Gilbert F. White
A: Yes.
Q: In what way?
A: At this point I wish that I had access to the archive files and some of the
numerous memos that passed back and forth. I've never gone back to look
at those. If you were to decide to use some of this material, I'd want to
check it out in the archives.
The way in which the board, or committee, became involved was that efforts
to establish a national flood control policy were sparked by supporters of the
Corps of Engineers. The Department of Agriculture--the head of the Forest
Service and head of the Soil Conservation Service-were unhappy about this.
It became plain that Congress would have to pass legislation to provide
support both for the Corps and for the two agencies in Agriculture. Other
groups in the government were also disturbed about a prospective heavy
commitment to financing Corps projects for flood control. They used the
National Resources Board people as one means among many of trying to
reach the President on the importance of having some kind of integrated
planning provided under the proposed act instead of having it solely under the
corps.
As the legislation took shape following the disastrous floods of 1936, the
board was an instrument for proposing that the President push for a more
comprehensive kind of river basin study and management than was provided
for by having it all going to the Corps. As passed, it included provisions for
the Agriculture people doing their own thing. Collaborating with the Corps
was present in theory but not in practice. A series of efforts was made using
the chairman of the National Resources Board and Vice Chairman Frederic
Delano, uncle of the President, to persuade the President to veto the bill. He
did not.
The same process followed the Ohio River floods two years later. That led
to the Flood Control Act of '38. The board again tried to persuade the
President to veto it, which he didn't feel was wise. Then the issue was very
much the issue of cost sharing for reservoirs. And it was felt strongly by
members of the Water Resources Committee, which included Barrows and
Wolman, that to remove cost sharing from the major reservoir projects, even
though such action would simplify the process of getting the projects started,
15
Previous Page
