Resource conservation and development projects are one of the most promising new approaches to natural resources development. These projects, initiated and sponsored by local people, are already contributing to the economic growth and job opportunities in many areas. Since resource conservation and develop. ment funds cannot presently be used for cost sharing on recreation and fish and wildlife developments, local sponsors have been stymied.

The recreation developments alone would have a tremendously favorable impact on any area that lags economically behind the rest of the Nation. They would offer full-time and off-farm employment to many of the rural residents. They would create a need for new businesses. And they would make the area more attractive to industry and for residential development.

From the standpoint of public water-based fish and wildlife developments, the legislation would be of immense help on the environmental front. We hear a lot about saving our environment. This bill would help in these efforts.

I respectfully urge the committee to give favorable consideration to H.R. 14793.

STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM D. HATHAWAY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MAINE

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am pleased to have this opportunity to indicate my support for H.R. 14793, a bill to amend the BankheadJones Farm Tenant Act to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to provide technical and financial assistance for this purpose of public recreation and fish and wildlife development in authorized Resource Conservation and Development project areas.

In this environmental decade, recreation has become one of our nation's most important considerations, and the need to provide for water-based recreation and fish and wildlife facilities must be among our first priorities if we are to make the best use of our natural resources. Moreover, the financial and technical assistance made available under this bill will not only help fulfill an environmental need of man; it will also serve to stimulate the local economy as recreation and fish and wildlife facilities provide an important base for new job opportunities and increased income in R.C. & D. project areas.

In my own state of Maine, approximately 46 project measures in about 30 different towns are being implemented under the auspices of the St. JohnAroostook Resource Conservation and Development Project. These project measures are concentrated in low income areas where sound environmental development will increase job opportunities and attract new businesses which are of vital concern to these rural areas.

Because of the economics involved in many projects having fish and wildlife or recreational development needs, the towns implementing project measures are in need of the funding and technical assistance that would be provided under H.R. 14793. Passage of this bill would, I believe, add much to sound rural planning and development in my state.

We are all well-aware of the need to conserve our very precious natural resources and to provide facilities for our citizenry to enjoy such resources. We are also aware of the needs of low income areas in terms of job opportunities and resource development. The provisions of H.R. 14793 are comprehensive and direct themselves to these very basic issues. I support the bill, and respectfully urge your favorable consideration of H.R. 14793.

STATEMENT OF HON. J. J. PICKLE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM

THE STATE OF TEXAS

I should like to present a statement in support, and to urge your approval of the legislation proposed in H.R. 16543. I am happy to be one of the 69 cosponsors of this bill. The authority is urgently needed to provide cost-sharing for public water based fish and wildlife and recreational developments in resource conservation and development projects. It will do much to enable local sponsoring agencies in project areas to carry out a more balanced program of resource development to meet the total needs of rural areas.

A portion of the Eastern Hill Country Resource Conservation and Develop ment Project area in Texas lies within my Congressional District. Like most other project areas, this R.C. & D. project has a recognized need for more public water based fish and wildlife and recreational facilities to meet the increasing

demand of project area residents and visitors. Also, the Coastal R.C. & D. has a good, strong application now pending in the Soil Conservation Service office. It waits for funds which could be included in the legislation we are here considering.

In developing their project plans for both the Eastern Hill Country and the Coastal resource conservation and development projects, the sponsors recognized that there were tremendous opportunities to improve the overall development of fish and wildlife and recreation resources. The demand for outdoor recreation exceeds the ability of the present public and private facilities now available in the area. Our vast recreation potential in these areas is yet to be developed. While the need and opportunity has been recognized, the local agencies have not been able to proceed with the installation of additional facilities at a rate to meet the need. As is true in so many rural areas, this is necessitated by the fact that limited resources must be allocated to more pressing area needs. Enactment of this bill would make utilization of the recreational and fish and wildlife resources more effective in accelerating the economic growth of resource conservation and development project areas and at the same time provide new recreation opportunities for more citizens. It will enable RC & D local sponsoring agencies to do even more effective job of resource planning and development than they have been able to do heretofore.

I respectfully urge your favorable consideration of the proposed legislation. STATEMENT OF HON. HOWARD W. ROBISON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Mr. Chairman: I appreciate the opportunity to present views on the very important subject of Resource Conservation and Development projects. There is little doubt that these projects are valuable and there is little disagreement that they are needed. The question becomes how best to turn the desire of local agencies to establish additional conservation projects in their areas into the reality of finished projects.

I believe that part of the answer to that question lies in the enactment of H.R. 16544, a bill which I have co-sponsored. Conservation has a value not just to the locality which develops the program but ultimately to each one of us. As our resources diminish due to our increasing needs-and in some cases our waste a viable conservation program becomes more and more necessary. Currently, under the Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act the Secretary of Agriculture can sponsor programs aimed at improving resource conservation and development-there are presently some 68 such projects-but he is not allowed to sponsor and commit federal monies to those programs, even though such programs are part of, and consistent with, the general plan for conservation.

I would note, collaterally, that the Secretary does have the authority to cosponsor such programs under the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act. H.R. 16544 would merely extend his authority for those programs falling within the scope of the Bankhead-Jones Act.

If these recreational and water-based fish and wildlife programs are consistent with the overall conservation scheme, then the Secretary should be empowered to expend federal funds on such projects. What better way can we conserve our natural resources than to encourage states to see the possibilities for improving their economies by developing fishing and watersports activities at the same time that they are conserving and developing their natural resources? I would note that each year brings with it more and more Americans who are seeking recreational areas. The huge crowds that descend on our public park areas bear witness to that fact. This desire for outdoor recreational activities represents not only a potential market for revenue for the states but also a need which must be filled by those states.

This need can be filled, this market tapped, at the same time that we initiate conservation programs. H.R. 16544 would allow the Secretary to stimulate conservation efforts by helping subsidize some of the costs that are involved in developing these conservation and development projects. As well as offering an attractive means of conserving resources and providing needed recreational areas, this legislation would help to stimulate employment in areas which are basically rural-the very areas in which much of our unemployment and disguised unemployment is found. Many jobs would become available in areas which heretofore have had shortages of adequate job opportunities.

46-761-70-2

It would seem that there are numerous benefits to be secured by passage of this legislation without any substantial drawbacks. We need additional conservation areas and we need additional outdoor recreational areas. As the demands on our environment increase, now is the time to take a step to preserve and develop that bounty. I commend to this Committee H.R. 16544 because I believe that it fills those demands.

STATEMENT OF HON. LOUIS C. WYMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Mr. WYMAN. Mr. Chairman, I sincerely appreciate the opportunity to testify before you and this committee.

As a co-sponsor of the Poage Bill, I am here to urge your favorable consideration of this legislation in part to demonstrate the sincerity of the concern of this Committee and the Congress for the problems facing the preservation of our natural resources.

Never has the need for preservation of our recreation areas been so apparent. Never has there been greater public support for such action than today.

It has been my experience that non-commerical development of wilderness areas opens up our countryside with a minimum of ecological dislocation. It is the best possible way to attract our urban population to the country and dramatize for them exactly what is at stake in the battle against environmental pollution.

But small states, like my own, though blessed with a remarkable share of natural beauty and natural recreational resources, are unable to shoulder the financial burden of fully developing these areas so they may be enjoyed in safety and without undue hardship. I believe this measure would ease the burden on New Hampshire and other smaller, less developed states where so much of our natural beauty lies.

As important as the need for environmental preservation is the need to provide additional sources of employment and opportunity for our rural population. It is a cruel irony indeed that some of the most troublesome poverty in America exists in the shadow of some of our most beautiful natural landmarks. I do not suggest that legislation of a limited scope such as that now proposed will be a cure-all for rural poverty, but it is a needed step in restoring a sense of opportunity and dignity to depressed rural areas.

The Roman General, Tacitus, once said:

We cannot live without the Earth or apart from it, and something is shriveled in a man's heart when he turns away from it and concerns himself only with the affairs of men.

Nothing in the past 2000 years has changed the essential truth of that statement. The members of this committee and this Congress can take a giant step toward recognizing its meaning for all of us today. They can help open whole areas of this nation to millions of Americans who might otherwise never learn to appreciate what it is to get close to the Earth in its natural state.

They can do, both these things through prompt and favorable action on this bill.

STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM R. ANDERSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TENNESSEE

Chairman Poage and distinguished members of the Subcommittee. It is a pleasure for me to appear before this Committee to make a statement in support of legislation which would permit the Federal Government to costshare the expense of installing needed water-based recreation and fish and wildlife developments in Resource Conservation and Development (R.C. & D.) projects authorized under the Food and Agricultural Act of 1962. It is my privilege to be one of the several sponsors of this measure, my own bill being H.R. 16845.

I am particularly interested in this legislation because of my intimate knowledge of the situation in two R.C. & D. projects located partly within my Congressional District in Tennessee. One, the Hull-York Lakeland R.C. & D. project has been in operation for about three years. The other, the Five-Rivers R.C. & D. Association has applied for USDA planning assistance. Both organizations serve

rural areas with limited employment opportunities, low family income, and a poor capital formation prospectus, which, according to my information, is the situation in most R.C. & D. project regions.

Agriculture is still the economic mainstay in these areas in Tennessee. Future growth and development, however, must clearly come from other economic pursuits.

One of the principal hopes for economic growth is tourism and associated recreation. There are great underdeveloped recreation and fish and wildlife potentials in the projects in my District; however, because of the poor capital formation possibilities open to these people, the potentials cannot be developed without the type of outside help that could be provided under the pending legislation.

One important and badly neglected element in these rural areas is recreation facilities for industrial workers and management personnel. New industries are reluctant to locate in areas that do not provide opportunities for recreation. Unfortunately areas that most need new industry are usually able to provide the recreation opportunities necessary to attract them.

The primary objectives of R.C. & D. projects are to stimulate increased job opportunities, better living conditions, and more rational, ecologically well-designed, resource-based industrial development. Unfortunately the basic law under which R.C. & D. projects operate does not permit cost-share assistance for water-based recreation, and fish and wildlife developments. The pending legislation under consideration would correct this previous oversight in the basic law. Mr. Chairman, I urge favorable consideration of this bill by the members of your committee, and I pledge my support when it comes before the Rules Committee and the House.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN PAUL HAMMERSCHMIDT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARKANSAS

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to have this opportunity to present a statement in support of H.R. 16543. This bill would provide legislation in which I have been very much interested. As a matter of fact, last November, I introduced H.R. 14901 which was identical to the bill now under consideration. I am happy to note that H.R. 16543 now has about 70 co-sponsors in the House and that the provisions of the bill, included in S. 3598, already have passed the Senate on a unanimous vote.

This legislation is designed to effect further improvements in the BankheadJones Act to keep pace with the rapidly changing times in this new environmental decade. Today, as population, leisure, and affluence increase, the demand for recreation, fish, and water-based wildlife is growing rapidly as never before. The bill would provide financial assistance in meeting this growing demand.

I have observed the Arkansas River Valley resource conservation and development project in my congressional district ever since the idea for project action started in late 1964 and early 1965. I have been greatly pleased to have observed the manner in which the project activity was initiated and sponsored, and how it has been carried through by local people and local agencies, with assistance from a number of State and Federal agencies. They have analyzed their problems and opportunities, have laid out a course of action to accomplish their objectives, and have been actively striving to meet those objectives.

As background for understanding the proposed amendment, the BankheadJones Act directed the Secretary of Agriculture to develop a program of land conservation and utilization, including retirement of submarginal land. Title III of the act was amended in 1962 to include the protection of fish and wildlife under the land conservation program, and further amended in 1966 to include developing and protecting of recreational facilities.

And now, my amendment would further enhance the act by authorizing financial assistance for installing works of improvement applicable to public water-based fish and wildlife or recreational development. These developments shall be consistent with any existing comprehensive Statewide outdoor recreation plan found adequate for purposes of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965. The cost-sharing assistance shall be limited to developments that could not be effected under other existing authority.

Outdoor recreation is already big business in this country. In 1965 some 33 million American sportsmen spent more than $4 billion just for hunting and

fishing alone. Last year they spent $183 million for hunting and fishing licenses, tags, permits, and stamps. This is $14.5 million more than the preceding year. We are all well aware of the Nation's outdoor water recreation opportunities which have resulted from water resource development projects. Visitors to these areas increased in 1969 to an all-time high of 254.7 million. Reservoir projects provide an enormous potential for outdoor recreation and the tourist trade enhances the economy of many depressed areas of the Nation such as the Third Congressional District of Arkansas which I am privileged to represent. These statistics, I believe, help show the need for the proposed amendment. STATEMENT OF HON. HAROLD T. (Bizz) JOHNSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Mr. Chairman, as one who long has supported the Resource Conservation and Development Program of the United States Department of Agriculture, I am pleased that this distinguished committee which first authorized this outstanding coordinated effort for conservation and wise utilization of our natural resources should be considering the broadening and improvement of this effort.

You will recall that when this R.C. & D. concept first was envisioned, it was considered ideal to meet the needs of a specific area which even then was seeking a coordinated solution to its resource development needs. I am speaking, of course, of the Surprise Valley and Vya Soil Conservation Districts situated in northeastern California and northwestern Nevada.

These early efforts have evolved into the North Cal-Neva Resources Conservation and Development Project, an operational project which has proven tremendously successful. I want to take this opportunity to express my deep appreciation for the authorization which permitted this effort to move ahead.

As always happens, one good thing brings another. We now are developing programs in Tehama County and in Lassen and Modoc Counties where we are in the early stages of developing new R.C. & D. efforts.

These are all good projects, projects that would be most worthwhile under existing legislation, but they would be even better, meeting even greater needs of the rural regions to be served by these projects should the proposed amendments now before this committee be approved.

As a sponsor of this legislation, I feel strongly that it is needed for the following reasons:

(1) It would give the Secretary of Agriculture essentially the same authority for assisting in the installation of public water-based fish and wildlife or recreational development in R.C. & D. projects that he now has under the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act (Public Law 566).

(2) Multiple-purpose water developments that include provision for recreation and fish and wildlife are major community improvements needed in most R.C. & D. project areas.

(3) Many projects having fish and wildlife or recrational development needs are in low-income areas and the full potential for resource development cannot be financed from local sources. In many cases, the needed developments, while consistent with the State approved outdoor recreation plan, cannot obtain costsharing assistance from other existing authorities.

(4) Recreation and Fish and Wildlife facilities are an important base for creation of new jobs and income in R.C. & D. project areas.

(5) It would provide a greater opportunity for rural communities in R.C. & D. projects to develop their fish and wildlife or recrational potentials as a part of their overall resource development program.

(6) It would facilitate meeting the demand of rural and city residents for additional recreational opportunities.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I want to say that we are taking advantage of the enlightened leadership of this committee in authorizing these programs, and you are to be commended for this.

We hope that this committee will approve the expanded program before it today. Thank you.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN KYL, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF IOWA

For thirty-one years, the Soil Conservation Service has been engaged in a tremendously important task which has gone almost unnoticed. Now, with the new interest in our environment, the public generally is awakening to the basic nature of this work.

i