HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.gao/gaobaabpw0001 and id is 1 raw text is:
DOCUMENT RESUME
00011 - [0590925]2(R.1r4f-t-d7
[Review of Effectiveness of Land Treatment Agree53nts in
Watershed Areas]. CED-77-13; B-11U833. December 27, 1976. 10 pp.
+ enclosure (2 pp.).
Report to Rep. Don. H. Clausen, Ranking Mincrity Member, House
Committee on Public Works and Transportation: Water Resources
Subcommittete; by Elmer B. Staats, Comptroller General.
Issue Area: Land Use Planning and Control: Land Pclicy and the
Envizonment (2302).
Contact- Community and Economic Development Div.
Budget Fuvction: Natural Resources, Environment, and Energy:
Conservation and Land Management (302).
Organiza+ion Concerned; Soil Conservation Service.
Congressional Relevance: House Committee on Public Works and
Transportation: Water Resources Subcommittee.
Authority: Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act (1954),
as amended (P.L. 83-566; 16 U.S.C. 1001-08, sec. 4(5)).
Representative Don H. Cl.ausen requested a review to
determine if the Soil Conservation Service was properly
administering section 4(51 of the amended Watershed Protection
and Flood Prevention Act A pilot review of a watershed project
was tnndertaken to determine if recommendcd soil conservation
measures agreed to by landowners had been installed. Visits were
aade tc about half the farms in the pvoject which were in
compliance with section 4(5) of the ac% to cbserve the soil
conservation measures which had been carried out.
Findings/Conclusions: The provision of the act, requiring that
not less than 50 percent of the lands above the retention
reservoir be under conservation agreements as a condition to
providing Federal assistance, was not met by the Service.
Cooperative agreements vere obtained from owners of only about
47 percent of the land in the drainage area above the reservoir.
Some recommended soil conservation measures had not been
implemented; however, Service officials believed the failure to
implement these practices had not resulted in an adverse impact
on the watershed project. The Service's handbook conflicts with
requirements in the act for determining whether projects are
eligible for Federal financial assistance for constructing dams
and other works of improvement. Recommendations: The Secretary
of Agriculture should requir- the Administrator cf the Soil
Conservation Service to: (1) revise its Administrative Services
Handbook to conform to the Watershed Protection and Flood
Prevention Act concerning the 50 percent requirement; and (2)
emphasize to its field offices the importance cf determining the
exact eligible acreage under agreements in making their
Certifications. (Author/SW)](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.gao/gaobaabpw0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)