27 



services, of the National Association of State Universities and 

 Land-Grant Colleges. 



The land-grant universities have been actively involved in ad- 

 dressing water quality issues for a number of years. This is not 

 new territory for us. As a result of our involvement and as a result 

 of our concern in regards to the policy debates of the last 2 or 3 

 years, the directors have appointed a working group of research 

 and extension specialists to follow these policy debates and to de- 

 velop a working paper that would outline the research and the edu- 

 cation concerns of the university communities as they relate to 

 these debates. 



In my remarks today, I would like to briefly touch on three is- 

 sues: First, the importance of multiagency cooperation, as we have 

 heard about earlier today; second, the need for a rational structure 

 for balancing voluntary and mandatory approaches to protecting 

 water quality; and third, the roles of State research and extension 

 programs in protecting water quality. 



First in regards to multiagency cooperation. The land-grant uni- 

 versities have already been involved in numerous multiagency ac- 

 tivities to protect water quality. For example, in the Midwest, five 

 site evaluation areas have been established to monitor agricultural 

 chemical movement in large-scale watersheds. These projects have 

 been underway for several years. We have data and we have re- 

 sults coming in. These research efforts have been jointly supported 

 by USDA, EPA, the U.S. Geological Survey, and by State funds. 

 The State Extension Services have worked jointly with the Soil 

 Conservation Service to develop demonstration projects and to de- 

 velop programs in hydrologic unit areas. The State Extension Serv- 

 ices have worked with their State agencies to address nonpoint 

 source programs implemented in response to section 319 of the cur- 

 rent Clean Water Act. 



We have all learned over the last several years, that no Federal 

 or State agency has all of the resources, expertise, or staff that will 

 be necessary to address nonpoint source pollution or wetland is- 

 sues. The Federal agencies, the States, and the universities each 

 have a role to play. We would like to commend the chairman and 

 this committee for taking the initial steps and fostering and en- 

 couraging and requiring that sort of interagency dialog and coordi- 

 nation. 



Second, in regard to the need to balance a voluntary and regu- 

 latoi7 set of approaches. There has been, and there will always be, 

 considerable debate over the relative role of voluntary and regu- 

 latory approaches to address nonpoint source pollution. We would 

 like to commend the possibility of creating a rational framework 

 within which the scale and the severity of Clean Water Act require- 

 ments are clearly linked to the severity of the nonpoint source pol- 

 lution problems that exist. 



In the working paper that I have referenced, which we would like 

 to submit for the record, we discuss this idea that you referred to 

 earlier of creating a tiered and targeted approach to watershed and 

 wetlands management. Given our time constraints, it is not pos- 

 sible to fully describe this approach here. But there are several 

 fundamental concepts. 



