1972 (folder 1 of 3)

(1)

RC

D. IL; I

L--)3

!kr—IOWA

[J,V, \71,151, 111-M \.i`Q,.9 )

ASSOCUIcEM

Ni!LO W. HOISVEEN STATE OFFICE BUILDING 900 Bout..EvNRD

BISMARK, NORTH DAKOTA 53501

TO: All NWRA Board Members SU3JECT: Spring Board Meeting

MILO W. HOISVEEN, President (North Dakota) TED RIGGINS, JR., First Vice President (Arizona) J. R. BARKLEY, Second Vice President (Colorado)

897 NATIONAL PRESS BUILDING

I. J. COURY, Treasurer

(New Mexico)

DEC 2

7 1972

LORIN W. MARKHAM, Past Prasictent

(Washington)

CARL H. BRONN, Executive Director (Nashington, D. C.)

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20004 (202) 347-2672

December 21, 1972

As indicated in previous correspondence, the date of December 20 was set as a dead] inc or obtaining the Board's desires in regard to the spring 3oard meeting. The consensus of the Board appears to favor the dates of March 12 or.Oarch 19,

1973

_{as the most desirable time for the spring meeting. Most of the-tomments} favored a cocktail party for the Senate and House members desiring to attend such a function.

You also gave consideration to the possibility of attending the presentations made at the National Water Commission hearings. Your President and Executive Director will make one or two presentations. It is also possible the President-Elect will be on hand for this hearing.

Enclosed is a form to be used in expressing your desires as to the exact date you prefer, March 12 or 19, and the hotel of your choice which would either be the Hotel Washington_or the Quality Motor Inn. The later is near the Old Senate Office Building.

An invitation is being extended to Mr. Jack Ross, Chairman of the Resolutions Committee to be present at our spring session.

NH: s1

cc: Carl Bronn Ted Riggins

All NWRA Board Members Jack Ross

DICTORS

Ted Riggins, Jr., Ariz. James F. Sorensen, Calif. J. R. Barkley, Colo. Robert T. Chuck, Hawaii John A. Rosholt, Idaho

Chris C. Green, Kans. Wesley D'Ewart, Mont.

Judge William C. Smith, Jr., Nabr. Roland Westergard, Nay. I. J. Coury, N. M. Sincerely yours, • Milo W. Hoisveen President Milo W. Hoisveen, N. D. Clarac,ce Base, Okla. Harold Henson, Ore. Homer Engelhorn, S. D. John W. Simmons, Tex.

Edward H. Southwick, Utah Lorin W. Markham, Wash. Marlin T. Kurtz, Wyo. Kenneih L. Cook,

(2)

Ntr

MVER RESrar,ZS

4SSBC[11rOri

MEMO To: A7REVIEW:

MILO W. HOISVEFN, President (North Dakota) TED RIGGINS, JR., First Vice President

(Arizona) J. R. BARKLEY, Second Vice President

(Colorado)

I. J. COURY, Treasurer (New Mexico)

LORIN W. MARKHAM, Past President (Washington)

CARL H. BRONN, Executive Director (Washington, D. C.) WASHINGTON, D. C. 20004 (202) 347-2672 December 21, 1972

RC

L).

DEC 7 1972

AD HOC COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL WATER COMMISSION

On November 21, the Ad Hoc Committee and Board members were offered--for comment--options for our approach to the NWC report; addressees also were advised to encourage the States and Universities to testify. Responses:

John Rosholt counseled a temperate approach and reported his work with Idaho State and University "pros."

Lutcher Simmons furnished us a 50-page analysis of the draft report, which the State of Texas will use as a basis for testimony (copies have been distributed among Western States Water Council members, and will be repro-duced here on request. Copies already have been mailed to John Rosholt and Milo Hoisveen.

Jim Sorensen furnished copy of his advice to the State association.

Check with Don Doncaster shows coordination with the

State of Washington, and also Washington State University. Milo is working with the State and the Souris-Red River Basin Commission. Milo also obtained views on the Iowa State Agricultural Water report from our "advisory

economist" (NWRA letter of December 5); copies--together with statistics just obtained from Department of Agricul-ture--have been mailed to John Rosholt; Utah State

University; Montana State University and Nebraska Uni-versity (several of the economist's points had been made in my first discussion of the Iowa report, mailed the Board last July 27).

Bob Barkley advised (by phone) that NWRA try to be helpful,

DIRECTORS of

to guide Commissioners toward modifications findings.

Ted Riggins, Jr., Ariz. Chris C. Green, Kans. Milo W. Hoisveen, N. D. Edward H. Southwick, Utah James F. Sorensen, Calif. Wesley D'Ewart, Mont. Clarence Base, Okla. Lorin W. Markham, Wash. J. R. Barkley, Colo. Judge William C. Smith, Jr., Nebr. Harold Henigson, Ore. Marlin T. Kurtz, Wyo. Robert T. Chuck, Hawaii Roland Westergard, Nev. Homer Engelhorn, S. D. Kenneth L. Cook,

(3)

-2-A common view is that the scope and volume of the report are too large to permit comprehension in time available. B.-TASKS OF AD HOC COMMITTEE

a. The discussion of aims in the November 21 letter to you brought written response from Rosholt and Milo, and some telephone discussions. Results:

1. There is no recommendation to undertake a publicity drive. 2. Blasts of the Commission beyond those at, and stemming

from, Salt Lake City are not necessary.

3. Our people should be encouraged to testify. (The

WERX5 letter of last week - discussing the Action Alert by environmentalists - was mailed to 350 executives to spur their efforts).

b. _{I see the Ad Hoc task as: to cause the Commissioners to} pay attention to NWRA, as a prospective witness among a multi-tude. In NWRA testimony, to create doubt as to beneficial effects of proposed recommendations, and to suggest moderation of some views of the Draft Report. With Action Alert geared "to produce ten thousand letters," gaining real attention to NWRA's views may be difficult. (Gaining attention is one of the purposes of the letter to Mr. Appling, and the inclosed question to Ted Schad)

Each Ad Hoc member will devise his own methods of alerting the Commission to NWRA - one view among 10,000!

c. The Committee may consider the advisability of seeking legislative action for additional time, since extension to July 15 was not obtained.

C.-TESTIMONY TO NWC:

Ad Hoc Committee please comment on my draft of prospective testimony by NWRA, to be furnished you a month before the hear-ing in Washhear-ington, D.C.

D.-NEW:

I have a 59-page compendium (from Water Resources Council) of the recommendations of the Draft Report, which will be reproduced on request only.

This afternoon I shall obtain from Ted Schad an 89-page compendium of Recommendations in the Draft Report. If you want this reproduced for you, please write me.

Water Resources Congress has issued a summary of the Draft Report, of which extra copies are available here (however, it is the Ted Schad talk which we distributed at Salt Lake City,

(4)

-3-Water Resource Executives met in New Orleans to stimulate interest in testifying.

Tom Cahill has study groups working on sections of the

Draft Report, and may be contacted for copies of reviews of his analysts 'Regional Effects is one such].

A group of people interested in water resource development

met in Washington, D. C. December 20 to discuss implications of the Report, and to encourage industry and labor to develop views and to furnish them to NWC.

Carl H. Bronn

Inclosure

Copy to:

(5)

MA'

ATE2 RESIECE

ASSUCETOON

DIRECTORS

Mr. Theodore M. Schad Executive Director

National Water Commission 800 North Quincy Street Arlington, Virginia 22203 Dear Ted:

CARL H. BRONN, Executive Director (Washington, D. C.)

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20004 (202) 347-2672

December 20, 1972

This is concerned with impacts of the final report of the NWC.

I suppose that for certain purposes [for example:, the use of G.P.O., and civil service rules], the National

Water Commission is regarded as an agency [lower-case "a"] of the Federal government? Is there an official determination as to whether NWC is an "agency recommending major Federal actions"?

..if so, descriptions of alternatives and im-pacts are to accompany the NWC recommendations, under requirements of Sec. 102, PL 91-190.

Since NWC is to report to the -Congress, as well as to the President, this issue is significant. ..if no, the Executive Branch is confront.ed: with preparing statements of alternatives and impacts on legislative proposals and major actions stemming from the Report. [The Office of the President might find helpful such pre-liminary statement by NWC, even if NWC is exempt from PL 91-190].

NWRA is especially interested in the potential impact of the package of recommendations on long-term productivity; we think that impact statements are necessary to picture the probable results from following the Commission's advice. Thus the question about NWC's responsibilities in the matter.

Chris C. Green, Kans. Wesley D'Ewart, Mont. Judge William C. Smith, Jr., Roland Westergard, Nev. I. J. Coury, N. M.

Nebr.

Sincerely,. , Carl _ H _•

Milo W. Hoisveen, N. D. Clarence Base, Okla. Harold Henigson, Ore. Homer Engelhorn, S. D. John W. Simmons, Tex.

Edward H. Southwick, Utah Lorin W. Markham, Wash. Marlin T. Kurtz, Wyo. Kenneth L. Cook,

(6)

r r wipc,e4r..\\

•-•—•

*47tRE

-1t7,

HEIM

MILO W. HOISVEEN, President

(North Dakota) TED RIGGINS, JR., First Vice President

(Arizona) J. R. BARKLEY, Second Vice President

(Colorado)

Don Bowsher

Spokane Chamber of Commerce P.O. Box 2147

Spokane, Washington 99201

Dear Don:

LORIN W. NARKHAM, Past President (Washington)

CARE H. BRONN, Executive Director (Washington D. C.)

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20004 (202) 347-2672

December 20, 1972

Further regarding your inquiry about the NWC Draft, and human values, you may examine recommendations about recreation [especially beginning on Page 5-160, Draft] for consistency with benefits and cost sharing on irrigation and flood control. You may find a bias to favor the guy who floats around the U.S. having a good time, versus the worker fighting flood and drouth to produce stuff for other people to use.

Carrying the comparison further, you could examine cost sharing on Page 14-24. Note that Item b, irrigation, seeks to recover all costs from the man risking his capi-tal and his labor to produce food and fiber for sale; on the other hand, the recreationist -- enjoying himself --would repay no capital costs [it appears]!

Qñ Page 14-25, note advice to invest heavily in.,environ-mental areas of national significance -- which can be enjoyed only by people with the means to travel.

DIRECTORS

Ted Riggins, Jr., Ariz. Chris C. Green, Kans. Milo W. Hoisveen, N. D. Edward H. Southwick, Utah James F. Sorensen, Calif. Wesley D'Ewart, Mont. Clarence Base, Olda. Lorin W. Markham, Wash. J. R. Barkley, Colo Judge William C. Smith, Jr., Nebr. Harold Henigson, Ore. Marlin T. Kurtz, Wyo. Robe•t T. Chuck, Hawaii Roland Westergard, Nev. Homer Engelhorn, S. D. Kenneth L. Cook,

(7)

S

4rwmoc

L. DIRECTORS TO:

ASSOC MIL

1

MILO W. HOISVEEN, President (North Dakota) TED RIGGINS, JR., First Vice President (Acizonu) J. R. BARKLEY, Second Vice President

(Colc,raciol

Alfred Drayton

Niobrara River Basin Development Assn. RFD #1, Box 60 O'Neill, Nebraska 68763 I. J. COUR. (New Mex LORIN W. Ma,hingtom CARL H. BRON,,., (Washington, D. C.) WASHINGTON, D. C. 2000.-(202) 347-2672 December 20, 1972 Jim Lewis

Oahe Conservancy District P.O. Box 78

Huron, South Dakota 57350

Henry G. Lange Ord, Nebraska

68862

SUBJECT: Information to Aid the NWC in Preparing Its Final Report

You know from the WERXS letter that self-styled envir-onmentalists are trying to stack the NWC hearings with party-line testimony in the guise of public opinion. That will reduce time for helpful testimony.

However, NWC states it will regard written testimony with equal care, but the sooner received the better.

Therefore, each of you might write the Commission about the implications of the Draft Report to people,in your area. Specifically: were cost sharing for irrigation' to tequire that DIRECT beneficiaries -- either the irrigators or the entities representing them -- bear full allocated costs [with interest at 5 7/8, or thereabouts], your projects might not be built. The consequences of Federal withdrawal from funding could then be listed, by you. The national interest in such consequences could be set forth, as your views.

Such technique -- analyses of consequences of nbt under- 1 taking an action under debate -- is standard analytical pro-cedure used to obviate direct confrontation with the theories

Judge William C. Smith, Jr., Nebr. Roland Westergarcl, Nev. I. J. Coury, N. M.

Milo W. lioisveen, N. D: Clarence Base, Okla. Harold Henigson, Ore. Homer Engelhorn; S. D. John W. Simmons, Tex.

..CONTINUED..

(8)

•

-2-behind recommendations. It is within your capabilities

to

do this, without wrestling with the Draft Report

and the slug

of back-up studies. You note I have suggested this to Mr.

Appling, one of the so-called "strong men" of the Commission.

Regards,

Carl H: Bronn

cc: judge William C. Smith, Jr.

NWRA Director, Nebraska Homer M. Encrelhorn

(9)

RECD.

DEC 1 9

1972

R. P. PARRY T. M. ROBERTSON JOHN H. DALY (1913-1968) BERT LARSON C. G. MCINTYRE JOHN R. COLEMAN THOMAS G. NELSON JOHN A. ROSHOLT FRED D. DECKER ROBERT C. PAINE

PARRY, ROBERTSON, DALY 8c LARSON LAWYERS

THE IDAHO FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING P. 0. BOX 525

TWIN FALLS, IDAHO 83301

December 14, 1972

Mr. J. R. Barkley Director

National Water Resources Association P.O. Box 679

Loveland, Colorado 80537

Re: Bronn's December 9, 1972 Letter Dear Bob:

TELEPHONE

1206) 733-3722

Carl advises me that I may contact the Executive Committee member of my choice concerning the questions he asks in his letter. Please accept my humble suggestions.

Spring Meeting of the Board of Directors

I am beginning to think that the National Water Commission isn't going to listen to any inputs anyway. But we have to go down fighting. I am wondering if the best ap-proach would be to flood the field hearings as best we can and have only Carl or Milo testify at the Washington hearings. February 7th is too early for the winter board meeting espec-ially in light of the fact that a new Commissioner of Reclama-tion and a new Assistant Secretary might not be appointed by that date if the occurrence of four years ago repeats itself.

I am in favor of a reception rather than committee hear-ings as I think the latter are totally useless. If the meeting were scheduled for the week of March 19 or the week of March 26 with a reception on Tuesday or Wednesday of that week, we would certainly be able to better assess what the administration has contemplated in "our little corner of the world". I do favor

including officials of appropriate committees and other water user organizations in our reception.

As to the loss of Jim Smith and Ellis Armstrong, regard-less of my personal feelings, I have made some inquiries of my Congressmen as to whether or not they have any information con-cerning a possible change in philosophy within the Department of Interior. My personal guess is that Morton would like to

(10)

over-

-2-PARRY, ROBERTSON, DALY & LARSON

Letter to J. R. Barkley December 14, 1972

take Agnew as the front runner for 1976. Consequently, he must cut out people who he doesn't think are in the main-stream of American thought.

Basically, I think Carl's schedule for a week's activities are good without the sub-committee hearings, but if it is the consensus of the directors to assemble during the National Water Commission hearings, I will certainly make every effort to attend.

Our usual balmy Idaho Winter has this year turned into ten straight days of sub-zero weather and 8 inches of snow on the valley floor. I anticipate that one of the preserva-tionists will soon propose Idaho as a National Ice-cap Monument.

My best to you and Muriel. It's my hope that you have a fine holiday season and that 1973 finds you in good spirits.

Sincerely, "`1044/ici ASA/d7Cf JOHN A. ROSHOLT JAR:ddm cc: Milo Hoisveen Carl Bronn

(11)

011 '2ES7U

ASSMARIK

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20004 (202) 347-2672

December 9, 1972

TO: NWRA BOARD OF DIRECTORS, INFO TO CHAIRMEN OF COMMITTEES

SUBJECT: SEE ITEMS 1, 2, 3 & 4: ITEM 1 REQUIRES YOUR ACTION!

1. SPRING MEETING OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS

You recall that the Executive Committee of the Board is to select the dates for the Spring meeting, subject to a "gues-timate" of progress by the Congress in organizing its committees.

This letter outlines factors influencing selection, so that each of you may offer views to a member* of the present Executive Committee. Committee members will, in turn, inform Milo Hoisveen of their recommendations, hopefully by December 20.

A...Hearings by the National Water Commission Holding the Board sessions and the Capitol Hill reception in tandem with the D.C. hearings of the NWC would have such benefits as:

1. .For NWRA affiliates, witnesses at the NWC hearings in D.C. could attend NWRA's reception at no travel cost. Further, some Members of Congress at the reception might be greeted by more than one NWRA member per State. [More than one M.C. at previous receptions has asked: "Where are my people?"]

2. .Members of the Board of Directors could at-tend the NWC hearings without duplicating travel costs and time.

*Telephone numbers of present Exec. Committee are at end of letter.

WHOM

Judge William C. Smith, Jr., Nebr. Roland Westergard, Nev.

I. J. Coury, N. M.

(12)

BOARD - - - -2

B...Time for Congress to Organize

Congress convenes on January 3, which is more than two weeks in advance of the Presidential succession date. Within one month, the Congress could appoint members to the Committees, and select the Full IIA Committee chairmen. As to Subcommittee chairmen, my inquiry reveals no forecasts of clashing of wills for those seats. However, full Committee organization may not have occurred, i.e., prerogatives between Subcommittees and full Committee may not be established by early February.

C.. .Possible Days for Reception

Days that are best for a reception are said to be either

Tuesday or Wednesday. The place best to secure reasonable attend-ance of Members of Congress is said to be the Rayburn Office Build-ing, Rooms 339 & 340 [which we have used successfully twice before]. Those rooms are presently available during early February. I have placed a tentative hold on Wednesday, February 7 -- subject to a formal request by Congressman Harold T. "Bizz" Johnson, who doesn't know anything at all about this yet!

Alternative days are Tuesday, February 6; Tuesday, February 13, or some arbitrary date [as the first Wednesday] in March. D...A Possible Schedule

1. Open the Board sessions at 2:00 P.M. on Monday, February 5. 2. Continue Board sessions all day February 6.

3. Recess all day Wednesday for individual members to call on their Senators and Congressmen.

4. a. _{.With sponsorship by an official of each of the IIA} Committees, hold open house on Wednesday night to honor the new members of the two Committees. Officials of Department of Interior, the National Water Commission, Water Resources Council, the Public Works Committees, the Appropriations Com-mittees, among others, could be invited [Your views?]

b. .Invitations could be extended to other associations, as: the National Wildlife Federation, the League of Women Voters, the Association of Soil Conservation Districts, the Water Resources Congress, and the National Waterways Confer-ence.

c. .The reception could also mark the turn-over of responsi-bility from outgoing officers to incoming officers of NWRA [pre-sumably, Mr. Hoisveen could later testify to the National Water

(13)

BOARD - - - -3

Commission, since he would have been responsible for the preparation of testimony]. Your views?

5. The new Executive Committee of the Board could meet on the morning of Thursday, February 8. Other Board members could attend the NWC hearings, as desired. Or, if the in-coming Executive Committee prefers, it could use Thursday, February 8, to testify before the Irrigation and Reclama-tion Subcommittee of the House and the Water and Power Sub-committee of the Senate on NWRA proposals for the future of the Reclamation program, or of Western irrigation. Your views?

E.. .YOUR PREFERENCES

Please telephone your preferences to any member of the present Executive Committee whom you choose.Their names and telephone num-bers are on attached list, at the end of this letter.

will the present Executive Committee please pro-vide their recommendations to Milo Hoisveen by December 20? I realize this is expedited decision-making, but several members of the Board are confronted by possible conflicts in February and March.

2. NEW LEADERS FOR DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR -- TO WHAT ENDS?

A. While in Minot at the end of last week, I telephoned Sally to arrange the distribution to you of the inquiry as to background information you collect about the "oh-so-quick" acceptance by

Sec-retary Morton of pending resignations by Jim Smith and Ellis Armstrong. REASONS: NWRA needs knowledge of [for example] whether the accept-ance forebodes:

a..further downgrading of irrigation by the Secretary of Interior;

b..a strengthened determination to avoid long-term commitment to "irreversible" construction;

c. .a yielding to pressures inside and outside of

Interior for a greater emphasis on fish and wildlife, scenic set-asides, encroachments on State water ad-ministration, and other conflicts with comprehensive multi-purpose water development.

To whatever extent members of the Board can obtain information, and provide it to me [as requested earlier], I shall collate it and redistribute it to the Executive Committee.

(14)

BOARD - - - -4

B. Unbalanced environmentalism has drawn new strength from analyses of recent elections, especially the defeat of two power-ful reclamationists in Colorado. Now, the combined Evening Star and Daily News reports:

.."Environmentalists charged that many of those in Interior understood to be on their way out had been more eager to exploit natural resources than to pro-tect land, water, and energy."

NWRA needs to know if the three-year turnabout in the Reclama-tion program -- "exploitaReclama-tion" like:unlocking the Small ReclamaReclama-tion program from the "Udall icebox"; reversing the trend in funding for Reclamation loans and construction to reach the highest point in history; slowing the rise in interest rates for project formulation and evaluation; persisting in support of Garrison, Oahe, CAP, Central Utah, Riverton, Westlands, and 2nd Syphon; breaking the barrier be-tween formulation for purposes and formulation for objectives; avoid-ing Interior's proposed Presidential veto on all new authorizations of the past two sessions of Congress -- aided by Secretary Smith and Commissioner Armstrong, may be factors in their ouster,

The Senate IIA Committee also needs to know this in considering new nominations from the Executive Branch -- including that of White House Assistant WHITAKER to key position of Under Secretary.

3. EXTENDING TIME TO COMMENT ON NWC DRAFT REPORT

NWRA i s request for extension of time to consider the NWC

Draft Report has received an interim reply; in essence: not practic-able, but is under study by Chairman Luce.

4. ENCLOSED UPPER MISSOURI RIVER TALK OF DECEMBER 7

The last third of the enclosed talk at MINOT groups some views of NWC in a way you may find informative.

...on the same panel were John Neuberger [Chairman, Missouri River Basin Commission], and Jim Casey [Irrig. & Reclamation Subcommittee, House IA]. Mr. Casey

said Reclamation is in real trouble; he suggested that reclamationists ought to suggest the kind of program that could be accepted by the Nation.

Sincerely,

(15)

National Water Resources Association December 9, 1972

PRESENT MEMBERS OF NWRA EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

MILO W, HOISVEEN, President National Water Resources Assn. 900 Boulevard

State Office Building

Bismarck, North Dakota 58501 TEL: [701] 224-2750

J.A. "TED" RIGGINS, JR. Director

National Water Resources Assn. 111 West Monroe

Phoenix, Arizona 85003 TEL: [602] 258-7011

J.R. BARKLEY, Director

National Water Resources Assn. P.O. Box 679

Loveland, Colorado 80537 TEL: 1303] 667-2437

JOHN W. SIMMONS, Director

National Water Resources Assn. Sabine River Authority

P.O. Box 579

Orange, Texas 77630 TEL: [713] 883-2531

LORIN W. MARKHAM, Director National Water Resources Assn. 5524 South Garfield Avenue Spokane, Washington 99203 TEL: [509] MA-4 0927

ROBERT T. CHUCK, Director

Honolulu, Hawaii 96809

TEL: [808] 548-2211 Ext. 373, or 537-1214

MARLIN T. KURTZ, Director

Cody, Wyoming 82070 TEL: [307] 587-4256

EDWARD H. SOUTHWICK, Director National Water Resources Assn. 1483 Wall Avenue

Ogden, Utah 84404

(16)

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS WASHINGTON, D.C. 20314

IN REPLY REFER TO DAEN-CWZ-A

Mr. J. R. Barkley Second Vice President

National Water Resources Association P. O. Box 679

Dear Mr. Barkley:

11 December 1972

Being a last minute pinch-hitter for the Deputy Chief of Engineers, I did not find it possible to have printed copies of my remarks

available at your Fortieth Anniversary Meeting in Salt Lake City. The speech has now been reproduced and I am inclosing a personal copy for you.

I believe that you, as a Director of the National Water Resources Association, will find the portion describing the old and new missions of the Corps of importance to your particular area. Once again, let me stress the point that if your Association is to provide for the future it is very important that you make your voice heard by the policy makers and the priority setters.

It was a great pleasure for me personally to have had the opportunity to participate in your program, and I congratulate you on a splendid meeting.

Sincerely yours,

1 Incl . MORRIS

16 Nov 72 Speech Mor General, USA

before NWRA 11rector of Civil Works

A1ECC "EJ

EC 1 3 197p

(17)

DAEN-CWZ-A _{11 December 1972}

Mr. J. R. Barkley Second Vice President

National Water Resources Association P. 0. Box 679

Dear Mr. Barkley:

Being a last minute pinch-hitter for the Deputy Chief of Engineers, I did not find it possible to have printed copies of my remarks

available at your Fortieth Anniversary Meeting in Salt Lake City. The speech has now been reproduced and I am inclosing a personal copy for you.

I believe that you, as a Director of the National Water Resources Association, will find the portion describing the old and new missions of the Corps of importance to your particular area. Once again, let me stress the point that if your Association is to provide for the future it is very important that you make your voice heard by the policy makers and the priority setters.

It was a great pleasure for me personally to have had the opportunity to participate in your program, and I congratulate you on a splendid meeting. 1 Incl 16 Nov 72 Speech before NWRA Sincerely yours, J. W. MORRIS

Major General, USA Director of Civil Works

(18)

REMARKS BY

MAJOR GENERAL J. W. MORRIS DIRECTOR OF CIVIL WORKS

BEFORE NATIONAL WATER RESOURCES ASSOCIATION SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH

16 NOVEMBER 1972

THE VIEW FROM THE FISH BOWL

If ever there was an appropriate place for this Association to meet, it is here in Salt Lake City. The phrases used to describe the accomplishments of this Association - - "Pioneers of Irrigation - - Yesterday: Protectors of the Environment - - Today! Providers for the Needs of Tomorrow" take on an historic and significant meaning when mentioned in the Great Salt Valley.

Preston Nibley's fascinating book, BRIGHAM YOUNG - THE MAN AND HIS WORK is sprinkled with quotes from President Young's Journal. A few passages will illustrate what I mean.

"I proposed building a Council House by tithing and suggested bringing the waters of Big Cottonwood on the east of our big field to the city by a canal. For in these elements are not only all the cereals common to this latidude, but the apple, peach and plum: yea, and the more delicate fruits, the strawberry and raspberry.... We will extend our settlements to the east and west, to the north and to the south and we will build towns and cities by the hundreds, and thousands of the Saints will gather from the nations of the earth. This will become the great highway of the nation."

I am partictlarly attracted to the key words PIONEERS, PROTECTORS, and PROVIDERS. I hope you will not mind if I use them as the framework for my remarks and also .to use them to discuss the Corps of Engineers role in water resources.

(19)

As Pioneers, we in the Corps of Engineers today are justifiably proud of the Corps long heritage and its early leadership. We feel we fulfilled a truly important role as nation builders. During the earliest days of our country, the primary source of engineer talent was found in the Army as graduates of the country's first engineer college at West Point accepted their commissions as ALmy Officers. Quite naturally, as engineering problems developed, the Army was called upon to solve them. An early example was the need for a National transportation system which lead to the Navigation Act of 1824 which placed responsibility for navigable streams upon the Army Corps of Engineers. At the same time, our earliest engineers were leading the pioneers to the west as they surveyed the rivers and mountains and opened the roads across the Rocky Mountains.

The earliest railroads, such as the B&O route in 1E37, were both surveyed and built by Army Engineers. Other pioneering achievements included the Panama Canal, numerous special buildings, the Capitol Dome, Washington Monument and recently the Pentagon.

As Protectors, we are quite proud of what we have done for the environment In spite of a rocky start in the early application of NEPA, we have now found our historical achievements have not been too bad. Shelter belts to control winds and erosion, wildlife refuges and sport fish developments built in conjunction with local and Federal wildlife interests have signi-ficantly added to the population of these splendid creatures of nature. At the same time, rough fish population has dropped.

During my many speeches and appearances, I have been asked frequently, what does the Corps of Engineers think of the National Environmental Policy Act?

(20)

The easy answer to the question is that we like it fine, and our primary regret is that we did not have it ten years sooner. Having been authorized and then required by this law to display the extent to which we have gone in protecting the environment, we find that our record through all the years has not really been bad at all. But the additional authority and the clarity of the requirements of NEPA have really been a big help to us. Besides pro-tecting the environment, the Corps of Engineers is foremost in propro-tecting people. The dramatic floods of 1972, which did not happen, should be proof of that. Actually, there were three major floods which would have occurred last year but for the flood control protection which had been built earlier. Two of these were on the Columbia in the Missouri and the third was on the Ohio. I'll talk about the first two now and catch the Ohio a little later. In the Columbia Basin, we would have had the second highest flood on record, but because of the flood control works, very little, if any, flooding occurred except in the lowest lands. The people of the Columbia River Basin probably did not even realize how close they came to tragedy. In the Missouri Basin, for the second consecutive year, we have had more water than the system had ever had before. Except for the major flood control works on the main stem of the tributaries, the Cities of Omaha and Kansas City would have suffered one of the worst floods on record. Again, I am sure that most of the people in the Missouri River Basin and even downstream along the Mississippi, were not even aware of the security provided to them, their families and their homes by the flood control works.

Being Pioneers and Protectors is relatively easy to describe because we merely have to take a page out of the past. To talk about providers of

(21)

tomorrow's needs is a considerably tougher proposition.

I would like to turn to the third portion of the talk and that is Providers. The reason this is a tough one not only should concern the National Water Resource Association, but also all other agencies and particularly action agencies such as the Soil Conservation Service, The Bureau of Reclamation and the Corps of Engineers. I say these action agencies are able and are willing to provide for tomorrow's needs. The problem, however, is finding out what the needs are and even more fundamentally, finding some technique to determine what is best for our people and our nation. Let me go a little bit further and then come back to this particular point. Providing for tomorrow's needs requires us to take a look at a lot of the missions that have come along as well as to consider again some of the old requirements that have been placed upon the various Federal agencies. I will talk parti-cularly about the Corps of Engineers and the purpose of outlining many of our new missions is not to impress you with all the work the Corps is doing, but emphasize the variety and scope of the needs we are called upon to fulfill today and also to develop the problem of identifying the priorities in which these needs should be addressed.

Let us look at some of the new and old missions:

Environmental - This is not necessarily a new mission for the Corps, but it has taken a more clearly defined and a much more highly emphasized effort since the passage of the National Environmental Policy Act. Environ— mental considerations affect all of our activities, old as well as new, not

(22)

e• ;

• .

only in the planning and engineering stages, but. in terms of the prodGcts we build and the way we run.

Dam Safety - The Congress recently placed on the Corps of Engineers the responsibility for the inspection of all water retention structures if

they are over 25 feet high or retain more than 50 acre feet of water. The U. S. Committee on Large Dams in 1965 identified about 29,000 so called large dams, and in all probability there will be an equal number of smaller structures which we will have to inventory as we develop the inspection program and prepare to report to the Congress by 1 July 1974.

. _{. .}• _• Jirban Studies' 'iddress -.the p-Zoblem..df-uar..resources andr'eiet..d land •

management in high industrial and populated areas. These have become critical because of a lack of long-term planning as our cities have grown, in terms of 'utilities; drainage, and communications .sygtems, The need for these Studies

.••••.• ••••

also.. .i.'eflet0 _{for„floOdpi.ain - zoning. Thi*}

• • • • •• •.. . •

• program for each city which is unable to plan completely its own water and related land use. At the present time, the ratio of new planning starts is running about four urban to one traditional study.

Stream Erosion - Whether it is appropriate or not, the, effects of streel.Ls on their banks is beingidentified more and more with the improvements that the Corps has accomplished on our navigable rivers. Throughout our country

are 3.3 million miles of rivers and abo!.:: 7 million of river bans. There is some problem on every river stre=. As a. rough estf.mate, there is aout one-half a million miles of

• critical because of imminent

which could be termed or actual loss of high-value public or •

(23)

private property. This subject is of growing concern throughout the Congress and I feel confident that current authorities to deal with this problem on public property will be extended and that some attempt will be made to protect private property on a cost sharing basis.

National Shorelines - Including Alaska, we have over 30,000 miles of shorelines around the perimeter of our country. A recent report completed by the Corps of Engineers indicates that there are 2700 miles which are critical to the extent that the cost of protection is less than the value of the losses which are about to be sustained. A big problem here is the requirement that Federal funds be spent on public lands and that

private cost must be borne, by the owners. These works are very expensive,

-and, under present. cost-sharing arrangements many Miles of shoreline will• probably never be protected. This is a program which seems almost

.certain to become the subject of policy decisions. in the nent few

major congressional .interest and • • --,

Deep Ports - For several years we have viewed the approach of super-sized bulk carriers to U. S. shores, being accommodated by new facilities in the Bahamas and in Canada. The time is now to decide under what

conditions supercarriers will operate on a regular basis within U. S. jurisdiction.

Deepwater port facilities are of current concern because the world market for seaborne movement of bulk commodities is very large and growing rapidly. The 1971 shipments of six principal bulk commodities - oil, iron ore, coal, grains, phosphate rock and bauxite amounted to 1.7 billion metric tons.

(24)

Only a few major facilities for petroleum delivery by supertankers are needed. Accordingly, they must be located very carefully in relation to our national interest -- economic, social and environmental.

The:most .dramatic aspect ofl.T. S.-buljk commodity t_ading stems from tle rapid*growth in the.demand Of our industrialized nation for-crilae petroleum. We face the almost certain need for import up to 300 million tons of crude oil annually by 1980, growing to possibly one billion tons annually within 30 years.

The world petroleum and maritime industries, led by Japan and Europe, have responded to the growth in trade - partiCularly in movement of crude oil over long distances - by the develo:=ent :E supersize ships which have capacities up to 359,000 d.w._., w'th 1 P ,-E7Pr 3hips up to

500,000 d.w.t. now being built. Currently,the maximum capability for most ,• U.S. crude oil ports is 65 to 80,000 d.w.t. Carriers.

_ Shif)s or movin;•, iron ore, coal and other btlk commodities, separately or in mul:i-purpose vessels (030's) are also becoming 1111.,-h larger.

As exciting and important as these needs may be, we just cannot allow ourselves to be wooed completely away from the job we set out to do as a result of earlier laws which the people of America persuaded their

at critical t4T-Ps in this nations develooment The Flood Control Acts of 1927 and 1936 - or even the Navigation Act 1824-are exa,aples.

Every time we look away Y:',ther us not to turn our back on flood protection - 9 disasters sin2P 1 June, including , Agnes. If ever we are to learn,Asncs is an excellent: teacher.

(25)

Agnes came ashore in Florida around the 20th of June and after creating damage on the Gulf coast, moved inland quietly and without any particular impact on Georgia, South Carolina and North Carolina,

went out to sea - apparently on its way to oblivion. On 22 June, however, Agnes decided to pay the coast of America another visit. Headed inland around New -jersey up to New York and Pennsylvania where it turned West to Western Pennsylvania, it then turned South and .made a 180 degree turn as it waned on the 24th of June and headed to upper New York and Canada. The most devastating impact was in the Susquehanna Basin where it made a circle with the Wilkes-Barre and the Corning-Elmira areas being in the center of what was to become a $3 1/2 billion disaster affecting extensive

- • :•

areas - o Virg-±ria,.MaryIand Pennsylvar4a-:and* 7.:;ew York:* The-severity'was: so great that we established an office in Pennsylvania called the Susquehanna District. This office has executed 3200 contracts with value in excess of $33 million to clear debris; repair utilities in homes and to - contruct

, . .

.mobile hom,emsites. To .dat there are over 3300'permanent- hOmes &"6300 mobi_{_} •

home sites which have been repaired_{_} _{_} _{_} r constructed. Associated with _these major relocations of some 300,000 homeless people are many residual

problems involving schools, post-offices, shopping areas, new communiti' and creating neiahbors of people who did not Know each other and such _

harrassments of determining how to get a newspaper or where to Cate_{_ _} Ironically, the damages from Agnes resulting from flooding could have been prevented for the most part. The levees which were built for the 100 year storms, or the Johnstown flood, did their job as well as could have been expected in the light of 400 year occurrences. On the

(26)

other hand, the flood control retention reservoirs which were necessary to supplement the levees have been only partially completed. Had the system been in effect, all the damage in the Corning-Elmira area could have been eliminated and Wilkes-Barre would have at best only received minor damage and Agnes would have been a "naughty girl" instead of a national disaster.

I have mentioned two major flood events about which the public knows very little -- one on the Columbia River, floods of record were prevented with only minor localized flooding by the flood control structures in that system -- and the other on the Missouri River. To further emphasize the importance of flood control works, we have only to look at the impotency of Agnes on the upper Ohio where ten flood control projects costing $250 million took 12 feet of the flood crest of Pittsburgh and prevented over $1 million of damage at Pitts-burgh and down stream on the Ohio.

Waterways - Another traditional mission for the Corps of Engineers has been serving our nation's navigable streams and inland waterways. While some of these are new, others are approaching their initial life expectancy and all traffic is rising at an unexpected rate. Within the next 30 years, the traffic on the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway will double and on the lower Mississippi will quadruple. Within 60 years, the Ohio and upper Mississippi will see 4-6 times the present tonnages and the Arkansas System is well ahead of its expected tonnage capacity, while the Missouri set an all time record last year.

(27)

•.•.:•• •

._.Besides-these illpTssive gains- j.q.-commarciAl traffic,he demand pn

•. .• • - . . a , •.

. . . .

. .

Our. system by non-commercial interests such -as spOrtsmen, recredo'n enthusiasts and by conservation groups and industrial developers, only

dd to the total business served by- our Waterways.

The waterways ha:4.6'a limiting capacity because of either physical

. •

. • . • . • . , •

constraints or by operational techniqdes. Besides the' limited' funds available to improve the waterways, emphasis is needed to get maximum service from our present system in the face of rising demands. Some questions which need to be asked to be assured of maximizing waterway capabilities for today s user and to meet tomorrow's demand are:

1. Which systems need attention and 'in what priority?

2. T:,:here are specific bottlenecks and ho y can they best be reduced or

3. What oTera:fr!24 techniques can be massaged to save minutes time after time?

4. Are our design and construction practices no more elaborate or costly than necessary for the purpose?

The factor which emphasizes the need for good judgment and setting .1 priorities is money. A quick look at the cost of some of the'old and new missions will show what I mean. Environmental considerations are increasing .

_

project, planning costs by .about 50% as well as extending the time needed to do f_{_} _{_} planning and engineering. The full cost of the environmental considerations is not yet measurable. The dam inspection program alone will cost in

excess of $100 million before it is finished. Urban studies are costing $1.5 million each,with the actual projects which follow costing in the hundreds of milliohs of dollars in all probability.

(28)

Super ports will also be expensive, but at this stage of the game we'do'not .kno7:hdurmuCh'. -Deepening ' _:existing ports will probably average $100 million apiece. Stream erosion costs about $100 per foot for the 500,000 critical miles - over $2.5 billion. National shorelines . protection of 2700 critical miles will also

-cost about $2 billion.

rinally,-th6to§t fnarigton Systes .doula c6Stsj.S..much

to $400 million per lock and dam and we are already constructing multi-purpose structures in the northwest which approach one-half . billion

-each.-So, it becomes clear that with these dollar requirements, priorities will be established among the various contenders for funds. These

priorities will be either by accident or emotion, or by some realistic and intelligent foresight and planning which give the proper balance between old pro..-,ra7is in rPlati:n to each and n relation to

environmental, economical, technical criteria and control.

Such cos_s will - also lead to a natin-a-1 polic- on usa of furZs- ail:: this again will be either by accident or by good judgment and foresight. Out of these increasing demands have already &merged certain positions which might be of interest. The first is the search for . cost-sharing in all investments. We have already seen water supply and recreation: cost-sharing criteria and just last week fish and wildlife mitigation lands fell into the sharing category. Tomorrow will bring other

cost-sharing features and among them might be navigation. Another priority which seems to be emerging will favor urban Studies-b-ecatse of their-_{_} _{_}

-

higher need aspects. Another criteria reflects an appatent .Federal -reluctallae. to initiate expensive projects which have a high follow-on cost.

(29)

The new priorities and policies toward developing and paying for the development of our water resources are beginning to emerge in several activities now moving across the Federal government. First is the strong trend toward government reorganization. Then there is the new report of the National Water Commission and, of course, the recent revenue sharing laws.

My deep concerns are that those responsible for establishing policy and priorities and for making changes, have really taken the time and possess the wisdom to detect the needs of our people, have separated personal prejudices or organizational gains from the basic issues, and do not abandon ongoing programs so precipitously as to abort the invest-ments to date.

If this National Water Resources Association is really to provide for the future, then the needs of the individual Americans who make your membership, and those of the region you represent, must be heard and understood by the policy makers and priority setters. Otherwise, the builders and implementers, such as the Bureau of Reclamation, Soil Conservation Service and the Corps, may very likely be directed away from what this Nation really needs -- a wholesome and secure life for its people based on frugal and efficient use of its resources.

0

(30)

MINA

iEiR

JUS:URES

ASSOCIIA-Igal

TO NWRA BOARD OF DIRECTORS

REca

DEC 1 1 1972

I. J. COURY, Treasurer -(New Mexico)

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20004 (202) 347-2672

December 7, 1972

This confirms news reports that the Secretary of

Interior accepted, as of January 20, 1973, the resignations of Assistant Secretary of Interior for Water and Power

Re-sources, James R. Smith, and Commissioner of Reclamation Ellis L. Armstrong.

Any information that Directors may get with regard to background for this, and whether Members of Congress

are being consulted by the Secretary of Interior might prove helpful.

Sincerely,

Carl H. Bronn

ls

DIRECTORS

Ted Riggins, Jr., Ariz. Chris C. Green, Kans.

Milo W. Hoisveen, N. D. Edward H. Southwick, Utah James F. Sorensen, Calif. Wesley D'Ewart, Mont.

Clarence Base, Okla. Lorin W. Markham, Wash. J. R. Barkley, Colo. Judge William C. Smith, Jr., Nebr.

Harold Henigson, Ore. Marlin T. Kurtz, Wyo. Robert T. Chuck, Hawaii Roland Westergard, Nev.

Homer Engelhorn, S. D. Kenneth L. Cook, John A. Rosholt, Idaho I. J. Coury, N. M.

(31)

DEC 1 1

1972

2ES2

1

11 15;

LIS

MSDC_ -10R1

RE

TO:

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20004 (202) 347-2672

December 5, 1972

NWRA AD HOC COMMITTEE FOR RESPONSES TO THE DRAFT REPORT OF THE NATIONAL WATER COMMISSION

The mailing addresses of the Ad Hoc Committee members are as follows:

Carl H. Bronn

Executive Director NWRA

897 National Press Building Washington, D.C. 20004

Lutcher Simmons

Texas Water Development Board P.O. Box 12386

Capitol Station

Austin, Texas 78700

John W. Simmons, Director NWRA P.O'. Box 579 Orange, Texas 77630 James F. Sorensen Consulting Engineer 303-307 Bank of America Building Visalia, California 93277 J.R. Barkley, Director NWRA P.O. Box 679 Loveland, Colorado 80537 J.A. NWRA 111 West Monroe Phoenix, Arizona 85003 Jack Ross 802 Capitol Life Center 225 East 16th Street Denver, Colorado 80203

The Directors requested that an economist from outside the Board be made a member of the Ad Hoc Committee on NWC. As stated in Board Letter of December 1, economists and other disciplines at Utah State and University of Nebraska plan to comment on the Report; those experts might be available for

DIRECTORS

Ted Riggins, Jr., Ariz. Chris C. Green, Kans. Milo W. Hoisveen, N. D. Edward H. Southwick, Utah James F. Sorensen, Calif. Wesley D'Ewart, Mont. Clarence Base, Okla. Lorin W. Markham, Wash. J. R. Barkley, Colo. Judge William C. Smith, Jr., Nebr. Harold Henigson, Ore. Marlin T. KUrl Z, Wyo. Robert T. Chuck, Hawaii Roland Westergard, Nev. Homer Engelhorn, S. D. Kenneth I. Cook,

(32)

-2--consultation.

Further, DR. ALAN KLEINMAN, Research Economist, Planning

and

Coordination, U.S.B.R., the Denver Federal Center, has studied the

Iowa State Report. By telephone, Dr. Kleinman agreed to

advise

regarding questions any of you might put to him about that Report.

DR. KLEINMAN is in Building 67; his office CODE is 740;

his phone number is: [303] 234-3166.

Sincerely, —

Carl H. Bronn Info Copies to:

Dr. Jay Bagley*

Utah State University

Dr. Warren "Bud" Viessman* University of Nebraska

(33)

MILO \N. HOISVEEN, President (North Dakota) TED RIGGINS, JR., First Vice President (Arizona) J. R. BARKLEY, Second Vice President (Colorado)

Mr. Charles F. Luce The Chairman

The National Water Commission 800 North Quincy Street

Arlington, Virginia 22203

Dear Mr. Chailman:

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20004 (202) 347-2672

December 5, 1972

This requests that the National Water Commission

extend the time for public review of its Proposed Report. The complexity of the preceding reports to the Commission, the volume and scope of the back-up data and of the

Pro-posed Report, and delays in securing adequate numbers of copies of NWC publications, all are factors which imperil

abilities to comment adequately within the present time frame.

As to time, the delegates to the 41st Annual

Convention of NWRA -- who directed that this request be made -- suggested that the period for review be extended to at least July 15, 1973. This date was selected with knowledge of the limited life of the Commission, ,and of indications that NWC funds for Fiscal Year 1974 are not budgeted.

DIRECTORS

Chris C. Green, Kans, Wesley D'Ewart, Mont.

I. J. Coury, N. M.

Sincerely,

(/).

Milo- W. Hoisveen, Presiden National Water Resources

Association

Milo W. Hoisveen, N. D. Clarence Base, Okla. Harold Henigson, Ore. Homer Engelhorri, S. D. John W. Simmons, Tex.

(34)

itECD.

KONA_

M

UR' 12

EAMES

ASSMAVEK

JOINT LETTER

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20004 (202) 347-2672

December 4, 1972

TO:

[1] Grant R. Sykes, President, American Bikeways Foundation, 1000 Vermont Avenue N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005

[2] Western Resource Executives

This relates to that Task Force of "Outdoor Nation"* which is studying

--"Where do off-road vehicles fit into the outdoor recreational picture?"

[1] You state a hope that a body of facts can be assembled. Members of NWRA are concerned with watersheds and also the operation of water storage and conveyance facilities. Off-road vehicles can affect terrain which influences both. However, the Association has undertaken neither an assessment of conditions, nor a forecast of potential influence.

12] Copies of this letter are being mailed to resource executives in 18 Western States. THIS IS AN APPEAL to each executive to pro-vide NWRA with data responsive to your problem and also to your

request [copy of your letter of November 28 is on reverse side here-of].

Information received here will be collated and furnished you by the end of December.

*The "Outdoor Nation" is an organization designed to provide in-sight into and solutions for the Nation's most serious outdoor recreation problems. Such objectives closely relate to NWRA's de-sire for a balanced view as regards the use of resources for people.

DIRECTORS

I. J. Coury, N. M.

(35)

AMERICAN BIKEWAYS FOUNDATION 1000 VERMONT AVENUE, N.W. WASHINGTON. D. C. 20005 (202) 398-0900 November 28, 1972 Mr. Carl H. Bronn Executive Director

NATIONAL WATER RESOURCES ASSN. 807 National Press Building Washington, D. C. 20004 Dear Mr. Bronn:

NOV 7

_{0 197?}

The Off-Road Vehicle Task Force of the Outdoor Nation has selected the subject of 'Where Do Off-Road Vehicles Fit Into The Outdoor Recreation Picture?" As soon as possible

would you please provide a statement setting forth the position of your organization on this subject and any data you may wish to submit supporting that position, particularly with respect to trail bikes, snowmobiles, and all terrain vehicles, to Mr. R. C. Rittenhouse, The Jerry Martin Company, 4411 Grand Avenue, Gurnee, Illinois 60031. Mr. Rittenhouse will compile the various position statements and condense them to provide Task Force members with a summary of problem areas.

As a member of the Task Force, I am hepeful that a body of well-documented factual data will assist us greatly in the

search to find acceptable solutions for the problems and conflicts engendered by the growing use of off-road vehicles in natural

areas.

Sincerely yours,

Grant R. Sykes President

(36)

krATIDE

FirER E'ES:URCES

ASSOCMCK

LORIN W. MARKHAM, Past P (Washington)

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20004 (202) 347-2672

December 1, 1972

TO NWRA BOARD OF DIRECTORS: CHAIRMEN OF THE RESOLUTIONS, RESEARCH & AGRICULTURE, M&I, AND WATER USES COMMITTEE

SUBJECT "IN HOUSE" INFO! NATIONAL WATER COMMISSION, 1973.

1. PURPOSE

This summation of events about NWC since Salt Lake

City is distributed outside of the Ad Hoc Committee because of needs of others to know [no infringement on responsibili-ties of Ad Hoc NWC Committee].

2. PUBLICATIONS

RECD

0 1972

a. On Sally's return from Salt Lake City, she provided NWC with names and addresses [furnished either her or me in lists from State caucuses] of persons ordering the Draft Report. Under agreement with Ted Schad, his office checks the lists against names to whom he had mailed copies, and

mails copies without charge to those lacking them [Ted "found" some money after my talk with him on November 13, and used it to order more copies before traveling to Salt Lake City].

Meanwhile, the environmentalists found gold in the Draft Report, and clamored for copies -- causing a fresh demand.

b. On November 30, Ted reported that be believed his

mailers had satisfied our Salt Lake lists. Stock is again ex-hausted. Ted is seeking GPO authority for an emergency run of the Draft Report.

DIRECTORS

Judge William C. Smith, Jr., Nebr. Roland Westergard, Nev. I. J. Coury, N. M.

..CONTINUED..

(37)

-2-c. NEXT -- Sally has combed the countryside to beg or borrow

copies of _{Agricultural Water Demands by Iowa State University -- only} one copy [airmailed to Dr. Warren "Bud" Viessman, Director of the Water Resources Research Institute, University of Nebraska, and a speaker on our Salt Lake program] could be borrowed; NTIS has none.

d. We 'phoned the authors, at Iowa State, and spoke with Dr. Hargrove. He said:

..they have no stock of PB 206 790;

..however, that Report, with minor changes, has been printed by the Center for Agricultural and Rural Devel-opment at Iowa State, AMES, Iowa, as CARD NO. 40 T, price $2.50. AMES is mailing copies to DR. JAY BAGLEY (Utah State University), DR. BUD VIESSMAN (Univ. of Neb.), and James F. Sorensen (Ad Hoc Committee).

e. A sequel to Agricultural Water Demands ["Future Alternatives Affecting the Agricultural Demand for Water and Land", PB 211 444] has been obtained here from NTIS and mailed also, as in "d." preced-ing. This sequel is the basis for variations about "soybeans instead of meat", and different doses of fertilizers, discussed in the Draft Report.

3. PROFESSIONAL ACTIONS

a. DR. JAY BAGLEY, Director, Utah Water Research Laboratory, and some colleagues are studying the Iowa works. Their objectives

..provide views to NWC;

..as a max, to suggest alternative findings; ..as a min, to point out why conclusions need be withheld pending time for further work.

Timing of the testimony, and mode of presentation, will be fixed later.

b. DR. WARREN VIESSMAN, Director WRRI, University of Nebraska, possibly with DR. HANNA, Dean of Engineering, and DR. LESLIE SHEFFIELD [also at S.L.C.], are working with DAYLE WILLIAMSON [at S.L.C.1,

Liaison for Governor with NWC, State of Nebraska, on proposals for a Governor's comment to NWC [all mentioned, along with leaders from State Legislature, held Council in Kearney, Nebraska last week]. DOCTORS VIESSMAN AND BAGLEY are in touch with each other.

c. And Commissioner FAIRCHILD and I reviewed possible actions, yesterday, and will inform each other of whatever our respective or-ganizations do.

(38)

d. Enclosed for info are copies of three letters [August 14, September 12 & 281; subject, the Iowa Study.

4. NWRA APPROACH

a. Absent responses to my Board letter of November 21, I

assume your efforts will be directed primarily to encourage responses by States, and views by State Associations and entities thereof.

Those testifying orally need to write now for time. ..I assume the tone will be constructive.

b. At the Upper Missouri River Water Users Association meeting in Minot, North Dakota, December 6-7, I will continue efforts to promote two categories of testimonies -- public entities and profes-sional researchers.

c. After Minot, I shall draft a prospective NWRA view for criti-cism by the Ad Hoc Committee on NWC. I propose to keep it broad but short -- on the basis that UTAH & NEBRASKA will provide profes-sional inputs, and Board members will generate political inputs.

5. REMINDER

You recall the two pages of hand-written notes about the Draft Report and why it should not be ignored that I used it to brief the Board and the Resolutions Committee. You recall its purpose was to incite a reading of the 50-odd pages of actual excerpts from the Re-port. Please keep in mind: Ili my statement that each of my points about a view of the Draft Report carried a reference to Chapter and Page that NEED BE READ to understand the NWC view! [2] my warning that those condensed sentences were not placed in quotations; they are appraisals of the referenced views, in context of the Report.

6. FINAL

I mentioned to Mr. Luce, yesterday, the shortage of copies of Draft Reports and Ted's special efforts to alleviate the situ-ation [in case he*should be inclined to aid the effort]. He*said: "I hope your people make the hearings interesting!"

Sincerely,

Carl _Bron7W47--) *Mr. Luce

(39)

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE

vivo

Oklahoma - Texas Area

Southern Region

Bushland, Texas

79012

August 14, 1972

Mr. Carl H. Bronn, Executive Director

National Water Resources Association

897 National Press Building

Washington, D.C.

20004

Dear Carl:

I was pleased to have an opportunity to review "Agricultural

Water Demands"

prepared by Iowa State University for the National Water Commission.

Even'

though ay review has been hasty due to a lack of time, I was

able to form

the following views:

1. The study dealt largely with interrelations of water, land,

and

technology on food and fiber production by the year 2000.

This

is as it should be, •since the National Water Commission requested

such an evaluation.

2. ,The study dealt with only one component of the total need

for a

national land and water policy. As our nation struggles with

this matter over the next quarter century, we must take into

account the demands from land and water resources for timber

production, forage for livestock, natural areas, recreation,

water harvest and storage, living space, transportation,

etc.

3. The study brings into sharp focus the matter of water

resource

development for irrigated agriculture in the western United

States. This has been a growing concern of NWRA, bringing

about a shift in.emphasis for water resource development

in the

iiest for other high priority National needs.

4. The Iowa study did not focus attention on the concept of growing

the nation's food and fiber requirements on Class I and II lands

with full use of technology and irrigation to reduce environmental

degradation from cultivated lands. This concept is referred to

in the paper "Crop Production Potential," which I prepared for

the Great Plains Agricultural Council 1972 meeting at Lincoln.

A copy is enclosed for your review and comments.

(40)

-2-5. The Iowa study should be made

available to agricultural research

and education leaders in USDA and

the Land Grant Universities

and to leaders in government and

the private sector concerned

with land and water use policy in

this country. The study (if

released broadly) will be a much referenced

and discussed

docu-ment in the years ahead.

1 am sending the Iowa report to Dr.

Howard Ottoson of the University

of

Nebraska, who represents that State

on the NWRA Research Committee,

hop-ing that he can find time to review

it and send his views on the report

to you.

J. R. aohnston

Acting Area Director

Oklahoma-Texas Area

Enclosure

cc:

Howard Ottoson

T. W.Edminster

A.W. Cooper

(41)

0 ,

Oz-,

ill#V1111

PilA\77r1-1_Piiiro

_11-.)ffif

11 1 ' H "iPid

MILO W. 110ISVEFN, President (North Dakola) TED RIGGINS, JR., First, Vice President_(Arizona) J. 7. C.',,R1,1.!..Y, `...7,..!crid Vice President_{((.Thloraclo)}

897 NATIC)NAL. PRESS BUILDING

I. J. COURY, Treasurer' (New Mexico)

CARL Ft. BRONN, Executive Director (Washington, D. C.)

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20004 (202) 347-2672

September 12, 1972

No=n .K. v4hittlesey

,Depar.:,.ment of Agricultural Economics Washington State University

'Pullman, Washington 99163

De -- Dr. Whittic!sey:

This mornig I received from Lorin Markham

a copy of your--.memo of August 28,

toting that you do not have a copy of

the study discussed,

am air-mailing you. a_copy - now!

you state'(;,C, Lorin, " An acre of subsidized irrigation in the West (i.e_lgor) can be shoan to have

a ratlier severe impact on farm Income.

o The authors did not

so show me, but if they - or anybody eL so ihows the National Water Commission, trc

Western States can fo: the Ree1:41nation program (in my opinion).

Why? Because already theorists_z.nil the Office

of Managem„::11, -and Budget seek to eliminate regional

benefits 'from the objectiveL of water development, except as OMB would

approve. 3 , If irrigation. Kal1y impacts severely

(autsade'lleclamation-te ritory, it would,. indeed be verboten. 'And

there is already enough - difference of opinion about 1;.1=sidizod

irrigation within the Con-gressional Committees that an adverse NWC

report would break the ( 1)aok.

But, to me, irrigation is not yet proven

to be a zero-sum ga,.a -as-contended in several ,reports to the NWC

-- because of at least •thr2e sets of factors;

DIRECifORS

Ted Piguins, Jr., Ariz. Jarr.i-2s F. ;',oreitsen, Calif. J. R. borkley, Colo. Pobz,rt Chuck, Hawaii

r .JtIdaho

Chris C. Green, Karts. Wesley D'Ewart, Mont.

Judge William C. Smith, Jr., Nebr. Roland Westergard, Nev. I. J. Coury, N. M.

Milo W. Hoisveen, N. D. Clarence Base, Okra. Harold Heitioson,.Q.re. Homer Engelhorn, S. D. John W. Simmons, Tex.

0000 tl•

Edward H. Southwick, Utah Lorin W. Markham, VVash. Marlin Kurtz, Wyo.

Kthinuili L. Cook,