438 



a meeting by the Federal Government of all additional costs on a straight 

 appropriation basis.^ 



However, he said later on, "this report, like the Bible, can be used as 

 an authority bv taking any passage out of it and lifting it out of 

 context * * *." 24 



It was notable that the President's Commission had tried to integrate 

 many new values along with the conventional financial values of water 

 development. For example, it said of "evaluation" in chapter 4 : 



No aspect of multiplepuriwse water resources development has been more 

 productive of confusion and controversy than the treatment of social, or in- 

 tangible, values. This is a relatively recent isisue ; it was not present in earlier 

 single-purpose projects constructed * * * solely for the realization of primary, 

 tangible benefits, most of wihich could be assigned directly to individual 

 beneficiaries. 



Increasingly, when the Federal Government undertook large-scale multiple- 

 purpose basinvpide developments, social values became a significant factor in 

 project evaluation and authorization, allocation of joint costs, assignment of 

 benefits, and the determination of reimbursement requirements. At this juncture 

 It soon became apparent that prevalent patterns of thought and methods of 

 analysis were quite inadequate to cope with this new problem. 



The positive social values inherent in water resources were immense 

 and vital, as were also the negative values, in terms of floods, erosion, 

 and pollution. There were social values of the highest order in re- 

 gional balance, in assured permanence of the resource base, in the 

 "widespread sense of well-being, hopefulness, confidence in the essen- 

 tial soundness of existing institutions * * * along with a sense of 

 responsible participation." Also important was the demonstration 

 to the world "* * * that a democracy can control its own destiny and 

 can manage its resources for the good of all the people." This, said the 

 report, "is the ultimate social value for our generation." And such 

 values "are actually more real and more vital [than material considera- 

 tions 'which heretofore have dominated our thinking about water 

 resources development'] because they constitute the motivation for 

 social action and the ultimate test of social survival." ^^ 



A different approach was taken by the President's Materials Policy 

 (Paley) Commission, that reported in June, 1952, in response to the 

 question: Has the United States of America the material means to 

 sustain its civilization ? ^^ 



The primary interest of the Paley Commission was whether essential 

 requirements of industry for quantity and quality of water could be 

 met in the foreseeable future. 



Supply was mainly a regional matter. However, "supplying indus- 

 trial water in 1975 * * * -will constitute a major problem." For exam- 

 ple, the requirements of water for condenser cooling in steam electric 

 generating plants (44 percent of consumption use in 1950) was ex- 

 pected to triple by 1975. To increase water supply, the report rec- 

 ommended four approaches : 



(1) Total usable supply in an area may be increased. (By 

 evening out supply by impoundment and ground cover.) 



2»Tbirl.. p. 45. 



2* Ibid., p. 67. 



^ A water policy for the American people. The report of the * * ♦ 1950, op. cit., pp. 

 56-58. 



2" The President's Materials Policy Commission. Resources for Freedom. A report to the 

 President by • * *. Vol. I : Foundations for Growth and Security. (Washington, U.S. 

 Government Printing Office, June 1952), 184 pages. 



