early date to hear from department representatives. That date will be publicly announced.

The CHAIRMAN. It is desirable that the hearing as it has progressed thus far should be printed and distributed as soon as possible. The staff will, therefore, assemble the hearing with appropriate appendix materials. This should include the reports of the Bureau of the Budget and the departments.

Before recessing this morning, I want to note that the able senior Senator from Missouri, Mr. Hennings, notified me that he has a statement to present, including a communication from the director of the Missouri Conservation Commission, Mr. William E. Towell.

Senator Hennings has long been identified with resource development and conservation, and he took a distinguished part in the work of the Missouri River Basin Commission. The report of that Commission and the subsequent legislative proposals that Senator Hennings has introduced are, in large measure, founded on a concept similar to the proposed Resources and Conservation Act now under consideration. It will, of course, be helpful to the committee to have the statement of our distinguished colleague from Missouri, and the communication from the conservation commission of the State of Missouri. They will appear at this place in the record.

We will adjourn now, to meet at the call of the chairman.

(Whereupon, at 11:35 a.m., the hearing was adjourned, to reconvene at the call of the chairman.)

(The matter referred to is as follows:)

STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS C. HENNINGS, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF

MISSOURI

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate this opportunity to state briefly the reasons for my support of the proposed Resources and Conservation Act (S. 2549) of which I am one of the original cosponsors. First, however, may I express sincere commendation of this latest evidence of your long and distinguished leadership in the field of natural resources. The Senate again is indebted to you for bringing before it the legislative vehicle by which we may move forward toward the goals of sound and comprehensive resources programs and progress in this field is long overdue.

The need for this legislation is apparent in my State of Missouri. We are proud, and justly so, I believe, of the significant progress that we have made in conservation of Missouri's natural resources. There is visual evidence across the entire State of the progress in soil conservation, and we have done a great deal in water resource improvements also. Then, too, wildlife resources of Missouri are well managed, and woodlands and recreation developments are now the subject of not only the cooperative State-Federal programs but they also are sponsored by local organizations in many parts of the State.

But looking ahead to the future, we realize that we have hardly made a start in the development of our vast wealth of natural resources, and in their conservation to meet the needs of the greatly increased population and industrial production that Missouri will experience in the coming years. To meet the challenge of our future, to take full advantage of our opportunities, we will have to increase our resource programs to many times their present levels.

These problems are well exemplified also in the Missouri River Basin, which includes one-sixth of the land area of our Nation. To transform the Missouri River from an instrument of destruction and flood damage to a source of wealth and prosperity is indeed a great and challenging task that faces my State and the nine other States in the Basin.

To this end, in 1952, the President appointed a commission to study the problems of the Missouri River Basin and to recommend what may be the best means for making progress in this task. It was my privilege to serve on the President's Missouri Basin Survey Commission in company with other Members

of the Congress and distinguished citizens from the States of the basin. Our work on that Commission is directly relevant to establish a Missouri Basin Commission and the bill now before you.

The Missouri Basin Survey Commission found that one of the most urgent needs was for a comprehensive and well articulated plan, one that reflected the interests and desires of the people of the basin, and that would guide the Federal and State agencies in their complex missions. The Commission report stated: "In view of the huge investment programs needed for resource development, it is essential to make this investment yield the maximum social and economic benefits. Planning to achieve maximum benefits from these investments is both a regional and a national problem. It has recently been studied by several Presidential commissions and by many congressional committees. Various Federal agencies have for years been trying to improve planning procedures. In the Missouri Basin there are some special problems; in general, however, the planning problems of the basin are the same as those of the Nation."

That finding of the survey Commission remains true today. In fact, today and in the years ahead, planning is more than ever before essential in guiding the "huge investment programs needed for resource development." And still true is also the Commission's statement that in general the planning problems of the basin are the same as those of the Nation.

This measure will complement the attempts to provide coherent and unified direction to the development of natural resources and coordinated activities that I have so long envisaged in my proposals concerning the Missouri Basin. It seems apparent to me, and I am certain it seems apparent to you that the measures would help to round out a full picture of realistic conservation endeavors.

The resources and conservation bill that you have authored, Mr. Chairman, and of which I am proud to be a cosponsor will additionally place in our handsin the hands of the people of the Missouri Basin-the planning tools that we need to help bring to focus the vast efforts of Federal, State, and local interests. I urge early enactment of S. 2549 pending before your committee because I sincerely believe it will be a major step forward in realistically gearing our resources and conservation programs to the true needs of present and future generations.

Mr. Chairman, participation of the States and local interests is essential in any sound resource effort. For that reason, I have sought the comments of the Director of the Missouri Conservation Commission as spokesman for people at the grassroots. Mr. William E. Towell, the Director, has written me all his concurrence in the resources and conservation bill. I append the letter from Mr. Towell.

Hon. THOMAS C. HENNINGS, Jr.,
Senate Office Building,

Washington, D.C.

MISSOURI CONSERVATION COMMISSION,
Jefferson City, Mo., February 4, 1960.

DEAR SENATOR HENNINGS: This is in reply to your letter of January 27 in which you ask for my comments or opinion with regard to the bill, S. 2549, which you introduced in the last session of Congress.

I have gone over this bill and have discussed it with other administrators in the conservation field. It is my opinion that this would be a very desirable piece of legislation. I do not feel that any conservation agency would have reason to oppose what this bill provides; namely, an annual resources and conservation report to the President, the establishment of a Joint Congressional Committee on Conservation, and the setting up of a three-man Advisory Council to the President.

I appreciate the opportunity which you have given me to express my thoughts on this proposed legislation and, as one conservation administrator, feel that its enactment would be a forward step in getting better use and control of vital natural resources.

Very best personal regards.

Very truly yours,

WILLIAM E. TOWELL, Director.

DEAR SENATOR MURRAY: I regret that conditions of health in my family make it impossible for me to attend the January 28 and 29 hearings on S. 2549, the Resources and Conservation Act of 1960.

I congratulate you and your colleagues on this forward looking proposal for national action. I suspect that there is nothing which should concern the people of the United States as much as the conservation of their natural resources. Sincerely,

E. J. WORKMAN. SEPTEMBER 3, 1959.

DEAR SENATOR MURRAY: I heartily endorse your proposal as contained in your bill, Resources and Conservation Act of 1960.

This is an excellent idea and it urgently deserves action by the Congress.
Sincerely,

ALVIN H. HANSEN,

Professor Emeritus of Economics, Harvard University.

Senator JAMES E. MURRAY,
U.S. Senate,

NEW YORK, September 2, 1959.

Washington, D.C.

MY DEAR SENATOR MURRAY: This replies to your letter of September 1. I have read the proposed Natural Resources and Conservation Act (S. 2549) and I am heartily in favor of it. I do not see on first reading any changes that need to be made.

It need hardly be added that the strength must depend, both of the council (proposed in S. 4) and of the joint committee (proposed in S. 5), on the vision and expertness of the staffs. I presume that the joint committee would use the staff of the council as its secretariat.

I need hardly add that I am glad that you and your colleagues are seeking effective action in this area.

DEAR SENATOR MURRAY: Thank you very much for your letter of August 31. I am pleased to have this opportunity to study S. 2549 and your speech introducing this bill in the Senate.

It should be a matter of concern to all of us that the United States lacks a national policy on conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources. Certainly, more people are noticing this failure and are becoming more fearful of its consequences. I myself have pointed out the need for such a national long-run policy in a report prepared for the Democratic Party under the direction of Dr. Gilbert White, professor of geography at the University of Chicago.

As you know, the American Mining Congress is meeting in Denver at present and already several spokesmen for the group have called for the formulation of a progressive and effective program for mineral resources, and deplored the lack of a national minerals policy.

I wish to endorse your proposal to develop such a policy through a Council of Resources and Conservation Advisers to the President. As you so correctly pointed out to the Senate in your speech, both the Paley report and the Cooke report have lost much of their value because of the lack of effective followup. I will be glad to help you in advocating a new Council of Advisers for natural resources, in Colorado or in the region or at hearings in Washington. Sincerely yours,

MORRIS E. GARNSEY,
Professor of Economics.

COMMENTS OF DR. SEYMOUR HARRIS, PROFESSOR OF ECONOMICS, HARVARD UNIVER

SITY, ON S. 2549

In view of the failure of the Government to integrate the various plans for the best use of our natural resources, and in view of the failure to make the most effective use of our resources, I welcome Senate bill 2549, a bill introduced by Senator Murray and 30 other Senators on August 20, 1959. This bill states that it is the responsibility of the Federal Government, with the assistance and cooperation of industry, agriculture, labor, conservationists, State and local governments, and private property owners, to use all practical means, including coordination and utilization of all its plans, functions and facilities, for the purpose of creating and maintaining, in a manner calculated to foster and promote the general welfare, conditions under which there will be conservation, development, and utilization of the natural resources of the Nation to meet human, economic, and national defense requirements, including recreational, wildlife, scenic, and scientific values and the enhancement of the national heritage for future generations. The President is required to present an annual report called Resources and Conservation Report dealing with conditions of soil, water, forest, grazing, wildlife, recreational, and other natural resources with particular reference to the attainment of multiple purpose use. The report shall deal with the current and foreseeable trends in management and utilization of these resources and their adequacy of fulfilling human and economic requirements of the Nation. The President shall have the help in the Executive Office of the President of a Council of Resources and Conservation Advisers. The Council should gather timely and authoritative information concerning natural resource conservation and development trends, appraise various activities of the Federal Government, and, in the light of the declared policy, develop and recommend to the President national policies to foster and promote conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources, etc.

This proposed legislation is an excellent bill and should contribute greatly to the formulation of an adequate policy which has so far not been available in the area of utilization of natural resources.

Senator JAMES E. MURRAY,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

MONTANA STATE COLLEGE,
Bozeman, October 14, 1959.

DEAR SENATOR MURRAY: I have studied carefully your Senate bill 2549 referred to as the "Resources and Conservation Act of 1960." In your letter of August 31, you asked me to comment on your bill and I am very glad to do so.

I am in complete sympathy with the overall objective of your bill; namely, to achieve needed coordination and assure effective promotion of conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources. You will recall that the President's Water Resources Policy Commission, of which I was a member, made

a very strong recommendation for a Federal Board of Review in its report submitted to President Truman in February 1951. In each of the last 3 years, the American Association of Land-Grant Colleges and State Universities has gone on record favoring some such effective coordination and overall formulation of national resource policies to promote conservation, development, and utilization of our water resources. As chairman of the water resources committee of that association, I have had an opportunity to work closely with the executive committee of the association in its consideration of various recommendations pertaining to water resources development.

I believe your bill would do much to improve the effective conservation, development, and utilization of our natural resources, and the creation, in the Executive Office of the President, of the Council of Resources and Conservation Advisers should be helpful in getting more effective development programs. I have not been able to find anywhere in your bill any statement of the term of office of such Council members, and it seems to me that provision should be made for relatively long-term appointments. You may recall that in the recommendations of the President's Water Resources Policy Commission we recommended a Federal Board of Review of five members appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate for terms of office of 10 years. With no specific term designated, it would seem to me very difficult to get topnotch men to accept such appointments on the Council of Resources and Conservation Advisers.

I believe that a Council of three would probably be satisfactory, since your bill provides for an adequate staff of specialists and other experts to carry out the functions of your bill under the general supervision of the three-man Council. I think I would feel a little better with five members on the Council, but I know you have had considerable experience in these matters and this is not an important point. However, I do think it is highly desirable to have relatively longterm appointments, with opportunity for reappointment, on the Council if there is to be continuity in the work of the Council and if the best men are to be secured for this work.

One other matter concerning your bill. As I read it, the Council is strictly advisory. Perhaps this is sufficient in view of the fact that your bill provides for a Joint Committee on Resourcees and Conservation made up of eight Members of the Senate and eight Members of the House. I like this proposal very much and think it strengthens the whole program, because it will give a continuing joint committee for consideration of matters dealing with conservation of resources and their effective development and utilization. Since the joint committee is to make a report each year to the Senate and to the House of Representatives containing its findings and recommendations, with respect to each of the main recommendations made by the President in his "Resources and Conservation Report" which was in turn, I assume, drafted largely by the Council of Advisers, there is an effective means of taking action promptly on recommendations of the Council by the only group that can really take action, namely, the Congress itself.

You will recall that in the report of the Presidential Advisory Committee a recommendation was made to establish a position of Coordinator of Water Resources. Also, this Committee recommended an independent Board of Review which would analyze the engineering and economic feasibility of projects and report to the President through the Coordinator of Water Resources. Your bill, S. 2549, creating a Council of Resources and Conservation Advisers, would achieve some of the major recommendations aimed at effective coordination in water-resources programs and policies recommended by both the President's Water Resources Policy Commission in 1951 and the Presidential Advisory Committee in 1956. However, your bill does not provide for river-basin committees recommended by the 1956 group or river-basin commissions specifically provided for in recommendations of the PWRPC report of 1951. Perhaps such basin commissions or committees can be established at a later date and, if the Council provided for in your bill is made up of outstanding individuals, it would be possible to get the kind of coordination and effective resource de velopment which is badly needed.

We trust these comments may be of assistance to you in connection with hearings on your bill and work preparatory to congressional consideration.

Sincerely yours,

52421-60- -10

ROLAND R. RENNE, President.