Hearings

Available Studies of Possibilities for Fees or Charges. While there is very little published information available on this subject that is specifically applicable to the problem at Corps of Engineers' projects, various facets of the fees and charges problem have been a subject of discussion and study over a considerable period of time by several recreational planning organizations and administrative agencies of government that are directly concerned.

Office.

Should the Committee desire to pursue the matter, useful background information will be found in an early report by the National Park Service on "Fees and Charges for Public Recreation, a Study of Policies and Practices," published in 1939 by the Government Printing Administrative studies have been made from time to time by the U. S. Forest Service with respect to the National Forests and by the Bureau of the Budget with respect to the programs of the Federal agencies involved. It is anticipated that the report of the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission based on studies now underway will deal specifically with the matter of fees and charges in the field of outdoor recreation.

VIII SUMMARY

This report has summarized briefly the problem of public use of land and water areas provided by Federal projects constructed for flood control, navigation, and related purposes of water resources development. An effort has been made to respond specifically to the questions raised by the Committee in Report No. 1634.

Although the Corps of Engineers has a very broad legislative

authority to provide for public use of water resources projects under

its jurisdiction, it has endeavored to administer this authority conservatively with due regard for the public interest, and with appropriate consideration of the capabilities and responsibilities of other agencies, Federal, State and local.

Administrative policies and procedures necessary to accomplish

the intent of the law have been developed gradually to meet the ever increasing demand for public use. Every effort is being made and will be made to meet the desires of the Committee to secure greater uniformity in facilities to be provided by the Federal Government and to accomplish the maximum participation by State and local agencies and by private enterprise.

The public use and interest in the major recreational resource which has been created by Federal projects warrant its careful consideration as a function of Federal water resources programs.

70856 0-61-pt. 1

General CASSIDY. We have submitted our report to the committee. While we discussed the planning and layout of our report with the Bureau of Reclamation, the two reports were not coordinated in their writing. Each agency is submitting its own ideas on the subject. We have not given our report to the Bureau and we have not seen the Bureau's report, so that as far as the two agencies applying the same practices to their developments is concerned, that is not being done. One of the problems is the fact that we operate under different laws and different interpretations of those laws.

Mr. CANNON. How wide a difference did you find, first, in the legislative authorization; and, secondly, in the purport; and, thirdly, in the projected effect?

General CASSIDY. The reservoirs of the Bureau of Reclamation are located in the West. Some of them are quite remote from centers of population. They do not have the demand for recreation placed on them that is faced by the Corps of Engineers, where many of our reservoirs are fairly close to main centers of population.

Another factor that enters into it is that the road networks which permit people to get to reservoirs are generally of lesser extent for Bureau of Reclamation reservoirs than for the Corps of Engineers reservoirs. So that we have a greater use of our reservoirs in general than that facing the Bureau of Reclamation.

The net result of this is that we have gone into recreation because of demand on a greater scale than the Bureau of Reclamation. In addition, because the 1944 act states that access to the reservoir will be provided without charge, we have been very careful in providing such access not to charge or to permit the counties to charge for such access. I believe that the Bureau of Reclamation has a somewhat different slant on that, but again they have different laws under which they operate.

As far as the standards are concerned, the things that are provided for recreation, the access roads, launching ramps, parking areas, sanitary facilities, water supply-there we are quite similar in our practices.

EMPHASIS PLACED ON RECREATIONAL BENEFITS

Mr. CANNON. What percentage of the projects for 1961 and the projects of 1962 required recreation in order to make them feasible on a benefit-cost ratio plan?

General CASSIDY. None in construction, sir.

Mr. CANNON. In no instance was recreation essential to feasibility? General CASSIDY. No, sir.

Mr. CANNON. There are none in which that is true, in the budget before us?

General CASSIDY. That is correct, sir.

Mr. CANNON. Tell us how benefits from recreation are taken into account?

General CASSIDY. One of our objectives in developing water resource projects is to protect existing recreation resources, preserve and make available for use the recreation resources they create, and enhance their recreation potential when this is sound from the viewpoints of engineering and economics. In keeping with this objective we evalulate the full recreation potential of our projects. However, to avoid overemphasis on recreation we do not recommend projects where

more than 15 percent of the total project costs must be offset by recreation benefits in order to establish economic justification.

Where functions other than recreation provide benefits equal to at least 85 percent of project costs, and recreation benefits will be equal to or more than the remaining 15 percent, we designate "recreation' as a project purpose and take the full recreation benefits into account in determining the overall economic justification of the project.

When recreation is designated as a project purpose, we allocate the separable cost of basic recreation facilities and a fair share of joint project costs to this function. The allocation of joint costs to recreation reflects the service rendered to this function by project lands, waters, and facilities which serve several or all project purposes.

The cost of basic recreation facilities for access to and use of the recreation resources provided by Federal projects is assigned to the Federal Government. Joint project costs allocated to recreation also are assigned to the Federal Government if they do not exceed 15 percent of total project costs. Joint costs allocated to recreation in excess of this limit are assigned to local interests or are shared between the Federal Government and local interests on the basis of the incidence of the recreation benefits, ranging from local to national in significance.

The first 15-percent rule provides a reasonable check on project formulation to insure against overemphasis on recreation in project planning. The second 15-percent rate sets a reasonable limit on the amount of joint project costs allocated to recreation which will be borne by the Federal Government.

Mr. CANNON. Fifteen percent is a maximum?

General CASSIDY. That is the maximum; yes, sir.

Mr. CANNON. In all of these projects, perhaps not so much in the reclamation projects as in other projects, you find the local interest in recreation one of the dominant interests of the locality in asking for projects.

General CASSIDY. This is correct, sir. Recreation has become a big business in the last few years. It is an industry in itself. So we have a tremendous expansion in boat users and all of the things that are required for people to use water, from skindiving equipment, boats, outboard motors, fishing tackle, water skis, and on through the rest of it. This has now become a tremendous industry in the United States, so that there is an intense interest in any locality in which a reservoir is proposed, in the recreational features to be gained from that reservoir.

Mr. CANNON. While our constitutional limitations permit us to expend tax funds for flood control, for navigation and improvement of commerce, there is no provision under which Government funds could be used exclusively for recreation.

General CASSIDY. Under the 1944 act we provide recreational areas and facilities in accordance with that act, so that the general public is able to use a facility which is provided for another purpose.

Mr. CANNON. But while you may expend funds for recreational purposes, and may include in your benefit-cost ratio a percentage up to 15 percent for recreation, there is no authorization for such recreational facilities alone and exclusively. The funds can be expended and can only be included where flood control or navigation is involved.

General CASSIDY. We have submitted our report to the committee. While we discussed the planning and layout of our report with the Bureau of Reclamation, the two reports were not coordinated in their writing. Each agency is submitting its own ideas on the subject. We have not given our report to the Bureau and we have not seen the Bureau's report, so that as far as the two agencies applying the same practices to their developments is concerned, that is not being done. One of the problems is the fact that we operate under different laws and different interpretations of those laws.