in the soils from reservoirs and as to their stabilizing
effect on stream flow as a means of preventing erosion,
siltage, and improving navigation.
BOULDWE C irYOr PROJE.r.-To retain continuity in our
chronology, we merely mention here the 1928 adoption of the
Boulder Canyon Project Act, saving discussion of its provisions
for later treatment in connection with development in particu-
From the "Depression" to Date
With the "depression" came a sharp stimulation of interest
in development of natural resources and their utilization in
projects built as public works. Throughout most of the subse-
quent period, there has been an acceleration in legislative and
administrative acceptance of the principles of comprehensive
planning and development.
TENNESSE VALLEY AUTHorIr.--Passage of the unique pro-
visions of the Tennessee Valley Authority Act in 1933 marked
the single instance of legislative provision for unity of federal
development in a geographic area. We shall treat this legis-
lation in more detail later in our examination of development
in particular regionss?
PUI ac-Wo a PaoJEicTS.-The National Industrial Recov-
ery Act of; 1983 directed the Public Works Administrator to
prepare a "comprehensive" program of public works which was
to include among other things control, utilization, and purifica-
tion of waters; prevention of soil and coastal erosion; develop-
ment of water power; transmission of electric energy; river
and harbor improvements; flood control; and certain drainage
improvements."9 This Act, "with a view to increasing employ-
ment quickly," also authorized the President, "through the
Administrator or through such other agencies as he may desig-
See i~fra, pp. 460-4.
bee sinfrd, pp. 481-488
Act of Jfne 16,- 198, 202, 48 Stat. 196, 201, 40 U. S. C. 402. The pro.
gram thus envisaged spedcally excluded river and harbor improvements
unless "adopted by Cong0esa" or "recommended by the Chief of Engineers."
nate or create," to construct or finance any public-works project
included in the program prepared."
A few months later, Congress requested the President to
transmit a "comprehensive plan for the improvement and de-
velopment of the rivers of the United States," for guidance of
legislation which would "provide for the maximum amount
of flood control, navigation, irrigation, and development of
The resulting report, containing plans for ten river basins,
consisted primarily of information already at hand." It was a
kind of compendium of water projects drawn from the "308 Re-
ports" of the Amy Engineers and the experience of the Bureau
of Reclamation." The report of the President's Committee on
Water Flow pointed out that existing basic data "is fragmen-
tary, and scattered among many bureaus and agencies.",
While emphasizing the need for continued study and the devel-
opment of more specific plans, the Committee asserted that
the basis for a "comprehensive plan for a water policy" lies
(1) adequate facts, maps, and general information in
easily accessible and comparable form; (2) continuous
study and refinement of plans for the full development
of river basins with coordination of present agencies
208(a), 48 Stat.202, 40 1. S. 408(a).
Sen. Bes. 164, 78 CONG. REo. 1738 and H. Res. 248, 78 CoNe. RBm. 1854,
both 78d Cong., 2 sess. (1984).
"H. Doe. No. W95, 784 Cong., 2d sess. (194). The basins selected were,
in' order ofi prriity: Tennessee Valley, St. Lawrence-Great Lakes Basin;
MississIppi-main stem, Missouri -including the Platte, Sakiamenito-an
Joaquin, Delaware River Basin, Columbia River Basin, Colorado River
Basin, Ohio Valley, Great Salt Lake Basin. I. p. 5.
The report was preliminary in character, being prepared and submitted
to the President within less than three months. Id. pp. I, 1. The study
was organized by the President's Committee on Water Flow, consisting of
the Secretaries of Agriculture, the Army, the Interior, and Labor--woking
through six technical subcommittees, including representatives from the
Departments of Agriculture, the Army, and the Interior, and the Federal
Power Commission, all coordinated by the National Planning Board. Id. p. .
SWAas PLANINOe, National Resources Committee, p. 2 (1988).
SH. Doc. No. 895, p. 9.
engaged in elements of the work; (3) agreement upon
a statement of principles to govern the division of re-
sponsibility and costs as among Federal, State, munici-
pal, and private bodies, for various kinds of projects
and combinations of projects; (4) agreement upon a
statement of principles to govern, the extent to which
various kinds of projects shall be charged to the users
and on methods of apportioning such charges; and (5)
agreement upon a statement of the social, economic,
physical, and geographical criteria for choice and pri-
ority of projects and units.
Although he signed the Committee's report, the Secretary of
the Army submitted a supplemental letter stating that he did
not concur in it in al respects.1" Thus, he pointed out that by
congressional mandate the work of the Army Engineers in as-
sembling data was "restricted to navigation, hydroelectric
power, flood control, and irrigation." 12 If it be desired to in-
clude "stream pollution, soil erosion, reforestation, recreation,
and sociological plans," the Secretary indicated that they
might be superimposed on the data assembled in "'308 Re-
ports." 10 However, he expressed doubts as to the wisdom
of consolidation in a single plan, saying: 10
Here is a place where too much coordination, or the co-
ordination of unrelated activities, might prove harmful
instead of beneficial.
Many of the river-development projects authorized by the
President under the provisions of the National Industrial Re-
covery Act were additionally authorized later by Congress in
the:1935 River and Harbor Act." This Act authorized proj-
ects estimated to cost $590,000,000, of which projects aggregat-
ing $484,000,000 had previously received partial allocations
"Id. pp. 10-13.
ml Id. 11.
SId. p. 12.
SAct of August 30, 1935, 49 Stat. 1028; H. Rep. No. 424, 74th Cong.,
1st sess.; Sen. Rep. No. 893, 74th Cong., 1st sess.; H. Rep. No. 1816, 74th
Cong., 1st sess. (al 1985).
from the Administration of Public Works."1 Among the bet-
ter-known projects which were authorized in this manner are
Fort Peck,l" Bonhe'ile, 1"bsCetral Valley,'" Grand Coulee,/
aMd Parker Dam."1 Alos, the timing of the construction of
Whielir Dam by the Thnnissee Valley Authority was fixed in
the interest of relieving unemployment."
MississiPPi VALEy COMMITTEE.--Concurrenty, the Mis-
sissippi alley Committee of the Public Works Administration
was engaged in working on water problems of that two-thirds
of the Nation ifi the Misisssippi diainagearea. Its report
added further recognition of the broad problem of social and
bitomie ]poci4 inherent in water planning: "s
Engineering does not exist for its own sake. It is of
little use to control rivers if we cannot thereby improve
S the quality of human living. Therefore, thefinal and
most significant element which the Committee has coin-
sidered is neither land nor water, but the people who
live on the land and are dependent on the water.
-NATIONAL RESOURCES BQARD.-Appointed by the President
in June 1934, the National Resources Board was directed to
prepare a program and plan of procedure dealing with the
"physical, social, governmental and economic aspects of public
policies for the development and use of land, water, and other
national resources." 'u This Board also recommended a pro-
1H. Rep. No. 1816, p. 6.
'. 1, 49 Stat. 1034; H. Rep. No. 1816, pp. 14-15.
S1, 49 Stat. 1088; Sen. Rep. No. 893, pp. 7,80.
1, 49 Stat. 1038, Sen. Rep. No. 898, pp. 53-54; see also Act of August
26, 1937, 2, 50 Stat. 844, 850.
1" 2, 49 Stat. 1039; H. Rep. No. 1816, p. 21.
m See H. Doe. No. 82, 74th Cong., 1st sess., p. 18 (1935).
m REPORT OF T MISSISSIPPI VA THE Misi VAY C HE PUBsI WOBxS AD-
stiTBrAowS, p. 3; see also p. 24 (1934).
1 Ex. O. No. 6777, June 30, 1934. The program was to include coordina-
tion of projects of federal, state, and local governments with proper division
of responsibility. The Mississippi Valley Committee became the Water
Planning Committee of the National Resources Board. See WATua PLAN-
NING, National Resources Committee, p. 3 (1938).
gram of cppWehensive development along drainage basin
lines.: Moreovqr it emphasized need for an inventory of
water raspw i and.brqught together data on factors such as
rai (allrn-p#, starm-flow, and underground water.2 eight t
mplnographi, each powering a region or group of drainage basins,
were prepared and issued as supporting data.11
Following the submission of these reports, the Board's Water
Planning Comnittee attempted a first priority rating of con-
truction projects concerning water use and conservation
.NrATIONAL RASOURCE CoMMirTEr -Organize i~,i9 5,1
the National Resoagres Comniittee, through its Water Re-
sources Committeelater undertook a major study of drainage
basin problems.O" In addition, special studies were made of
particular river, basins.tm The Water Resources Comnmittee
carried on a "clearing-house for water-strage and land-drain-
age projects, for PW. W A. water projects, flood control projects,
"P REPOR oV tra N Mtro Ax R~sorBCEu BOARI, December 1, 1934:
"That studies for water projects and programs for adoption by Congress
be prepared on the basis of drainage bsin' as wholes and consider a great
variety of *ater and land uses and controls." p. 5.
"The more interdependent we become s ldiniidunal and as communities,
the more do we need tp plan the uses of water with all our Interests in mind.
What was done on a lake or a stream in one settlement did not much con-
cefr other settlements a hundred years Ag o it may change livingconditions
vitally In other districts today, and at hundred years hence the interde-
pendence of interests will be greater than it is at present." p. 26.
"Until the country has some organization responsible for the continuous,
systematic study of water uses in all their manifold aiipects 'and in their
bearing upon the life of every citizen, it will continue to pend'-m ge sums
for inadequate returns in well-being.: ,Lhe costs of such an organization as
is suggested would make but a small fraction of the wastes avoided and of
the gains secured by its work." p. 29.
SId. pp. 77, 292-360.
WATER PLa~NINe, National Resources Committee, p. 3 (1938).
mEx. 0. No. 7065, June 7,1935.
mDBINAGE BASIN PROBLEMS AND PROGRAMs, National Resources Com-
mittee (1936 and 1937 Revisiof).
m WATEr PLANNING. National Resources Committee, pp. 3-4 (1938).
Forty-five drainage basin committees were organized through the regional
offices of the National Resources Committee. Id. p. 1.
m I.p. 5.
..!A 1938 repo on Wa.ter Planning by the Nation .
Co unittee pointed ,out thtlsoaund federal
c.qce4. not withwtr.by iand :foa r itself, but 4 Ft t
optionn of public safety, public health, public coeq .ienIan
comfort, the economic welfare of the publieand
fs n M ntetanM 9f0hiW tandad1t4 f liviPnghi lbi
Sad3ition, it.begyed tgiatR uch a policy, pbg
the lmaxirun integrate contiroland useof yvaigt^ raif
ag arap imr^uit; v)e.thb rigitp of the states;,P)a4.flAP~
to. be indispenaable to sound, action; assign ,spwn* grfcg
cies concerned in general accordance with the diatjaginf-i
benefits; and reilte drahiagebasin developnmentf tAbrpr*ll
national development and to the business cyele.%ja adJ ih)bfu
Speciilcaly,:ti Cohmmittee agreed that a: 2s 3,dT '".8801
unified plan 6fwiater control and develop 4tG i4 a
traist'b a me(dey b6riirenated projects, ag ilyprh
integrated Federal policy with respect tddth i@
types of water problems in their interlIo Io1fitta flft
'o sihipl-in contrast to a t collection r nmtireor l$UfiolaIed
"' tiviba lo0jaco
NAVIGATIOiN A'D' y-dNTOL PFOJECTs.-AtN 9L'fI
lowing striiousf ods in 'le Mississippi Vall'e ," JMtg
declared control of floods to be a national problem, expr~aly
recognizing that: t .t .1 a ,
Sdestructive floods upon the rivers of theU Sf] .t ,
i upsetting orderly processes and easing losbI lift bid
Property, including the erosion of lands, aiff
and obstructing. navigation, highways, r4 g
other channels of commerce between theb'tes~aomti
stitute a menace'to ti.h national welfare. o 1 ,afI' s)dt .
i : ,: ;.' jsmJl t qshr ntnl
It announced that flood control on navigable waesaom thsirp
tributaries is a proper federal activity in coo-p* ~ff
- ..a 1.lu I trIA 1o int',m
m4 I. pp. 12-16.w Iilw tlo
mY Id'' L uldo VA"A
4,t Ao1MtA It C
Act of June 22, 1936, 1 1, 49 Stat. 1570, 833 U. S. C. 701a. .(Mtet)
states, and their political subdivisions and localities.' In ad-
dition, it asserted that the Federal Government should "im-
prove'or participate'in the improvement of navigable waters
or their tributaries, including watirsheds thereof, for flood
Federal investigations and improvements for flood control
and allied purposes were assigned to theli iy Engineers.
Off the 6ther hand, federal investigations of' watesheds and
meomures for run-dffl fbr water-flow retardation, and for soil-
erosion prevention were assigned to the Departmient of
AA large number of basin-wide, flood-control plans prepared
under the authority of the 1936 legislation were authorized in
1938.131 These include, among: others, the Merrimack, Con-
necticut, Ohio, Upper Mississippi, Missouri, White, Arkansas,
and Willamette Rivers. Together with modifications and
additions, these plans have formed' the basis for extensive
flood-control operations:by the Army Engineers.2
SIn connection with this recent accentuation of federal flood-
control activity, it should be remembered that the requirements
of the 1917 Act that all flood-control examinations and surveys
must include "a comprehensive study" of the watershed remain
"Id. In 1944, Congress declared that the term "flood control" as used
here shall be construed to include "channel and major drainage improve-
ments." Act of December 22, 1944, 2, 58 Stat. 887, 889, S U. 8. 701a-1.
2,49 Stat. 157Wa a amended, 33 U. S.-C. 701b; 2, 58 Stat. 889,
33 U. S.C. 701a-1.
mId. Responsibility for, administration of the Department of Agricul-
tur's portion of this program has been assigned to the Forest Service in
the case of lands primarily forested, and to the Boll Conservatfon Service
in the case of other lands. The Office of the Secretary is responsible for
interdepartmental and interbureau coordination, for establishing over-all
program policies, antI'for approving reports. Secretary of Agriculture
Memorandum No. 1166, June 27, 1946.
The jurisdictional assignments to the Army Engineers and to the Depart-
ment of Agriculture are required by the same statutory provisions not to
interfere with work incidental to authorized Bureau of Reclamation projects.
SAct of June 28, 1938, J 4, 52 Stat. 1215, 1216.
See ANNUAL REPORT OF THE CHIIF or ENGINES, U. AIBR p. 28
in effect.1 And where the Chief of Engineers approves a
smaller structure than authorized in order to complete "a use-
ful improvement within an authorization," such smaller struc-
ture must be so located that it will be feasible later to enlarge
the work to permit full utilization of the site for "all purposesof
conservation such asflood control, navigation, reclamation, the
development of hydroelectric power, and the abatement of pol-
lution."'" In addition, by 1937 legislation, provision is made
for use of flood-control projects for the purpose of domestic
One policy of Congress respecting comprehensive develop-
ment is expressed in the following provision applicable to flood-
control and navigation improvements, which Congress first in-
corporated in the 1944 Flood Control Act, and which has since
been made applicable in each Flood Control and River and Har-
bor Act: .
In connection with the exercise of jurisdiction over the
rivers of the Nation through the construction of works of
improvement, for navigation or flood control, as herein
authorized, it is hereby declared to be the policy of the
Congress to recognize the interests and rights of the
States in determining the development of the watersheds
within their borders and likewise their interests and
rights in water utilization and control, as herein author-
ized to preserve and protect to the fullest possible extent
established and potential uses, for all purposes, of the
waters of the Nation's rivers; to facilitate the considera-
tion of projects on a basis of comprehensive and coordi-
nated development; and to limit the authorization and
construction of navigation works to those in which a sub-
See supra, pp. 134-135, 402.
SAct of August 18, 1941, J 2, 55 Stat. 638, 83 U. S. C. 701m. See also
H. Rep. No. 759, 77th Cong., 1st sess., p. 6 (1941).
1*Aet of July 19, 1937, 1, 50 Stat. 515, 518, 33 U. S. C. 701h; see also
uiaprap. 139-140, 823.
Act of December 22,1944, 1 1, 58 Stat. 887; Act of March 2, 1945, 1, 59
Stat. .10; Act of July 24, 1946, 1, 60 Stat. 634; Act of July 24, 1946, 2, 60
Stat. 641; Act of June 30, 1948, 101, 202,'62 Stat. 1171,1172, 1175; Act of
May 17, 1950, f 101, 202, 64 Stat. 168, -.
a s4voftial benefit to navigation will be realized therefrom
-" u "aWaPwhich can be operated consistently with appropriate
-ou'lJ 'i tecononic use of the waters of such rivers by other
,s a m mej f s of implementing this licy, the Act contained
certain ruirements for interchange of views between the
g'linmeers, the Department of the Interior, and the af-
Se It again delineated the flood-control jurisdio-
ons of the Army Engineers and the Department of Agcul-
ture and it provided for recreation development, for disposal
sc su power and water, for irrigotion works at Army proj-
ec Tor Arijy regulation of use of storage allocated to
co al and navigation at all reservoirs constructed with
dr un with a qualified exception as to flood control in
te case o VA reservoirs Noiithstanding this policy re-
specting "comprehensive and coordinated development;" Con-
0f1'Y9 1950: approved the Army 1bginineer portioni of the
oadtfi;juBasin coordinated plan but tabled the Bureau of
Mit hfif Ai n portion od the sakrneplan.1"
CI ATION PROJE.CS.-In the Reclamation Project Act
,9 9,Cngress incorporated provisions expressty recogniz-
m Ihe mrltiple-use possibilities o reamation projects. In
a .ionirrigation, cognizance was t iere ten of other uses
Iic .Eower, flood control, navigation, and "municipal
lwyr g or other miscellaneous purposes." u While
of sieme :of these purposes had appeared in earlier
F, I legi iod, the 19* lAct ifor th first time made
r locations by the secretary of the Interior of a
g oi projectt costs flo control or navigation.141 To
ths en, the Act provides for his coisultation with the Chief of
Engineers and the Secretary of the Army-.14 Later, "the preser-
"c o ember 22, 1944 1,58 $tat 887, See atqp," pp. 96-97.
2" ,28M t. s,889, 89 U. s.0. Z61a-1 i 4, 5 stat. 889, 16 U, q. 460d;
8 at.90, 16 8258; 1 6, 58 Stat 890,8 X6. (. 708; 1 7, 58
a. Qg S. 709; 8,58 Stat. 891, 43 U. S. C. 90.
S17, 1950, 8 204, 64 Stat. 163, -. See infrG, pp. 464-46.
S, us 4, 139, $9(a), 53 Stat 1187,1193, 43 U. S. C. 485h(a).
b, t. 194,4 U. S 0. 4851 (b) ; see eupra, p. 195.
nation and propagation of fish and wildlife" was,4g I a
purpose to which a part of the project costs might betjPi t4~^
This broadened authorization for multiple usesm4fqgifof
afeck the scope of surveys which may be undertae ),ijf>tk e
Bureau of Reclamation. It is authorized to condyp,4 gIfSt p
for "irrigation works for the storage, diversion, and dev p-
ment of waters, including artesian wells." Or ai re
miiore recently, for "any reclamation or irrigation t 'h ,
cluding incidental features thereof or
constructed or operated and maintained by the *'
reau of Reclamation fr the reclamation of arid lan Bubr o
purposes."1 4 The Secretary of the Interior is also t
to investigate water-conservation and utilization
"the purpose of stabilizing water supply and there a
stating farmers on the land and providing oppormf qiM iE l
permanent settlement of farm families!?' Thesade W ga-
tioris are carried out by the Bureau of Reclamat"ind e"o-
sistently with the emphasis upon irrigation in therf 8s
authorizations for surveys and investigations, a repoft11e t.
from these Lgal Division of the Bureau told a Senatp
mittee in 1944 that the Bureau is "required to opdtate pri-
marily for irrigation.'"1t 4 10')
The General Appropriatibns Act, 1051, made hppropria-
tions to the Bureaiif Reclamation for "engineerintand eco-
nomic investigations of proposed Federal reclamationuprojects
and studies of water conservation and developmentgls' 1
But this appropriation is followed by a proviso that, except
to certain investigations in Alaska, "no part of this.approp-
ation shall be expended in the conduct of activitiesi shioh 're
not author ized by law." r' T'. h
Act of August 14,1946, $ 2,60 Stat. 1080, 16 U. S. C. 62. 1- 0 1 .4
"-At of Jun 17,-1902, I 2,'82 Stat. 88, is amended, 48 U. S.TOr41 '"'
'-Act of August 4, 1989, i 2(e), 9(a), 58 Stat. 1187, 1198,148 t1i W*v.
485ac) and 485h(a) ; ofiAct of December 22, 1944, (e), 58 Statis 8GW tl
?" Att of October 4,1940, 1, 14 Stat. 1119, as amended 16 1W l (Jr90 t
See Sen. Doe. No. 18, 77th Cong., 1stess., p. VIIi (1941). i s .0 1 .I'.
Statement of Howard B. Stinson, Legal Division, Bureau qf etedifLta-
tion. Hearings before Subcommittee of Senate Committee on Ciommee'on
H. R. 8961,78th Cong., 2d sess., p. 1141 (1944). 1 To A "'
Act of September 6, 1950, ch. VII; 64 Stat. 595, -. () 0o~
In certain specific instances, the Bureau of Reclamation has
been authorized to develop more comprehensive plans for water-
resource development. Notable examples are the authoriza-
tions for the Colorado River Basin, the Missouri Basin, and the
Central Valley of California.1s'
FOREST, SOIL, AND WATER .CoNSRVATIN.-Throughout the
foregoing discussion, repeated markers have appeared pointing
toward the inseparability of land practices in comprehensive
development of water resources, In the chapter on "Related
Land Uses," we have already discussed in some detail the
authorizations whereby the Secretary of Agriculture may
undertake, independently or in cooperation with federal, state
and local agencies, and private parties, programs of forest con-
servation, soil conservation, and water conservation."
It will bear repeating, however, that the establishment of the
national forests was founded upon purposes which included
regulation of stream flow."1 Likewise, the initial purpose of
the soil-conservation program was; ~:
to provide permanently for the control and prevention
of soil erosion and thereby to preserve natural resources,
control floods, prevent impairment of reservoirs,
and maintain the navigability of rivers and harbors, pro-
tect public health, public lands and relieve unemploy-
And 1936 amendments added additional purposes, includ-
"*Act of December 21, 1928, 15, 45 Stat. 1057, 1065, 48 U. S. C. 617n;
Act of July 19, 1940, 2(d), 54 Stat. 774, 775, as amended, 43 U. S C. .618a
(Supp. III); Act of July 3, 1945, J 1, 59 Stat. 818, 84; Act of October 14,
1949, 2, 63 Stat. 852,- :
m See supra, pp. 351-882. It should be noted.at this point that the Depart-
ment of Agriculture has authority to "acquire and to diffuse useful
information on subjects connected with agriculture, in the most general
and comprehensive sense of that word." R. S. 520 from Act of May 15,
1862, 1, 12 Stat. 387, 5 U. S. 511.
SSee supra, pp. 354-355.
SAct of April 27,1935, 1,49 Stat. 163,16 U. S. C. 590a.
'"Act of February 29, 1936, $ 1, 49 Stat 1148, as amended, 16 U. S. C.
(1) preservation and improvement of soil fertility; (2)
promotion of the4 economic use and conservation ,of
land; (3) diminution of exploitation and wasteful and
unscientific use of national soil resources; (4) the pro-
tection of rivers and harbors against the results of soil
erosion in aid of maintaining the navigability of waters
and water courses and in aid of flood control; and (5)
reestablishment of the ratio between the
purchasing power of the net income per person on farms
aid that of the income of persons not on farms .
Similarly, the Water Facilities Act of 1937 expresses a recog-
nition by Congress that:
the wastage and inadequate utilization of water re-
sources on farm, grazing, and forest lands in the arid and
semiarid areas of the United States resulting from in-
adequate facilities for water storage and utilization con-
tribute to the destruction of natural resources, injuries
to public health and public lands, droughts, periodic
floods, crop failures, decline in standards of living, and
excessive dependence upon public relief, and thereby
menace the national welfare.
Still further, Congress stated as the purpose of the sustained-
yield forest-management program, administered by the De-
partments of Agriculture and the Interior:"
to promote the stability of forest industries, of employ-
ment, of communities, and of taxable forest wealth,
through continuous supplies of timber; in order to pro-
vide for a continuous and ample supply of forest prod-
ucts; and in order to secure the benefits of forests in
maintenance of water supply, regulation of stream flow,
prevention of soil erosion, amelioration of climate, and
preservation of wildlife.
Not to be overlooked is the Civilian Conservation Corps. Es-
tablished to provide employment and vocational training to
youthful citizens, war veterans and Indians, the CCC was au-
Act of August 28,1937, 1, 50 Stat. 869,16 U. S. C. 590r.
Act of March 29,1944, 1 1,58 Stat. 132,16 U. S. C. 583.
f4atb4 U employed on works of public interest br utility
hrlde ieetion, l deelopment,;utiliiation, maintenance, or
4o Mvtfl "the natural resource of lands and waters, and
iSf 1 ki# thereof, including forests, and fish abd wildlife" on
dlitd &lM6lled by the federal or state governmentss" The
IO vCxtLiv.hidkted in 1943, but its reactivation' "as been
ViiAoin'Alh introduced recently8
n W oN Co ;oL.-, 11ow0 many attempts to
secure oegi0n for control and abate t of pollution, the
Water PolCiut ~oon C~aono Act wipa sd by Congress in 1948."
aif iiits of that legislation are eevnt here.
For example, it directs the Surgeon General to 'prepare or
toWt~&mJinehensive programs for eliminating oe redlining the
mUllt e 1' ihte~itate-waters and tributaries thereof and im-
foleWt itIinitary condition of surface and underground wa-
f."'@ tyRfkeover, the statute requires that such programs be
rtMlWlfdp f operation With federal, Mtate, and interstate agen-
"'tifVdhB the-iiituiipalities and industries involved.1
MInafiieskaljtioins minybeiude of the discharges of any sew-
,l~d iaaId wastes, or substance which may deleteriously
affect such waters." Such comprehensivev programs" must be
-hArdthped with due regard to improvements necessary to con-
-arveodatpIsf/for public water supplies, propagation of fsh and
aquatic life, recreationailpurposes and agricultural, industrial,
le^ g "t"mta uses."1 ~e
,ij Shy 'aie, these programs are for the initedvpurpose of
.^syPi pollen", and "improving the sanitary condi-
S'n 28, 1M i 1, 1,3, 50 Stat. 81, see ch. 3A. As
m y hck#ct of AUgast 7 '1 53 Stai-.258, the 1937 statute was
,vrfra*ar6ntseB 1ioly 1;A03.0
bnfI CjggWgM eO iqul41ation of CCC, .se Act of July 2, 1942, 56 Stat.
562, 869; Act of July 12, 1943, 57 Stat. 494, 498; As to bills, see, e.g., in the
81st Congress: S. 3144, H. R. 7462, H.' I; '48~, I. IL 7523, and I. R. 7721
.( ")50.qq,)aNffn has been taken on any of these bills.
O) a, ju1 8130, 1948, 62 Stat. 1155, as amended, 33 U. S. C. 466-466J
- ("8)a (5ait. 1155,33 U. S. C. 466a(a) (Supp. III).
tibii of waters, and-thus are not "comprehensive," as we have
used the term
Encouragement of interaAency coordination of water-pollu-
tion control is sought by establishment owf aWater Pollutia
Control Advisory Board in the Publie Health Serviee.",-o Co
posing this Board are the Sirg~i aeo General or his representa-
tive, as chairman; prprentaitives of the Departments of'Agri-
fttire, the Army, and the Interior; and six nonfederal repre-
sentatives to be appointed annually by the President.'
The possibility of achieving basin-wide pollution control or,
abatemeint is sharply restricted, however, by the veto power
over enforcement action vested in the state in which the offend-
ing pollution originates.
NAniONAi SBcumrr tRELeRuoIB BoAD.--The duties of the
Natiornal'Security Resources Board are sufficiently broad to
pernit, among other things, formulation of a program of com-
pr~eensive development of water resources for war purposes.a
Its function is t advise the President concerning the coordina-
tion of military, industrial, and civilian mobilization, including
among other things: "
(2) Programs for the effective use in timeof war of the
fd tion's natural and industrial resources for military
and civilian needs, :*
'()Y Policies for unifying, in time of war, the activities
of the federal agencies and departments engaged in or
concerned with production, procurement, distribution, or
transportation of military or civilian supplies, materials,
and products *
SADVANCE PLANNING.-AS we have seen, Congress has ac-
corded increasing recognition to the need for comprehensive
development. As yet, many of the pieces are unmatched, and
*"6 (b), 82 Stat. 1188, as amended, 83 U. S. Q. 486e(b) (SUpp. Im).
"14. One of the six appointed bl the President must have shown "an
active interest in the field of wildlife conservation." Others are to represent
state and municipal governments and industry.
See supro, p. 341
"Act of July 26, 1947, 1 103, 61 Stat 495, 499, as amended, 50 U. S. C. 404
"* 108(c), 81 Stat. 499, as amended, 50 S. 0. 404(c) (Supp. I).
there is, no single domna ehensive :poliy. But thl existing
machinery for projecting construction agency plan s i yearsitn
advance offers a possibility for relating separate, agency eg-
ments to comprehensive plans. TFor all construction agencies of
thieGovernment are required to prepare and keep up-to-date,
"carefully planned slnd realistic, long-range programs" which
niust be submitted annually to the Bureau of the Budget?,"
The Bureau is reqbiied to consolidate these programsand
submit to the President an "over-all advance program for the
Executive Branch."" ,
This responsibility of the Bureauihasebeen described to Con-
gress by its Director as follows::
The development of long-range programs 'is ritithe
operating responsibility of the' Bureau of the-Baudget.
Rather it is the responsibility of the agencies that have
been authorized by Congress to undertake or aid, ini
executing the projects comprising the program. The,
S Bureau of the Budget has the responsibility of insuring,
that estimates for public'works and improvements are
based on a carefully thought-out program, that tthey,do
not impinge q upon or conflict with, programs of other
Federal agencies, and that the estimates of appropria-
tions recommended to the President for presentation to
Congress represent orderly process in our national de-
velopment and bear proper relationship to each other.
This: practice of requiring federal construction agencies to
prepare six-year, advance programs stems from the Employ-
ment Stabilization Act of 1931.7"
Ex.O. NO. 9384, October 4,1943, 8 ."R. 13782.
'J 14. par. 8.
; Hearings on H. R. 359 (First Supplemental National Defense Appro-
priation Bill for 1944) 11efore Subcommittee of the Senate Comnmittee on
Appropriations, 78th Cong., 1st sess., p. 324 (1943). See also id, p.,740, for
memorandum concerning;,tbe authority of the Bureau of.the Budget in
relation to public-works programming.
'"Act of February 10, 1931, 8, 46 Stat. 1084, 1086, 29 U. S. C. 48g. (The
compilers of the United States Code state that this Act "became obsolete
upon the abolition of the National Resources Planning Board." However,
the Act abolishing the NRPB did not mention the 1931 Act which, in addi-
tion to prescribing certain duties that later.becanm vested in the NRPB,
:In: connection with the use of river-development programs
as public-works projects, it may be noted that the flood-cop-
trol works provided for by the 1944 Flood Control Act were
re qured federal construction agencies to prepare and submit six-year plans
to the Budget Director who "shall report to the President from time to time
csolidated plans andtestitates." In the memorandum mentioned in the
precedinglootnote, the Bureau of the Budget says that Ex. 0. No. 9384, issued
after abolition of the NRPB, was based in part on the Employment Stabiliza-
tion Act' of 191. The la~nage of the Executive Order states its issuance by
virtue of the uthoit0y vested in the "President of the United' States, and
particularly by the Budgeting and Accounting Act of 1921, as amended.")
The purpose of the six-year plans was "to assist in the stabilization of
industry through the proper timing" of construction. The Federal Em-
ploymentiStabilization Board, created by the 1931 Act, was later abolished;
and its powers, duties, and functions were transferred to the Federal Employ-
ment Stabilization Office, established within the Department of Commerce.
Ex. O. No. 6186, g 1, June 10, 1938; Ex. O. No. 8828, March i, 1984.' The last
appropriation for-this Office was made in 1934. See H. Doc. No. 142, 77th
Cong., 1st sess., p. 51 (1941).
t ii.198, ti~e President requested the National Resources Committee to
assume responsibility for annual revision of the federal six-year program.
H. Doe. No. A42, 77th Cong, 1st ses., p. 51 (1941). ,This Committee had
assumed the powers and duties of the National Resources Board, which in
turn had succeeded td the powers, duties, and functions of the Natioal~
Planning Board, estabi shed by the PWA Administrator to advise and asset
*hm In the preparation of the comprehensive plan of public works author-
izd by the National Recovery Act. kct of June 16, 1933, 1 201, 202, 48
StEt. 195, 200-201. Thus, the foregoing duty of the Federal Employment
Stabilization Office and that of the National Resources Committee were
substantially th Isame, that's, responsiblttty for preparation of compre-
hensiet, public-Works program. .
"'Th powers, duties, and functions of both of these agencies were later
transferred to the Natiomi. Resources Planning Board, created in the
Executive Ofice of the President. Reorganization Plan No. Iof 1939, 114, 6,
effective July 1, 1989, 4 F. R. 2727, 2728, 53 Stat. 1423, 1424, 5 U. S. C.
iB3t; ote following. This new Board was directed to develop an orderly
program of public works and to list susi works "in the order of their relative
importance with respect to (1) the greatest good to the greatest number of
people, (2) the emergency necessities of the Nation, and (3) the social,
economic and cultural advancement of the people of the United States."
Ex O. No. 8248, September: 8, 1989, 4 F. R. 8864, 8865. All construction
agencies were directed to submit six-year, advance plans and programs of
their public-works construction to the NRPB and to theBureau of the
Budget. Ex. O. No. 8455, June 26, 1940, 5 F. R. 2420. For details of the
procedure used in developing the six-year programs, see H. Doc. No. 142,
77th Cong., 1st sess., pp, 51-54 (1941).
In 1943, Congress abolished the NRPB and expressly provided that its
functions not be transferred to any other agency. Act of June 26,1948, 101,
authorized, among other things "with a view toward providing
an adequate reservoir of useful~ nd wbrthy public works for
the post-war construction program.:'1" '.
Furthermore, Cor gress in 1946 d4 1ged it to be the policy
and responsibility of the Federal Government to utilize 41
its plans, functions, and resources for the purpose of creating
and maintaining, in a manner calculated to promote the gen-
eral welfare, conditions of maximum.gainful employment."'
The Council of Economic Advisers has the duty of appraising
the various federal programs in light of this policy in order to
determine the degree of their coofprmity with this policy and
to make recommendations to the, resident:"L But neither this
agency nor the Bureau of the Budget has received appropria-
tions for.the purp use enabling their participating directly
in planning for comprehensive development, as such." :
POPOSALS FOR sONAL AuTwimo msS.-A- ti delpp-
ment of larger and more extensive river-improvement projects
was made possible in recent years by advances in engineering
methods, as populations in riyer S increase ,, J industry
expanded, and as our economy grew more complex-the need
for comprehensive development became increasingly apparent.
As the scope of the activities of the special-purpose agencies
57 Stat.1680,170. The President then Issued E?, O. No. 9384, 8,B. 8382L ,
which revoked Ex. O. No. 8455 and directed the federal oetstruction agepngl
to submit long-range, advance programs to the bureau of, the Budget ppler
regulations prescribed by t. The Bureau Waspsi gretd tqronso4datethese
programs and report to the President ovrell, advance program for the
Executive Branch. Such programs are not the same as the six-year, river-
basin programs prepare d by the Fed Committees of the Departments of
Agrc~t ture asd the Interior. See fntro, pp. 4836-3.
m Act of December 22,1O44 10, 18, 58 Stat. 887, 801, 90.
'"'Act of February 20,1946, 12, 6 Stat. 28, 16 U, 0.1021.
"i 4, 60 Stat 2 15iUJ. S.C. 1023(c).
However, the Counoll of Economic Advisers has concluded cooperative
agreements with the Department of the Interior whereby it has received
funds from the latter Department which have enabled the Council to broaden
its studies of the Southwest and New England economies to include re-
source development. Letters from the Chairman of the Council of Eco-
nomic Advisers to the Secretary of the Interior, dated June 22, 1950 and
June 27, 1980, and letters from the Secretary of the Interior to Chairman
of the Council of Econmic Advisers, dated June 26, 1950 and June 28 195.
was e lpanded, it was inevitable that their programs would
come into conflict. Particularly was this so in the West where
water supply is often limited.'"
Various alternativeproposals have been advanced from time
to time to lessen or eliminate this conflict. In 1937, President
Roosevelt recommended the creation of seven regional authori-
ties ag ies blanketing the ited States, saying that: "
Apart from the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Co-
lumbia Valley Authority, and the Mississippi River
SCommission, the work of these regional bodies, at least
in their early years, would consist chiefly in developing
integrated plans to conserve and safeguard the prudent
use of waters, waterpower, soils, forests, and other re-
sources of the areas entrusted to their charge.
He indicated his intention to use the National Planning Board
to coordinate the development of regional planning to insure
conformity with national policy, without giving the Board ex-
ecutive authority over the construction dorm management of the
Subsequently, the House Committee on Rivers and Harbors
held hearings on two bills designed to carry out the President's
recommendations. One would have created seven regional
planning agencies and authorized the creation of, regional
power-marketing authorities to operate and maintain hydro-
electric power-prodcing facilities." The other would have
est4lshed seven regional development authorities similar to
1" See, e. v., Missouri River Basin (H. Doe. No. 475, 78th Cong., 2d sees.
(1944); Sen. D6o. No. 191, ''th Cong.;, 2d sess. (1944)); Central Vdilef,
California (Sen. Doe.'No. 118, 8it "'Cong., lt sess., pp. 1,' 29, 27-277
194'?); if Doe o. 67,: 1t Cong., i t ses. (1949)); Columbia Rtver
Basin (H. Doe. No. 47, 81st Cong., 2d sess., vol. 1, pp 2-28, Italic, 8-8.
Itdlic (I195); H Doe.:14o. 581, 81*t Coit 2d ses. (1950)); Colorad
River Basin (H. Doe. No. 18, 81st Cong., 1st, sees, p. 102 (1949)).
:H Doe. No. 261, 75th ong., 1st es, p. 8 (1987).
S". 7865,75th Cong., let seass. (1987).
H. B. 7868, 75th Cong., 1st ses. (19, ). This bill was an amended
version of HE R. 7892, which in turn was identical with S. 2555, both 75th
ong., 1st seas. (1987).
As stated in the first section of one of these bills, and in sub-
stantially identical words in the other, the purpose was: '
to develop, integrate, and coordinate plans, projects, and
activities for or incidental to0 the promotion of naviga-
tion, the control and prevention of floods, the safeguard-
ing of navigable waters, and the reclamation of the puh-
lic lands, in order to aid and protect commerce amohg thie
several Stites, to strengthen the national defense, to
conserve the water, soil, mineral, and forest resources
of the Nation, to stabilize employment and relieve un-
einploynenrt, and otherwise to protect commerce among
the States* provide for the national defense, and pro-
mote the general welfare of the United States.
The regional plans contemplated by,both bills were to include proj-
ects and activities, both federal and nonfederal, which would be adapted
to the "conservation and integrated development of water, soi and forest
resources" for: (1) 'l~ie promotion of navigation by means of channel im-
provements, prevention of siltation, regulation, of stream; low, development
and coordination of navigation facilities and other means. (2) Flood con-
trol by means of storage, control and disposition of surplus waters, control
and retardation of water-run-off, the restoration and improvement o -the
absorption and infiltration capacity of the soil and other. neans. (3)
Safeguarding the use of navigable waters by means of pollution abate-
Pment, provision `of water purification and' sewage-disposal works and other
r .ans. (4)' !edf ibn of arid or IWaipy public lands by means of ir-
rigation and dAnai.age, the economic development and use of such lands,
andothermeans. 6a,H..R.73865; IS, B. 7868.
So far as consistent with the above purposes, these plans were. to give
due regard to: "(1) The present and future development and conservation
of water for power, irrigation, and other beneficial uses; (2) the prAdent
husbandry of soil, mineral, and forest resources and their conservation for
rereation, the protection of wild game, and other beneficial uses; (8) the
urgency of preventing irreparable waste of the Natlop's resourcep rm
droughts, winds, dust storms, and soil eropiop; (4) tae integration and
interconnection of projects and activities, the development of tteir lnul-
tiple purposes, and the equitable distribution of the benefits thereof.;,()
equitable contributions to cost by. States and subdivisions and agencies
thereof specially benefited by the projects and activities; (6) equitable con-
tributions, from the revenues of a project or otherwise, to compensate States
and subdivisions and agencies thereof for special losses, not offset or
mitigated by benefits, which may be occasioned by the carrying out of proj-
ects; and (7) such economic, social, and cultural values as may be affected or
furthered by the projects and activities." 6b, H. R. 738~ i 8b, H. R.7 t88.
Bills similar to these have been introduced in succeeding
Congresses, but have never reached the floor of either House.88
SNevertheless, much attention was directed toward specific
'bsins, In 1944, after hearings on the Bureau of Reclamation-
Army Engineer plan for development of the Missouri River
Basin, this plan was authorized.1" Extensive hearings were
held in the following year on a bill to create a Missouri Valley
Authority." Hearings were likewise held in 1949 on a pro-
posal for a Columbia Valley Administration.1" Other pro-
posals introduced during this latter period included bills for
the creation of particular valley authorities," bills for the
territorial expansion of TVA,"' bills for comprehensive surveys
or planning only," bills for adopting certain basin-wide pro-
grams worked out by two or more agencies1 or by one
agency,1 bills for consolidating existing agencies of govern-
ment," bills for interstate commissions,"8 and a bill for inter-
I See, e. g., H. R. 1824,79th Cong., 1st sess. (1945) ; H. R. 894, 81st Cong.,
Ist sess. (1949).
Hearings before a Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Irriga-
tion and Reclamation on S. 1915, 78th Cong., 2d seas. (1944) ; Act of Decem-
ber 22,1944, 9,58 Stat. 887,891.
See infra, pp. 474-475.
Hearings before the House Committee on Public Works on H. R. 4286
and H. R. 4287, and before the Senate Committee on Public Works on S.
1645, both 81st Cong., 1st seas. (1949).
"For Columbia: S. 460, 79th Cong., 1st sess. (1945); H. R. 427, H. R.
4286 and S. 1645, 81st Cong., 1st sess. (1949). For Connecticut: H. R.
4701, 81st Cong., 1st sess. (1949). For Merrimack: H. R. 463, 81st Cong.,
'1st sess. (1949). For Missouri: S. 555, 79th Cong., 1st sess. (1945); S.
1160 and H. R. 3522, 81st Cong., 1st sess. (1949). For Ohio: H. R. 2540, 79th
Cong., 1st sess. (1945). For Savannah: S. 64, 81st Cong., 1st seas. (1949).
nTo include Cumberland Valley: S. 338, 81st Cong., 1st sess. (1949).
For Merrimack and Connecticut Rivers: S. 253, 81st Cong., 1st sess.
(1949). For New England-New York: S. 3707, 81st Cong., 2d sess. (1950).
SFor Columbia Basin: 8. 1595 and S. 2180, 81st Cong., 1st seas. (1949).
"For Central Arizona Project: S. 75, 81st Cong., 1st sess. (1949).
SS. 2833 and S. 3657, 81st Cong., 2d sess. (1950). During debate on the
1944 Flood Control Bill, the Senate defeated an amendment to transfer to
the Bureau of Reclamation the functions of the Army Engineers pertaining
to western water conservation reservoirs. See 90 CoNe. RaC. 8616-8626
"For Columbia Interstate Commission: H. 8686, 81st Cong., 1st sess.
(1949); for Susquehanna Watershed Commission: H. R. 9724, 81st Cong., 2d
'"For "Interstate Water and Power Users' Associations": S. 3376, 81st
Cong., 2d sess. (1950).