216 Broader Bases for Choice: The Next Key Move 



aged under state management. Mineral exploitation has been unaf- 

 fected except as to certain safety measures and in curbing petroleum 

 production to meet demand. Water regulation has been chiefly in the 

 nature of regularizing and protecting private development in a rather 

 rigid pattern. 



Some state action, to be sure, has been conspicuously successful in 

 achieving declared conservation aims. The Adirondack preserve in 

 New York has been maintained against all attackers. Forest fire con- 

 trol now is largely a state responsibility, and the federal-state co-oper- 

 ation in forestry supported by interstate compacts in some areas has 

 been encouraging. State water-pollution regulation has grown rapidly 

 in effectiveness, chiefly under the goading of wildlife conservation 

 groups. The licensing of fishing and hunting and the management of 

 fish and game resources have proceeded vigorously. A few state park 

 systems have begun to meet recreational needs. 



But the list of successes is short. The one state — CaUfornia — which 

 had the environment and the plan for comprehensive water develop- 

 ment lost the initiative to federal agencies during the emergency public 

 works period, and it seems doubtful that it will recapture the lead. 



Why have the states, by and large, not carried more of the respon- 

 sibility? The sprawling of benefitted areas across state boundaries, the 

 confusing competition among federal agencies, and the enjoyment of 

 federal nonreimbursement programs are no doubt among the reasons. 

 AU are factors that make a major extension of state organization ex- 

 tremely difficult. It may be, also, that most states lack the diversity of 

 interest in their political base necessary to cope with strong interest 

 groups, so that only a few can deal with resource problems responsi- 

 bly. It also may be that state administration flourishes most where 

 federal aims are clearly defined and are administered by one agency. 

 Probably the greatest relative improvement in state activity took place 

 in the Tennessee Vafley under the stimulus of one agency. The suc- 

 cessful forest fire prevention and wildlife activity lends support to this 

 view. 



Can we foresee major extension of state authority? The prospect is 

 not promising. 



Why has consolidation of the splintered federal agencies been pre- 

 vented? The resistance of the major agencies to any consolidation 



