Show 44 0 k IiI By Cecil D. D Andrus Secretary of the Interior Developing a water resources policy Some disturbing rumors have surfaced about the public hearings weve we've been conducting as part of the Administrations Administration's studies on water resources policy This is unfortunate because the meetings otherwise have been of great value in exploring the issues To be specific some fears have been expressed by a few that the Federal government wants to establish federal wa water ter rights and that the Feds are advocating the inter-basic inter transfer of water I WANT to clear up these false impressions in the strongest possible terms so the American people can concentrate concentrate con con- on the real challenge at hand and not get sidetracked by simulated I do not advocate and have never advocated federal water rights that would preempt or infringe upon state or private rights And as a former governor I have always personally personally personally per per- opposed moving water from one river basin to another Because President President Carter recognizes the h pressing g urgency of the issue he initially gave ave us a six month deadline to complete our water policy study and prepare recommendations he could send to Congress In his mandate he directed us to engage in open honest dialogue with the public the states and the Congress to Insure that what we come up with will truly reflect the national interest To gather comments nine public hearings were held in July and August As Chairman of the Water Resources Council I directed our people to go into these hearings with no preconceived preconceived preconceived pre pre- conceived ideas I want the broadest possible range of views from the public on nn water issues As a springboard for discussion we also published a aset aset aset set of issues and options to help trigger as wide a range of views as possible Somehow confusion and misconceptions have arisen on several points as a result of the hearings I hope that by reiterating the facts and the true purpose of the hearings I Ican Ican Ican can lay these deliberate distortions to rest I REPEAT that we have no pre-conceived pre commitment to any of the options being discussed We included them for discussion purposes only To have done to otherwise-to have left out any option we did not would favor have defeated the objective of wheeling free-wheeling debate on the full range of alternatives Worse it would have meant wed we'd already made up our minds on some of the thc issues I. I j 4 a inn tit titI h. h I cannot emphasize too strongly the importance of a comprehensive coordinated water policy Its It's an issue too important to be carried out by a handful of experts gathered in the marbled halls of Washington Its It's an issue which in future years may be as critical as today's energy crisis and I am determined t to get the e t t Jr the largest number of people before we begin to draw up recommendations recommendations recommendations not after TilE THE ONLY conclusion weve we've reached so far is that we should allow more time to complete the study I have therefore extended extended extended ex ex- ex- ex tended the deadline by 90 days- days until January 1978 This will give us more time to consult with the states with Congressional leaders and with the office of Management and budget and the Council on Environmental Quality who are also involved in this effort More public hearings may be beheld beheld beheld held as the study progresses The inter agency nature ot of this study the extensive participation participation par par- of the public the full partnership of the Congress in shaping our future resources policy all point to the best possible chance for designing a awater awater awater water resources policy that will serve the needs of all the people |