PAGENO="0001" REDESIGNATE THE DEPARTMENT~F THE INTERIOR AS THE DEPARTMENT OF NA1kJRAL RESOURCES ~~og3~ uonnirl1EE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE NINETIETH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION ON S. 886 A BILL TO REDESIGNATE THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AS THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND TO TRANS.. PER CERTAIN AGENCIES TO AND FROM SUCH DEPARTMENT U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON : 1968 DOC~. I.. f OCTOBER 17, 19 AND 20, 1967 tii'~i\ 88-889 7Y/~ PAGENO="0002" HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington SAM J. IRVIN, Ja., North Carolina ERNEST GRUENING, Alaska EDMUND S. MUSKIE, Maine ABRAHAM RIBICOFF, Connecticut FRED R. HARRIS, Oklahoma ROBERT F. KENNEDY, New York LEE METCALF, Montana JOSEPH M. MONTOYA, New Mexico JAMEs R. CALLowA~, Chief Counsel and Staff Director ARTHVB A. SMAR?, Staff Editor RonEaT WAGER, General Counsel ESTHER NEwnEUG, Chief Clerk B. F. BErntENs, Minoritij Côn8uttant PAMELA M. PANCZAK, Staff Editor SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas, Chairman KARL B. MUNDT, South Dakota CARL T. CURTIS, Nebraska JACOB K. JAVITS, New York CLIFFORD P. HANSEN, Wyoming HOWARD H. BAKER, Ja., Tennessee II S PAGENO="0003" WITNESSES Hon. Wilbur J. Cohen, Under Secretary, Department of Health, Educa- Page tion, and Welfare; accompanied by Richard A. Prindle, M.R., Director, ~ij;,e~a~u~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 32 Hon. Frank E. Moss, a U.S. Senator from the State of Utah 12 Hon. Stanley R. Resor, Secretary of the Army; accompanied by Alfred B. Fitt, special assistant to the Secretary of the Army for Civil Works. _ 43 Hon. Stewart L. Udall, Secretary of the Interior 105 EXHIBITS No. 1. A bill to redesignate the Department of the Interior as the Depart- ment of Natural Resources and to transfer certain agencies to and from such Department, S. 886, 90th Congress, first session, intro- duced by Senator Moss I 2. Memorandum concerning S. 886, prepared by Wallace D. Bowman, specialist in conservation and natural resources, Natural Resources Division of the Legislative Reference Service, the Library of Con- gress, October 12, 1967 4 3. Analysis of natural resource spending, the budget of the U.S. Govern- rnent for fiscal year 1968 7 4. A bill to preserve the Nation's estuarine areas and their natural resources, S. 2365, 90th Cong., first session, introduced by Senator Ribicoff 2~ 5. Statement of Hon. Gale McGee, a U.S. Senator from the State of Wyoming, submitted for the record 40 6. Article from the New York Times, "Army Admits Role in Lake Pollution," October 11, 1967 50 7. Joint statement by the Departments of the Interior and the Army regarding the issue of dredging on the Great Lakes. suhmiii-~1 PAGENO="0004" - 153 ~ 157 2 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (b) Clause (S) or section oon oi ULie U UI. (41V ~ -- amended to read as follows: "(5) Under Secretaty of Natural Resources for Water and Under Sec- retary of Natural Resources for Lands." TRANSFERS rno~ THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ~ ,`~ i-n `mm flnvaan nf Tna-linn Affnirs in the Denartment of the In- PAGENO="0005" flEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (1) the functions transferred under subsection (a) of this section to the Secretary of the Army, and (2) such personnel, property, records, obligations, commitments, and unexpended balances of appropriations, allocations, and other funds as he determines are used with respect to such functions to the Department of the Army. At the end of the war or the period of national emergency the President shall transfer such functions back to the Secretary of Natural Resources, and he shall transfer such personnel, property, records, obliga- tions, commitments, and unexpended appropriations, allocations, and other functions back to the Department of Natural Resources. TRANSFERS FROM THE DEPAETMET~T OF THE NAVY ; OCEANOGRAPHIC FUNCTIONS SEC. 8. The National Oceanographic Data Center in the Department of the Navy together with such nonmilitary personnel, property, records, obligations, commitments, and unexpended balances of appropriations, allocations, and other funç~~ asare determined by thA fliv~"~~ `~1' 4i~ ~ -- - ~ ~ ~ ~ (b) All personnel, property, records, obligations, commitments, and unex- pended `balances of appropriations, allocations, and other funds, which the Direc- tor of the Bureau of the Budget determines are used primarily with respect to any function transferred under the provisions of this section, are transferred to the Department of Natural Resources. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WEL]?ARE; AIR POLLUTION CONTROL FUNCTIONS SEC. 10. (a) The functions of the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare under the Clean Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1857 et seq.), the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 3251), `and all other air ncelliifirn~ o~-rntwb1 fi ~-~H.t~na ~ A BILL To redesignate the Department of the Interior as the Department of Natural Resources and to transfer certain agencies to and from such Department Be it eHcwted by the Senate anZ Hol4se of Repre.s~entcrtives of the TJnitetI SI tate8 of America i~ Congress assembled, That this Act may be cited as the "Depart- ment of Natural Resources Act of 1967". ~-w~ ~ n~teat~ry~oi aie mterior aurnorizect uncter tne Act en- titled "An Act making appropriations for the Department of the Interior for 1 3 PAGENO="0006" partment of the Army and all such functions of the Secretary of the Army with respect to or being administered through such Corps are transferred to the Secretary of Natural Resources. (b) All nonmilitary personnel, property, records, obligations, commitments, and unexpended balances of appropriations, allocations, and other funds, which the Director of the Bureau of the Budget determines are used primarily with respect to any function transferred undE~r the provisions of this section, are transferred to the Department of Natural Resources. (c) In time of war or such other national emergency as the President de- termines, he may transfer- 4 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ANNUAL REPORT Sue. 13. The `Secretary shall, as soon as practicable after the end of each calendar year, make a report to the President for submission to `the Congress on the activities of the Department during the preceding calendar year. EFFECTIVE DATE SEa. 14. The provisions of this Act shall be effective after ninety days. follow- Ing its date of enactment. _______ EXHIBIT 2 S. 886-To REDESIGNATE TIlE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AS TIlE DEPARTMENT or NATURAL RESOURCES AND To ThAN5FER CERTAIN AGENCIES TO AND FROM SUCH DEPARTMENT (By Wallace D. Bowman, Specialist in Conservation and Natural Resources, Natural Resources Division, October 12, 1967) S. 880, introduced by Senator Frank B. Moss on February 7, 1967, would establish in one executive department various federal agencies, bureaus and commissions dealing with renewable and nonrenewable resources. Senaitor Moss made his ease for unification in citing the lack of any federal plan for the development, management and protection of the Nation's resource endow- ment. He also pointed out that every resource agency is surrounded by competing (3) 1'èrmit the u~ovef1i1ifeT11L7t'Y ~xia~xrc~ ~i~a 2L~ ja&lancLfor its own material requirements of our industries; - ~(4) Provide coordinated administration of farfiung resource programs, PAGENO="0007" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RJ~SOURCES 5 bility at Interior, the bulk of construction is assigned the Oorps of Engineers in the Department of Defense. In addition, the Federal Power Oomuiissio~ is authorized to grant licenses for the construction of hydroelectric dams on rivers. If ocean resources are included in this resource category, three other agencies of government must be added to the list. Typical conflicts of interest arising in the case of river basin planning would find the Corps of Engineers (Defense) concerned with many aspects of flood control and waterway development ; the Soil Conservation Service (Agriculture) concerned with upland watershed protection ; the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife (Interior) concerned with fish habitat and recreation ; and the Federal Power Commission granting licenses for the construction of hydroelectric facilities. E~rZier Proposa18 Several earlier proposals contained provisions similar to S. 886. Secretary I~kes in 19~38 sugg~sted that the Interior Department 1e changed into ~ Department of Conservation. In 1949, a task force of the first Hoover Commission defined the functions of a proposed Department of Natural Resources, the establishment o~f ~hieh President Truman supported until 1951. President ~ ~ ~~~Jhn1- f1~ ~ S. 886 would create a national Department of Natural ~esources, ahsorhing the present Department of the Interior-but exclude a number of Interior fime. tions that fall outside the natural resources category-and include a number of resource-related agencies and functions of other Departments. The Secretary of Interior, to be redesignated Secretary of Natural Resources, would be assisted 1y a Deputy Secretary and two Under Secretaries for Water and Lands. All would 1e appointed by the President with Senate confirmation. The proposed agency and functional changes in resources administration are shown below. To Department of Natural Resources from Department of Agriculture: 1. Forest Service. 2. Watershed Protection and Flood Protection (16 U.S.C. 1001-1008). 3. Construction of certain public works on rivers and harbors for flood control, and for other purposes (58 Stat. 887). To Department of Natural Resources from Department of Defense: Civil work functions of the Corps of Engineers.' To Department of Natural Resources from Department of Navy: Functions relating to National Oceanographic Data Center. To Department of Natural Resources from National Science Foundation: Func- tions relating to sea grant programs (title II of Marine Resources and Engineer- ing Development Act, 80 Stat. 998). To Department of Natural Resources from Department of Health, Education, and Welfare: 1. Functions under the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 1857, et seq.). 2. Functions under the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 3251). 0 A~1 ~ ~ PAGENO="0008" 6 DEPARTMENT 0]? NATURAL RESOURCES In addition to the above, the Federal Power Act would be amended to include the following: 16 USC `W7(e) ~ ulan of -estahlishment of resources policy through administrative regulations -dissemination of a vast range of information to assist agriculture and other resource industries -many kinds of research and development Next to expenditures for national defense and for the costs of past wars, the FOST found that activities concerned with natural resources are the largest category in the Federal budget. Although the study conducted by POST was concerned primarily with Federal research and development activities, its focus on budgetary and manpower aspects resulted in a detailed analysis of overall Federal effort in the natural resources field. Research and development activities are carried out by eight Departments (Agriculture ; Commerce ; Defense ; Health, Education and Welfare ; Transporta- tion ; Housing and Urban Development ; Interior and State) . An even larger number of independent commissions and councils are also involved including the Atomic Energy Commission ; Federal Aviation Agency ; Federal Power Corn- mission ; National Science Foundation ; Tennessee Valley Authority ; Marii~e Resources and Engineering Development Oouncil ; Office of Science and Tech- nology ; Water Resources Council ; Council of Economic Advisers ; Bureau of Budget ; Smithsonian Institution ; National Academy of Sciences ; Appalachian Regional Coiiimission and Delaware River Basin Commission. Departments and commissions, or segments thereof, identified by the POST as having research and development functions, which have apparently been excluded from transfer under S. 886, are outlined below.2 Energy Resources (p. 34, FOST report) Department of Defense ~iuiiii~uilAaii ~u~t~±ui-t Mineral Resottrces (p. 76, ibid) Department of Defense Department of Agriculture Atomic Energy Commission Department of Commerce (B 5) National Science Foundation Department of Transportation Tennessee Valley Authority 1 Research and DeveZopment on Natura' Resources, Office of Science and Technology, Executive Office of the President, May 1963. (A separate task force report on water resources was Issued on March 25, 1963, as a Senate Interior Committee print entitled "Federal Water Resources Research Activities"). 2 Slightly modified to account for reorganization of federal activities since 1963. PAGENO="0009" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 7 Air Resources (p. 87, ibid) Department of Agriculture Department of Commerce (BS, ES) Department of Defense (AF, A, N) Department of Health, Education and Welfare Atomic Energy Commission Federal Aviation Agency National Science Foundation Water Resources (p. 182, Senate Committee Print) Department of Agriculture (CSESS, ERS, SCS) Department of Commerce Department of Defense treaties. ~ S. 886 makes no specific reference to these aspects of resource policy and administration. FEDERAL SPENDING FOR NATURAL RESOURCES Senator RIBIco~s'. . Federal expenditures in the field of natural re- sources totaled $3.2 billion in fiscal 1966, and are estimated at $3.5 billion for fiscail 1968. We will also include at this point the analysis of natural resource spending from the 1968 budget. (The excerpt from "The Budget for Fiscal Year 1968" follows:) EXHIBIT 3 NATURAL RESOURCES The needs of a growing population and an expanding economy demand care- ful development and prudent use of our natural resources. The budget recom- mendations for 1968 are aimed at meeting these demands. They provide for selected increases in those programs most important for preserving our natural heritage and promoting the Nation's economic growth. Payments to the public for the conservation and development of natural resources are estimated at $3.5 billion in fiscal year 1968, an increase of $288 niilthm nv'~v 10R7 PAGENO="0010" WI i~Uo $1,250 $1,260 367 $1,330 Administrative budget funds: Land and water resources: Corps of Engineers Department of the Interior: Bureau of Reclamation Power marketing agencies: Present programs Proposed legislation for revolving funds~______________ Federal Water Pollution Control Administration Office of Saline Water: Present programs Proposed legislation for desalting plant_______________ Office of Water Resources Research Bureau of Indian Affairs: Present programs Proposed program improvements Bureau of Land Management and other___________________ Tennessee Valley Authority___________________~______________ Soil Conservation Service-watershed projects International Boundary and Water Commission Federal Power Commission and other_________________________ 327 $1, 289 320 79 117 316 128 137 151 -74 -78 -53 12~ 229 306 13 6 15 7 24 23 4 8 11 13 122 111 120 118 15 30 77 84 73 76 54 78 111 62 102 102 104 102 33 36 23 18 14 17 20 19 2,235 2,218 2,443 2,479 386 20 442 21 424 487 24 25 17 62 106 146 13~ 137 140 134 130 134 139 143 Subtotal, land and water resources Forest resources: Forest Service Bureau of Land Management Recreational resources: Bureau of Outdoor Recreation National Park Service and other Fish and wildlife resources Mineral resources: investment in the development of the Nation's water 4~nct po~er res~?urces. ~s order to provide for future needs, new water resources projects are to be started in 1968 and advance planning is to begin for projects to be started in later years. However, in an effort to help prevent inflationary presstires in the economy, ongoing Federal construction projects have been slowed dowui in the current fiscal year. A small number of new starts is being recommended for 1968. The budget for 1968 includes $7 million in new obligational authority for the Corps of Engineers to start construction of nine water resources projects cost- ing an estimated $150 million in total. Advance planning will be started on 24 projects. In addition, $3 million is included to begin land acquisition for the Tocks Island Dam and Reservoir project in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and New York. The budget also provides for programs which improve our basic knowledge about flood hazards and enhance the effectiveness of our flood control efforts. New obligational authority of $8 million is included for the Bureau of Reclama- tion to start two projects and to provide loans to finance two new small reclama- tion projects. Studies and investigations by the Bureau will include special em- phasis on weather modification research. A thorough review is being made of PAGENO="0011" alternative solutions to the water problems faced by the States in the Colorado River Basin. When this review is completed, recommendations will be made to the Congress. Legislation previously proposed will again be recommended to allow the Bonne- yule, Southeastern, and Southwestern Power Administrations to use revenues from the sale of power to finance capital outlays and operating costs. Enactment of this legislation would place these power marketing agencies on a basis consist- ent with other business enterprise activities of the Federal Government while retaining continued control through the appropriation process. Revenues from the sale of such power are currently deposited in miscellaneous receipts of the Treasury. ffih~~ fli ~ ~cr-~it- ~ &~ ~ ~ t,vw~t1:U aLLacKing the problems of pollution in entire river basins. During fiscal year 1968, much of the agency's effort will be devoted to reviewing and approving standards developed by the States under the Water Quality Act of 1965. The budget includes grants of $203 million in 1968 to assist municipalities in construction of waste treatment plants. Additional funds are recommended for research and demonstration activities authorized by the Clean Water Restoration Act of 1966. Legislation will be proposed to permit the Department of the Interior to partici- pate with the Atomic Energy Commission and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California in the construction of a large prototype desalting plant. Public domain a~d Indian l~nds.-Tbe Bureau of Land Management manages 457 million acres of public domain land containing valuable mineral, forest, range, watershed, recreation, and fish and wildlife resources. In 19438, the Bureau ex- pects to spend $70 million on the development and use of the resources of these lands. Total receipts from the management of all public lands are estimated to be $626 million in 1968, including $430 million from mineral leases (primarily oil and gas) on the Outer Continental Shelf, which the Department of the Interior also administers. Programs to aid American Indians in 1968 will provide for improved schools, irrigation facilities and roads on Indian reservations, and for expansion of in- dustrial activities and housing facilities. New obligational authority of $118 mil- lion is recommended for 1968, including $31 million for construction of 15 new schools for Indian children. An additional $30 million is proposed to further im- prove programs for the Indians. Forest resources.-National forest lands will provide outdoor recreational activities for an estimated 199 million visitors in 1968. In addition, the Forest ~ ~i~1 ~I~for comparing expenditures for re-, forestation and timber stand improvement with other Federal programs whicb enhance timber supply. I I PAGENO="0012" Recreational resource&-In fiscal year 1968, the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation expects to complete the first Nationwide Outdoor Recreation Plan, which will provide a general guide for all outdoor recreational programs in the country. Receipts of $110 million are estimated to become available to the Land and Water Oonservation Fund in fiscal year 1968, and an advance appropriation of $32 million is recommended to augment the Fund. Together, these funds will enable Federal agencies and States to expand their recreation programs to provide additional outdoor recreation opportunities. Grants of $65 million will be made from the Fund to the States for this purpose and $74 million will be available for acquisition of recreation lands by the National Park Service, Forest Service, and the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. Because of rising land prices, the budget propoSes that all of the $32 million advance appropriation to the Land and Water Conservation Fund be used by Federal agencies to accelerate land acquisition. The 89th Congress enacted legislation to authorize a number of national sea- shores `and other recreation areas. Additional areas are needed, however, in order to meet the growing recreational requirements `of our people. Proposals are under study and recommendations will be made at a later date for the development of the North Oascades `area in the State `of Washington. Proposals are also under ~ +Q m~1r~~ th~ PntAmj~f Vajlexjunodel of scenic and recreation values for the througn resource conservdtlon, impiuv eu ~LOUUCI4UII I~~CL1LLVIV~jf , ~&jJWLaW~ j lug, marketing assistance, and programs to modernize the American fishing fleet. A significant `advance will be made toward the solution of protein-deficient diets throughout the world with the construction in 1968 of `a pilot plant for manu- fa'cturing fish protein concentrate. Mineral researces.-Tbe Bureau of Mines will continue research to expand mineral production and utilization, with increased attention to problems of air pollution and oil shale research. A new research program directed toward major improvements in tunneling technology will be Initiated. If successful, this effort will be of major benefit to mining, urban transportation, water supply, and other public services. Congressional approval will be sought, within the authority of the Helium Act Amendments of 1960, for the Secretary of the Interior tO enter into long-term contracts in 1968 for the purchase of an additional 24 billion cubic feet of helium. This unique resource would otherwise be wasted as a component of natural gas being marketed as fuel. PAGENO="0013" kv_[o~s, oi: utan, wno introclucect ~. 886, and Senator Edward M. Ken- nedy of Massachusetts, one of the cosponsors. We also have a statement prepared by Senator Gale McGee, of Wyo~. ming, which will be inserted at the conclusion of today's hearing. RIBICOFF COMMENDS MOSS' C0MMITM1~NT TO CONSRRvATION We are very delighted to have you, Senator Moss. All of us in the Senate have the highest respect and regard for you, not only as a dis- tinguished Senator but as a man very knowledgeable and very dedi- cated to the whole field of conservation and natural resources. Frankly, were it not for you, these hearings would not be held. Over the past 2 years, I have been deeply impressed with your dedication toward this cause and this objective. ~ `~. ~ uO~e u11au~cou1crrse nere at ieast most ot the time. I appreciate it, too, because I recognize that this is sort of a begin- ning and informational phase of building a record on which the com- mittee can then work its will, and I would hope that a full record could DEPAETMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 13 Reorganization. I hope these hearings signal the beginning of a corn- prehensive congressional examination of our natural resource needs. NA~WRAL JD3~5O1JRCEs ARE DISAPPEARING Despite much public understanding and concerns however. it is Our cities are in desperate need of recreation space. Citizens travel hundreds of miles to escape the noise and concrete of the city. Attend- ance at our national parks continues to break records. The once empty forests of Yosemite National Park are now filled with so many people on some weekends that every campsite is filled. And the smoke from their campfires throws a layer of smog over this beautiful park. But pollution abatement, and conservation in general, are only part of the problem. We must have more land and more water for use at the PAGENO="0014" Thec ~ -~ ment c~I ~rnme: reco~ iate the aeL~ mind, ~et me discuss briefly our existingFederal organiz~tion. Water resource development is the area of most critical need. In this field, we have three major departments with primary responsibility; the Department of Defense ; the Department of Agriculture ; and the Department of the Interior. Until recently, there was a fourth- Health, Education, and Welfare, but last year the President trans-. ferred the Water Pollution Control Administration from HEW to Interior. SEVERAL AGENCIES DEAL WITH WATER RESOURCES The functions of these agencies in the water resource field were mi- tiated to provide answei~s to specific problems. The Army Corps of Engineers began with an appropriation of $75,000 to remove sandbars and "sawyers, planters, and snags" from the Mississippi and Ohio Rivers to aid navigation. The Bureau of Reclamation was created in 1902 to reclaim the land of 17 States for agriculture. Their beginnings came in earlier days of the technological revolution of which I have spoken, when it appeared unnecessary to pay much heed to resource destruction. With the passage of the years, and our increase in popu- lation and wealth, their tasks have necessarily grown in both scope - _, -` ---- __1 ~ ~ ~-1 .~ .. ,-~. ~ ~- ~ 1 ~ ~lz~ -- -- 1_____ 1~~__~_~ L~. PAGENO="0015" - - -~-- ~--~ ~ conservation practices, strip ~ activities, use i the land and water conservation fund, and ---~ open spaces program under HTJD. Involving the Federal Go~- ernment more completely is another category-the management of the public domain. Although located predominately in the West, there is public domain acreage in every State. It includes national forests, the lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management-some of which are forested-wildlife refuges, and units of the national park system. The national forests and BLM lands are managed for a multiplicity of purposes, and the wildlife refuges are used for timber harvesting, oil and gas extraction, and recreation, in addition to their primary purpose. There are two large agencies engaged in the management of the public domain-the Bureau of Land Management in the Department of the Interior, and the Forest Service in the Department of Agri- culture. OVERLAP OF LAND MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS For reasons which I will not go into at this time, their separation was deliberate. Since the emergence of the modern concept of a na- `tional land reserve, however, their functions haye beeomc~ ~Jmnc~ ~ ~L~t~L CLi~II~y ~ Snoula nave responsibility for tall major Federal land man- agement functions, and for the submission of Federal policy recom- mendations to the President and `the Congress. Parenthetically, it should be noted that coordination is `also needed between land management `and water management, since water pro- duction is to `a great degree dependent upon land condition. The head- waters of many eastern streams tare located on the national forests. The water supply of the West is produced almost entirely on the public domain, more than half `of it `on national forest land. OUTDOOR RECREATION PROGRAM Most agencies engaged in w'ater development or land management are engaged also in `outdoor recreation. In accordance with the recom- mendations of the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission, Congress established the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation to promote as well as coordinate outdoor recreation resource development. BOR is in the Department of the InteriOr. Yet, two non-Interior a~enci~s thc~ PAGENO="0016" 16 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES more recreation seekers than does any agency in the Department of the Interior. It is perhaps in the field of land management that the citizen is con- fronted with the greatest inconvenience resulting from two or more agencies. In the West, many timber `operators `and livestock men find `themselves negotiating and contracting with both. Often, policies differ and `almost always the differences in the regulations of the two corn- plicate the `opera'tions.'and waste the time of citizens dealing with them. BALANCE NEEDS BY COORDINATING ACTIVITIES The Engineers have built massive levees to conLaill rifn~Jn iiuiii i~4c~n~ Okeechobee and constructed 1,400 miles of drainage canals in the name of flood control. Park Service officials complain bitterly that the Engi- neers have drained Everglades National Park almost dry in their efforts to halt wetlands flooding and reclaim glade country for agriculture. Flood control advocators have said that reclamation is for people and Everglades Park is "for the birds." But I do not believe that is the question. The park is for people and the farms are for people. The real question is how shall priorities be established for the best use of limited resources. SOME AREAS OF CONSERVATION HAVE BEEN OVERLOOKED One detrimental effect of the multiplicity of agencies is that some important areas have been permitted to fail between the cracks, so to speak. An instructive example of this is our mounting concern for the wetlands. The distinguished chairman of the subcommittee has this year introduced a bill aimed at the preservation of the Nation's estuarian areas and the natural resources of these areas. The estuaries furnish environment for unique and valuable forms of aquatic life - 21 A!~ ~ ~1~ ~~iili~r1v suhiect to percent of the coastal marshes had been ctestroyed Dy hTh~. it is my belief that, had a natural resources department been in operation, much more would already have been done to save this unique resource. 1 See exhibit 4, pp. 26-31. PAGENO="0017" ueu~y t~uasua1 marsnes. ~atcnes of 18 species along the coast were said to have dropped nearly 50 percent from 1960 to 1965. In the field of oceanography-as with the estuaries-proposals have been made leading to better resource management. But a department with responsibility for natural resources would in all probability have prevented much of the deterioration of the fish life of the Continental Shelf. NEW DEPARTMENT WOULD HANDLE MAJOR RESOURCE PROGRAMS Turning briefly to the provisions of S. 886, the bill in essence sets up a Department of Natural Resources and assigns to, it all major Federal responsibilities having to do with water, power, land manage- ment, wildlife, outdoor recreation, minerals and fuels, ocean resources, and clean air. The bill provides for a Secretary of Natural Resources and a Deputy Secretary. It provides for two Under Secretaries, one for water and one for land. The jurisdiction of the Tinder Secretary for Water includes : the functions exercised by the Bureau of Reclamation ; the civil works `. -till `uuI~;tz~ ~1iiignV aiso oe createa to coordinate efforts of our other mineral resource agencies in development of the minerals in and under the ocean. While I have not provided for further administrative division h~. the bill, it would appear logical to divide the responsibility of the Under Secretary for Land into four branches, each headed by an Assistant Secretary. The Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management could report to an Assistant Secretary for Land Resources. The National Park Service, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation could report to an Assistant Secretary for Recrea- tion and Wildlife. The Bureau of Mines, Geological Survey, the Office of Coal Research, and the several other agencies in the Department of the Interior with responsibility in the fields of minerals and fuels could report to an Assistant Secretary for Minerals and Fuels. The fourth Assistant Secretary would supervise our air pollution abate~ ment program. PAGENO="0018" 18 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES RESOURCE ACTIVITIES hAVE OUTGROWN PRESENT ORGANIZATION My advocacy of a Department of Natural Resources does not con- stitute severe criticism of the performance of existing departments, al- though it is often interpreted as doing so. Given their limitations and their overlapping of responsibility, our agencies have done a corn- mendable job. But our needs in resource development and conserva- tion have simply outrun our agency structure. For example, a century ago, water management meant the con- struction of dams, pipelines, and sewer systems. Later, it included treating municipal water supplies to kill disease germs. Meanwhile, rivers were improved for navigation, and dams constructed for electric power production. Subsequently, there came the building of flood iior tue iuture, water IrlaIlageiiielIiu mu~ ii~~w uii~' £~L~1i~iii r ~ all uses, preservation of water and related land resources, and provi- sion of enough water for constantly expanding needs. LONG-RANGE PLANNING COULD RESULT FROM REORGANIZATION Were I asked to list concrete beneficial effects that might be ex- pected from the creation of a Department of Natural Resources, I would put first the opportunity to improve long-range planning. There exists nowhere a comprehensive plan that states our resOurce requirements and delineates a program for meeting them. A first piority of the Department of Natural Resources should be the preparation of such a plan. The plan should set forth the na- tional goals, projected alternative programs for reaching those goals, and the costs involved. This will furnish to the President and the Congress, the facts upon which wise decisions can be made. This, in general, is the method utilized so successfully by great industrial enterprises. It combines maximum efficiency with maximum flexibility. A ~mi~p fl TMPpflv1~ TW'F1~R(4OVERN1~f~çENTAL RELATIONS should be done, the proDlem of water supply was nrst or all, a great responsibility of our local governments." PAGENO="0019" PAGENO="0020" PAGENO="0021" -~- -~ `-~`, ~ i~ `~~c~e ueijneU vy uie ilaLura.I oounuaries oi ~ne valley of a river, the Tennessee River- Senator Moss. Yes. Senator BAKER (continuing) . Quite apart from State lines or county lines or other geopolitical lines. If this bill were to become law, would the regional development con- cept, carried forward in the Appalachia Regional Commission and the Four Corners Regional Commission and the other various regional development commissions which have grown out of the so-call~d An- J~~11I~.~ItLI1. ~JI1~ufu1a11 i uo not want to unnecessarily be- labor my following of these questions- Senator RIBICoF]~'. Go ahead. Senator BAKER (continuing). But I am really quite distressed at the prospect of the function or planning functions of the TVA being altered or changed in any respect. And while I do not want to pre- judge the merits of S. 886,1. must say that I would react quite unfavor- ably to that aspect of such a proposal at this time. , - -i-------- --~/~ wu~;~. 1. ()flhlLLt UIISt oy caretul and painstal ing work and examination of this it might be possible. And I cite the fact tha,t the President moved in this direction a little bit-as a matter of fact, when I had my bill drafted, before I had the Department of Pollution Control, which was in HEW, as one that would go over to the Department of National Resources. Well, the President accomplished that by executive order, which was a movement in this direction, and it indicated to me that the executive department thought there ought to be some more orderly arrangement in the water field of resources. So, I have introduced the bill, and I am hopeful that now is the time that we can probably get this done, even though it has failed in previous efforts. NATURAL RESOUROES ADVISORY COUNCIL Senator RIBICOFT'. Now, Mr. Smith advocated a Natural Resources Advisory Council which would have the same role in the resources field as the Council of Economic Advisers now has in the economic field. PAGENO="0022" tion and resource development, responsible for all federal planning anci action in the field, might still work if it could be achieved by waving a magic wand. It simply cannot `be achieved, however, without a bloody, bone-shattering fight, which would leave the landscape so scarred that the ~onservation cause would be lots in the critical years immediately ahead. I do not know if our distinguished colleague read this book. Senator BAKER. I have not. Senator RIBIcoFF. Would you want to comment on Frank Smith's statement~ Senator Moss. Well, first of all, let me say that I have no illusions that there will not be a great deal of resistance to rearranging the functions of natural resources into a department. The history of this proposal would indicate it goes clear back to Harold Ickes. It was pro- posed by him, and, of course, the Hoover Commission proposed it. It has come up various times and never been accomplished because of certain departments h functions would be taken CONFUSION IS LIABILITY OF COMPETZNG AGRNCIES Senator Moss. Well, although I do not reject the idea that there is always some element of advantage perhaps in competition, I think it adds up really to more confusion than competition. We are talking here about the sovereign, managing, planning for the management of all the resources of the country. And to have com- peting agencies with different regulations simply adds to the con- fusion, I think, of the consumer on the other side. Now, it was mentioned in the quote you read that BLM and the Forest Service sell timber in a different manner under different Seni~tor ~RIBIo~FF. Senator Harris ~ . ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ !_ ~1 ~ Senator HARRIS. I do not have any questions, Mr. Chairman. Senator RIBIcon~'. Senator Hansen? Senator HANSEN. I have no questions. Senator Rraioo~~. Senator Baker? Senator BAKER. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask just one or two additional questions, and I ani mindful of the fact that Senator Ken- nedy is anxious to testify, and I do not want to unduly prolong the hearings. But let me make a point or two at the outset, Senator Moss. I have no desire to be antagonistic or in opposition to this proposal. Senator Moss. I understand. - - 24 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PAGENO="0023" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 25 Now, would you agree with me, Senator Moss, that there must be some sort of regional totality in the effort to plan and conserve our natural resources? Senator Moss. Oh, I agree. As a matter of fact, we have a river basin planning act now where the Congress has said that each river basin should do its planning within the river basin, and this is a logical thing wh~n you come to water and land. I would a~ree with you, Senator, that regions vary. Some of them have pecularities of one kind and some another, and they ought to be managed ii. accordance with whatever the physical and natural fea- tures are in a given area. Here, again, I would mesh the whole thing into what our national picture is. Senator BAKER. I would hope that this would lead you to agree- ment that a structure as unique and vital and effective as the Ten- nessee Valley Authority ~ h~ ~v~liit~t~ ~ 4-1~ ~ - - - ~ Senator Moss. I would appreciate that very much. Senator BAKER. Thank you. Senator RIBICOFF. Thank you very much. ChANGES IN HEARING SCHEDULE If there are no further questions, we appreciate your being here, and I hope, Senator Moss, that you would feel free to take your seat with the rest of us during the remainder of these hearings. I have postponed the Wednesday hearing because of a conflict with the Finance Committee, of which both Senator Harris and myself are members. I think that the nature of the testimony tomorrow requires our presence there. The Department of the Interior and the Bureau of the Budget will testify on Friday instead. I am sorry if this inconveniences anyone, but we will go ahead with our Thursday hearing as scheduled. Senator Moss. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it. I would hope that the chairman would permit the record to be open for some time after these hearings are concluded, because I think, out of questions such as have been raised by S~i~trn' P~1r~ (~~1 I _ __ _ PAGENO="0024" 26 ~ DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES [From the Congressional Record, Aug. 30, 19~37] ~`-~~-~- ~--~- . EXHIBIT 4 sponsored the Kennedy bill and whose committee win con'sluer uie~e ~ J~stuaries form where rivers run into the sea. They create and attract vital biological, scientific, recreational, and economic resources. Cities are built near most estuaries, intensifying land use and the consequent pollution and destruction risks. My bill tries to take account of the unique nature o~f our estuaries and to find the proper balance between their protection and restoration and their use and development for the largest number of people. These sea and land complexes create rich marine resources. At least 65 percent of our Nation's commercial fish and shellfish resources inhabit the estuarine areas during ail or part of their life cycles. Many of our valuable waterfowl use these areas as nesting and wintering sites. People use them too, for swimming, boating, bird watching, hiking, or for an opportunity to enjoy the beauty of natural resources along coastal areas. Scientists study and expand our knowl- edge of the wonderfifl variety of animal and plant life around the estuaries. It is not only the coastal States, like Connecticut, which will benefit from this proposal. For our seashores are a national trust for all to use and enjoy. ~ Many of our priceless shore resources have already been lost. Others can be saved if we act soon, as this bill proposes. In my own State, nearly 50 percent of Connecticut's coastal marshes had been destroyed by 19~5. At the existing rate of destruction, by the year 2000 there would be no tidal marshes left. The principal causes of this manmade destruction are careless filling, usually from dredging and waste disposal. Both of these hazards will be controlled un- der this legislation. ~ This bill will help determine the state of our natural estuarine resources as a first step to preserving what is left. After this survey by the Secretary of the In- terior~arnoredetailedstudywifl see what can be done to preserve and enhance They would insure that an authority charged with the protection anu aeveiop~ ment of natural resources reviewed such projects before they are undertaken. My legislation encourages States to protect their own estuarine resourcea and water quality by establishing or improving plans to regulate dredging and related activities, when the plans are approved by the Interior Department. In such States there would be no direct Federal control of these activities. Federal responsibility must be exercised, for presently most States do not have effective controls to protect their estuaries. The Interior Department esti- mates that only three or four States have effective plans now in operation. Dumping refuse of all kinds-except oil and sewage which are covered now by law-in our estuaries would be subject to regulation by the Interior Department or by States with adequate protection plans to guard these waters from further pollution. Finally, Mr. President, this bill requires the Interior Department and the Army Corps of Engineers to work together to authorize dredging, exeavation~ PAGENO="0025" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 27 filling and other work along our shores, under the principles cited above, to eliminate duplication and to insure that a balance is maintained between legiti- mate conservation and development interests. The principles involved in this legislation are sound. They seek a more fruit- ful protection and development of our shore resources. By encouraging corn- munities and States to consider their own estuarine resources and to cooperate in their protection and improvement, I believe we have found the proper bal- ance between conservation and growth and between local initiative and Federal responsibility to insure that our natural resources are devotptl ti~ thc~ s~4'~4- ~ t~t1P5lea oy tae ~3enate and House of Representatives of the United ~States of America in Con~gre8s assembled, That Congress finds and declares that the Nation's estuarine areas are endowed with a variety of natural resources of recreational, commercial, esthetic and scientific value to the present and future generations of Americans, and that any modification of these areas directly and indirectly affects their natural values ; that many of these areas have been irreversibly altered or destroyed ; and that it is the policy of Congress to protect, preserve, restore, develop and make these estuarine areas accessible for multiple compatible uses, which give priority to maximum benefits for the widest number of people and which can be continued without destruction, or undue alteration or diminution of their natural resources. "SEC. 2. For the purposes of this Act- " ( a) The term `Secretary' means the Secretary of the Interior; " (b) The term `petson' means any individual, partnership, corporation, associ~ ation, or political subdivision of a State; " (c) The term `estuary' or `estuaries' means part or all of the tidal portion of the navigable waters in `the United States up to the mean high water line, in- cluding, but not limited to, any bay, sound, lagoon, or channel, and the lands underlying all such waters; " (d) The term `national estaurine area' means an environmental system com- posed of an estuary or estuaries and adjacent lands which together is deter- mined by the Secretary to constitute a manageable unit and which has national significance ; and " (e) The term `national resources' includes, but is not limited to, sport anal commercial fishes and other aquatic life, wildlife, esthetic, and recreational values. ~ ~ _ ~ mi~ ~ - , -- ~-- - ~ .~ V ~ LL1e~U1S ior preserving these areas and "for orderly development within them, if he determines such development con- sistent with the goals listed in the first section of this Act. The Secretary shall also take cognizance of the results of the study authorized by section 5 (g) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, the nationwide recreation plan, plans developed pursuant to the Water Resources Planning Act and river basin planning, statewide outdoor recreation plans prepared pursuant to the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965, and other applicable studies. `(b) The Secretary shall give particular attention to whether any estuary PAGENO="0026" I "(c) The Secretary ~ dent a report of the inven ory con ucted ~ reeon~mendation~ with respect to the designation ~ ~ estuary and areas as a national estuarine area to be acquired ~ him. Each recommend of the Secretary for such designation shall lecome effE tive only if so * by subsequent `Act of Congress. Recommendatio: ~ . ~ _ ` ~ be `developed in consultation with the `States, mi `ested Federal agencies. E'ach such recommendation ~. ~nied .~; (1) expressions of any views which the States, mun~. ~, ~ other Federal agencies may submit within ninety days after 1~ . ±~ been notified of the proposed recommendation, (2) a statement setting forth the probable effect of `the recommended action on any comprehensive river `basin `plan that may have `been adopted by Oongress or that is serving as a guide for coordinating ` Federal `programs in the basin wherein each estuary is located, (3 ) in the absence of such a plan, a statement indicating the probable effect of the recommended action on alternative beneficial users of the resources `of the proposed national estuarine area, and (4) ~ discussion of the major economic, social, and ecological trends occurring in such area. " (d) There is `authorized to be appropriated not to exceed $500,000 for the first fiscal year `beginning after enactment of this Act and for four succeeding fiscal years not to exceed $1,000,000 anni~al1y `to carry out the provisions of this section. "SEa. 4. ( a) The Secretary may acquire land's and waters or interests therein, including land use easements, within any national estuarine area, approved by `Congress or established pursuant to section 5 of this Act, by purchase with (b) Notwit~sf~uI~i~G 114nfl~m019r~e~chan~e He shall not acquire acquire `by condemnation any land or interests therein within any national estuarine area if such land is being used primarily for hunting, sport fishing, or other purposes which `are compatible with the purposes of this Act. The Secretary may exclude from the provisions of this aubsection `any beach `or waters, together with so `much of the land `adjoining such beach or waters for public access thereto as `he deems necessary to `carry out `the purposes of this Act. " (c) Any lands, waters, or interesth therein within a national estuarine area which are acquired `by the `Secretary under this section' or administered under section 5 of this Act, `shall he managed and developed primarily for `the purposes of sport and commercial fishing, wildlife conservation, outdoor recrea- tion, and scenic `beauty, and for such other purpose's as the Secretary determines are compatible with the purposes of this `Act. " (d) Any Federal land located within any national estuarine area may, with the consent of the head of the agency having jurisdiction thereof, be transferred to the Secretary for administration as part of said area. "Suc. 5. (a ) The Secretary may enter into an `agreement, containing such terms and conditions as are mutually acceptable, with any `State or `political subdivision or agency thereof for the permanent management, development, and admin~ ~tration of any land or interests therein within the `a of an c~ and s which are `c I or thereafter r ~; a State any ~ Jvision ~a agreement , long other t~ he `State oi subdivision ~ `thereof an 1 share e cost of a ninisteri] h areas. and fi.sbin ~uiatioi PAGENO="0027" \ ~, 1 ~ area covered by an agreement entered into pursuant to this section shall be deemed a national estuarine area for the purposes of this Act. " (C) In furtherance of the effective `administration of any area covered by an agreement entered into under this section, the Secretary may acquire in accordance with the provisions of section 4(a ) of this Act not to exceed one thousand acres within the boundaries of said area and such ac~uired land shall be subject to `said agreement. "Sue. 6. In order to carry `out the purposes of this Act, the Secretary may- " (a) construct, operate, install, and maintain buildings, devices, structures, recreational facilities, access roads, and `other improvements on property acquired `by him or covered `by an agreement entered into pursuant to this Act, and " (b) enter into agreements with any person or public or private agency or organization through negotiation for the provision of public accommodations. " Sac. ~ 7 ( a ~ `The `Seer~4a rv .~ha11 `npvm~ F h~4-~ . ~.. ~_ ~ ~ " ~ ~ ~ `3 ) IN 0 ~[)~OSOfl snail `knowingly violate any regulation of the `Secretary relating to the public use of any national estuarine area, or injure, remove, or destroy any property or improvement of the United States therein. " (c) Any person authorized by the Secretary to enforce the provisions of this section may, ~without a warrant, arrest any person violating this section in his presence or view, and may execute any warrant or other process issued by an officer or court of competent jurisdiction to enforce the provisions of this section, and may, with a search warrant, search for and seize any property taken, used, or possessed in violation of this section. Any property seized, with or without a search warrant, shall be held by such person or by the. United States marshal pending disposition `thereof by the court. " ( d) Any person who violates the provisions of this section or any regulation issued thereunder shall be fined not more than $500 or be imprisoned not more than six months, or both. "Sue. 8. (a ) Except as provided in section 9 of this Act, before any person con- ducts any dredging, filling, or excavation work within any estuary such person shall file with the Secretary prior to initiating such work a notice of intention to conduct such work together with such plans, specifications, and other informa- tion relative to such work as the secretary may require by regulation. No such work shall be commenced until authorized by the Secretary. After receipt of such notice the Secretary shall, within a reasonable time, authorize such person to commence the work in accordance with such terms and conditions as the Secretary deems desirable, unless he determines, in his dlsc~etion, (1) that such work will unreasonably impair the natural resources of the estuary, or (2) that such work will reduce the quality of the waters of the estuary below appli- cable water quality ~ designed to conserve and protect the natural resources in such estuaries, and to prevent the pollution therein, including pollution by leaching from dumping in adjacent areas. 88-889--68---3 PAGENO="0028" or threatened violation. ~_______ " (e) Any person who knowingly violates any provision of this seciauu ~ regulations issued thereunder or any condition in any notice issued thereunder shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be fined not more than $2,500, or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both. " (f) In accordance with the policy established by Congress in the Act of August 31, 1951 (63 Stat. 290), the Secretary shall, to the greatest extent prac- ticable, recover from persons seeking to conduct any dredging, filling, or exca- vation work in any estuary all reasonable costs incurred by him in administer- lug this section, and all sums received to cover such costs shall be credited to the appropriation from which payments for the administration of this section were made. "(g) Nothing in this section shall be construed as affecting the authority of the Secretary of the Army to issue permits for dredging, filling, or excavation work in any estuary under any other provisions of law. The Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of the Army shall, prior to the effective date of this section, enter into such agreements as may be appropriate to avoid duplication of effort and to insure the expeditious handling of requests for dredging, filling, and excavation work. "(h) The Secretary shall provide, by regulation, that the provisions of sub- section (a) of this section shall not apply in the case of any work to be initiated by the owner of a single-family residence if such work relates solely to the use and enjoyment of said residence by such owner or his tenant. ~ !`~~ iSSUE~dP1iI~5U~thttO this tary may prescribe, for his approval a State plan for the protection and con- servation of estuaries. The State plan shall: " (1) require any person, hefore conducting any dredging, filling or excavation work within any estuary, to file with the appropriate State authority a notice of intention to conduct such work together with such plans, specifications, and other information relative to such work as the State authority may require by regulation, and provide that no such work shall be commenced until authorized by such State authority in accordance with such terms and conditions as the State authority deems necessary to assure that such work will not unreasonably impair the natural resources of the estuary or will not reduce the quality of the waters of the estuary below applicable water quality standards, except that notwithstanding the adverse effect such work will have on natural resources, the State authority may permit such work whenever it determines that it is necessary in the public interest; "(2) provide, for the purposes set forth in section 8(b), for the regulation of the dumping of dredgings, earth, garbage, or other refuse materials of every kind or description, except refuse materials flowing from streets or sewers in a liquid state, or oil as defined in the Oil Pollution Act, 1924, into any estuary in such State or into any other waters in such State which would have a detrimental effect on any estuary in or outside of such State; PAGENO="0029" all project plans and reports submitted to the Congress shall ~ " ~scussiofl by the Secretary of such areas and such resources and the of the project on them and his recommendations thereon. ~ I 12. The Secretary shall encourage States and local subdivisions thereof to consider, in their comprehensive planning and proposals for financial assist- ance under the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act (50 Stat. 917) , as amended (16 U.S.C. 669 et seq.) , the Federal Aid in Fish Restoration Act (64 Stat. 430) , as amended (16 U.S.C. 777 et seq.), the Land and Water Con- servation Fund Act of 1965 (8 Stat. 897) , the Commercial Fisheries Research and Development Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 17) , and the Anadromous Fish Con- servation Act of October 30, 1965 (79 Stat. 1125) , the needs and opportunities for protecting and restoring estuaries in accordance with the purposes of this Act. In approving grants made pursuant to said laws for the acquisition of all or part of an area surrounding an estuary by a State, the Secretary shall estab- lish such terms and conditions as he deems desirable to insure the permanent protection of such area, including a provision that the lands or interests therein shall not be disposed of by sale, lease, donation, or exchange without the prior approval of the Secretary. - wruuia~e wun a pian tnat is mutually acceptable to the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of the Interior and that is con- sistent with the purposes: of this Act." Senator RIBJOOFF. Senator Kennedy. a fractured administrative organization within the executive branch of the Federal Government. RESULTS OF CONFLICTING RESOURCE POLICIES In a special message to the Congress on natural resources, delivered on February 23, 1961, President Kennedy took note of this fractured organization and of some of its results: This statement is designed to bring together in one message the widely scat- tered resource policies of the Federal Government. In the past, these policies have overlapped and often conflicted. Funds were wasted on competing efforts. Widely differing standards were applied to ~ 1fthth1 wimse ptesëi'vation is encouraged by another agency-conflicts between private land owners and sportsmen-uncertain responsibility for the watershed and antinolliition uro~rams that are vital to our fish and wildlife onnortu:nities. bEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 33 PAGENO="0030" With the creation of subsequent executive ~ agencies, the role of the Department of the Interior changed, during the more than 100 years of its existence, from that of general housekeeper for the Federal Government to that of custodian of the Nation's natural resources. Changing the name to the Department of Natural Resources will give recognition to the actual status of the Department, reflecting the changes that have occurred in its functions since 1849. TRANSFERS OF EXISTING PROGRAMS PROPOSED The transfer of operating programs between Federal departments is the heart of this bill. It is also the most controversial aspect of it. The two programs presently administered by Interior most directly concerned with the health and welfare of individuals-the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Office of Territories-would be transferred to the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. This comports with the ~reneral mission of HEW as described in the Go~v&nment `i~- ~3 ---~ ~ ~ ~f hck w~tf~rs made foiili. Roosevelt and Gifford Pinchot, in the early ctays saved vast areas of wilderness by placing them in national parks, ~ saving them for future generations by making them a national respon- sibility. In the 1930's, Hugh Bennett and Ira Gabrielson continued the pioneering work of President Roosevelt and Secretary Pinchot, and laid the base of information needed for subsequent actions by the Con- gress. The aggressive and able leadership of Secretary Stewart Udall has continued this determined effort to leave for our children some large part of the natural resources we inherited, unspoiled, and I am certain that history will place Secretary Udall alongside +ifford Pinchot as an architect of constructive natural resource management policy and action. The calendar of natural resource preservation efforts, while illumi- nated by the strong personalities I have just mentioned, is marked all too often by contrasting and duplicating policies, the result of PAGENO="0031" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES These responsibilitiesq operated a1mosi~ cmt~r~1'~~ ~u~iov~1~1 iviassaciausetts, it seems that the transfer of these functions is highly desirable. OCEANOGRAPHIC ACTIVITIES WOULD BE BROUGHT TOGETHER Oceanographic functions presently lodged in the Department of the Navy and the National Science Foundation would be transferred to the new Department, to be woven within the oceanographic pro- grams-research and operational-now being operated by Interior. This would raise the level of coordination and focus of action presently being spurred by the temporary Cabinet-level National Council on Marine Sciences. Once again, this has a very interesting relationship to those States which border on the sea, where much of the food on which the fish feed is located in estuaries. The kind of research being done in this particu- Jar area has considerable significance, as we discover from the ex- perience at Woods Hole. The scientists there have been doing compre- hensive work on oceanography, fishing, and other types of conservation of our fish resources. The importance of having these efforts coordi- nated and consolidated cannot be overstressed. The fact that this would be coordinated by the new Department would be exf~t~mplv. ~ ~ - i~ ~ b ~ ~`~` ~i~W1U~ ~e~iv1~ies. ~ioseIy atlieu witn tnis is the logic of subjecting certain applications for Federal Power Com- mission licenses to the new Department ; many projects for which FPC licenses are sought have profound effect on comprehensive river basin development, and the officials charged with an overall natural resource development program should be given an opportunity to comment. I think the distinguished chairman is familiar, for example, with a number of different programs that exist for sewage treatment. I believe there are four different programs, for which different communities are eligible. This, obviously, has a very direct relationship which does irnt }~~iv~ th b~ to the mernhc~rs M thi~ ~nmmittee~ cncl n~ir- 35 PAGENO="0032" 36 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PLANNING TO PRESERVE RESOURCES FOR THE FUTURE In short, the reorganization of Federal functions in the natural re- source field to be effected by this bill would have a major impact on the national effort to use what resources we have left in a way best suited to the needs of the future-the needs for consumption and the needs for preservation. It is a bit chilling, in this regard, to consider the implications of two statistical items: The U.S. has about 6 percent of the world's population ; yet it consumes 50 percent of the non-renewable resources used every year ; One hundred twenty-one million visits were recorded at National Parks in 1965; yet experts placed an efficient capacity of only 50 million visits on these parks. The Cape Cod National Seashore Park is another example. Even though it has been in existence only a relative shorl period of time, the tremendous increase in the numbers of visitors taking advantage of it is indicative of the need for coordinate resource planning. We I iavor enailge-lul u1icw~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ _ ~. 1~ ~ +h~~ i~~I men who administer the programs involved in the transfers contem- plated by this bill are, I am certain, public servants dedicated to high ideals, and I think the reorganizations would be of great help to them in the pursuit of theirjobs. I am in favor of the bill because I think it will make their individual tasks easier, by bringing together under one administrative roof the related tasks ; it will make the overall programs less expensive, by introducing comprehensive planning and programing to the entire natural resource effoi± ; and it will make the tasks of the Congress more simple, by giving one department the responsibilities presently vested in many departments. A sensitive area of any reorganization legislation involves the juris- diction of congressional committees. It would seem to me that in this area, the various committees and staff have developed an expertise, and that legislative authority should remain where it is, relying upon effec- tive administration of the programs to provide essential coordination. KENNED~ STRONGLY ENDORSES S. 886 Children in school are taught a song about the land, which, in part PAGENO="0033" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 37 ago in a speech in Boston. I think Senator Moss, in introducing the legislation to do it, deserves the gratitude of all of us. Similarly, the distinguished chairman of this subcommittee, by giving the bill a public hearing, has done much to foster an informed public discus- sion of the need for it. Tt i~ r)lflin f1i~+ m±;~Y~t7 ~ ~ . 1 * i: believe one of the most thrilling parts of government and the phil- osophy of the American people in the last half dozen yeti i's is the re- vival of interest and dedication to conservation of natural resources. There is a realization that this is a national problem. We are all ~ dedicated to trying to beautify America and preserve what we have, especially when we realize the fantastic growth and urbanization of this Nation with a population anticipated at 300 million by the year 2000. I am grateful to Senator Moss and his position on the Interior Committee when he proposed the Connecticut River Park and Rec- reation Area that you are such an ardent advocate of, too, Senator Kennedy. The western Senators understand the need of developing our resources in the East as well as in the West. HEARINGS OPEN NATIONAL DIALQG ON CONTROVERSIAL PROPOSAL There is no question that the creation of this department is probably as controversial as any reorganization proposal that could be advanced. It is going to take a lot of debate and discussion and much contro- versy, but I do believe that all of us-the Governmont and the people-arebetter off~?y~n~5h~ ~ States of the East, and in New England particularly, for preserva- tion. I am mindful of the fact that only in the last 2 or 3 years have we had State action to preserve estuaries in Massachusetts, and also to preserve the wet lands. It was with this in mind that for the last 2 years I have introduced legislation to preserve our estuaries all across the country. In the last few years we have also seen, in my own State, the passage of a law to provide tax incentives for those who bequeath or donate undeveloped land to the State. This is a rather unusual PAGENO="0034" States. So, as you point out, there is a great deal of interest in this ques- tion of conservation and preservation of natural resources in our urban areas. I think that the whole structure and scope of this bill, the purpose of it, to consolidate this and to preserve it, will be of extraordinary value not only to friends in the West but also to those of us in the East. Senator RIBIO0FF. Senator Harris? Senator HARRIS. I have no questions, Mr. Chairman. Senator RIBIC0FF. Senator Hansen? Senator HANSEN. I have no questions, Mr. Chairman. Senator RIBICOFF. Senator Baker? Senator BAKER. Mr. `Chairman, I have no questions except to reiter- ate that, in general, I share the sentiments expressed by `Senator Ken- nedy and Senator Moss to the effect that this heightened awareness to the necessity for conservation might better `be served `by improved organization. However, I would once again underscore my belief that central- ization of planning does not always produce uniformly good results, and I once again espouse my concern for one of the primary examples in this field. the TVA. distance ot our population centers. i nai, ouee ~ig~in, i ~ w thing in my own State, in part at least. The Great Smoky Mountain National Park may not be the most spectacular national park in America-I happen to think it is-but it is the most visited, simply because it is in the East where the population is located, and I think there must be a coordination of effort in this direction as well. But I caution against, for my part, the destruction of those things good that have been created by way of regional agencies, such as TVA, the Ap- palachian Regional Commission, and others who have the responsi- bility, not only for natural resources development, but human develop- merit and economiè development at the same time ; and these are in- exorably interwoven. Senator RIBIC0FF. Senator Moss? Senator Moss. I wish to express my appreciation to Senator Ken- nedy for his very fine statement and his understanding of the problem and the objective. I think you stated it very well, and we would count on you to con- tinue to expound this as the dialog continues on this. I expressed my appreciation to the chairman of the subcommittee for setting this down and gr~ this underway. T I to i ~,that i~ s to me, was in your PAGENO="0035" u11141 1U-1LS IUflCtlOflS have grown intobuilcling 1&vees and bu~1ding reservoirs, and it is into the recreation area now. The Corps of Engi- neers has more recreational days that is spent on its waters than any other water agency in the Federal Government, you see, and yet we think of it sitting over there in the Department of the Army, some- thing which was not supposed to be for recreation I do not believe. It has grown into a full-bloom water agency, and this is proper, because water can be used for many things, not just for transportation and not just to control floods, but to supply cities, and so on. We had an instance of this very recently, of the conflict that arises, in my own State. The Bureau of Reclamation is building the central Utah project out there, to bring water from the Colorado basin into the great basin. For a number of years, the city of Salt Lake has talked about a reser- voir in the mountains above the city for flood control, one, but really more important for water supply. Well, the Corps of Engineers got in on that one, because of the flood control part of it. So, when they made the announcement of the proposal to build the dam there to control the floods and to bring water to the city, the Bureau of Reclamation came up and said, "We do not want to do that. ~L'~Q'~~2 ~ u~j. j~ aCUraF i~esources sometime far back before it ever got that far along, obviously. Now, that is just one little minute element of conflict. I think you can find it all through the thing. One other thing you mentioned, about the structure of the commit- tees of Congress on this thing. It is a fact that we have been treating the Forest Service appro- priations in with Interior for a long time in the Appropriations Committee, even though they are in two separate departments, because they are on the same subject matter, and therefore we have been a little more logical than the executive department here in the Congress in our structure. I certainly appreciate your testimony, Senator. Senator RIBIC0FF. Thank you very much, Senator Kennedy. Senator KENNEDY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. (At Senator Ribicoff's previous instruction, the prepared statement submitted by Senator Gale McGee is incorporated into the record at this point and is as follows:) PAGENO="0036" EXHIBIT 5 STATEMENT OF SENATOR GALE MCGEE (]D-W~o.) Mr. Chairman, the testimony I offer this morning is to favor a vital piece of legislation introduced by Senator Moss, myself, and others to redesignate the Department of the Interior as the Department of Natural Resources and to transfer certain agencies to and from such Department. Legislation which takes such a broad, but absolutely compelling step undoubt- edly means there will be cries of pain from two types of protesters. The first of these types will be those who go into shocked anguish when a name is changed. The second type is that person who views any change as a threat to what he views as his own fixed and God-given order of things. In regard to the first type, those who quiver at changing words, it is thus thflt ehanjdng the name of the Department of the Interior to the Department uces over a iwig peiivu w. ii~t~ .~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ fh~ i~ th ~i1 and must be, one must once again point to the fundamental fact of life-tL &ct of change-which means that from time to time that the administration of the consequences of change must also change. There isn't a person in Congress and the government who isn't aware of the hodge-podge of agencies that deal with natural resources. At times indeed the competing and contending activities of the agencies and bureaus within the various departments charged with the care of our natural resources boggles one's reason. By the same token, one cannot help but be impressed by the skill and dedi- cation of the employees in all of these agencies and departments. Yet we are faced with incredible complexities in administering our natural resources ; and the murky conglomeration of agencies and bureaus, too many times contending with one another for jurisdiction, do not make the problem any easier. For example, the development of our water resources. is made unduly difficult, if we are con- cerned with the entire river basin concept, as long as independent bureaus with traditional loyalties and jealous clientele carve up the development and manage- merit of tasks. This Nation faces a two-fold task in developing overall river basin planning. First, this country must find and find quickly increased supplies of clean water; and second, we must manage with far more wisdom than we have used thus far the water supplies we now have. The total management of water resources in- volves a variety of functions. Among others are watershed protection and man- agement, flood control, river and harbor improvements, irrigation, fish and wild- life, recreation, desalinization, and pollution. This whole package must be tied together. We must plan for entire river basins from their sources to their mouths. Even should authorities be successfully established for every river basin, how- UeLe1miii~~ ~ ~ ~ ~---~--`` t~.,~4~+,~t4crn .nnllntbrn and water not to mention the vital role that the Department of Housing anct U man iievei- opment should play. Below the departmental level, a Pandora's box opens. In In- tenor alone we have this array of agencies-the Bureau of Reclamation, three PAGENO="0037" --$/ `,~ L~e~ 10 WfllCJi we haveputour natural resources, b~ut by the way in which we view those natural resources. The distinction between use anti view is an important distinction. Such a distinction is not meant to suggest that use and view are polarities. Indeed, they are closely interrelated. Those who first came to the North American continent must have been struck by the magnificence and abundance of our natural resoiircea-the timber, the game, the water, the very spaciousness led inevitably to the view that the cornucopia was endlessly full. Indeed, this sense of abundance was manifested ]~1 many of the landscape paintm~sand ~rn the World The point is, Mr. Chairman, that for a long time in America's history most Americans had little, if any, awareness that our natural resources would, or even could, have a limit. Thus, during the time of our national expansion, we found little attention being paid to the wholesale devastation of our landscaper of our minerals, of our water, and, sad to say, in some cases, of our human resources. But as we became more adept at recognizing the role of government in helping to solve problems, the more we saw government reflecting the com-~ plexities of the times. The present departments ef government came about because problems were recognized. This is most particularly true of the Department of the Interior, the Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Commerce. The Department of the Interior, established in 1849, came about as a result of the long-established recognition that we had untold. acres of land which re~ quired orderly development. The settling of the West was due in no small way to the fact that the Federal Government took a direct hand in that settlement. In 1889 we established the Department of Agriculture because we had long since become aware that the practice of mining farm lands no longer had the easy out of abandonment for new vistas. Thus, one of the chief functions of the Department of Agriculture was the pursuit of scientific fai~ming. During the Progressive Era, more and more Americans became aware of the irrational pillage which our natwral resources were undergoing. One of the answers to such pillage was the establishment of the Department of Commerce in 1903. The effort to regulate commerce was as much an effort to save our natural resources as it was to regulate the excesses of business. REDESIGNATE THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AS THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES THURSDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1967 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON Exi~cuTIvE REORGANIZATIONS TI TI 1 PAGENO="0038" One of lihe a~so1ute requirementsofwise ~1annrng in ~ ~ ~ ~ resources is the recognition o~ the fact that if we `run out of raw material for our productive maehine, we will ba~e no more productive machine. But what of man's psychic requirements ? The necessity that the spirit requires something good must happen to the eye. The redwoods, the mountains, the wilderness areas, the lakes, the uninterrupted vistas, these are all our heritage as much as steel plants and highwaya-indeed, not only a heritage, hut a necessity. A Department of Natural Resources should be ais mu~b concerned with the psychic income from our natural resources as it would be `with the material income from our natural resources. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, my remarks should be construed in no way as an attack on the Departments presently involved. Indeed, it is a plea that they be allowed to operate more vigorously and effectively. We need the talent and dedication of these ~epa'rtments in a new and reordered way which `would allow us the wise use of natural resources. This wise `use `should be the result of the government's activity, not in spite of it. `Surely, when the private sector of our affairs increasingly incorporates the ththl `system's approach, then the public sector should benefit from the `same kind 4-l~,~ ~ Shi+ 44 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES The balance of my remarks this morning go to that aspeot of the ~erram1y uifau i~ It u~ii ~tJ~ ~ . ~ ~ means suggested-removing the civil works program from the~ Army Corps of Engineers-would contribute to the objective sought, and even if it `did, whether that contribution would be worth the sacrifice of the benefits, national security and other, inherent in the present arrangement. When it began in 1824 the civil works program was aimed only at improving navigability of the Nation's rivers. Over the intervening 143 years many functions have been added by Congress: flood protec- tion, the development of water power; the provision of municipal and industrial water supplies; shore protection; pollution abatement; assistance to State and local governments in managing flood plain - -~ -` +qn-.c~ to communities stricken by floods, earthquakes, PAGENO="0039" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL I~ESOURCES COMPLEMENTARY NATURE OP TWO OPERATIONS The Corps of Engineers at the present time carries on two inter- related programs : One for military construction, which has aggre- gated $11.5 billion in the past decade, and the other for civil works, which has involved $10.7 billion in the same period. This conjunction of responsibilities permits the two programs to be run on a comple- mentary basis, with one overhead of technical and administrative personnel rather than two. Throughout the country the military con- struction activities of the Corps of Engineers, including the impor- tant work it does for the Air Force and NASA, are carried out through the same district and division offices that are responsible for the civil works program. Military construction requirements would demand that a substantial part of this organization continue even if civil works responsibilities were eliminated. Yet in such a case many of the same jobs and functions which now use one set of nL~v~~ ói. j~aee we ~fthtt or personnel and funds is in the other direction as the civil works program becomes the main activity. The overall program of the corps, therefore, is at the same time flexible and stable, with advantages in efficiency and economy which would be lost if the programs were to be separated. CORPS~ CIVIL PROGRAM STRENGThENS MILITARY CAPABILITY In addition, enactment of S. 886 in its present form could adversely. affect the military capability of the Army. In part, the success of the Army Engineers in the military field may be credited to the fact that the corps has, for a period of 143 years, also been responsible for the civil works program. A trained organization in being and capable of taking immediate action has been of inestimable value in military as well as natural disaster emergencies. The 1965 report of the Army's Civil Works Study Board concluded that conduct of the civil pro- cram by the corns "strene~thens the Army's mn~f~~n~ +`-. ~ 45 PAGENO="0040" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES they should. The goals of our society are many, and those which clash must be examined and balanced against each other in seeking to max- ~ 1. ui2j .AIilXArf £~LOt47~A~1 tion to the Congress. This does, of course, lengthen the decisionmakrng process on difficult issues, but the additional step may be at a small price to pay for the assurance that full public consideration has been given to all viewpoints, objectives and alternatives, and that plans are truly comprehensive and balanced. INTEGRATION OF WATER RESOURCES POLICIES Finally, Congress already has moved to improve interagency co- ordination by enacting the Water Resources Piannin~ Act of 1965. This landmark legislation provided coordinating machinery by estab- lishing ~as interdepartmental bodies the Water Resources Council and River Basin Commissions. These bodies have not yet had sufficient time to prove `their effectiveness. In addition, useful recommendations as to future water resource policy can be expected from the National Water Commission, to be established in legislation already passed by both Houses of Congress. In these circumstances a sweeping alteration of civil works responsibilities within the executive branch appears at best premature. For these reasons, the Dep'artment of Defense opposes the transfer of its functions as called for in S. 886. read. However, I. Will oe uefl~i O~~&~~&r ~U11~1~m~ you wish. General JOHNSON. I have made some slight alterations, Mr. Chair- man. Iwould prefer to read it, if I may. Senator RIBIconr. Certainly. 46 PAGENO="0041" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 47 STATEMENT OP c+EN. HAROLD K. FOHNSON, CHIEF OP STAFF, U.S. ARMY; ACCOMPANIED BY LT. GEN. WILLIAM CASSIDY, CHIEF OP EN'GINi~ERS, AIW BRIG. GEN. HARRY G. WOODflURY, DIRECTOR OP CIVIL WORKS, CORPS OP ENGINEERS, DEPARTMENT OP THE ARMY General JOHNSON. Mr. Chairman, as Chief of Staff of the Army, I oppose enactment of that part of S. 886 that would transfer the civil works functions of the Army Engineers to `a Department of Natural Resources. I believe the transfi~r ~vrwl'1 ~ ~ C~1LU C011 ~J~' .~~WiL iiJ~ UU~~ oomoat zones, in `tue communications areas, and in the mobilization support areas in the United Staites are critical to the Army's effective performance. Our mobilization rate is dependent in part on qualified engineers, trained, organized `and in being, with experience as a part of the mili- ~ tary team, who are prepared to expand our posts and `training facili- ties, `and to man our combat `and combat-support units. It is important that construction support be av'aik~ble when it is needed. It must be large enough and flexible enough to meet a wide range of conditions. lit is upon the Corps of Engineers that `the Army relies to provide that support. The Army Engineers are an essential part of the military team `that is necessary to meet our needs in the United States and in those external areas where `the United States has commitments. ADVANTAGES OF ARMY~S CIVIL WORKS PROGRAM The total Army Engineers capability in the United States is di- vided roughly into 75 percent civil activities and 25 percent military activities. The total organization operates under the control of the Army, is experienced in Army procedures. and ic~ f~u pc~at~k uu'~ Lne Ai~sI~an earthquake, Operation Noah in New England in 1955 and Hurricane Betsy in the gulf in 1965. PAGENO="0042" `_~`Jv~L ~ ~ Provides an inducement for attracting anu reuaiiiiii~ ~ qualified professional engineers and related skills for the Army, both military and civil service personnel, who would not be attracted by a less diversified organization; Provides an opportunity for the experience and training of engineer and logistics officers in planning, constructing and man- aging large and complex projects that would not otherwise be available in the normal peacetime situation ; 75 percent of the engineers commanding battalions and larger units today in Viet- nam have had the benefit of experience gained in Engineer dis- triet assignments ; 62 percent of the Regular Army field grade officers-that is, officers in the grade of major and above-are likewise so trained ; Provides close ties with the engineering profession and the engineering and construction industries, keeping the military up-to-date on civilian engineering, construction, and scientific techniques and developments; Provides, conversely, for an easier flow of the results of miii- tary engineering research and development techniques and devel- opments to ~ the civilian engineering community ; and ~:-~--~~ -`:~~ ~-~: ~ t~~~b1e~ ~ii~ viq~h1ç~ evidence at the country's grass- ties must be available to the Army at au times anu paI~uiuui~aij ~ the critical mobilization planning phase required to cope with an actual state of emergency. The time available to respond to emergency conditions is now more compressed than ever. The difficulties and delays inherent in the re- transfer of a separate civilian agency would so increase the time re- quired to put the necessary engineering and construction resources into an effective operation that its usefulness in the mobilization phase could be seriously impaired. And there is no assurance that the civil works elements lost to the Army would remain in an organizational form in the new department that would be suitable for military needs when retransferred. LIABILITIES OF TRANSFER OF CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES If civil works responsibilities were taken from the Army- Our cost of construction would go up; The technical quality of our personnel and the capability of our Army units would be reduced; and I PAGENO="0043" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES fl~ i~-~v ~ j3ei U~L~ Oeiter tnan 1. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator Rimcorr. You are welcome. COORDINATION BEGINS EARLY IN PROJECT DEVELOPMENT Mr. Secretary, it has been said that various Federal agencies each tend to operate in a vacuum with little coordination in developing projects. At what stage of project development and to what degree does the Corps of Engineers coordinate with other Federal agencies ~ Secretary RESOR. I have here with me Mr. Fitt, who is my SpeciaJ Assistant for Civil Functions, who has spent most of his time while he was General Counsel of the Army, at least a significant portion of his time, on engineering matters, and I am going to ask him to assist in answering some of these questions. I would like him to respond to that `one. Senator RIBICOFF. Perfectly all right. Mr. FITT. Well, of course, coordination takes place at the very out- set of any project which has its inception `as a gleam in somebody's eye. The way in which the system flflt~rfl.t~~ b~ ~ ~ -lt~.~ ~`ruexiCoOrainat1Ofl begins. CONFLICTS WITH OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES Senator RIBICOFF. But you do run into some conflicts. You might be putting up a dam or building some projections out into a harbor or bay, mid you certainly run into problems with the Department of the Interior in protection of wildlife, and so' forth. 1 notice here an item from the New York Times: "Army Admits Role in Lake Pollution." There is a story here about the Army Corps of Engineers problem in Lake Michigan. So, you do run into' conflicts. (The article referred to follows:) P 49 PAGENO="0044" [From the New York Times, Oct 11, 1967) EXHIBIT 6 ARMY ADMITS ROLE IN LAKE PoLLtrrIoN HOUSE~ PANEL HEARS GENERAL AT LAKE MICHIGAN INQUIRY WASHINGTON, October 10 (AP).-The Army Corps of Engineers admitted today that it was helping to pollute Lake Michigan, and said that it would probably have to continue doing so at least through 1970. But Brig. Gen. H. G. Woodbury Jr., the corps' director of civil works, told a House subcommittee that the pollution material,. harbor dredgings dumped into the lake, was small compared with that from industry and cities. The corps must dredge in order to maintain 108 Great Lakes harbors, General Woodbury said, and must dump dredgings into the lakes until Federal and local agencies are willing to spend some $500-million for inland disposal pits. He testified at a hearing requested ~y Chicago's Metropolitan Sanitary District after the corps announced it must dump 200,000 cubic yards of dredging from Indiana Harbor into Lake Michigan. The sanitary district asked a C~mgressional investigation aimed at ending aredumpingissmallhio~j3~j?~ 1W ~ The the lake." Representative Roman 0. Pucinski, Democrat of Illinois, said the amount of pollution dumped by the corps was not the point. ~ "The problem," he said, "is that you really can't crack down on private industry when you have a Federal agency doing any kind of polluting." General Woodbury said the corps was not likely to get sufficient money to end the dumping before 1970, when a $6-million study on effects of the dumping will be completed. He said an interim report was expected next summer. Senator :Rinioor~. What I am curious about is this : When do you sit down and how often do you sit down with the Department of the Interior or HEW on water pollution, or the Department of Agri- culture? When do you sit down with any of them? Do you? Mr. FITT. Oh, yes, sir. There is a constant course of dealings. CORPS WORKS TO C0OP]~RATE WITH OTHER AGENCIES For example, in the case of the really serious difficulties in the Great Lakes area that were mentioned in the New York Times, the Army Corps of Engineers has been working directly with the Federal Water -- ~-~-~1 A ~lm ef.v~i±j~~. both at its regional office in PAGENO="0045" --- ~ £ ~ `~ ~ - OFFICE OF TH~ CHIEF OF ENGINEFRS TECHNIQAi~ LI4i~O~ ~ ~,i. i~ngineers ror the -~-~p~weu~ oi: ~ne Army, and the Federal Water Pollution Oontrol Administra~ tion (FWPOA) for the Department of the Interior. By acts of Congress the Corps of Engineers is responsible for improvement atid maintenance ~ of the waterways of the lJnited States in the interest of naviga~ tion. These waterways are life-lines of America's growth, industrial might and prosperity, and their proper maintenance is an exceedingly important .responsi- billty of the Corps. The Corps of Engineers recognizes that considerable time will be required before complete treatment of municipal and' industrial wastes will pre~rent the introduction of pollutants to the waterways. During this time a means must be found to keep the waterways open. Doing so involves dredging of polluted material. The Corps is therefore studying alternate procedures for the disposal of the polluted dredgin~g resulting from these industrial and municipal wastes. The Department of Interior (FWPOA) by Congressional acts has the responsibility to enhance quality and value of all water resources and to carry out, In cooperation with State and local governments, a national program aimed at the prevention, control and abatement of water pollution. Additionally by Executive Order No. 11288, the Department of the Interior shall provide tech- nical advice and assistance to heads of other Departments, who are to provide leadership in the nationwide effort to improve water quality through preven- tion, control and abatement of water pollution from Federal Government activities. The two agencies agree that joint effort is required for the development of acceptable alternative disposal means with the ultimate objective of providing leadership in the nationwide effort to improve water quality through preven- tion, control and abatement of water pollution by Federal water resources projects. T~-. DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ESTIMATED DREDGING REQUIREMENTS-CALEEDAR YEAR 1967 Pro~fec'ts 53 Lake On~tario Rochester Harbor, N.Y. Oswego Harbor, N.Y. Great Sodus Bay Harbor, N.Y. Little Sodus Bay Harbor, N.Y. Lake superior ~ Tt/T~ Toledo Harbor, Ohio Lorain Harbor, Ohio S'an'dusky Harbor, Ohio Fairport Harbor, Ohio Aishtahula Harbor, Ohio *I~1,.,_~1._ ~ ~ Lake Michigan Calumet Harbor and River, Ill. and Ind. Indiana Harbor, md. Green Bay Harbor, Wis. Two Rivers Harbor, Wis. Kenosha Harbor, Wis. Muskegon Harbor Micb.. ~,~t~wju1u1ee uarnoi~, ivncnigan and Wis. Holland Harbor, Mich. New Buffalo Harbor, Mich. Racine Harbor, Wis. Port Washington Harbor, Wis. Kewaunee Harbor, Wis. ~ ~ TT.-~ ~ rr~ PAGENO="0046" into the lake rrom such areas, as weIUaS~ormmu5 . ~ ~ When acceptable alternate methods of dredge disposal have been agreed upon, and at the earliest possible time, the Corps will take appropriate budgetary action to secure the necessary funds. This may require substantial funds programmed over a period of several years. The Federal Water Pollution Control Administration will contribute to the pilot ~study effort by providing leadership in the development and implementation of an effective program for measuring the polutional effects of the materials to be dredged. Skilled personnel as well as fixed and mobile laboratory facilities of that agency will be made available to analyze these materials for chemical, biological, physical and other characteristics and thus determine the effective- ness of the various methods proposed. to vit~a~ ex~n~i~ ~ vi~i~t~ ?llee5iE~ local progranito prevent, the incomparable values of the Great Lakes water resources. ;;i;g;~; solve these problems through the cteveiopiiietiu ~ ~ sive plans in which all viewpoints have been considered. I believe that is the process which is taking place now. It is not a perfect process, and improvements are constantly being made. But the old charges against the corps as an authoritarian organization in- different to the values of beauty and preserving wild rivers, for ex- ample, or lands in a pristine condition, those charges simply are not accurate. Senator RIBICOFF. Well, how often do you sit down with other agen- cies to discuss the problems of potential conflict in the conservation of natural resources? I am just curious. - Mr. Frrr. Let me refer that to General Cassidy. CONSULTATION BEGINS EARLY IN STUDY General CAS5IDY. In all of our studies, right at the beginning of the study. For instance, one of the projections we must make immediately * T-T,~ ~ i-ha ~ivf~m1flr area ~ to ffrow? And here we ~o to the PAGENO="0047" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 55 - -~----~-~J `~w-t ~JiiijflM~e11ee vi. tll~ &rmy i~ngineers. Haviifg been Governor during those years and having called on the corps for assistance, I recall that your aid was given so rapidly and so effectively that we, in Connecticut, have always had a great affection for the corps and all the men that compose it. CORPS IS INVOLVED IN RECREATION PROGRAMS But I am curious about whether you are aware, aActively and positively aware, of the problems of the erosion of our natural resources and the need to do everything possible to see that they are preserved. Just in the planning stage of how these projects are executed, it seems to me that much more can be done, although I think, today, in build- ing most of your dams, you take into account the problems of recrea- tion. Now, who runs those recreation areas ~ Do you or does the De- partment of the interior? General CASSIDY. We run most of the recreation areas at our reservoirs and on the rivers where we have developments. If there is a national forest in that area, the Forest Service will run the recreation in the national forest areas. Senator RlBlcoirir. Let me just take a field like this : You build a dam and you try to nhin ~ `~"~ ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~ .j V ! ~ uiIO 1cLI~t~bU UltilC recreation agencies. Senator Rinioo~~. Why should the Army he in the recreation business? Let's say that you build the dams, and the recreation areas are an important byproduct and a great asset, and I like what you are doing, but once you build a dam and do the engineering work why should not the recreation areas be turned over to the National Park Service? I mean, what do you want it for? General CASSIDY. At one time, this effort was made, and the Park Service turned it down. (The following additional information was subsequently furnished for the record :`i PAGENO="0048" I 56 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES General CAsSIDY. Now, we try to turn the areas over to the States or to the counties or to local interests to operate them in accordance with national policy expressed in the Federal Wwter Project Recrea- tion Act (Public Law 89-72) . We make a definite efFort to get some- one else to operate the recreational side ; however, we do have to oper- ate the reservoir itself in its fluctuation, in taking care of the water surface and the shore surface. So, it is hard to separate reservoir regu- lation for its many purposes from recreational use and its manage- ment. Senator RIBIcOFF. It becomes very obvious that there is not much chance of the Corps of the Army Engineers being turned over to a Department of Natural Resources, but that does not mean that we cannot see what you should be doing and what you should not be doing. PARK SERVICE COULD hANDLE RECREATION AREAS stand that when you are in a tneawr ii VY~L ~ ~ fh~ Nfl tional areas, but you certainly do not `want to run recreational areas in 50 States with all the headaches and prthlems that this entails. General CASSIDY. We are doing it very competently now, sir, but if the Park Service wanted it and if the `Congress decided to do so, we would have no objection. Senator RIBICOFF. In other words, irrespective of what happens to' this measure, if there could be, either through Executive order or a reorganization plan, some `way worked out between you and Secretary Udall-why, this is something you are not going to fight for, if Inte- nor would like to take itt over ? General CAssIDY. We are already doing this to some extent in the reservoir at Tock's Island. The Park Service is to operate it ; going to operate the entire area. So', we have no basic objection there, sir. Senator RIBICOFF. I have a few questions here from Senator Moss who could not be here today, and I will ask them for Senator Moss. The first question is: AREA CONTROLLED BY ARMY ENGINEERS "How many acres of water and land are controlled by the Civil PAGENO="0049" EMPLOYEES OF CIVIL WORKS DIVISION Senator BIBICOpp. Should point ~ - control life resourcE General ( Senator RIBIOOFF. How many military and civilian employees are presently assigned to the Civil Works Division ? How many military and how many civilian? General CASSIDY. There are about 32,000 civilians and, at the pres- ent time, 127 military. Senator RIBICOFF. 127,000? General CASSIDY. 127,000. Senator IRIBICOFF. One hundred twenty-seven military? General CASSIDY. Yes, sir. Senator IRIBICOFF. And 32,000 civilian General CASSIDY. Yes, sir. This is as the result of the Vietnamese war. It is the same thing that happens in any war. (The following additional information was subsequently furnished for the record:) The total civilian capability of the Cor~~ ~yf Engineer~ for Military Construc~ tion and Civil Works encompasises a work force of Over 47,000 employees. o~ these, approximately 13,000 are categorized as professional personne~ and are in the personnel management ~ A&tl~ I~it~r ~i~soi~i.ces are lim~cT. Should we not make every possible effoit to effect the best management techniques with regard to land, water, and mineral resources? General CASSIDY. Yes. And I believe, over the years, Congress has considered this and has finally evolved a system in the Water Resources Council. (The following additional information Was subsequently furnished for the record:) The Water Resources Council as presently COflstituted is well structured to accomplish the missions assigned to it and more. The agencies are working increasingly well together and we all benefit from the increased coordin~tjo~ and communication This is a significant accomplishment and perhaps the main objective of the Act. Tangible results of this interagency coordination can be expected with increasing frequency as time goes by. FLOOD CONTROL IN FLORIDA EVERGLADES a Everglades be drained at one 1 thus causing as loss of wild- that question, because it is ~ PAGENO="0050" The Engineers have built massive levees to contain runoff from Lake Okeechobee and constructed 1,400 miles of drainage canals in the name of flood control. Park Service officials complain bitterly that the Engineers have drained Everglades National Park almost dry in their efforts to halt wetlands flooding and reclaim glade country for agriculture. Flood control advocates have said that reclamation is for people and Everglades Park is "for the birds." But I do not believe that is the question. The Park is ~ snd the farms are for people. The real question is how shall priorities was cut off by the local Florida ~1anaiYWl1k~i-a ui corps project has been underway 20 years. The construction has gone on and we are about 50 percent complete. We have looked at this prob- lem for many years. It is a problem of water use, and part of the problem must be solved by working with the State of Florida which really has authority in the use of the waters of Florida. PLANS TO CONTROL DROUGHT AND FLOOD CYCLES In the last several years, we have been working on a plan to provide additiona~l water to the Everglades. It is not a question of draining the Everglades. It is a question of adequate rainfall supplemented by a flow of water down into the Everglades from the north. The glades are now getting twice as much water south of the Tamiami Trail per inch of rainfall a~s they have had before, and we are working toward a system which will enable us to continue and make a more reliable supply of water. There is a great deal of talk about whait is happening there. The glades used to go through a periodic cycle of drought and wet. There were losses in the glades at that time. This is the natural cycle. And, really, what they are looking for now is an even ecological cycle, a ~ ~1] ~mrnt historic dr~ughts. We think DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR-NATIONAL PARK SERVICE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY-CORPS OF ENGINEERS Joint Fact Sheet on: WATER SITuATIoN AT EVERGLADES NATIONAL PARK 58 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES I The Everglades National Park is primarily an aquatic area. The park has tor several recent years experienced drought periods that have been extremely PAGENO="0051" eriuCal to its well being. If it is to survive in the natural state which justified its establishment by Congress as a national park, it must continue to be nourished with sufficient water to provide the environment necessary for the production and maintenance of aquatic plant and animal populations. The pronounced arid conditions which resulted from this deficiency of supply were alleviated, at least temporarily, by the late-starting rainy season of last fall. Hurricane Betsy, with 6 to 10 inches of rainfall directly on the park, and other rains, have raised the water levels to the point that, at the end of 1965, they were about equal to levels at the end of 1964. The question as to how soon, or if, the animal and plant `life that has been so severely damaged in the jrv period can recover rpmahi~ ti~ 3~ `~-`- ~-~~--- ~ ~ piopefly uamage, tue ~ U~. i~ng1neers starting in 1928 constructed the Okeechobee waterway in- volving the existing St. Lucie Canal, the lake, and the Caloosahatchee River and enlarged the existing levees around much of the lake. In 1947, the Everglades National Park was established. At that time, and sub- sequent thereto, there was some overland flow of water into the park from the north. In 1948, the Congress authorized the construction and operation of the Central and Southern Florida flood control project. Considerable detail as to purposes of the project are contained in House Document No. 643, 80th Congress, 2nd Session. This document also contained assurances that "the plan of improvement has also been developed in full recognition of the importance of the Everglades National Park * * *~ Releases of water from conservation storage will assist in restoring and maintaining natural conditions within the national park area, by reducing damage from drought and fire which have threatened the preservation of lands, vegetation and wildlife." With specific reference to the Everglades National Park, `the Central and Southern Florida floor control project works include construction of three con- servation areas north of the park for storage `and release of water for beneficial use. Conservation Area 3, directly north of the park, is the main storage facility designed to hold water which can be released into the park. As a `part of this conservation area there was constructed in 1962 a levee (L-29) for approxi- utately 10 miles along the northern edge of the park. This levee contains five sets of gates through which water can be released from the conservation area into the park. At present, several factors make `supply of water to the park difficult. The southward flow `of water released into `Conservation A v~ ~ ~ T ~ ~ ~ i~s~"conducted in 1965 indi'cate th'at the release capacity of the existin.g system for the benefit of the park can be improved by the use of project pumps. Funds for this purpose have not heretofore been available. However, even using maximum pumping capability, it may be necessary, in an emergency, to dis- charge excess water via the St. Lucie `Canal and `Caloosa'hatebee River to safeguard life and property when heavy rainfall is encountered and the hurri- cane season is imminent. PAGENO="0052" `-~`-~ ~ _~_&~ ~-~--~ diagonal levee, I1-t;Tc~ ) within Conservation Area 3 was startea in eep~w~ 1965. This will reduce seepage losses to the east and thereby increase surface water for distribution to the park. Additional work (L-l7 extension) consist- ing of a levee and canal along the east boundary of the park to distribute water to the park will be placed under way during the spring of 1966. A further interim plan has been developed for the transfer of water from Lake Okeechobee to the park during periods when the lake levels will permit. With the cooperation and assistance of the Central and Southern Florida Fiood Control District and the State of Florida, this work can proceed, in part, under existing authorities and in part under additional authority now being sought. The plan censists of enlargement and extension of the North New River Canal downstream from the agricultural area to a junction with the Miami Canal and the Borrow Canal for L-67, enlargement of the Miami Canal downstream from the agricultural area to the same point, and the enlargement of the L-67 Borrow Canal from the Miami Cai~al to the park boundary. This work can be done under existing authority with the participation of the State. To this the State has agreed. The construction costs total about $3,000,000 ($2,4OO,OOO~Federal ; $600,- 000-State) . Funds to accomplish the North New River Canal enlargement, esti- 1Th:Ite~ ~t $265,000, are available, and it is proposed to place this work under con- quic Iy as ~U~iuw. ~ . ~ ~ .~ (~ Senator RIBIC0FF. Now, this is what I was wondering ab~it. flO~cV much consultation is there with the National Park Service ~ Let's take the Everglades as an example, because you do have a complicated problem here. Now, how do you plan with the National Park Service on a prob- lem of this nature? General CASSIDY. We work with the Park Service constantly, sir, and with the State of Florida, to try to reach solutions to problems. But we have to reach solutions that are agreeable to the State and to the Park Service, and this has been rather difficult until just recently. COOPERATION WITH BUREAU OP RECLAMATION Senator Rmioor~r. Here is a final question from Senator Moss: "General Cassidy, you stress coordination with the Bureau of Rec- lamation in the West. Have the Bureau's views on a proposed proj- ect ever prevailed over the views of the Army?" General CAssmY. Yes, sir; quite often I would say. I 62 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES STATE?~LNT OP HON. ORVILLE L. FREEMAN, SECRETARY OP AGRICULTUJ~E Secretary FREEMAN. Mr. Chairman and ii mittee, the Department of Agriculture natiira 1 ~ ~ iicrF~r sil of our functions a.dnimistpv~ PAGENO="0053" OTHER PR( PAGENO="0054" tial for growL~! p PAGENO="0055" OF NATURAL RESOURCES n_ as ion and*( co1~ programs. our our t rtmeni ~ to advanc nomic we] - ing of ~. ~. ~~ryside, U.S.A. PRO~RAM5 AIM AT CREATING VIABLE RURAL COMMtTNITIES Today, one of our most pressing needs is to build economically viable rural communities. Consistent and integrated land and water resource management systems are needed to make multiple use of resources effeetivA fl~nd th ~ the small watershed program under Public Law 566 from the rest of the land treatment programs of the Department-and, figuratively, to separate the woods a farmer owns from the rest of his farm enter- prise-is poor organization The ties that weave the research, cooperative forestr land management of the Forest Service, and the soil-c watershed and flood prevention activities of the ~ Service into the overall programs and respons~ we are convinced, are much more significant, they would be to a Department of Natural Res~ arces such as t. posed by S. 886. AGRICULTURE'S PROGRAMS DECENTRALIZED TO MEET LOCAL NEEDS I most en ~ to minimize in portance of Inter ut historic matter of day-to- are not 1: communities fai makers- In the PAGENO="0056" 66 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES By contrast, the Department of Agriculture has traditionally been decentralized so as to be acutely sensitive to local and private needs as well as those which are regional and national in scope. Therefore, if the Congress decides it will be beneficial to group uatural resource functions in one complex, then let me suggest that the economic and social rural counterpart ~to metT~t~pb1ltftn `~uiiitr L. - - REoRGANIzATIoN OF AGENCIES IS NOT NEEDED Let me make it clear, however, that I do not recommend that agen- cies in the Department of the Interior be transferred to the Depart- ment of Agriculture. On the contrary, it is my considered judgment that it would not be wise to reshuffle agencies in either direction. I base this judgment on some practical experience as an adminis- trator, both as the Governor of a great State and for almost 7 years as the administrator of a department with multiple programs in every county of the United . States and more than 50 countries around the world. From the standpoint of effective public administration, efficiency, and maximum use of the talent and funds available, I am convinced nothing would `be gained by regrouping resource agencies. On the con- trary, the aggregation of such agencies, as proposed in S. 886, would, in my judgment, result in an enormous concentration of authority and responsibilities in one Department. Such a concentration of widely varied functions would be so enormous in its scope as to make manage- ment extremely difficult. Further, I am convinced it would place an -- ~. --- i~1~ ~ ~ ~.,~-~iii'flt~C iti Today, the Departments of the Interior, Army (Corps of Engineers), and Agriculture enjoy, and benefit from, a very satisfactory working relationship. This was brought home to me again just last month when I visited Bend, Or~g., and saw dramatic examples of how the combined efforts of Federal resource agencies, working closely with local groups, could restore economic vitality to a once severely de- pressed area. For the most part, today's competition between the. Department of the Interior and the Department of the Agriculture is healthy. Most of PAGENO="0057" I DEPARThtENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 67 this competition takes place in the area of recreatiGn, where the Na- tional Park Service and the Forest Service vie with one another to provide morei ma~inative, innovative, and effective service to the recre- ation seekers of this land. . Such sensible competition stimulates greater effort and more effec-~ tive performance, . without the waste of extremes. It should be con- tinued. It is in the national interest. Mr. Chairman, the needs of the times demand nothing less than our hc~sl~ rf~rimm~ ~+ +h~ I~1~.n1 L~1 ~ ~ -~--~- Aside from your testimony, I want to commend you for your speeches and efforts in developing rural America. I have been follow- ing them with great interest, and I think they are most important. There is a. big job to do, to keep people from pouring into the cities the way they are. They certainly are galloping into the cities. And I want to take this opporttmity to commend you for your constructive pioneer work in this field. Secretary FREEMAN. Thank you, sir. COORDINATION BETWEEN AGRICULTURE AND INTERIOR Senator RIBIconr. I am just curious as to what coordinating arrange- ments now exist between the Department of Agriculture an~ the Be- partment of the Interior in dealing with natural resource problems. Do you think there can be any improvement or strengthening in your coordinating efforts? Secretary FREEMAN. Well, I am sure that we have not reached a state of perfection by any means. Any of these questions come down to corn- paring alternatives. Actually, there is a great deal of coordination and cooperation, and I think it is imDrovinQ' very s rnlv. nrim~i.rilv ti~i~iir1i fhA W~if~' Senator RIBI00FF. Senator McClellan wanted to be here, but he has a conflict in committees and could not be with us today. He has sent to me a series of questions that he would like for me to propound. . So, Mr. Secretary, the next 11 questions are being asked of you in behalf of Senator McClellan: PAGENO="0058" gement ment; otherc purpose of bi not separate wh farm I. ~ melhod of its I with maximum return and sound c counter, and is, I think, a rather sharp J how the proposal currently before the corn- sult not in eliminating duplication but in magnifying ~ increased cost and less efficiency. LOCAL DISTRICTS' EFFICIENCY WOULD BE LOST Senator RIBICOFF. "The action programs of the Department of Agri- culture are implemented through local organizations such as soil and water conservation districts and other subdivisions of State and county government. Would the transfer of the watershed activity to another department inhibit their effectiveness in carrying out local responsibilities for resource development?" Secretary FREEMAN. Yes, I think, inevitably, it would affect work- ing, relationship between the elected soil conservation committees, and I would point out, Mr. Chairman, that these are people~ that are fling, wny, you wc in~vitably PAGENO="0059" in i~neir local areas. They have the overall policy-performing responsibility in the given locality. They, of course, are closely re- lated to the professional and technical personnel that make up the staff in each county in the United States, and all of this is an integral part of a whole and, as such, cannot be split apart without, I think, a great loss of efficiency and effectiveness. BALARCE BETWEEN SUPPLY AND DEMAND OF CROPS WOULD BE IMPAIRED Senator RIBICOFF. "Mr. Secretary, since vQ1)pJ~rgxcáhj1~ afrsistance in bringing any land into production, any new land into production, in surplus crops. This is a kind of integrated operation that I think is necessary for effective administration, and we would not have it if the transfer in question took place. COORDINATION OF RIVER BASIN PROJECTS WOULD BE MORE DIFFICULT Senator RIBICOFF. "The Department of ~ three major water resource development r - ing that your Department is heavily mi hensive river basin planning program. Is Secretary FREEMAN. `~`~t is correct. Ac bit is mor I is one o: 5Q-water - otherd-" PAGENO="0060" Secretary FREEMAN. Yes. Mr. * airman, i cer ~ By Presidential order, the Secretary of Agriculture is directed to try and coordinate in rural America the various Federal programs and to perform an outreach service so that we can use personnel we have located in local areas to help other departments that have no one there so their programs will reach the countryside. The current ma- chinery is what we call technical action panels. There are at least four nrograms in every county in the United States administered by the Department of Agriculture. All Department programs meet together in what we describe as technical action panels. Other Federal pro- grams and State and local programs join in coordinating. in nlanning~ and integrating all our programs with local efforts and in stimulating local efforts and providing leadership where it is absent.. The Forest Service and the watershed functions of the Soil Con- servation Service that would be moved by this bill are an integral part of this process, and, as such, it would represent a severe setback ~ ~ ~ .41T~?(1 vicrnvOhls efforts we are making to revitalize rural this Council is so far the most ettecuve oi any ~`i ~ ~ coordination efforts, and I believe it is bringing very real possibilities of preserving the local relationships and the decentralized adminis- tration that the Department of Agriculture, fpr example, has built up over the years. And at the same time, in the process, giving proper representation to interests that might well be swallowed up in the large and monolithic department, and~ by the same token, accomplish- ing very effective. at least potentially so, integration and forward planning in the whole water field primarily, but in soil and land use as well. This Council has just begun, but I would say that its actions to date are most encouraging and represent a real step forward. Senator RnncorF. And the final question from Senator McClellan: "Mr. Secretary, the Department of Agriculture is engaged jointly with the Departments of the Army and the Interior in comprehensive river basin planning. Don't you think that a more efficient job could be done if the effort.s of `these three departments were concentrated within one department ?" I I I I 72 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES live and work and to run our vast industrial complex, the way in which we produce and package a multitude of manufactured goods, and, among other things, the ways in which we dispose of our trash and garbage. The impact of these problems touches every segment of our society. Their adverse effects on human health are felt by people of all ages. The economic burden they impose on society is shared by all of us whether we realize it or PAGENO="0061" ~~~1 i~ +b~-. ~1-~LAJ~ ~. ~ ~L7J~j~. ~j~jj~ OF X1EALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I appreciate this oppor- tunity to present the views of the Department of Health, Education, and Wel- fare on S. 886 We welcome the opportunity to discuss reorganization and re- assignment of governmental activities with you because we know how im- portant you believe it is to keep governmental functions adjusted to chang- ing conditions. Under your chairmanship this subcommittee is performing a vital function. One of the provisions of S. 886 would transfer the air pollution and solid waste programs from this Department to the Department of the Interior, which would be redesignated the Department of Natural Resources. For reasons, which I will discuss, we do not recommend enactment of this provision. In many respects, air pollution and solid waste disposal are typical of the entire range of environmental contamination problems of our technologically advanced and predominantly urban society~ Air pollution and solid waste dis- posal are primarily health problems, but like most other problems of environ- mental contamination, they have far-reaching economic, social, and technological ramifications. They are deeply rooted in the way we build our cities, the ways in which we provide transportation for ourselves and our goods, the ways in which we provide the energy needed to heat and light all the places where we PAGENO="0062" are the immediate costs involved in research and control efforts. But they will surely materialize, not only in the form of a reduction in the economic losses as- sociated with air pollution and obsolete waste disposal practices, but also in such forms as more efficient use of fuels, recovery of usable materials that are now wasted, and greater efficiency in transportation and in the production of a vast array of manufactured goods. In both the air pollution and solid waste programs, the Department.is placing equal emphasis on the development of new scientific and technical knowledge anc~ on the application of existing knowledge. The air pollution program includes re- search on both the effects and control of air pollutants ; training activities ; grants to local, State, and regional governmental agencies to assist them in the creation and maintenance of effective control programs ; abatement of interstate and in- trastate air pollution problems ; the development and application of national ~ ,~ ~ f~ fh~ coj~trol of motor vehicle pollution ; and numerous other activ- wasue uisposal prouiems ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ sir nollu- mineral resources. The proposed transfer of responsibility for the air pollution and solid waste programs to the Department of the Interior might well create more problems than It would solve. To be sure, air and water pollution, in particular, are often talked about as though they were twin problems, but are they really so much alike? The fact is that they are not, even though they have many things In common ; indeed, among all our natural resources, Including air, water, soil, and mineral resources, the aIr Is unique In many respects. The air Is not a commodity available for sale, as minerals and even land are. The air does not always travel in the same channels, as water does; airshecis cannot he defined with anything like the degree of precision possible with watersheds. We are not free to decide how we will use the air, nor can we decide to use part of it for one purpose and part of it for another Neither do we have the option of storing any portion of the atmosphere for future use. To one degree or another, all these choices are et of water. soil. and mineral resources. its background environmental State and loci L governments in M' T-T~,i,h. Education, and WeL~.~ 74 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PAGENO="0063" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 75 The threat to health constitutes the primary and most powerful impulse for effective contrel of environmental contamination problems in this country. Those groups who seek to slow down such coutrol efforts invariable do so on the ground that the health hazards have not been proved or are n~t really serious; conversely, many groups whose activities are most directly affected by the application of control measures will take whatever action is necessary if dangers to human health can be demonstrated. Any action at the Federal level which would make public health considerations a secondary factor would clearly slow down the Nation's progress toward effective control of air pollution and efficient management of solid waste disposal problems. S. 886 also provides for the transfer of the Bureau of Indian Affairs to the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The problem of the most appropriate location of the Bureau of Indian Affairs in the Federal Government has been considered over many years. The Indian affairs program is comprehensive and covers nearly every aspect of Indian life. T4 ~ ~ ~ 1. Several functions of the Bureau are completely foreign to this Department. They include the building and operation of irrigation projects, the regulation of tribal government, the authorization and regulation of tribal and individual economic enterprise, the overseeing of law and order on Indian reservations, the management of forest lands, and the building and maintenance of public roads on Indian reservations. The effect the transfer would have on these linpertant functions should be carefully weighed. 2. The Indians themselves have generally opposed transfer of the Bureau from the Department of the Interior. Since the transfer would affect them, there should be consultation with the Indian people before any decision is reached. We believe further attention should be given to these matters before this transfer is made. Further, S. 886 provIdes for the transfer of the Office of Territories to the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. ~ The transfer of the Office would bring to this Department an organization whose functions go beyond the current scop~ of the functions the Deparbment administers. The Office is concerned not only with the social advancement of the Territories but with their economic and political development. Involvement in Territorial affairs would present the Department with Issues concerning which it has no present experience or expertise. Further study should be under- taken before any commitment for transfer of the Office to the Department Is made. A word should be said about the provision in the bill for the transfer of per- sonnel and property. The proyisions providing for the transfer of personnel and property, cited In Section 5(h~ anti 1A(h\ ~ ~ ~ Uohen:) I I I P PAGENO="0064" PAGENO="0065" EXHIBIT 9 COMMITTEE PRINT PREPARED FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON EDUCATION OF THE COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND PUBLIC WELFARE UNITED STATES SENATE Public Welfare U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFPIOE WASHINGTON: 1967 (77) 90th 1st Congress Session ~.. ii 88-889 O-68-----8 PAGENO="0066" COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND PUBLIC WELFARE WAYNE MORSE, Oregon RALPH YARBOR~iTJGH, Texas JOSEPH S. CLARK, Pennsylvania JENNINGS RANDOLPH, West Virginia HARRISON A. WILLIAMS, JR., New Jersey CLAIBORNE FELL, Rhode Island EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts GAYLORD NELSON, Wisconsin ROBERT F. KENNEDY, New York STEWART B. MCCLURE, Chief Clerk Josaw S. FORSYThE, General Counsel EUGENE MITTELMAN, Minority Counsel ROY AL, iVil u,~,,.,.. - LISPER HILL, Alabama, Chairman JACOB K. JAVITS, New York WINSTON L. PROUTY, Vermont PETER H. DOMINICK, Colorado GEORGE MURPHY, California PAUL J. FANNIN, Arizona ROBERT P. GRIFFIN, Michigan U (78) PAGENO="0067" FOREWORD grants to i PAGENO="0068" PAGENO="0069" J'JiJ..LV - ~u~uior~ would be~condijcted. We are pleased to transmit herewith for your consideration a report of our findings and conclusions. - 1 CONTENTS I. Background of report: Purpose Summary 71 7i. Disadvantages VIII. Recommendatjo~: Policy and administration Legislation I (81) Page 1 61 7 7 9 VT? PAGENO="0070" PAGENO="0071" PAGENO="0072" 86 ing schools. a1i~a1'~~~ce of the Me and economic conditions cond change of attitude toward I self-government for Indian RESOURCES During the period since 1960, Indians have been the beneficiaries of many new Federal programs which have come into being as a result of the increased national awareness of the problems of disadvantaged citizens. Among the agencies administering such programs are the Office of Economic Opportunity, the Economic Development Adminis- tration, and the Housing Assistance Administration. The major thrust of the Bureau's educational program is to provide a high quality education which will prepare Indian children for life in the 20th century. This includes the teaching of communication skills, DE?ARTMENT OF NATURAL att~nd social ~d to a ~r emp ri improved ~ ~ -~t~i1 ~.o~neies ~ SINCE 1960 2 PAGENO="0073" DEPARTMENT OP NATURAL RESOURCES 87 vocational training, and the providing of guidance and counseling for cultural adjustment. The Bureau is attempting to attain a goal which would result by the 1970's in most Indian youth graduating from high school and continuing their formal training in colleges or vocational and technical schools. Transfer of rt~snnnsihil~+.~r 1'~' 4.1-~~ ~ -1-- - - ~ T~ 1~ ~ ~ U~) ~LSS1SL in tne planning and implementation of programs and projects under Public Law 89-10, as well as to advise on all matters pertaining to the education of Indians. rphe newly established educational objectives of the BIA are as follows: 1 . As many children as possible should be moved out of boarding schools, particularly off-reservation boarding schools, and placed in community schools on the reservation. rphis is based on the theory that the most effective education takes place when children are educated in their local community and when their parents are involved in educational policy decisions and implementation. In such circurn- stances, adult and community education take place simultaneously. Furthermore, in a community school setting financial benefits of a school accrue locally. However, it would not be beneficial to make such a move until the local school is prepared to offer education of at least equal quality. 2. Quality education must be stressed in any federally run program. Indian education should be an exemplary system of instruction. * All of the teaching technologies available should be brought to bear on the instruction of Indian children. 3. The community ni~ti~mn w~-~ `-1W ~1 I 1 *~ ~ . I ue iuuian population in the United States, estimated to have been more than 800,000 at the end of ~ the 15th century, gradually decreased to about 240,000 at the end of the 19th century. The population has been growing rapidly since that time, and in 1960 there were 524,000 Indians, and an additional 29,000 Eskimos and Aleuts in Alaska, bringing the total to 552,000. At least 380,000 receive some services from the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Division of Indian Health (HEW's Public Health Service). Due to the high birth rate during the 1950-60 decade, the number of Indian children of school age has greatly increased. Furthermore, a determined effort has been made during recent years to make educa- 3 PAGENO="0074" tional opporLumuie~ enrollment of Indians is higher than ever before; yet, ci number of students that have been transferred to local s, the number of students attending Bureau schools has grown from 42,000 in 1961 to nearly 50,000 during the current school year. The Bureau now operates 254 schools, 31 fewer than the high of 285 schools in 1959. BIA FuNDING For fiscal year 1967, $84.4 million was appropriated for the educa- tional activities of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and nearly $40 iriillion for construction of schools and related facilities. Of the $84.4 million, $72.2 million is earmarked for Federal school operations. Under the authority of the Johnson-O'Malley Act, $9.5 million is allocated for assistance to public schools: $1.6 million to pay full cost for 2,355 Navajo students in eight "border town" schools; and $7.9 million to assist public schools enrolling some 50,000 Indian students in 17 States. In addition, $2 million is available to provide grants-in- aid to eligible Indian students enrolled in colleges and universities, while $0.7 million has been set aside for adult education activities. tion, and ruoiic i~iu~v O1~(~JW ~ ~ ~_ T~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ti~. T struction. Local school districts annually receive about $14 m?llton of Public Law 81-874 funds and around $3 million of Public Law 81-815 funds based on their enrollment of reservation Indian youngsters. Under titles I, II, and III of the Elementary and Secondary Educa- tion Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-10) as amended in 19~6, Bureau of Indian Affairs schools have obtained about $5.4 million for fiscal year 1967. Most U.S. Office of Education programs involve grants to State and local educational agencies. It is assumed that large numbers of Indian children in public schools have benefited from services provided through Federal programs such as titles I, II, and III of the Ele- mentary and Secondary Education Act. The U.S. Office of Education has recently undertaken a thorough examination of its resources to identify and to help solve the special problems encountered in the education of Indian children. In the area of research, the nine research projects conc I and I Tess of Education has funded 1 tion, seven C i isexplor~~ e PAGENO="0075" aimed at improvement of education of Indians and other minority groups. In the area of teacher training, some of the teachers of Indian children have already been involved in summer institutes funded under the National Defense Education Act. Many more opportunities for such training will soon be available. . A d t h ~ ft-~ ~ £ ~ ~~~uc~uiU11 SJIOUIU bO located within uie J~ ecf~r~i1 ~overnment. Lists of those attending these meetings are attached. Attending the first meeting were 18 Indian tribal chairmen and members of tribal education committees, representing 76 percent of the total enrollment in Bureau of Indian Affairs schools and 60 per~ cent of the entire reservation population. Indian representatives expressed concern about the transfer of education from BIA to the Office of Education. Fearful of "termina~ tion" of Federal activities in their behalf, they are generally opposed to the disruption of the traditional relationships which has existed with the Government. They indicated distrust of the fragmentation of Indian services within the Federal Establishment and felt that their welfare would suffer if these functions were further divided between agencies rather than remaining concentrated in the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Attending the second meeting were college and university faculty who have conducted research on Indian problems, teachers of Indian children from both BIA and public schools, and others who have been involved in the educational aspects of community action programs. This group agreed that major responsibility for Indian education should remain within the BIA, nrovided~ f,h~f ~ w~L~urn~i ur;th~±J-~-J;~R?j x~oThinenteU turther that local studies be undertaken with the assistance of Indian groups, non~Indian groups, and State and Federal officials; and that Governors of the States involved should call attention to the need for improvement of educational opportunities for Indians in public schools. The consensus at both meetings was that the BIA should be given time to carry out its new educational program before serious considera- tion is given to a transfer of the education function from one agency to another. I I PAGENO="0076" w education' Much of the ~discus5i0Il cen1~e1eU assistance to help ~~~omplish these objectives because of the limitea financial resources of lo~al school districts in manY Indian areas. There was no consensuS among these repreSe11tat~~~S 00ncerning the proposed transfer of the education function from BIA to the Office of Education and manY stated they did not feel sufficiently informed to express a firm opinion. VI. TEANSFER OF INDIAN HEALTh TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE In an attempt to gain further insight into the possible effects of ~~~~sferring Indian education, members of the Public Health Service were consulted regarding the transfer of Indian health from the Bureau of Indian A~airs to that agency in 1955. Iii ~ that Ifl~'~ ~ ~ th~ ~j5~Ofl was made quite suddenly, and 5~rrounding Indian health and ~nthan e~uca~10n1. part in health to the existing system of State~5uPP0I't~ education with well~e5tahh15b~ relation5~P~ between these systems and the u.s. Office of Educati0~ Further, the Public Health Service 1S experienced in the operatiofl and control of hospitals and other medical facilities, whereas the Office of Education has never operated schools or school systems. VII. ANTICIPATED EFFECTS OF TRANSFERm~~~ INDIAN EDUCATION The e~ects of ~~~nsferring responsibility for Indian education from the BIA to the Office of Education must be analyzed in the context of providing improved qu~itY of educati0~ opportunities for Indian children. The committee identified the followiI~g significant ~~vantages and ~j5~dVantages ADVANTAGES OF TRANS~~ 1. The quality of Indian educa a result of the augmentation of research capS r, and f acml I 2 4L more DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES influence to insure that resources become and continue to be available for Indian children enrolled in public schools and should urge States to give the same emphasis to Indian children. 4. Education must be viewed as a single, ~ontinUiflg process which from nrescho°l through adulthood. Beginning ~tb prescho0~ - - 1 ~ ~ v~c~reh and deve1Opm~t )ectecl to increaS~ as ssiOnal expertise, jon could result 92 PAGENO="0077" 1. The Bureau of Indian function at this time, working in C~3 coop~~ration ~ne ~ of Education to develop a high quality program of I i education. 2. As long as the Federal Government operates schools, the princi~ pal official responsible for education should be in a role comparable to that of a superintendent of a major school system, i.e., with full responsibility for the total educational enterprise, including school construction, operation, and maintenance. 3. The Office of Education in HEW should review all its programs to determine how to make these available to the greatest extent possible for the benefit of Indian children enrolled in federally operated schools. In its own programs the Office of Education should exert `7 PAGENO="0078" 94 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES as that provided under Public Law 81-874 for impact areas. Closer coordination of all these programs should increase efficiency and effectiveness~ Respectfully submitted, Department of the interior: ~ ROBETtT EL VAUGHAN, Deputy Assistant Secretary. JAMES E. OFFICER, Associate Commissioner, Bureau of Indian Affairs. DR. CARL L. MARBURGER, Assistant Commissioner of Ed'ucation, Bureau of Indian Affairs. Department of Health, Education, and Welfaie: JOSEPH G. COLMEN, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Education. WALTER E. MYLECRAINE, Bonito, Wesley, education committee, Apacne i riue, ...Jx Colmen, Joseph G., Deputy Assistant Secretary for Education, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Washington, D.C. Coomhs, Madison, Deputy Assistant COmmissioner for Education, Bureau of' Indian Affairs, Washington, D.C. Cooper, Samuel, Tribal Council, Mescalero Apache, Mescalero, N. Mex. Deloria, Vine, Jr., executive director, National Congress of American Indians,' 1452 Pennsylvania, Denver, Cob. 1~r~nk. chairman, Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Eagle Butte,IS.~Dak. PAGENO="0079" Thom, Melvin D, chairman, Walker River Paiute Tribe, box 118,Schurz, Nev. Valandra, Cato W., president, Rosebud Sioux Tribe, Rosebud, S. Dak. Vaughan, Robert E., Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Land Management, Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. Walker, Tillie, executive director, United Scholarship Service, 1452 Pennsylvania, Denver, Cob. NOVEM~3ER 11-12, 1968 Aberle, Sophie D., coordinator of research, Psychiatric Department, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, N. Mex. Colmen, Joseph U., Deputy Assistant Secretary for Education; Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Washington, D.C. Dêloria, Vine, Jr., executive director, National Congress of American Indians, 1452 Pennsylvania, Denver, Cob. Denny, Benjamin, Jr., 833 Ponderosa Avenue NW., Albuquerque, N. Mex. Dozier, Edward P., professor of anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson, Aris. Ducheneaux, Frank,chairman, Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Eagle Butte, S. Dak. Echelberger, Winifred T., Pierre Indian School, 808 North Central, Pierre, S. Dak. Fitzgerald, R. E., superintendent, Seneca School, Wy~ndatte, Okla. Gaasland, John, 840 1?ourth Street, Wapheton, N. Dak. Geboe, Charles G., director, Indian community action project, University of South Dakota, box 85, University Exchange, Vermillion, S. Dak. Gentry,Rob~rtJ~.~ dire~oi,child d~v~1rir~rnc~f ~v'~'~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Moore, J'osiah, Pa'~ago Tribe, post office box 277, Sells, Ariz. Mylecraine, Walter, Assistant to Deputy Commissioner, U.S. Office of Education, Washington, D.C. Officer, James, Associate Commissioner, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Washington, D.C. Otte, Arland, U.S. Office of Education, Washington, D.C. Owens, Charles S., director of Indian education, State departmetit of e SantaFe, N. Mex. Parmeter, Adrian T., Bureau of Research, U.S. Office of Education, Wa D.C. Rock Howard, editor, Tundra Times, h.~. ~ Roessel, Bob, Rough Rock Dernonstra Snider, Glenn, professor of ediicatio~ nivers uy ii Thomas, Hadley A., box 35, Tuba (~` ~ ~riz. Tilson, David, National Institutes of 1i~ ~ Washington, D.C. Tyler, S. Lyman, director, bureau of Indian services, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. ~ Robert E., Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Land Management, ,artment of Interior, Washington, D.C. , Wilma L., superintendent, Intermountain School, Brigham City, Utah. Phillip, Jr., director of instructional services, department of public "u, Helena, Mont. , Director, Indian Branch, Office of Economic Opportunity, Wash- ~rs Poi PAGENO="0080" 96 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL I PAGENO="0081" still have to be administered by our Department and, thus, the frag- mentation of functions would probably be an even more difficult coordination problem than at the present time. BtTREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS SHOULD NOT BE PUT IN HEW Now, with regard to the second aspect in this bill that affects our Department, there is a more difficult problem, and that is the one for the transfer of the Bureau of Indian Affairs to our Department. This is ~ a problem which I know you have given a lot of thought to, and it has been discussed in the Federal Government for a long period of time. I have no doubt in saying that the transfer of the public health function that was formerly vested in the Bureau of Indian Affairs to the Public Health Service some years ago has resulted in a mate- rial improvement in the health of the American Indian, and I would have to say, in all honesty, that if the education function in the Bureau of Indian Affairs were transferred to the Office of Education, I think it `would likewise result in an improvement in the education of the American Indian. `-"s' eu~1ofls with the representatives of the Indians, they have indicated that they are quite opposed to the transfer of these functions to the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Senator RIBICOFF. Education too? INDIANS FEAR CHANGE IN POLICY WO~tTLD RESULT Mr. COHEN. Yes, sir. It is my understanding, on the basis of Secre- tary Gardner's meeting with various Indian groups in Kansas City in February, that while they do not take a position of the sort of being specifically against the movement of one function, they look upon any movement or change as having a long impact in changing the whole philosophy of the Federal Government's responsibility with respect to Indians. So, I would say that you have a very difficult problem in that the main constituents that you are interested iii dealing with are, at least vigorously, I would say, c to it. It would certainly be an im- portaiit factor, and require consultation with them before any such change in part or is made. RIBIco1~. I ~ F ~T1S pr *-~-` - havinQ~ 1 I I I PAGENO="0082" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Do they consider that, if they transferred education, the education of the Indian could be improved, too ? Mr. COHEN. I believe that their position is that they look upon this as the Federal Government withdrawing from its financial respon- Qihjljt,v for the tQtal support of Indian activities. In other words, they Mr. COHEN. w eli, i. wouici nope uia~ uiu~t et~ui~ ~ them. I think it . would require some time. I would have to add that there is one big philosophical question th~a has never been totally rec- onciled in the educational field, and that is whether it is desired that there be complete integration of the Indians into the cultural life of the white man or ~he maintenance of a kind of separation of their activities in separate schools. And there is a very strong difference of opinion on that matter, about how you regard the future of the Amer- ican Indians, and I think perhaps that element in the difference of opinion is a factor for not getting a complete agreement. Senator RIBICOFF. What do the Indians want? Do they want their separate schools, or do they want to be integrated into the overall school system? Mr. CohEN. Miss George has been working with the Indian groups, and she might `be able to tell you what their view is. I am not certain. DESIRE FOR INTEGRATION IS INCREASING AMONG INDIANS Miss GEORGE. One of the problems about the segregation aspect is the fact that Indian children attending Federal schools usually reside in isolated areas, so that under any jurisdiction they would not be in best of opportunities ~ iio yliu1~rmr~c ~bi'~gl ~i1jif~~ w iild be policies that puts education in the Department of the Interior? REPORT STRESSES IMPROVEMENT OF INDIAN EDUCATION Mr. COHEN. I would say, Senator, at least from this report that we made, that quality education for the American Indian has not yet been achieved, and I think that there is a lot more that' can and should be done to improve education for the Indians. Senator RIBICOFF. Well, what does that report recommend? 98 I I I PAGENO="0083" PAGENO="0084" ~AL RESOURCES PAGENO="0085" ~some of t spec SUPPLEMENTAL STATE~ EXRIBIT 10 PAGENO="0086" 104 ar CO p. DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES .itional resc ~ted by the President's uc ~ for ?creational potential of the country PAGENO="0087" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 105 SPAThMENT OP HON. STEWART L UDALL, SECB~TARY OP THE INTERIOR the sharp ~ bit. - - sob. and I am a not many more t at that point. STATEMENT OF SECRETARY Senator,T have apr( the heart , `.1 as maybe express some of will be drawn out in ques- thing that fascin~ttes you you look PAGENO="0088" you havei thing being in place as you would put it in an i~ ~. __ ~. i Department is more of a natural resources department- ~ mean there are more natural resources functions-than in any department in any other country that I am familiar with today. I think certainly the idea that is behind Senator Moss' legislation, that there should be a Department of Natural Resources, is sound. In fact, I think we have one in everything except name. DSVELOPMENT OF INTEEIOfl D1~PARTMENT The Department of the Interior got its name in 1849 at the time the two biggest functions it had was the Indian Bureau and what was then called the General Land Office. In 1849 the California gold rush was on, thes~ttlement of the West, the breaking of the frontier, was just beginning, and the word "Interior" was a pretty good description of the Department. at that time, although it was a catch-all depart~ ment. We had what was then the Veterans Bureau and the Office of Education, such as it was, and other housekeeping functions. So "Interior" described the Department at that time. Over the years and until rather recently the Department was also thought, .` .~ . ~ . . .p~ ~ 1QT1d~ ~riç1 Indians and the There are three or four major developthents that nave occurrea willie I have been Secretary. ~ In the first place, as a result of the outdoor recreation study that was carried out beginning in 1958 with a report by the group that Lau- rence Rockefeller headed in 1961, we established a Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. And to give it a further action focus, we established a Land and Water Conservation Fund. This Bureau is working today with all 50 States in terms of plan- nmg their outdoor recreation needs. We have a national master out- door recreational program that we did not have before. My Depart- ment runs it, supervises it. in that sense, my Department is much more national than it was before. FEDERAL WATER RESOURCES COUNCIL ESTABLISHED The second very significant development was the enactment of the Water Resources Planning Act of 1965. Previous to that time, planning was compartmentalized to a high degree. The Bureau of Reclama- tion, the Corps of Engineers, were the two main resource, or water planning agencies. PAGENO="0089" - ~ ~ ~ ~ TV ~er ~esoUrCeS Uotmcil where the Federal water planning policies are really made. We do not make them in my Department. The Corps of Engineers does not make them. The Federal Water Resources Council is the real water planning agency. ~ . ~ . ~ It ~is functioning well. It started off slowly, but they are working over there every day. My Department and the Corps of Engineers, for example, both find that neither of us can act independently any more. We have to work much more closely together. And the Water Re- sources Council is going to be calling the shots more increasingly in terms of important national policy. This is a second very important development. I am Chairman of that Council. lalso serve as the Federal member on the Delaware River Basin Commission. I was designated by the President to represent the Federal Government in this area. And this apparently is going to be an increasing function. REORGANIZATION OP WAT~.R POLL1JTION CONTROL PROGRAMS The third very important development, perhaps the most vital of all in terms of any department and this committee-~md t1~o s4i~o~r man M'. ~-Mc~ ~iih1~L1u~emt~nt tunctions of the Federai Govern- ment were centered in a single department. I think~ this was a very wise decision. This, more than anything else, mademy Department national because we are dealing in this program with all the water of the Na- tion, with all 50 States, with all of the cities. This was a very vital step. * ~ . Now, Mr. CI~drman we get down to the problem of what action should be taken if the bepartment of Interior is, in truth, as close to a Department of Natural Resources as exists in the Western World, if I may put it that way. Of course, you could. proceed by simply changing the name to describe what the department is, in fact, doing. DEPARTMENT OPERATES AS DEPARTMENT OP NATtTRAt~ RE$OtTRCES I think my Department has a sense of mission today that it did not have `T years ago in that it is no longer a loose aggregation of bureaus that are carrying on various functions. We feel that our mission is the conservation of the Nation's resources, developing a concept of steward- PAGENO="0090" 108 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ship for the management of those resources. We preach this every clay. We think it all the time. We, I think, have a very harmonious attitude within the Department as a whole. I think the trouble with some of the reorganization proposals in the past has been that-I am not criti- cal in the sense that I think that type of thinking should not be done- any time that you propose to do things with one fell swoop you then unite all of th~ opposition and nothing is done. The Hoover Commission report was a good example, because they proposed-and I think quite wisely-that a Department of Natural Resources be created, but they proposed it in such a sweeping fashion that nothing actually was done. And yet what I am trying to point out, Mr. Chairman, is that in a very quiet pragmatic, piece-by-piece way, in the last 7 years very significant things have been done to make to do this, let us tici! up." ii w~ ai~ g ~ ~u~t'~S. I think it is, to tidy up, so we will take the Indian Bureau out of the Department; and we will take the Office of Territories out of the Department. It is usually laid down as the price for changing the name of the De- partment. OPPOSITION TO TRANSFER OF INDIAN BUREAU Well, to me, we do not have a clear-cut concept here, and we do not live in an ideal world either. My Department has had as one of its first missions its relationship with `the Indian people and with their resources. After all, the Indian people of this country own over 2 per- cent of the land. They have resources. The management of those re- sources is one of our important functions. The Indian people also have a close emotional tie with my Depart- ment, as Secretary Gardner and I found when we talked with some of the Indian leaders last winter about this whole problem and reorgani- zation of the Indian Bureau. If you were to say today-to me as an administrator-that you would change the name of the Department, at least take that one step, but as the price for doing that you would insist that the Indian Bureau and the Office of Territories-we have administered histOrically these 1 ~- ,dllitA c~iwc.,pssfuflv.._that they be PAGENO="0091" ~1'k~~ ~ year-a: ssubcommittee was involireci- created a n~w ~ment of ~ )ortatiofl. vc~t t}iw~~A~ii t;riki~ ~ve ii~t,ve ~ quo ~ u. It certainly has not been any status quo ~ as far as my iiepartment is concerned in the last few years. It has been a very dynamic situation. Whether we change the name or not, I think my Department, as I said at the outset, is more a Department of Natural Resources than any government that I am familiar with has today. And I think that this process will con- tinne. How it evolves will depend on the judgment of this committee, on the feelings of the people of the country, and on what kind of organization we want our Government to have. Having said that and exposed some vulnerable points, Mr. Chair- man, I think I will rest my initial statement on that. PUBLIC DISCUSSIONS ARE ESSENTIAL Senator RIBICOFF. I followed your argument, Mr. Secretary, and I gather that you like the idea of Department of Natural Resources. I also gather, since everybody is against you and you cannot get the approval of the President and the Bureau of the Budget, that you feel you might as well do the best you can with an unhappy situation, as far as you personally are concerned. This is what I sense from what you said. TTtiw~kvAr b. n .~ T i - DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 111 I think we should look at this, and I was interested in that they proposed it. Senator RIBICOFF. One of the values of a hearing such as this is that pieces of services come out in greater focus. Now. basically, the Corns of EnQ'ineers cl~s ~n ~ ~h T PAGENO="0092" I gauierea irom tne testimony or me c~IIgiii~ei ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ were doing the best they could. They were not enthusiastic about having this mission, but it was there and they would undertake it. I think it was indicated by General Cassidy that at one time- the date was not stated, whether it was with you or your predecessor- the Corps of Army Engineers wanted to give their jurisdiction over their recreation areas to the Park Service but the Park Service turned it down. Was that while you were Secretary, or was that prior to your time? Secretary UDALTJ. No, I think it was probably prior to that, Senator. And I think there is a very strong case for it. You see, the National Park Service manages national parks, national park areas, and some recreation areas. The Bureau of Reclamation or, the Corps of Engineers as the agency which built the facility manages the works after they are completed, and, ulso, carries out the recrea- ~i~1 ~ J h~ve never zone into this in detail. I think it deserves But this is sometmng that I cannot give you a~v ~J~j ~ because, quite frankly, we have not, while I have been Secretary, had a serious discussion of this with the corps. I think the corps central mission always has been that they are a construction agency. They carry out all kinds of construction projects in this country. They have from the beginning of the country. This has been their main mission. It is quite true that outdoor recreation does not fit in with that as a main concept. I think the corps has done a good job. I am not critical of them, but I can understand them feeling that maybe the recrea- tional aspects should be carried out by a department that has that as a main mission. ~~;;~;; but I do not thiii~ And this was a wise decision. There is no subject that I am interested in more ; there is no area where I think we have ~ot to improve our performance more today of orienting people than in education. The new Assistant Commissioner for Education, who just went on the job a few days ago, I deliberately picked out of the Office of Edu- cation in HEW, one of their top people and a very able person. I told Secretary Gardner and Commissioner Harold Howe that I wanted one of their men. I wanted us to have the very closest coopera- tion with them. We found, ~ year or two ago, when there wasa serious discussion I I I PAGENO="0093" mere oai LIE1~ There is no question at all. made a very wise decision in PAGENO="0094" anu igf~I i~J~NkTURAL R,ESOUECES end of the stick in a very bad way in terms of resources. do not thin -~ ~nator ~ ~sor I, or and i~ ~e batt1~ country, it is abs who is going to s in terms of what is done. i responsibilities today. Well, having said that, Senator, I did want sonal views, on the basis of .my own experience, c~. Senator HANSEN. Well, first, let me compliment you, Mr. Secretary, on your observations here. I have not yet had a chance to read your prepared statement. I certainly have been most interested in what you have said here in PAGENO="0095" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOtECES .115 over~ so th sn~k~ ~ -~f~th~-- ~ Department, then Congress must give very careful and detailed study to such a process. HANSEN E1~OOMMENDS AGAINST TRANSFER OF CIVIL WORKS FUNCTIONS I would like to point out, too, if I may, that much of what has been discussed here this morning, Mr. Chairman, is a recognition, I think, as you put it, of the fact that the Department of the Army, throi~h the Corps of Engineers, does have a great number of visitors, but in my judgment that is not of itself sufficient reason to transfer that agency from the Army to a new department. I say this, because I am aware that in the West we have two very effective loosely knith organi- zations, and I refer to the Columbia Basin Interagency Committee `and the Missouri Basin Interagency Committee. I am certain that Senator Moss knows considerably about these two groups. But what they do do is to afford a forum and an opportunity for all of the agencies, Fish and Wildlife, for example-I think you have had quite a hand, incidentally, in furthering along the good work that has resulted from this informal meeting-~etting together with the van- ous interested resource agencies from time to time and discussin~ the fnfqj ~rv~ii&s~ of ~ ~tb~5 Vt~fj~ weir fôf trying to recognize an important use of a facility and taking that as justification for transferring that function to a new department. I would like also to agree most wholeheartedly with you, Mr. Secre- tary, insofar as Indians are concerned. INDIAN BUREAU SHOULD REMAIN IN INTERIOR Now, as I read the bill, I think that section 5 does indeed. propose to transfer the Bureau of Indian Affairs to the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. I think that there are some good reasons why that should not be done. * First, in my own State of Wyoming, our biggest minority group, as the Secretary and as Senator Moss know, is our American Indian. We have two tribes out there. We have two and a half times as many PAGENO="0096" 116 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES hink if we .owy the] Indians in Spanish-~ made, are a ~re to separate tli ireau of Indian ~ ~ration ~Te would have an c t into the operat on an endless amount of r ~. COORDINATION OF INDUSTRIAL PROGRAM FOR WYOMING We are trying, with the support and active consideration of the Secretary, to develop some industrial programs in Wyoming. We ar~~ thinking about building a sawmill, and we would hope to somehow combine the functions that could be separated by carrying on a work- training program, by making use of a resource, by developing jobs, by developing an industry and an economy, and I can see some awfully good reasons, why one single agency can do a far better job and do it far more expeditiously than could be done if we were to take the job ~LN ow, :i ust in concith~ioii-i iiav e ~c~u `i v ~fiy~~g, ~ ~ ~ ~ let me say that I think the Department has made some real progress, and that the measure of our progress, I think, will be determined more by the end results than by nomenclature, and I suggest what has been done during your tenure, has been helpful. You have pioneered in a number of important areas in what has been done in facing up to important problems that were not recognized some years ago. And I would suggest that, as has already been indicated, if we try to set up a new Department, immediately a lot of people-and I know Senator Moss and I would agree on this-will oppose the idea simply because it is a change, and any time anyone suggests a change, that always comes into the picture. So, I am simply saying that I believe we ought to take a long hard look at it and be more concerned with actually what is accomplished by the Department than to concern ourselves now with this. I want to compliment you, Senator Moss, on giving a lot of good hard thought to a problem that certainly is of real concern to us, and I am sure of your honest desire to try to make our natural resources service better than it is. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator RIBICOFF. Senator Moss? PAGENO="0097" DEPARTMENT OF I o the iat littl( And there a DUPLICATION OF AIR POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAMS I read an article-in fact, this was in the Washin~t,on Daily News day before yesterday, I believe-in which Senator Kuchel was making PAGENO="0098" a speech out in california, and he was talking about air pollution. But what he said is the sort of thing that is the background here for talking about other resources. He said, and this is quoting the article: The Government has tackled the air pollution with too-little, too-late, and the result Is an increasing patchwork quilt of overlapping air pollution program.sfull of duplication and full of holes. And then two paragraphs later it says: Currently air pollution control programs are beIng run by the Environmental Science Service Adminstration, Atomic Energy Ooinmlsslon, Bureau of Mines, Air Pollution Control Division, Tennessee Valley Authority, Environinent~l Health Services Center, and Solid Waste Office. Then, Senator Kuchel goes on talking about the subject. But this, it seems to me, is what we get into very often and what I h.~74~ n'~~t~intc~ iii many areas of the resource field. And as a Secretary TJDALL. Well, Senator, I think I made it very plain. As you know, one can say what is in a name and maybe names are not important, but I think na~nes are important, among other reasons, so that people clearly understand what the functions are and what the missions are. The name "Interior" does not mean anything to the country today, except in the sense that people identify and know, in fact, what the Department does. went to ~ Middle East last Febrt 118 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ~er itan ~ )ortan.. ~ th1it, Senator ivioss. PAGENO="0099" I think the best way to ing to help terms of governm. _~ ~`/~ J LI W1J-41J. Engineers people fe ~t pei~aaps ~c function, I think we ht to give se this is a sound idea, }~ ~ I have ~ I can sound my owupeople ou~ want to give you a flip answer here in done. Senator Moss. Well, as I understood it, this was more a suggestion by the Secretary of the Army, that they might well like to be rid of these functions in the recreation area, and I wanted to point out that we do not necessarily leave recreation management with those who construct the reservoir, because we are busily creating national recrea- tion areas around our reservoirs. ~ Senator Hansen and I were sitting in on a hearing yesterday on that very subject. And if the National Park Service is organized so that it can operate a recreation area in Glen Canyon or Whiskeytown, or wherever else, I do not see why it would not be equipped to take on the recreation functions of the Corps' reservoirs. Secretary ITDALL Well, my initial reaction is that we perhaps should do this. I am not negative on it at all, but I do not want to commit my Department until I have had a chance for everybody to h~ 1i~rd hii+ T e Dell r, I have ju Secretar~ L PAGENO="0100" we iiL~i~ L7t~ ~1IUU1U jJUL) we ~irugi~uii .~- ~ fairs." You could say, "It Is a health problem, put it in HEW." You could say "It is a resource prdblem, put it in Interior." And, in face, part of the responsibility,, some of the responsibility was put in my Department. It would not surprise~ me if this evolves, if we do what we ought to do. These are really not wastes. It is inefficiency. And we are going to be recycling and reusing these resources rather than dumping them. And if we do, we are recycling resources, and this might evolve to the point, like water pollution, where ait some point the logic of having it come to~y Department would be rather clear. At this point-and I am not arguing that this is the time to do it- we have decided that it is a health problem and that primary respon- sibility should `be in HEW, but this is something new. The Federal Government did not really g*~t into this field-it, in my judgment, is getting into it late-until 2 `or 3 years ago. But this is what I mean when I talk about things evolving. Senator ~Moss. Planning, yes. ~1tLe Uouncii, yes; wie Secretary IJDALL. Well, I think the Council is till on trial. I. think it is working very well, and I think it gives us a very good focus for a type of overall thinking, in having the Federal Government have one mind when it approaches water problems, and have the big decisions made by a council of this kind. I think this is very vital, and I think it is going to work increasingly well as we go along. It always seemed to me that this was a pretty logical approach to the problem. This is one approach to the problem. But, as I say, part of this, in my judgment, is already being done through the Water Resources Council in terms of a certain aspect of the planning, as far as coordinating the national water planning effort and goals I 122 DEPAETMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES *1 PAGENO="0101" - -~ ~-- , , `- `-`* `-~ ~ ~ .y `-` UI ~j~I1I1Ufl, U~ UW~II k1L'I~ (A) `~1LL~I ~LLL of the planning functions in one department, even if we should leave the actual construction work in other departments at the present time-that is, we are talking about sort of a halfway house? WATER RESOURCES COUNCIL AIMS AT COORDINATED PLANNING Secretary TJDALL. Well, Senator, in one sense, some of the most vital planning functions, the big policy planning functions, have already been moved to the Water Resources Council. I know Elmer Staats, who is now the Comptroller General and who was once Deputy Director of the Bureau of the Budget a few years ago-i know his idea of reorganization which he advanced-and he probably still holds that view-was that he would not put the Corps of Engineers in a Department of Natural Resources; he would leave it as a construction agency but would have the planning function done by the Department of Natural Resources. DEPARTMENT OF NATURAIJ RESOURCES 123 -~ U1I~ .1~ UU~:~ It~SUIt~ mat ctoes not bother me. Again, with my philosophy of evolution, if there is a time down the road when the Departments' philosophies and their objectives come into conflict the way they have had at times in the past, I think you are going to see a stronger and stronger argument made for say- mg : "Well, this is stupid. Let's put it all under one Department and under onemanagement." But I. do not advocate that here today. I have not advocated it in the administration. I know there is a strong argument for it. I know there is a strong argument against it. I think Secretary Freeman and I have done a great deal, and the legislation you were working on yesterday is a good example. We had vigorous argument within our Departments as to who should administer the area, and we resolved it. We have decided to get things done and to move down the road and to not sit around snendin~' a lot of our ener~4es in fruitless disDutes PAGENO="0102" i~ having two minera1-~ managing agencies. There are strong ~rguments on both sides-I think we ought to be candid about that-with regard to the entire Forest convictiOfl~ aimost ov~riap k~u1iipT~er~ ~ i~nir ~ri~- Departrnents'much closer together. 124 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES The same with recreation. We said yesterday that one of the reasons we thought the Flaming Gorge recreation area ought to be adminis- tered by one department is this simple little thing about whether you had to pay to launch your boat or not. People went up there to go on the lake, and if they put their boat in at one place, it did not cost them anything ; if they put it in just a little ways down the other way, it cost them. They would have to pay to have the boat launched, and that is because we had two Departments with different regulations, function- ing on the same lake. Little things like that cause all kinds of trouble out in the field. JURISDICTIONAL ARGITMENTS PROVIDE BASIS FOR REORGANIZATION Secretary UDALL. Well Senator, I have often thought that some of the people who carry on the warfare do not realize that they are the best advocates of the kind of transfer you are proposing. By their very a rather~gooct jóo. ±i~ ~ww~ç~t 3ii'tiop~l views ahead of harmony, and I think we have done more constructive things than any two Secretaries. EMOTIONAL ArrACHMENT OF INDIANS TO INTERIOR DEPARTMENT Senator Moss. I would agree with that, and, of course, I am aware of a lot of the emotional conflict that there has been on the Forest PAGENO="0103" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES and water resources. Their economic functions perhaps belong with the Small Business Administration or OEO or some place like this. If we could get to dealing with them in this manner, don't you think we might bring the Indians along to self-sufficiency sooner than keeping them as a ward of a particular Department to which they have an emotional attachment? Secretary TJDALL. Well, I hope, Senator, that you have misdescribed it_a little hit~ T wniild be~t-~ +b~ ~-L-~ T.-~ ~ZI~~-- _ P 1 1 . ~ ~ - I do not have any doubt in my mind that if the education function were transferred, probably HEW would do a better job. They would be on the spot, as Senator Ribicoff hinted, and I think they would have to do a better job than we are now doing, although we are trying we are putting great emphasis on education to do a much better job. I do not want to just put one specific in, that you are familiar with yourself, Senator. In the Navaho-Hopi Reservation in Arizona where they have large coal deposits and where the electric power companies are looking around for development-you are familiar with this, because it is something you and I have discussed-I could say to these electric power companies, "Look, I want you to develop this Indian coal. If you do, I will give you a water contract," because the Department has the right to contract for water out of Lake Powell. "And I will put thi~ whole thing together, and we want these Indian resources developed." Now, if a Secretary of the Interior just sat back, you will have what has happened everywhere else. You develop all the resources, and the Indians are just developed last. And this is what I mean when I say that if a Secretary is toughminded and if he is determined to put the Indians first in terms of development, there are many things `~ei~ñ\~t~s. Well, thank you, Mr. Secretary. I appreciate your clarifying these points that I have discussed with you. I would hope that out of the record that is made here there will be material on - _i! __ i:~i_~. i~_.__~~ .1~1-. ~~1~___ _.____.~_~_.._~] 125 PAGENO="0104" mucn coniu~uoii. y~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ of the things we might clear up if we could get the Government better organized so that the whole citizenry knows where to go to get an answer that is the Government's answer, and it is not going to be different down the hall or wherever else he goes. Secretary UDALL. Well, Senator, you are absolutely right, in my judgment. You know, life is becoming more complex. That is the dynamism of modern life. That means Government has become corn- plex. The only way we can combat this in terms of governmental organization is to constantly be organizing and to be simplifying. And I think that is the essence of your proposal. That is the essence of the work of this committee, and I am pleased that this President that I now serve has been very reorganization minded. I think he has done more than almost anyone in this century. There have been two new departments. He has been very positive in terms of reorganization. And I think this has been a morning very well spent, as far as I am concerned. Senator Moss. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator RIBIC0FF. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. wo~r~ functions of ~ Hi under section 4 (e) of the Federal Power Act o~f approving the plans for dams or other structures affecting navigation for which a license is sought from the Federal Power Commission ; the Forest Service and the watershed protection and flood prevention functions of the Department of Agriculture ; the National Oceanographic Data Center and all nonmilitary functions of the Secretary of the Navy which are being administered through the Center ; the functions of the National Science Foundation under Title II of the Marine Resources and Engineering Development Act of 1960 relating to sea grant programs ; and the functions of the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare under the Clean Air Act and the Solid Waste Disposal Act. The bill would transfer from this Department to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare the functions now handled by the Secretary of the Interior with respect to Indian Affairs and Territories. The Department of the Interior has, from its creation In 1849, evolved from. a sort of "Home Department" that was primarily interested in the care of our lands and territories in the West into a Department that has interests that are national and international in scope and reach Into the everyday lives of all our citizens. The present responsibilities of the Department have led some of us to refer to the Department as the Department of Natural Resources because of the scope of activities now carried on by the Department. We know that the dynamic strength of a forward-looking America depends upon the full and creative development of our Nation's natural resource base- our mineral wealth, our vast plains, our timber-laden forests, our rivers, streams, and lakes, our irreplaceable wildlife, and our scenic and recreational resources. PAGENO="0105" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 127 We have for over 3b0 years depended on these natural resources to furnish the bone, muscle, and lifeblood of the most highly developed industrial society In mankind's history. Our resources, however, are not inexhaustible, and predic- tions have been made that by the middle of the 21st century people will face a grim struggle for existence, with food and water in short supply and with reserves of many minerals depleted. No one really knows whether such grim predictions will come to pass. Human resourcefulness, ingenuity, and invention-coupled with creative determination- can prevent this predicted calamity. We must work creatively, therefore, to pro- vide for the development, conservation, and wise utilization of the Nation's nat~ ural resource base to meet the requirements of today's citizens and to pass along our resources to the generations of unborn. The Department of the Interior, in cooperation with the other Departments and agencies of the Federal Government, with State and local governments, with private foundations, and with interested individuals, has worked to develop, utilize, conserve, and perpetuate for the future our natural resources. Representatives of the Denartment of .th.e ~ `~ ~- `~ ~ -" ~ ".-~`-`~ -~ - -~7 -~- ~--~- ~ ~,`Jtt~, ~1UU nuers worm ~1.o billion annually. We exercise Federal trust responsibilities for about 380,000 Indians, working constantly to improve both the natural and the human resources of the Indians. We increase the mineral and fuel potential of our Nation by assisting tech- nically-~and in the case of stra'tegic minerals, financially-in developing and improving mining methods and geologic knowledge, and by promotion of con- servation through wise utilization of our mineral and fuel resources. We protect and administer more than 230 national parks, mouuments~ and his- tone sites, and create new recreational areas at multipurpose wa'ter resource projects-as well as make public lands available for recreational needs to States and municipalities. The various recreational lands and areas of the Department are the scenes of some 200 million visitor days of use annually. We promote the conservation and development of our vital fish and wildlife resources and protect these resources from unnecessary depletion and sielfiah use. We finance and conduct research on the water and mineral resources of the Nation with an eye to the future. We provide for the basic geologic and topo- graphic mapping of the Nation. We administer laws and programs to solve water pollution problems of the Na- tion. We direct and coordinate the national effort to achieve the economical conversion of the waters of the oceans into fresh water for human use. We are responsible for the administration, economic improvement, and social and political betterment of the few remaining territorial areas of the United States-Guam, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, and the United Nations- mandated Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands. We strengthen, through several of our offices and bureaus, by means of ~r~int~ and other cooperative arrane't~imm~ ~ ---i' - -- - PAGENO="0106" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES L'~~- of private land for the year-to-year proctuction 01. ~ ~ ~ conservation of our soil is now shared by ourselves and the Department of Agriculture in the case of Federal land being used for resource value. The Depart- ment of Agriculture has sole responsibility in the case of private land used for the year-to-year production of crops. The consolidation of the management function over Federal land used for resource value would allow for the issuance of uniform regulations and might simplify management somewhat. When it comes to water resources, the proper way to handle management becomes more complicated. It could be argued that all water resource manage- ment should be consolidated in one place, but there are strong arguments against such consolidation. For example, when we study the potential of water we have to look at its navigational-transportation potential, which is quite separate and apart from its potential for power development and irrigation use. At the same time, one cannot plan a water storage site without considering the navigational aspect, along with the flood control and power potential of the site, and the effect the site will have on fish that use the waterway, just to name a few examples. When we look at our pollution problems, both water and air, we again find complicating factors. It is difficult to say whether the same agency should be responsible for all pollution problems. Some would argue that the same things cause the pollution of our water and air, and that a unified program is needed to solve the problems caused by the pollution. At the same time, I doubt that the present Federal controls over the manufacture of motor vehicles should be placed in the Department of Natural Resources even though a great percentage of our air pollution is caused by motor vehicles. The problems raised by how far one should go in consolidating the control KY~ ~ ~`. th~ nollution problem are those raised by management had this trust responsibility, and, to a marxect uegi-ee, vv~ itav~ ~ ~ of the Indians. We have made a concerted effort to improve the conditions of the Indians, and we look upon our responsibility as the development of a valuable human resource. The Indians have presented interesting and complicated prob- lems for us to solve and we have, in cooperation with other Departments and agencies, including the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, strived to solve those problems. We would regret losing these old friends. We should point out, moreover, that the movement of the Indian Bureau would serve to disperse some of the Department's functions, particularly those dealing with the management of federally owned lands, development of irrigation and power resources, mineral development, and others. Likewise, we would not like to see the Office of Territories taken from us. We have, in the not-too-distant past, seen two of our territories become full- fledged members of the Union. We are now working with the Congress and the people of Guam and the Virgin Islands to move them one more step down the road to home rule through enactment of elected Governor bills. We have im- proved through the use of television the educational opportunities of the people 128 PAGENO="0107" `-~- ~~aii KnU11U~L. VV e nave cooperated ifl sending Peace Corps volunteers to the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands to aid in the effort to bring those people into full participation in the 20th century. The overall management of the territories has been a longtime responsibility of this Department and it is one that we have been keenly aware of, one that we would regret losing. It should be noted that the Indian program and the Territories program do not fit neatly into any one Department. The programs require the participation of many Federal agencies-Housing, Transportation, Small Business, Economic Opportunity, and Regional Development, to mention some. A transfer to the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare would not advance the purpose of this bill, which is to consolidate responsibility for natural resource man- agement, and would conflict with that purpose by transferring important land management functions. Incidentally, the problem of Indian lands in multiple ownership-the so-called heirship problem-is one that most agencies would be reluctant to accept. Most of my statement has been aimed at the effect this bill will have on the new Department that it creates and the additions that will be made to it. I am sure your Committee will also want to consider carefully the results of taking functions away from existing Departments and agencies. In conclusion, let me say that the functions of the Departments and agencies of the executives branch and their relationship one to another are being con- stantly studied, and the results of these studies are the reorganization plans submitted to the Congress from time to time. We know that there is room for improvement. We hope that both the executive branch and the Congress will continue to consider all proposals that will result in better service to the public. Spricthir.. PTnTC~~ ~ I~1~rU~ ~ U1I~ gi~i1UIU coverea in the statement. STATEMENT OP PHILLIP S. HUGHES, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, BUREAU OP THE BUDGET Senator RImOoFF. Your statement is an excellent history of Federal activities in the natural resources field. I will tell you what I do not understand about the statement, namely : what your position is. Is the Bureau of the Budget for or against Senator Moss' proposal? Mr. 1-hUGHES. Mr. Chairman, on April 13 of this year, responsive to the subcommittee's request, we did submit a report on the bill indicat- ing that we did not favor the legislation at this time. Senator RIBIcoFF. You are against it? Mr. HUGhEs. Yes. (The report referred to by Mr. Hughes follows :`) EXHIBIT 12 ExEcUTIvE OFFIcE OF THE PRESIDENT, BUREAU OF THE BUDGET, Washington, D.C., April 13, 1967. I Hon ~ RIBn PAGENO="0108" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Department of the Interior as the Department of Natural Resources and to trans- fer certain agencies to and from such Department." In addition to providing for a Department of Natural Resources, the bill would transfer to it the civil works functions of the Army Corps of Engineers, includ- ing the function under section 4(e) of the Federal Power Act of approving the plans for dams or other structures affecting navigation for which a license is sought from the Federal Power Commission ; the Forest Service and the Water- shed protection and flood prevention functions of the Department of Agriculture; th.A N~jjonal Oceanographic Data Center and all nonmilitary functions of the uepaiuueni UL £~LUw(~~~. ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ÷~ ~ ~ ~, of reducing overlapping and duplication among Federal departments. 1~ cbWiu also simplify Federal cooperation with States and local governments, which have important natural resources responsibilities particularly with respect to water resources and related land-use functions. On the other hand, the desirability of placing all natural resources programs in one department has been strongly challenged. Opponents argue : (1) that the diverse viewpoints and approaches of current programs are helpful in meeting a variety of needs and satisfying legitimate differing interests ; (2) that any change in policies at this point could seriously disrupt established relationships with State or private interests and cause needless confusion ; and (3) that essential coordination can be achieved by other means. These and other matters involved require careful review. Congress recognized the complexity of administrative problems in this area when it enacted the Water Resources Planning Act of 1965. That Act established the Water Resources Council, composed of the Federal agencies having the major water resources responsibilities, and authorized the establishment of Federal-State river basin planning commissions. It was designed to facilitate coordination and cooperation among Federal agencies and among all levels of government in carrying out their respective water resources functions, without altering existing organizational relationships. In summary, while we believe that S. 886 merits serious consideration by the Congress, we are not yet prepared to recommend its enactment. Sincerely, (Signed) PHILLIP S. HUGHES, Depv~ty Director. Lacking any centrai respun~iuiii~y ai~ and management, the Bureau of the Budget is forced into the role of coordinator and arbiter between the various agencies. Probably in no other area of federal responsibility does the Budget Bureau exercise so strong an influence and leverage over programming. The present role of the Budget Bureau erceeds its normal responsibilities. I wonder what your reaction to that statement is, Mr. Hughes? Mr. HtJOHES. As I see it, Mr. Chairman, particularly with two devel- 130 PAGENO="0109" ~. ~ -rrvcr uasin commissions that are evolving as the result of that act. That is the first development that I wished to mention. And the other consideration is the establishment within the Depart- ment of the Interior of the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, and under rotating chairmanship, the President's Council on Recreation and Natural Beauty, which has coordinating functions in that area some what similar to those of the Water Resources Council in the water area. NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY COUNCIL Senator RIBIcoirrr. There have been many suggestions that we create a Natural Resources Advisory Council similar to the Council of Eco nomic Advisers in this field Have you ever given any thought to this ~ And if you have, what is the reaction of the Bureau of the Budget to a Natural Resources Advisory Council to~th~ Prp~id~ 9 ~ ~ ~jI ~~Led;Ir w~un it really in the context of our consideration of this legislation I think it is worthy of some exploration We would be happy to consider it I think my offhand reaction would be favorable Senator RIBICOFF Well, I wonder, in the days ahead when you have time, whether the Corps of Engineers, the Interior Department and the Budget Bureau would not explore- Mr HUGHES We certainly will, Mr Chairman Senator RIBICOFF (continuing). This thought. Thank you, very much. Senator Moss ~ CONSOLIDATION OF LEGISLATION WOULD BE NEEDED Senator Moss Thank you, Mr Chairman I have not read your statement very carefully, Mr Hughes, but I have gone through it. You have a paragraph on page 14 that sounds pretty good to me, and I read it: With a Department of Natural Resources, the President and the Congress could look to a single Department head, rather than the group of Department heads `~omposing the ~ ~` ources Council, for leadersh~ - - - - -- I PAGENO="0110" ~`/~ ~ changed the name of the Department, setting it up ~ ;~i:;;~c~:' Corps of Engineers law, and of water prioriuie~, oi piactices, of engineering and planning practices, that come out of both statute and tradition. Most of these differences could only be eliminated through statutory changes which we would favor, but, which would be very difficult, as you can appreciate, to work out. Senator Moss. It really comes along, though, all the time, does it not? The Corps of Engineers was first given the job of pulling snags out of the Ohio and the Mississippi Rivers and that was generally its functions. Now, it has evolved and grown to where it not only has navigation and flood control but now water supply, recreation as we were talking about. It is in the full scale water resource area now. Now, the Bureau of Reclamation started out just to get some water on the arid lands out West where they need some irrigation water, and it, too, is in water supply `to municipalities and recreation func- tions, `and all these other things. And so the evolution has been that these two particularly-we happen to be talking about water right now, and we could put in soil conservation and some others-have grown up into this whole general field to `where they are doing the M' fhirio! ~ist on a little different patch of ground. Is that `a problem. `The habits as well as the statutes or urn easily resolved. As we have tried to recognize, certainly in terms of clarifying lines of authority, single departmental leadership would be helpful, but there would remain `a whole panorama of problems arising from 134 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Mr. HUGHES. That is a tough question, Senator. Let me say this: I think that a name change should best' be saved to accompany some change in the character of the organization itself. The name, "De- partment of the Interior," with all the problems that name has-and the Secretary vividly described at least one type of problem-has been PAGENO="0111" powers anci a11thnritiP~ aiid v~Q ~ ~-u~- ~ ment of Natural Resources which encompassed the whole scope of the Water Resources Council's area of oversight. I think it is quite clearly so. Senator Moss. Well, I appreciate your talents very much, and, I think again, the function of these hearings and one reason they are good is to have pointed out the problems that we face. Obviously, you just cannot walk in and do this with a sweep of a bill or something of the sort. There are many intricacies to be worked out, and you have pointed out those for us, although, and I am happy that you think, the idea is pretty good. Mr. H1JOHE5. Those are your words, Senator; not mine. Senator RIBIcoFF. One question, one final question. It becomes very obvious that Secretary Udall devoutly desires to have the name of his Department changed from the Department of the Interior to the Department of Natural Resources. Do you object to changing the name program areas-w~1tc~i' ~ ~ ~ ilL wuiujJIe-purpose development or these primary resources. In the fiscal year 1966 Federal expenditures in these areas were weU over $3 billion. These expenditures were distributed among the various resource pro- grams, as follows: Land and water Forest Recreational - Fish and wildlife Mineral General resource surveys and 3, 120 A table from the budget for the fiscal year 1968 is attached to may statement for the hearing record. That table gives a breakdown of expenditures by agency, ~md ~h~n s~hnws hnw th~ mniiir fnii~tirnis flVA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 135 Total MiUAon8 $2, 235 406 152 130 108 89 PAGENO="0112" developed strongly held views both for aiid against a Department or r~aiui-ut Resources. Many administrative changes have occurred, however, since the or' ganization of natural resources functions was last explored in depth; your ex- ploration is therefore timely. 8. 886 would establish a Department having as its major purpose the de- velopment, utilization, and conservation of our natural resources. In addition to giving the Department of the Interior a new name, the bill would transfer to it the Forest Service and the watershed protection and flood prevention func- tions of the Secretary of Agriculture;, the civil functions of the Army Corps of Engineers; the National Oceanographic Data Center and other functions of the Department of `the Navy which are administered through the Center; the sea - n~1 +h~~ fiino11~~ic~ ~f the to which agency would undertake a particular project has been based on a determination of the dominant project objective. A similar evolution has occurred with respect to public lands and forests, which also are managed for multiple purposes. The Forest Service was established by the Secretary of Agriculture in 1905, when the responsibility for administering the national forest reserves was trans- ferred to him from the Secretary of the Interior. The transfer was made at the urging of conservationists, who believed that the Department of Agriculture would be more sympathetic with their conservation objectives. Interior, how- ever, continued to be responsible for managing the national parks, other public lands, and the mineral resources of the national forests. Both Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management now manage lands used for commercial timber production, grazing, mineral production, and outdoor recreation. Both Forest Service and the National Park Service manage great public recreation areas, let contracts for necessary service facilities, and super- vise the operations of concessionaires. All three agencies have common problems, such as fire protection and pest control, which require joint action in many local areas. The relationships inherent in water resources and land management functions are well illustrated in Agriculture's watershed protection and flood prevention WI walti ~--- .`m~1 fnrc~strv management and also require increasing consideration in developing comprenensive piarns wt ii' basin development. States also have activities similar to those of Federal agencies in outdoor recreation, fish and wildlife, and forestry. PAST EEORGANIZATION ~FFonTs I 136 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES II In the Federal Power Act of 1920 Congress attempted through legislation to -. . - ,~ ~ ~ ~ i~w~ T~h~ t~vio1n,~1 1~i1t~vsi1 Pg~w,cr PAGENO="0113" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 137 1933 to carry out all Federal functions essential to a unified program of resource development, use, and conservation. The DelawaTe River Basin Commission, es- tablished by Federal-State compact in 1961, `has a broad delegation of Federal and State powers, but it does not replace existing agencies. Thus far it has not engaged in direct operations, but it has adopted a comprehensive river basin plan to which actions by Federal and State agencies must conform. Analyslis of the accomplishments of those regional agencies should shed light on the poten- tial benefits of consolidation at the national level. ~ -----~. ~ t~iie i~ euenU-~tate river oasrn planning commissions authorized by the Act, State representatives are able, for the first time, to participate in comprehensive river basin planning as equal partners of the Federal representatives. The Act also established the Water Resources Council to perform certain Government-wide and nation-wide functions, which are designed to achieve a unified approach to water resources functions among the several Federal agencies. River basin commissions are composed of a Chairman, appointed by the President, and representatives of interested Federal agencies and the partic- ipating States, appointed by agency heads and Governors respectively. This broad representation enables the commissions to approach the development of water and related land resources in a way that recognizes inherent land and water relationships and undertakes to explore all economically feasible uses. Their major functions are to prepare joint, coordinated, and comprehensive plans for Federal, State, interstate, local and private development of these resources and to recommend priorities for action. Each plan is to include an evaluation of all reasonable alternatives for achieving optimum development as well as the commission's recommendations. Since the commissions are advisory only, the Act directs that their methods of operation be designed to achieve a consensus with respect to their recom- mendations. Failing consensus, each member is to be given full opportunity to present and report his views. A proposed plan will then be transmitted to each interested Federal agency, the Governor of each State, and any interstate agency or the U.S. section of any international commission that may be affected. With or without subsequent revision, completed plans, together with comments received, will 1)0 transmitted to the President through the Water Resources Council. The Water Resources Council is rnu~1 ~~1' piu~ia1il~. To provide for a unified approach among Federal agencies, the Act directs the Council to consult with other interested entities, Federal and non-Federal, and to establish, with the President's approval, principles, standards, and procedures for Federal participants in comprehensive regional or river basin ~ i1~+~-~-~ n~~-i ~1i-t~H~m `I PAGENO="0114" ~wnai, _~~_ the contribution the plan i é in a social goals. Based on the ~ Council is directed to make such recoin- mendations as it deems d~ in the national interest Its recommendations together with copies of the plan and the comments of any Federal agency Governor, interstate agencies, or U.S. Section of an international commission, will be transmitted to the President for distribution to Congress, and the Gov- ernors and legislatures of participating States. Congress and State legislatures of course will retain their usual powers with respect to pro)ect authorizations and appropriations Arrangements made under the Water Resources Planning Act do not in themselves meet all of the coordination problems which arise when several Federal agencies have independent authority to do river basin surveys and planning The budget process is also used to achieve agreements among the agencies which will permit an orderly approach to planning and funding. Be~ ginning in 1963 the agencies have developed a coordinated schedule of river basin surveys for the succeeding fiscal year have agreed among themselves on a lead agency for each survey , and have developed their budget requests on the basis of that agreement. The Outdoo~ Recreation Act of 1963 also made a substantial contribution to better coordination among Federal agencies The Act authorized the Secretary of the Interior in consultation with other Federal agencies, . to inventory the nation's outdoor recreation needs and re- sources to prepare a nation wide plan for meeting national needs taking Into account the plans of other Federal ~ agencies and State and local governments; and to take other actions to assist and promote adequate and coordinated ~ wueie ~ .. ~ ~ ~ ~ _ Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management to operate at less than full efficiency Under that authority almost three million acres were exchanged to consolidate agency holdings and simplify overall Federal administration House Report No. 2960, published in 1956 by the Joint Committee on Federal Timber, stimulated an intensive effort to reconcile differences in the timber practices of the Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs. This long range effort was undertaken through the Inter- agency Committee on Timber Sales, which made a comprehensive report and recommendations in December 1960 The Committee was continued in being to carry out the recommendations and to deal with other interagency matters as they arise. More recently BLM and Forest Service made a joint review of their timber sales policies and practices in relation to the policy on user charges Other operating problems common to Fedeial and State land management agencies, such as pest control, weed control, and research, are also handled through interagency committees. PAGENO="0115" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES RESULTS OF THESE NEW APPROACHES It is too early to have a valid evaluation of these recent developments in terms of their implications for further reorganization of resources functions. The Water Resources Planning Act is only two years old. ~rn1 w~ ho~r~ ~`~- and the President's Council on Recreation and Natural Beauty provide mechanisms for continuous attention to coordination problems in these areas where coordination problems are most pressing. They have already relieved the President and the Executive Office of a substantial burden of day-to-day coordination. CONCLUSION In summary, while several agencies are responsible for major natural re- source functions, we are optimistic that the new approaches to coordination will overcome many of the long-standing problems. Both the Water Resources Planning Act and the Outdoor Recreation Act reflect the recent tendency to rely on comprehensive plans as the major instru- ment for coordination in program areas where Federal agencies, and ~ often State Governments as well, have common, related, or complementary functions. Tl~ere is general agreement that comprehensive river basin plans are essential to sound development of water and related resources, and some experts in the field believe it does not much matter what Federal agency subsequently carries Out the plan so long as actions conform to it.. With a Department of Natural Resources, the President and the Congress could look to a single Department head, rather than the group of Department heads composing the Water Resources Council, for leadership and policy recoin- mendations geared to the national interest and objectives. The possibility of overlapping and duplication of work could be eliminated, and the machinery for interagency and intergovernmental coordination could bestreain~j~dtflaL ~ coordination can only be re- duced-they cannot be eliminated-~by reorganization. 139 PAGENO="0116" Program or agency Administrative budget funds: Land and water resources: Corps of Engineers Department of the Interior: Bureau of Reclamation Power marketing agencies: Present programs Proposed legislation for revolving funds Federal Water Pollution Control Administration Office of Saline Water: Present programs Proposed legislation for desalting plant____.__________ Office of Water Resources Research Bureau of Indian Affairs: Present programs Proposed program improvements Bureau of Land Management and other Tennessee Valley Authority Soil Conservation Service-watershed projects____________._~~_ International Boundary and Water Commission Iruso Intragovernmental transactions and other adjustments (deduct)__________ I Compares with new obligational authority for 1966 and 1967 as follows: Administrative budget funds: 1966, $3,356000,000; 1967, $4,526,000,000. Trust funds: 1966, $146,000,000; 1967, $176,000,000. Senator RIBICOFF. During the past few days I have received letters from many people asking that their statements or comments be in- cluded in the record. I will place them in the record at this point, and as I expect to receive similar requests in the near future, I will hold the record open for their inclusion. EXHIBIT 13 RESOLUTION OF THE WAERIOR-TOMIIIGBEE DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION Whereas a Bill in United States Senate S. 886, proposes to create. a Depart- nient of Natural Resources which, in si~bstance, would be the Department of the Interior under another name, and Whereas the new department would absorb most of the functions of the Department of the Interior, only a few being transferred to other departments, and proposes to transfer to the Department of Natural Resources certain func- tions of the Dc )artments of Defense, Agriculture, Health, Education, and Wel- t two in ~endent agencies of the government, and, [Fiscal years. In millionsj Payments to the public Recom- mended new obli- 1966 1967 1968 actual estimate estimate gational authority for 1968 $1,250 $1,260 $1,330 $1,289 367 327 320 79 117 316 128 137 151 -74 -78 -53 126 229 306 13 6 15 7 24 23 4 8 11 13 122 111 120 118 15 30 77 84 73 76 54 78 111 62 102 102 104 102 33 36 23 18 14 17 20 19 Total 3, 229 3,250 3, 538 PAGENO="0117" -------~`- ~%-, `-`J'(L ~W UI Jflt ~ i~uu~-eeS ueveiopment in this nation with valid doubt that such change would be beneficial, particularly with respect to the civil works functions of the Corps of Engineers : Therefore be it Respived by Warrior-Tombtgbee Development Association in~ An~wal Meeting a&s~embled in Mobile, Alabama~, April 14, 1967, That the officers of this Assocla- tion make its viewpoint known to Alabama's United States Senators and Repre- sentatives in the Congross of the United States and to Congressional Committees which may hold bearings on the Bill ; and be it further Resolved, That the officers of the Association be directed to alert the memher- ship not in attendance at the meeting and to urge all members individually to express to Congressmen of their respective Districts and to Senators Lister Hill and John Sparkman, their desire that the civil works functions of the Corps of Engineers be retained under the authority of the Department of the Army. Approved by unanimous vote of the members and of the Board of Director's present at the above mentioned Annual Meeting, April 14, 1067, Mobile, Ala. (Signed) C. M. KILIAN, (For W. P. Engel, Secretary). (Signed) H. A. PURYEAR, JR., Chairman-President. EXHIBIT 14 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C. July 3, 1967. Hon. ABRAHAM RrnIcoFF, Chairman subcommittee on Ecvecutive ?eoraa~t~a#~' ~ ~ ~ ~ .,~e ~ 01 rieaiFll, 1~Jctucation, and Welfare, the National Science Foundation, and the Army Corps of Engineers would be transferred to the `Secretary of Natural Resource's. Whether such transfers and `changes `should be `made, and whether the manner proposed would be appropriate to accomplish the purposes of S. 886, are quels- tions of policy as to w'hic'h the Department of Justice `defers to the departments and agencies that would be affected. However, if `si~lch legislation is to be enacted, we would `suggest that S. 886 follow more `closely t~e legislation which recently `created the Department of Housing and `Urhan Development and the Department of Transportation. To do `so would require some minor cihanges of nomenclature and of language in the transfer of functions, personnel, and assets. A mem'ber of our Departmental staff would be glad to `go over these sugge'stionu in detail `with the Committee staff. We note that section 3 provides that the Deputy Secretary of Natural Re- sources "Shall be compensated at the rate prescribed for level II of the Executive Schedu]~e `by section 5312 of title 5 of the United States Code." Level II of the Executive `Schedule is section 5313 of title 5 but the Under `secretaries of all Departments other than the Department of State, official's of comparable rank to the Deputy Secretary, are compensated at level III, `covered by section 5314. The Bureau of the Budget has advised that there is no objection to the sub- mission of this report from the standpoint of the Administration's program. Sincerely, (S) RAM5Ex `CLARK, Attorney DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 143 PAGENO="0118" EXHIBIT 15 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE, October 17, 1967. Hon. ABRAHAM RIBIcorr, ~ Chairman, ~Rbcommittee on Eceecutive Reorganization, Committee on Govern- ment Operations, U.S. $encz~te, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN : This letter is in response to your request of March 6, 1967, for a report on S. 886, a bill, "To redesignate the Department of the Interior as the Department of Natural Resources and to transfer certain agencies to and from such Department." This bill would have a substantial impact on this Department since it provides for the transfer of- 1. The functions of the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare under ---`~---- . . * ~ -~ ----.-~A~~~1 (4') TT ~ 0 1~7 ~f ~` th D Y t In addition to these changes, the bill calls ror The tx~t~Lêr v~ y~j~ ~ agencies and functions from other departments and agencies to the proposed Department of Natural Resources. Air pollution contro' a~id soTid waste disposal functions The main purpose of the bill is to locate within the proposed Department of Natural Resources those functions administered by the Federal Government which are related to natural resources. This grouping of functions within one organization would logically provide for better administration of the functions if the underlying purpose of each of them were mainly the use and conservation of natural resources. We find this is not the case with the functions to be transferred from the Department. While air pollution control and solid wastes disposal are related to natural resource management, they are much more directly concerned with the public health. The basic reason for studying and combatting them is because they jeopardize our very lives by polluting the environment in which we live. To combat them effectively we must determine how and why they affect our health and how we can alleviate the health hazards they create. This is mainJy a public health problem which requires research in the health sciences and application of public health control measures. These efforts hold the key to our success or failure. The Public Health Service has been deeply involved in research, train- ing, control activities, and other aspects of air pollution control. Transferring these important health functions from this Department would not enhance the Federal capability in this program, would seriously disrupt State and local program relationships, and would complicate the national health effort in this i~rjju~ ~ }~`j~l i~v~Q~l~bea wiser course to leave these functions with tering Indian affairs. - The transfer of the Bureau to this Department would have some logic since a considerable portion of the Bureau's budget is allocated to activities in the fieJds of education and welfare and since this Department already administers PAGENO="0119" time. We are advised by the Bureau of the Budget that there is no objection to the presentation of this report from the standpoint of the Administration's program. Sincerely, JOHN W. GARDNER, secretary. AMERICAN NATIONAL CATTLEMEN'S AssoCIATIoN, Denver, Cob., October 12, 1967. Hon. ABRAHAM RmIcon~, Cho~irman, subcommittee on Ecoecutive Reorganization, Senate Committee on Government Operations, Efenato Office Building Washington, D.C. DEAR SEN~ATOR RIBICOFF : It is our understanding that hearings are to be held before your subcommittee, October 17-19, on S. 886, which would set up a new Department of Natural Resources. The American National Cattlemen's Associa- tion is vitally interested in this measure and wishes to comment upon it in this letter which we respectfully request to be included in the hearing record. Our interest in this legislation is prompted by two very important agencies now within the U.S. Department of Agriculture ... the Forest Service and Soil Conservation Service. We work with these two agencies on matters of mutual concern frequently throughout the year. It is our considered judgment that they are properly located in the Department of Agriculture, so should r~mflin thAt.t~ 9'h~ Pc~+ .~ .~ sibilities confli~ts with the ovorall water quality control program. The agency charged with irrigation responsibility will be under pressure to frustrate efforts fOr control of pollutiOn from irrigation run-off ; the power people will be under pressure to frustrate efforts for strict temperature standards ; and the mineral rE~source people will place mining and drilling ahead of water quality control. ~ ~ special and singular attention. It may then be necessary to establish an inde- pendent agency to deal with these problems. However, until such time, I believe that wisdom dictates retention of the program in the Department of Health, Education and Welfare where a forward moving program is now getting under way. To move the program now would be to create disruption and delay in the national effort to preserve the quality of our environment and to secure clean air for all. EXHIBIT 16 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 145 EXHIBIT 18 PAGENO="0120" ~`1ATI~MI~JN T ~B I ~JiJ1N .~1'1Ui~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ Mr. Chairman ; I appreciate this opportunity to file a statement on S. 886, which would establish a Department of Natural Resources. This is important legislation that highlights the need to review ~ the functions of many Federal agencies involved in resource development in order to determne whether their role might be more properly carried out in a single agency. T~r~vftJ~A ~O~CP~j~hat t~1d~v ii~t of this nation's natural resources charged with the responsibility of developing and managing this nation's natural resources. 1~1ood control, recreation, navigation, hydroelectric power and irri- gation are legitimate water resource management areas and might well fall within the jurisdiction of one Federal department. However, I am convinced that environmental quality enjoys a unique Eosture within the administrative structure. On the surface it `night be argued that air and water quality control is part of one overall resource management program. Although this is true, it must also be considered in relation to the other resource development programs within that agency in order to assure absence of conflicts of interest. As an example I would like to cite the present situation in the Department of Interior. That Department has responsibility for irrigation, power marketing and mineral resource development. From time to time each of these respon- of i --- - -----.J of Sport 1 ~s and ~,. ~ ~ ~ of Cot ~ _ ~ _,_s by a new Bureau of 1 ~ Resources and a new Bureau of V. ~ Resources, the former new Bureau to concern itself with Inland, estuarine, and marine fishes, and related matters, and the latter new Bureau to concern itself principally with mammalian axid avlan resources, and related matters, both without over reference to special user Interests." The "overt trade-oriented activities" of reference in the subject resolution In- clude various activities in promoting utilization of fishery products as food, the development of fishing gear and exploratory fishing for exploitation of the fish resources, and the subsidization of fishing vessel construction, and related functions. Thank you for the privilege of submitting this statement for the record before October 31, in lieu of opportunity for public testimony. Sincerely yours, EXHIBIT 19 RICHARD H. Smoun, Executive Vice Presilent. DEPARTMRNT or AGRICULTURK, Washington, D.C., October 2~, 1967. Hon. ABRAHAM Rn~icorr, Chairman, Subcommittee on Ea,ecutive Reorganization, Committee on Govern- ment Operations, U.S. Senate. Secretary, Department of A jiri 4tni~, -~~` `~ ~ T'~n~ivtm,~iit and `the U.S. Washington, D.C. PAGENO="0121" I , -- ~ ~ cLIIU niunagement ot lands under the con~ trol of the Departments of the Army and Agriculture In and about water re- source projects of the Corps of Engineers within or partly within the National Forest System will be subject to the following overall policies: 1. The Corps of Engineers and the Forest Service will cooperatively plan the development, use and management of water resource projects as they relate to land resources. Such cooperative planning will start with the preauthorization plans and continue through the successive planning stages. This planning will be pointed toward achieving the maximum public benefits from each project and will delineate the procurement of necessary lands to assure meeting all foreseeable public needs for recreation, wildlife, and other uses compatible with the primary purposes of the water storage facility. 2. Water resource projects will be planned and operated to provide the great- est feasible public use for recreation, wildlife and fish propagation, conserva- tion of scenic and esthetic values, and the harmonious use of timber and other commodities consistent with the other water control and use purposes. Pro- grams of both agencies concerning land procurement, resource development and use, access facilities, roads and trails, on and adjacent to reservoirs and on the National Forest lands within the reservoir zones of influence will be corre- lated to the fullest possible extent. 3. The Department of the Army will determine, consistent with the land ac- quisition policy of the Secretary of the Army, the lands required for the con- struction, operation and maintenance of water resource projects of that De- partment for the purposes authorized by Congress. The Department of the Army after consultation and agreement with the Department of Agriculture will re- quest from the Department of the Interior the withdrawal from entry und~r th 1 ~ ~ ~ u'~1k~ 1 tit1 ~ "~ ~4-~ ~- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ LL~tU~JF ~Wtn1~ iiepa?tment of Agriculture lands under jurisdiction of the Department of the Army which are required for planning, developing and operation of water oriented recreation facilities or other resource manage- ment. The department of the Army will retain in any transfer of land the rights of use necessary for unrestricted operation and maintenance of the water re- source project, including the right to construct facilities or structures or to re- move any facilities or structures which are inimical to the operation of the project. The Department of Agriculture likewise will retain such rights of use and access as are necessary to provide for required other uses of National Forest lands and access for National Forest purposes. All Memoranda of Under- standing and transfers relating to land will be consummated as soon as prac- ticable. At all water resource development projects, necessary lands, as de- termined by the Chief, Corps of Engineers, in the vicinity of major structures including but not limited to the dam and its approaches upstream and down- stream will be under the sole jurisdiction of the Chief of Engineers. 4. Management of land and the use and development of resources, including water oriented recreation, will be assigned between the agencies in accordance with the following guidelines: a. Where water storage projects are located within or substantially withh th~ c~~ti~rinr hrni nr~~c~ nf iiMfc~ nf th~ ~J~,t~ni,~i1 P~r~c~f Svc~ft.m th~ PAGENO="0122" 148 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOuRCES lands and resources will be a, function of the Corps of Engineers or other agencies as It may determine and provide for unless the two Departments mutually agree otherwise. C. Where water resource projects are not i~ the foregoing categories, development and management of project associated land and resources will be undertaken by the Forest Service on those reaches of land adjoining the reservoir in which it has the predominant federal interest and by the Corps' of Engineers in those reaches of adjoining lands in which the Corps has the predominant federal interest ; provided that the two agencies may agree that in the interest of efficient public property management one or the other will undertake management of all such land and resources. In the determination of the predominant federal interest in adjoining reaches of lands and resources, the following factors, individttally and in combination, will be taken into account: ~ `U-'-- ~-~-- * ~ ~ M' l~iit1~ r~niiired for the water resource the degree to which these programs anct organTzaLioIu~ eau ~ ~ to the project area; (6) The desirability of single agency administration to avoid duplica- tion of federal programs or organizations on relatively limited areas of federal lands. Both agencies will seek resolution of jurisdiction at District Engineer-Forest Supervisor level during project formulation (Corps Survey Reports) or, for projects already authorized, as early as possible in the projecit planning or construction stages. Agreements reached at field level will be forwarded to the Chiefs of Services involved for confirmation. If irreconcilable differences develop, basic data will be referred without delay to the Chief of Engineers and Chief of the Forest Service for decision. 5. The Department of the Army will be responsible for the clearing of the reservoir area and for the construction, maintenance and operation of the water resource project except as otherwise provided herein and will have full use and administration of necessary lands for these purposes. Jurisdiction of National Forest System lands for other purposes will remain with the Secretary of Agriculture, including the sale of timber therefrom prior to clearing activities by the Department of the Army. Receipts from the sale of timber or use of National Forest System lands withdrawn for or made available to the Depart- ment of the Army will be deposited into the National Forest Fund. 6. Improvements and structures of the Department of Agriculture which will be destroyed or rendered useless by reason of the water resource development and which are still needed by the Department of Agriculture will be removed or replaced by the Department of the Army at a location to be determined by the Department of Agriculture in such kind and quantity as will provide levels ~ictooer ~ wu~, ~ ~ -~Hti~ ~vbir to the pro Sect ing document (i.e., survey reports), the Corps of Engineers has certain oo!1g~x- tions and commitments with respect to land management, including principally recreational development and use. Where the Forest Service elects to accept PAGENO="0123" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES I 149 jurisiliction over land use and management of a water resource project under this agreement, it agrees to accept these obligations and commitments and to pursue them diligently in its programming and budgeting procedures with the general objective of meeting them to the same degree as they would have been met under corresponding programs of the Corps. 9. Memoranda of Understanding supplemental hereto will be entered into by the Chief of Engineers and Chief of the Forest Service for each water resource project within the purview of this Memorandum of Agreement for the purpose of implementing the principles and policies herein agreed to as they apply to the particular project. Action toward such supplement agreements will be initiated as part of the project preauthorization planning processes or, as to projects authorized but not completed, at the earliest practicable date. Signed the 13th day of August, 1964. EXHIBIT 20 STEPHEN AILES, 2ecretar~ of the Arn~y. ORVILLE L. FREEMAN, f~ecretary of AgricuZture. U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, ~e UA. U luiteit, JJ11~CWt, L'epart- ment of Water `and Air Resources, State of North Carolina, P. 0. Box 9392 Raleigh, North Carolina 27603. With kindest regards, I `am, Sincerely yours, Hon. SAM J. ERVIN, Jr., UJg. senate, Wa8hingtoiev, D.C. DEAR SENATOR ERVIN: I have been advised that p -` of the Moss Bill (`S. 886) will be held at some futurc establish `a Department of Natural Resources whic responsibility for all resources development `activities i It would consoli ~ resources developme: the e ennes~ SAM J. ERVIN, Jr. ?5. rces, which operates r and Air Resources, is the State agency it cooperate with Federal and State agencies in water resource projects. Serving as the Director of this )rds me the opportunity to discuss the development of natural all `agencies having such responsibility and to make ~ertain that receive full côrisidersticrn i1~~r~1 ~ STATE OP NORTH CAROLINA, DEPARTMENT OT WATER AND Am RESOURCES, Raleigh, N.C., October 5, 1967. for oj ~onentS to :ull r agencies, w )artment of PAGENO="0124" B. EVERETT JORDAN, U.s. ,~enator. 150 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES deriVed. The projects of each of these agencies are concerned with recreation, fish and wildlife water supply water quality control and other aspects of water resource development. This is also healthy competition that provides a defense against arbitrary decisions precludes domination by a single agency, and provides for a more balanced development `of all water related natural measures have been taken to treat the polluting wastes at the source Despite testimony to the contrary there are indications that Federal recreation and fish and wildlife agencies are having to gloss over the adverse effects in North Carolina and Virginia to support the position of the Secretary of Interior In order that be might make a relatively minor improvement to the highly polluted water in West Virginia. Governor Moore has just announced his views that the State's Department of Conservation and Development which is concerned with natural resources, be split into three new and separate agencies in order that maximum potential devel opment may be attained I consider that this principle Is as applicable to Federal programs as to those of the State of North Carolina I will appreciate your support in opposing the Moss Bill (S 886) and would also appreciate your informing me of the schedule for the' public hearings In oppo~ sition to this bill. Sincerely, GEoRGE E. PICKETT. NOVEMBER 20, 1967. F Hon. SAM J. ERVIN, Uj:j. senate, Washin~/toa, D.C. DEAR SAM : Many thanks for your recent letter. I will be pleased to make the letter from the Director of the Department of Water and Air Resources of the State of North Carolina, a part of the printed record of the Subcommittee s hearings on S 886 I have also placed Colonel Pickett s name on our mailing list With eveiv ~opd wish. public hearings in opposition to tue i111. I understand that several days of hearings were held early in October on the proposal and I do not know whether the Government Operations Subcommittee on Executive Reorganization has scheduled any further hearings. I have called your statement and request to the attention of Senator Abraham A. Ribicoff, who is chairman of the subcommittee, and when I hear from him I will be in touch with you again. Meanwhile, with all best regards, Sincerely, PAGENO="0125" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 151 very truly yours, DALE TWACHTMANN, Ea'ecutive Director. STATEMENT OF EDWARD MEDARD, CHAIRMAN, GOVERNING EOARD, SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, BR00KSvILLE, FLA. Mr. Chairman a4~ gentlemen of the Committee, I am Mr. Edward Medard, Chairman of the Board of the Southwest Florida Water Management District, with headquarters in Brooksville, Florida. This district is a political subdivision of the State of Florida created by Act of the Florida Legislature in 1961. The district is responsible for fulfilling the requirements of local cooperation for the project "Four River Basins, Florida." The District embraces all or part of fifteen counties ; the watersheds of the Oklawaha, the Peace, the llillsborough and the Withiacoochee Rivers and includes within its boundaries a population of 1,150,000 persons, according to the 1960 census. At a regular board meeting on October 11, 1967, the Governing Board adopted a resolution concerning the hearings of your Sub Committee on Executive Reorganization dealing with S. 886, better known as the "Moss Bill." A copy of the Board's resolution, which was adopted by unanimous vote, Is attached to this statement. This District was organized in 19~1 and has been working cooperatively with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the responsible federal agency designing and constructing the Four River Basins project. We also have had occasion to work cooperatively with the Soil Conservation Service of the Departmen~o~,Ayjjg1~- tureqe1~~p1nf fhc~ `~~~11 ~ ~ ~ . , Since the creation of the Bureau of Reclamation in 1903 during the Theodore Roosevelt administration, there have been numerous attempts by various Secre~ taries of Interior `to extend their control over the Nation's water resources from the seventeen Western states to the entire Continental United States. Such all out efforts were made during the Herbert Hoover administration, the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration and most recently during the Harry Truman ad~ ministration. Each such effort to absorb the Civil Works program of the Corps of Engineers into the Bureau of Reclamation has. failed because `of the broad public support for the Civil Works program of the Corps of Engineers. The present effort in S. 886 would make the Secretary of Interior the ad- ministrative chief of all natural resources, including air and water, by trans- ferring into the new Department of Natural Resources the following named agencies not now a part of the Department of Interior : U.S. Forest Service ; the Soil Conservation Service; Civil Functions, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.; The NationaL Oceanographic Data Center; the Sea Grant Program of the National Science Foundation and the programs of Solid Waste Disposal and Air Pollution Control now a part of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Finally, PAGENO="0126" S. 886 would place the Federal Power Commission in a subservient position toure new Secretary of Natural Resources in the issuance of licenses for development of hydroelectric project by private power companies. All of the above named agencies and `their programs would be swallowed up in a giant Department of Interior-renamed Natural Resources-for no stated purpose. The benefits of the proposed reorganization are not mentioned in the text of the bill. This District has a great and continuing interest in the `Tour River Basins, Florida" project authorized by Congress as a part of the Flood Control Program assigned to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. This District has given assurances of fulfilling the requirements of local cooperation for the project as a part of the Army Civil Functions Program. We do not consider these assurances to be transferable to another agency or department of the Federal Government as proposed in S. 886. This District opposes S. 886 and recommends against its enactment into law. Our reasons are: 1. No benefit of the proposed reorganization is cited. 2. The Corps of Engineers has performed its assigned task in an outstand- ing manner with great benefit to the entire country. 3. The same performance record has been established by the Soil Conserva- -~ . ~ ~ ?11- 4'Ap.' 1~ be contrary to the best in~tere~ of~ii~ fd1~W~ _ ~ District, the State of Florida and the Nation as a whole. The Southwe~t Florida Water Management District Governing Board requests that no action be taken on S. 886 by the Subcommittee on Executive Reorganization of the U.S. Senate Commitee on Government Organization. EDWARD MEDARD, Chairman. REsoLUTIoN No. 223, SoUTHwEsT FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, Rz- QUESTING THE SCHEDULING or HEARINGS TO HEAR OPPONENTS OF S. 886, 90TH CONGRESS, isv SESSION Whereas the Governing Board at its meeting on October 11, 1907, was in- formed that the U.S. Senate Government Operations Committee, Subcommittee on Executive Reorganization plans to hold hearings on the "Moss Bill", S. 886, on October 17, 18 and 19, 1967 ; and Whereas the Board has been advised that the scheduled hearings are intended only for the taking of testimony from sponsors of the legislation and representa- tives of various Federal Agencies ; and Whereas the Southwest Florida Water Management District and many other political subdivisions of the Sta'te of Florida have a continuing interest in the orderly development and maximum beneficial use of the water resources of Florida; and Whereas this District is presently cooperating with the Corp's of Engineers in carrying forward `the "Four River Basins, Florida" project in accordance with the will of Congress `as expressed in the authorizing legislation in the Flood Control Act of 1962; and ~ th~~ "M~ Bill" appears to be a controversial piece of legislation which ~oiitjv~~ PAGENO="0127" [SEAL] SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, B~ ITS GOVERNING BOARD. EDWARD MEDARD, Chairman. EXHIBIT 22 WATER 1JSERS ASSOCIATION OF FLORIDA, INC., West Palm Beach, Eta., November 2, 1967. Senator ABRAHAM RIBIC0FF, Chairman, Committee on Ecoeeuti've Reorçjanization, Committee on Goier~vm"~ Operations Washinctoii~ TI Ci -~-- ~ ~iv vi natiOnal emergency. We .~,ii~iuer IfliS vital to the nation's defense. 2. The Corps of Engineers, Working With local and other agencies on public works projects affecting Flortda's fresh water, has done an excellent job. Any transfer of this function of the Corps of Engineers would result in confusion, delay, and added costs. 3. There are large areas of the Corps' civil works functions not related to the national resources of the nation. 4. It is believed that the same adverse effects would apply to the soil conserva- tion service of the Department of Agriculture now doing an excellent job on small water shed projects. 5. We do not believe that the creation of a department of such magnitude and power is in the best interests of the people of the United States. We can see no benefits accruing from the passage of this bill. Respectfully submitted. RILEY S. MILES, E~vecutive Director and Genera' Manager. NATURAL RESOURCES On the proposal to transfer the civil functions of the Army Corps of Engineers, The American Waterways Operators, Inc., would like to be recorded as endorsing the statement made before your subcommittee in the course of hearings in late October `by Secretary of the Arm.y Stanley It. Resor who so well expressed the objections which this Association's members themselves have to the proposal. We respectfully request that this letter be made a part of the record of the hearings held in October 1967; and, further, that if hearings are resumed at a future date to hear opponents of the legislation that we be given an opportunity to testify and expand our views on this matter. Sincerely yours, BRAXTON B. CARE, President. EXHIBIT 24 THE PROPELLEB CLUB OF THE UNITED STATES, PAGENO="0128" deserve. The stated purpose of such a transfer would be to provide better coordination of competing policies as to use, for example, of water resources. In practice, the proposed coordination would tend to lead to resolution of conflicts between corn- peting views at a level below and obscured from public scrutiny and knowledge. In many instances, such conflicts are too important to be settled without full public participation. Instead of suppressing `them by coordination among minor officials, they should be exposed for informed and vigorous public review and debate. In this respect, therefore, The American Waterways Operators, Inc., is concerned that, under the proposed organization, the interest of the shipping public in water resource improvements for navigation be given adequate con- sideration in favor of all competing interests. Coordination of water resources policy at a level at which competing views will not be lost to public sight can, on the other hand, be accomplished through the use of the organization recently established by `the Congress for this very pur- pose-the Water Resources Council, established by tho Act of July 2, 19G5, after many years of consideration and effort. The Council should be given the opportunity to demonstrate what It can do before the authority and responsibility assignment to it are withdrawn. In the debate which has taken place on S. 886, the viewpoint has been expressed that the Water Resources Council cannot be other than a weak arrangement it is a committee rather than an individual and because it is made up vtmi~nts of government. Under 156 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES By copy of this letter a copy of this Resolution will be furnished to the press. Sincerely, Swnr T. DAvis, Ecoecutive Director-Secretary. ~yTh~,1~1U~ 12;U~, THEPAT HARRISON WATSRWAY DISTRICT, OCTOBER 26, 1967 servation and regulation of the waters of the saiu u~ii , ~ ~ ~ Whereas the Corps of Engineers has at all times manifested a great interest in promoting sanitary water supply and the preservation, conservatio~n, storage and regulation of the waters of the Pascagoula River Basin for domestic, munic- ipal and recreational uses, and is presently engaged in said work and interest for the basin to insure adequate flood control thereof; and Whereas the United States Army Corps of Engineers is now operating under the Civil Works Program of the Department of the Army to achieve the fore- going goals of preservation, conservation, storage and regulation of the waters of the Pascagoula River Basin for domestic, municipal and recreational uses; and nr~ i~r~h1A t~c~v~1 ftir s~ifi~ IITU1 ~1(1PIThflth PAGENO="0129" I DEPAM~MENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Government Operations be notified by a certified copy of this R~so1ution stating and setting forth the position of the Pat Harrison Waterway District and the interest of the general public of the Pascagoula River Basin and the interest of the Pat Harrison Waterway District, and the Executive Director of this District be directed to furnish a copy of this Resolution to the members of the above Committees, who are Senator Abraham A. Ribicoff, Chairman, Senator John L. McClellan, Senator Ernest Gruening, Senator Robert F. Kennedy, Senator Fred R. Harris, Senator Joseph M. Montoya, Senator Jacob K. Javits, Senator Clifford P. Hansen and Senator Howard Baker, and the said Resolution be placed as a part of the permanent ~ ~ ~n iuuiu~e floo~k ~at pages 157-160. WITNEss my signature on this, the 26th of October, A.D. 1967. Swu~ T. DAvIS, S'ecretary. Senator RIBIC0FF. I would also like to include in the record at this point an article from the Natural Resources Journal of the Uni- versity of New Mexico Law School, entitled "The Case for a Depart- ment of Natural Resources." (The article referred to follows:) [Natural Resources Journal, vol. 1, No. 2, November 1961J EXHIBIT 26 THE CASE FoR A DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES The following article is offered to stimulate discussion of a con- troversial subject, and does not necessarily represent the views of the JOURNAL, or its councils. To guarantee that attention will be focused on the issues, and not on personalities, the author prefers to remain anonymous. MISTER Z Our growing population, our industrial demands ftir ` commitments ~ihr~~1 .~11 I. THE PROBLEM 157 Present divisions and duplications of authority restrict true comprehensive development. They pit agency against a~encv ii' inn ~o;Fhm~1 ~ ~ PAGENO="0130" I or; Defense 1~gricu1ture. ] costs and ~ can add many more ~ iods of corn- `ent stresses others' ac- Consen Eon thea a a t stance of LI _ resource matters wi the dei ~ agency to certain purp on the ~f artifically generated i decisions based on informed judgment The result is that present public policy towards evaluated by economic, political, or social criteria. The present situation can be summarized in ten propositions. They are: 1. In nature, the resources of soil, water, forests, wildlife, and minerals are ~ ~` ~ ~ ~ti~vre1ated whole. Conservation practices designed for their pro~ and production may rage pi~ ~ ~. ~ ~ . ~, ~ ~ . ,~ ~, ater and interrelated parts of the forest management. Many of these m~y ~taL place ~i- multaneously on the same land area. Each of them is related to the programs of some other agency in a different Department. Despite administrative divisions, resource management cannot be separated. 2. Natural resource programs of the Federal Government are dispersed and scattered among separate Departments and agencies, although primarily con- centrated in Interior. Consider the following list: Bureau of Land Management National Park Service Geological Survey Bureau of Mines Bureau of Reclamation Bureau of Indian Affairs Bureau of Sport Fisheries ~nd Wildlife Bureau of Commercial Fisheries Bonneville Power Administration Southwestern Power Administration Southeastern Power Administration Agricultural Conservation Program Rural Electrification Administration or villains in I from the adin acerned is nott needs a S is indefensi Interior Agriculture Forest Service Soil Conservation Service PAGENO="0131" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 159 -- -~--~-~, ~ ~J~_,y `~~)uJJIm1SS1Ofl. The -~ ~ ~ ~ vv ~:t1er x~esources Review Commission, and the Tennessee Valley Authority. 3. The scattering of program responsibility among Departments has resulted in a welter of confusion and cross-purposes. This applies both to the development of consistent legislative policy and to program administration. This is especially important at the local level. This situation is spectacularly inefficient and actually dangerous to the public interest in our divided water programs. The present re- sponsibilities of the Federal Government put great strains on the budget. Yet competition among agencies "to get business" contributes to inefficient water resource development and waste of public funds. Water resource development, instead of taking place within a framework of consideration of national objec- tives and resources, takes place as a result of "logrolling" and "pork-barrel" poli- tics. This is tragic when one considers the expanding demands for water-derived products as well as for all other natural resources. 4. Many conflicts arise because of the special interests of the various agencies. A typical situation in water resource development would find the Corps of Fingi- neers (Defense) concerned with river basin planning and flood control ; Soil Conservation Service (Agriculture) concerned with watersheds ; Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife (Interior) concerned with fish habitat and recreation. Attempts to resolve these conflicts have been made. One popular device has been the establishment of interagency coordinating committees in Washington and on local levels. Nevetheless, lacking any central authority short of the President, the member Bureau and Department representatives on these per- missive committees are unable to resolve basic conflicts of interest. Line-operating authority ~ a Special Message of Natural Resources revealed his concern with the problem of coordination. He said: "This statement is designed to bring together in one message the widely scat- tered resource policies of the Federal Government. In the past, these policies have overlapped and often conflicted. Funds were wasted on competing effQrts. Widely differing standards were applied to measure the Federal contribution to similar projects. Funds and attention devoted to annual appropriations or im- mediate pressures diverted energies away from long-range planning for national economic growth. Fees and user charges wholly inconsistent with each other, with value received and with public policy have been imposed at some Federal developments." The President pledged action in his Special Message to redefine resource re- sponsibilities within the Executive Office, strengthen the Council of Economic 1 Hoover Comm-Report on Organization of the Executive Branch of the Government, 267 (19491. 2H.R. Doe. No. 255, 86th Cong., 2d Sess. (1960). ~ Address on Natural Resources, N.Y. Times, Feb. 24, 1961, p. 12, col. 1. PAGENO="0132" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Advisers for this purpose, and establish a Presidential Advisory Committee on Natural Resources under the Council of Economic Advisers. 6. Present divisions have no logical justification. With respect to the land resource agencies now in the Department of Agriculture, the Forest Service and the Soil Conservation Service, the supposed justification for the former agency is that "trees are crops," and for the latter that farm lands suffer the most from erosion. Neither claim has validity in fact. Most Forest Service activity is centered on the management of 180 million acres of public lands, the national forests ; that which is directed towards private forestry assistance is kept completely separate from all regular farm crop pro- grams and is not even integrated with Soil Conservation plans on the same ownership. At least half of the private forest lands on which assistance is given are held by non-farm landowners. Even the Forest Service research function is separate from the Agricultural Research Service. The Soil Oonservation Service program is also unrelated to other Agriculture Department efforts. It is concerned with practices for the protection of the basic soil resource, regardless of ownership. It is not integrated with other farm pro- grams concernel primarily with production, marketing, price, and supply regu- lation. Some of the most serious erosion problems are connected with new hii~h~ays and suburban developments and have no relationship to farm land. rapi i~ ueveiupii~, ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ,~. m*aiiv noints with programs inaction will result in embarrassment to the Auministratiorr. 1. Lacking any central responsibility at the cabinet level for re~orurces policy and management, the Bureau of the Budget is forced into the role of coordinator and arbiter between the various agencies. Probably in no other area of federal responsibility does the Budget Bureau exercise so strong an influence and lever- age over programming. The present role of the Budget Bureau exceeds its normal responsibilities. Given the present structure of Federal natural resource activities, it has been the only agency which has any interest in, or capability for, developing a truly national resource program. This is particularly important for the development of new programs. New needs require new activities. Phe evaluation of goals and means to meet these goals require specialized attention and expertise that cannot be provided by fiscal specialists in the Bureau of the Budget. 8. Natural resource agency appropriations are developed as a group by the Bureau of the Budget and (since 1954) the House and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees, regardless of the fact that functional agencies are scattered among many Departments. The legislative committees in the Congress continue to divide responsibilities along older but less consistent lines. 9. Federal organization of resource activities is in sharp contrast to the or- ganization of those states with the most successful conservation programs. These States, e.g., Michigan, New York, Wisconsin and Minnesota, have single depart- ments which embrace all phases of resource management under central direction. 10. Federal organization of resource activities is also in sharp contrast to the organization of other major Federal programs. Every other sector of federal responsibility, e.g., labor, agriculture, health, foreign affairs, is assigned to a single governmental Department, which is publicly understood to have central ,-~ Gi1~hc~rjfv give citizens a sense of involvement 160 PAGENO="0133" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES The most popular alternative suggestion is to create coordinating and aclyis- ory committees. The Congress recognizes the need for developing policy and programs related to national needs rather than to the traditions and prejudices of competing agencies. A distinguished gr&up of Democratic Senators in both the 86th and 87th Oongitesses have sponsored legislation to establish a Council of Resource and Clonservation Advisers in the Executive Office of the President in order to coordinate resource conservation on the basis of national goals.4 This change would go only part of the way towards providing the necessary coordination. The past history of trying to obtain unity through committees and advisory groups illustrates the futility of expecting much from these proposals. At present, only if the President himself operates as his own Secretary of Natural Resources ( to the near exclusion of many nth~- i-~-~--~- ~ ~ ~ ~t1I~. nrtth1~m ~~43 ~ ~` ~ -~`-~-~-~ iii~~iury it is imperative that our resource man- agement programs be accelerated to provide for the increased productivity needed by an expanding population. A broad resource program involving the application of specialized techniques and investments of billions of dollars can be carried out only by a well designed arid coordinated federal organization. It is clear that the present clumsy operation of the Government in the natural resources field will not only result in wasteful duplication, but fail to meet the goals set forth. Public disillusion will be inevitable. Nor are the alternatives thus far clis- cussed adequate. A Department of Natural Resources is vital if the Federal Government is to meet its responsibilities for the conservation and development of natural resources. Because of the present concentration of resource activities in the Department of the Interior, the easiest way to obtain a Department of Natural Resources would be to transfer other resource agencies to Interior. The major obstacle in the past to such a transfer has been the organiz&I special interest clientele of the agencies involved~ These groups fear that their relationships to the Government would be affected. The most adamant group blocking the way to reorganization of federal water functions is the Rivers and Harbors Conference, backed by water development contractors who strongly support certain congressional relations of the Army Corps of Engineers. This, however, is only one example of a general condition. Many other agencies have special interest clientele groups which do not want their interests disturbed. Pew agencies or clientele groups have a direct interest in the improved efficiency which could result from a reorganization. On the other hand, public citizens' organizations such as the wildlife, park, forestry and simflar groups the League of~ c~asPci~i~d water and nh~~i~~ources, including primary extraction (except agricultural crops) and those which deal with product processing, economies, etc. It is the first phas~e with which a Department of Natural Resources would be primarily conc~riiéd. On the other hand, resource programs which affect privately owned j~e~ources 161 S. 2549, 86th Cong., 1st Sess. (1959) ; S. 239, 87th Cong., 1st Sess. (1960) ; S. 1415, 87th Cong., 1st Sess. (1961). PAGENO="0134" are so simijar in appiicaii~ ~ ~ ~__ ~ - than to split authority. Further, the goals and objectives of the public anci prlvaie programs are so intertwined that the programs should not be separated administratively. III. HOW IT SHOULD BE DONE ~ How should reorganization of the federal natural resource agencies take place? Three possible choices present themselves for centralizing natural re- sources responsibilities: L llinimum.-Minimum transfer of principal resource agencies and programs now in other Departments to the Department of the Interior with the exception of the constrv,ction functions of the Army Corps of Engineers. (The planning and water research functions would, however, be transferred to a water develop- ment bureau in the Interior.) This approach would be simply a recognition of the political power of the Corps of Engineers and a means of avoiding their bare-knuckled pressures. It would leave unresolved the problem of coordination of water management and development programs. Although the planning function would be transferred, the Corps would soon find a way to revive this power. In any case the division of responsibilities between the two Departments would continue to result in waste and friction, and inhibit realistic programming in this vital field. 2. Coordinating comnvtttees.-Another possibility is to have a Council of Re- source Advisers and a River Basin Coordinating Council. These are attempts to obtain unification through compromise by establishing another "coordinating" layer between the President and his executive action agencies. Presumably, nlanning, research, and reconciliation of conflicts would be assigned to river meat or f~U1UIaL i~ ~ . ~ . ~ 1~ ~ ~ tht~ (~ouncil of Economic The cleanest and most effective procedure would be ` tO ~ran~iei au ~ ~ ~ functions to Interior and then to concentrate all efforts to gain congressional acceptance. Offsetting the pressure groups opposed to this transfer will be sev- eral hundreds of conservation and other organizations which will support complete reorganization. This will take generalship, strategy, and an effective information effort during the 00-day period of grace during which Congress may deny the President's action.° The attached organization chart sets forth the "model" or organization of the new Department of Natural Resources.7 The Reorganization Act of 1949 8 gives the President powOr to transfer out- side agencies to Interior by Executive Order. Legislative authority would be needed to change the name of Interior to Department of Natural Resources. The organization of resource activities resulting from these proposed changes would centralize all responsibility for development and management of natural resource programs (except for the T.V.A.) in a Secretary of Natural Resources. The Secretary would have an Under Secretary and staff assistants for program coordination, public affairs, and so forth. There would also be an advisory board on natural resource policy with the Secretary as chairman. Regional or river Reorganization Act of 1949, 1 U.S.C. § 133z (1949). ~ Note 5 supra, § 133z-4. ~See chart appended. 8 No~te 5supra. 164 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PAGENO="0135" subcommitte will stand adjourned 11 :40 a.m., an adjonrnment was taken, subject to the 0 PAGENO="0136" APPENDIX MoccLOOUSTROS ~ Soc crc jBc 1~ NATUF Un~ [~AssistoctS:cre~i~j [~ostorrSeccero1J ___ -- L ~ ~1 H PAGENO="0137" PAGENO="0138" PAGENO="0139" PAGENO="0140" PAGENO="0141" PAGENO="0142" PAGENO="0143" PAGENO="0144" PAGENO="0145" PAGENO="0146" PAGENO="0147" PAGENO="0148" PAGENO="0149" PAGENO="0150" PAGENO="0151" PAGENO="0152" PAGENO="0153" PAGENO="0154" PAGENO="0155" PAGENO="0156" PAGENO="0157" PAGENO="0158" PAGENO="0159" PAGENO="0160" PAGENO="0161" PAGENO="0162" PAGENO="0163" PAGENO="0164" PAGENO="0165" PAGENO="0166" PAGENO="0167" PAGENO="0168" PAGENO="0169" PAGENO="0170" PAGENO="0171" PAGENO="0172" PAGENO="0173" PAGENO="0174"