A conceptual framework and the systematic collection of reliable information for application within the framework are the cornerstones of effective water planning. The ideal of strengthening these cornerstones was a driving force behind formation of the Water Resources Council and Council efforts, during its life, to develop the F'rinciples and Standards and to complete two National Water Assessments. The Assessments contained voluminous data but never really became an integral component of the national water planning process. Before being disbanded in 1982, the Council solicited several appraisals of its assessment process. This paper reports one made by the university community in which experiences and opinions were obtained from 108 water research administrators and water policy experts.The respondents judged the exercise of producing a national assessment to be useful in defining the general setting for water project, program, and research planning and for conveying needs to generalists in policy formulation roles. These applications require considerable specific information that has to be collected individually for a particular situation, but water studies are also greatly facilitated by more general setting descriptions which are better collected once than individually for each new application. A general effort has both economies of scale and provides a common basis for comparing studies. A solid data base, combining general information with a wide variety of routinely measured data, presently has a short term role in federal water program reorganization and a long term role in budgeting. The assessment should also cover the range of water problems, compare standardized data, interpret hydrologic events in terms of economic consequences and other societal goals, project trends over a reasonable planning horizon, and communicate water information to the political process. (KEY TERMS: National Water Assessment; water planning; projections; water policy; water research management; water statistics.) WATER RESOURCES BULLETIN

As availability of funds in the federal budget for water development has decreased recently, pressure has increased for state and local governments to pay a larger share of the costs. In this situation a difficult question immediately arises‐what is the capability of state and local governments to pay a larger share? Of course, there is no easy answer. Expenditures of public funds are policy outcomes of a government's political process in which political, economic, legal and other factors are involved in complex relationships. The traditional sources of capital funds for state and local governments include bond proceeds, tax revenues, and federal financial aid (state aid is also a major source of local government funds). The issuing of bonds is hampered by a variety of legal debt limitations, but there are means for circumventing the limitations. State and local governments vary widely in amounts of taxable resources available and in the extent to which these resources have been tapped. More effective use of revenue resources could be made in some cases. New sources of capital funds for water development ought to be considered‐a fee on the use of water per se, for example. Costs associated with water use currently are imposed to cover development costs, but a state might impose additional use fees earmarked for a state water development fund.

Many practices followed uniformly nationwide in the federal flood control and floodplain management programs are inappropriate or even counter productive in the arid Utah climate. An analysis of the 130‐year Utah flood history, the structural and nonstructural flood programs in the state, and local perceptions obtained by field visits and interviews in 35 Utah communities revealed a number of such inefficiencies. Since flood flows dissipate quickly when they emerge from mountain watersheds onto desert lowlands, risks are concentrated near the apex of alluvial fans, include hazard from mud as well as water flow, and are compounded by canal interception of flood waters. Because of variation in the area flooded from one event to the next, floodplain mapping has tended to show risks too high in mapped areas and too low outside. Traditional channelization carries floods downstream past where they would dissipate naturally. The federal government needs to become more active in developing better flood hazard delineation and structural and nonstructural designs for arid areas. State government can help by providing a forum where communities can exchange experiences, reviewing structural designs prepared by local government, and providing local communities with technical expertise for dealing with federal agencies.

ABSTRAa: Dramatic changes in Utah's economy caused by urbanization, large scale energy developments, and other influences will significantly reorient water use patterns. Thus, state water management policies and programs which have evolved over many years should be reevaluated. Several factors have influenced Utah water project financing policy. Among these have been: 1) the prominence of agriculture in the settlement of Utah and the century following, 2) dry cyclesand periodic severe droughts, 3) recurring periods of economic depression, and 4) allocation of Colorado River water among the basin states and Mexico. Three revolving funds have been established. The Revolving Construction Fund, created in 1947, provides money for irrigation projects; the Cities Water Loan Fund, created in 1975, provides money to communities for developing culinary systems and improving quality to meet the demands of exploding population growth; and the Water Resources Conservation and Development Fund, created in 1978, provides money for large scale multipurpose water projects costing $1 million or more. The justification for these financing programs seems to be a mixture of rectifying market imperfections and income redistribution. However, trends in the agricultural sector and the multipurpose nature of large scale projects now being funded suggest that earlier justifications may no longer be valid. Rigorous project evaluation procedures, lacking in the past, should be adopted.

No abstract