt, and Cary Meister.

Before we begin, let me share with the witnesses a concern I have. We have to be out of here in 11⁄2 hours or 14 hours maximum. It is unfair in a sense to cut the time off on witnesses, but if we don't get a fairly short presentation from this panel, it will shorten the time of other witnesses.

So, I would appareciate it if you help us. We will have all the statements in the record, and give us a brief 2 or 3 minutes on what is really at stake and why your idea should receive positive attention. It would be of great help to us, and give everyone a fair chance to be heard before we have to conclude.

[Prepared statements of Philip Younis and Gwen Robinson; resolution 344, plus attachments submitted by Gerald W. Hunt; and the prepared statements of Cary Meister and Don B. Moon may be found in app. I.]

PANEL CONSISTING OF PHILIP YOUNIS, RESORT OPERATOR; GWEN ROBINSON, REPRESENTING YUMA CROSSING PARK COUNCIL, INC.; GERALD W. HUNT, TOWN ATTORNEY, PARKER, ARIZ.; CARY MEISTER, PRESIDENT, YUMA AUDUBON SOCIETY; AND MARYETTA TSOSIE, VICE CHAIRMAN, LA PAZ COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

Mr. YOUNIS. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you very much for this opportunity to speak to you. I am Philip Younis, and I live in Parker where I have been self-employed since 1972. I operate three resorts on the California side of the river and a State park concession in Arizona.

I have heard public officials state that we, the business owners and residents along the river, only have ourselves to blame for being flooded. They claim we were warned that if we built below certain levels we stood the chance of flooding.

I not only deny ever being warned by the Bureau of Reclamation, but state that they didn't even inform other agencies of the possibility of flooding on such a grand scale. For example, why did the counties and States issue permits to build if they knew of such a damage? Why did the Bureau of Land Management even encourage building in the so-called flood plain? Why were Federal concessionaires never made aware of even the slightest possibility of such danger?

I will tell you why. It was a lack of communication. The Bureau of Reclamation failed miserably to warn us of the hazards we faced. The left hand of the giant didn't know what the right hand was doing, and all the while, Americans who built and lived on the banks of the Colorado River, supposedly protected by one of the greatest flood control systems in history, got wiped out.

We played by the rules that were given to us. We watched in awe as the United States launched the space shuttle. We believed the system sturdy and sophisticated enough to protect us. Then in disbelief it happened. The water rose and destroyed property, took lives, and brought commerce along the river to a standstill. Surely a nation that is first in space can protect its citizens back on Earth a little better.

Mistakes were made all right, but not by the people who live along the river. It does no good to keep looking back on what has happened; we must look ahead and start to rebuild on higher ground. Most of my friends and neighbors want that chance. We need a helping hand to accomplish the enormous task ahead of us. We also need some assurance that this will not occur again.

I believe in spite of all that has transpired, that help is forthcoming. I believe this so strongly that I have already started to clean up the mess to begin the rebuilding process.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, for allowing me to speak to you today.

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Robinson.

Ms. ROBINSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Honorable Chairman Udall, Congressman Stump, Congressman McCain, and Insular Affairs Committee members, I am Gwen Robinson, and I would like to speak to you as a representative of the Yuma Crossing Park Council, Inc.

The purpose of this nonprofit corporation is to foster the development of the Yuma Crossing Park along 2 miles of the Colorado River at Yuma. The park has two major sections. The eastern portion lies within the Yuma Crossing and Associated Sites National Historic Landmark.

You see the map that has that conceptual configuration on it. This natural ford is significant in the history of the opening of the American West. The progression of pathfinders across the river since 1540 included Spanish conquistadors, Padre Kino, Kit Carson, the Mormon Battalion, and 49'ers to name but a few. Transportation systems utilized woven Indian baskets, ferries, stagecoaches, mule teams, steamboats, and the railroad.

The development of this historic/cultural park will serve to interpret a major site in our American heritage. The western section of the park is recreational in scope. This plan utilizes the riparian river oasis as a greenbelt offering a variety of water-related activities such as fishing, canoeing, swimming, and picnicking. The need for more water based recreation is recognized on a statewide level by the Governor's Commission on this matter.

In 1980 the Yuma Crossing Park Council began to integrate conceptual park planning with the environmental impact study initiated by the Bureau of Reclamation to address flood control on the Lower Colorado River. We commend the Bureau for the open advisory group meeting process that spanned several months. Every effort was made to accommodate interests within the designated

area.

The two alternatives proposed in details for the draft EIS met the needs of the Yuma Crossing Park. However, the draft EIS had not been published by the time high water release reached the area in June of this year. Extended high flows will impact future park

facilities and operations. But primarily our main concerns have to do with the configuration of the land and river channel between the levees. Our main concern is the configuration of land. For this configuration to be drafted to completely annihilate the park planning areas would be disastrous.

In order to arrive now at a compatible flood control plan we would like to: One, support the continuation of the environmental impact statement process by assessing the current situation and incorporating new data concerning the high flows; two, request that the Bureau of Reclamation gather the new data quickly and, therefore, publish the EIS as soon as possible and three, recommend the review of the operation of the reservoir system to determine if improvements in water release management is possible.

The Colorado River is primarily a ribbon of life in these desert regions. The need for flood control and water for agriculture and development must be balanced with the benefits of recreational pursuits and wildlife habitat.

Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. I was pleased to visit the historical park yesterday, and I commend you and all who worked on this. It is an exciting thing, and it is in the old Yuma spirit and I appreciate it.

Mr. Hunt.

Mr. HUNT. The council of the town of Parker unanimously adopted Resolution 344, which has been supplied to this committee as part of the record and which sets forth the town's position on this particular matter. The town of Parker is a community of approximately 2,500 people located at the southern tip of the Parker Strip which is a major recreational area.

Many of the town's merchants receive the benefits directly from that recreational activity. Many benefit indirectly and with passage of time as dollars turn over, they, in turn, stand to receive their benefits from the recreational activities along the river.

The time that passes for these benefits or lack of benefits when disasters occur is a major concern. We, too, are very concerned, as is evidenced by this corporate resolution, with the thoughts that were eloquently set forth by representatives of the Quechuan na

tions.

The town of Parker is much more concerned with not finding blame or fault but much more concerned with enabling those people who have been damaged by this tragedy to pick up and go on and to prosper as they were prior to this tragedy.

Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

Mr. Meister.

Mr. MEISTER. I am Cary Meister, president of the Yuma Audubon Society, speaking on behalf of the members of Yuma Audubon. We are not only concerned about the potential of existing health hazards along the river but as citizens with a special interest in the natural environment, we are concerned about the damage that has been done to that environment by the flooding.

The dead and dying riparian vegetation, specifically cottonwoods, willows, and mesquite.

As a number of speakers have suggested today, we feel it is time to reassess water management policies on the Colorado River, spe

cifically, to give the Bureau of Reclamation more flexibility in management of reservoirs.

If during the flood season the reservoirs could be drawn lower is a possibility. This could create a more stable riverflow to benefit all river users, wildlife, vegetation, recreationists, property owners, farmers, and others. Moreover, if this were done, clearing of vegatation, dredging, and ground water pumping would be largely, if not entirely, unnecessary.

We also need to look more and continue the progress made in water conservation activities and agriculture and in municipal and industrial uses.

It doesn't really matter how many dams you build if these dams are not managed for flood control because they will be kept at high levels. They will not be able to accommodate the flood flows.

If you change the management policies, the existing dams will be adequate; therefore, we ask that no more dams be constructed on the Colorado.

A number of proposals have been made to pump ground water. We believe that this could be viewed also as a beneficial resource that perhaps existing technology or new technology could be developed to reclaim and recycle ground water for human use as in farming.

Another possibility is to pump it into the river, but we feel that the effects of this on wildlife, on water quality and water chemistry need to be considered so we really know what we are doing if we get involved in this.

We feel that perhaps it would be appropriate for the Government to support research and development in ground water use where there are abnormally artificially high ground water levels, but at the same time we would caution against the continued mining of ground water in areas such as central Arizona where the water level is getting lower and lower.

We also feel the State and local governments should reevaluate its flood plain zoning policies and enforce existing laws and regulations. We fail to understand how people were allowed to live between the levees and feel that they should be permitted to relocate with the help of the Government if they so desire through longterm, low-cost Government loans.

Saline water is killing or has killed vegetation along the river. If the Bureau is allowed to permit this, they should be allowed to mitigate it by restoring the vegetation loss by high water levels. Specifically, we ask for Government support to revegetate with native cottonwoods, willows, and mesquite. We feel existing trees that manage to survive the high water should be protected because they are essential not only to the wildlife but to human enjoyment of the river.

Community groups could very well help in revegetating the river. The Audubon Society is working with two refuges, Havasu and Imperial, for revegetation.

The lower Colorado River can serve many interests. We believe that its natural character should be given equal consideration with human uses, that we should preserve and restore some of the natural environment for present and future wildlife and human generations who want to enjoy the natural beauty of this river which epit