We believe this barge channel and harbor meet every test of a good business proposition for the investment of Federal funds. We have an option on a site for a public terminal and we are prepared to meet the conditions of local cooperation recommended by the engineers.

With your permission, I would like to ask the consulting engineer for the Baton Rouge Port Development Associations, Maj. General Tyler, to make a few brief comments.

Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. General Tyler, we will be very happy to have your statement.

We are delighted to have you here this afternoon. I notice you appear in a civilian capacity, but we all remember the very fine work that you have done with the engineers in years gone by.

General TYLER. Thank you.

STATEMENT OF MAJ. GEN. MAX C. TYLER

General TYLER. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, this is not a project that is by any means a local proposition. There is as much as 6,000,000 tons of barge business out of Baton Rouge a year. That is the highest figure we have had during the war. That business is mainly oil and gasoline, and goes as far north as Pittsburgh, Chicago, St. Paul, up the Cumberland and up the Tennessee.

The available water front in Baton Rouge is on high ground. Baton Rouge is the first high ground that you encounter as you leave the Gulf and go up the Mississippi River. It is above flood.

All of that front has been occupied by industry. There is no further high ground which can be developed. In time of flood the barges that carry on this average of 4,000,000 tons a year, and a peak of 6,000,000 tons a year, are moored here at the terminals of the Standard Oil Co., and other docks all along the river. They badly need a harbor in which to get out of the flood currents and the drift of high water in the Mississippi.

This proposed canal extends through_swampland along the continuation of the high ground north of Baton Rouge for a distance of about 4 miles, and in that area there will be undoubtedly located industries which will put large additional tonnage on the Mississippi River.

It is the belief of the port commission in Baton Rouge and others throughout the Mississippi River Valley that such harbors are definitely needed in order to produce the business which will help to pay out the investment that we already have in the Mississippi and its tributary streams.

Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. In other words, this is needed for the development of the port?

General TYLER. It is not only needed to serve the existing commerce, which is large-a port which handles 4,000,000 tons on the average is not a small port-the improvement is needed not only to serve the existing commerce, but it is needed to produce new commerce. And if you will prorate the cost of this development to the existing tonnage, and compare it with many of the South Atlantic and Gulf ports, you will find that the investment here would be not over 50 cents average annual ton of commerce, where in many ports it runs as high as $59 a ton.

Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. Would you like to give us any idea as to what this project would cost?

General TYLER. About $2,000,000, sir.

And it is proposed that it be extended as has been authorized by this committee in many cases in the past; that it be extended in here as needed; that it will not necessarily all be done at once.

As you know, Mr. Chairman, extensions have been made in a great many of our ports to accommodate new business which is located above the existing deep-water channels.

Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. Any questions?

Mr. PITTENGER. How deep are we going to dig in?

General TYLER. 12 feet, sir.

Mr. PITTENGER. How deep is it now?

General TYLER. There is a swamp in here. There is no channel in there now.

Mr. PITTENGER. You said it was more than of local interest. What did you mean by that phrase?

General TYLER. I mean that the commerce of this port extends through the entire inland waterway system.

Mr. PITTENGER. Intracoastal?

General TYLER. The Mississippi River, the Ohio River, the Tennessee, the Cumberland, the Illinois, the upper Mississippi, are all served by the business here.

Mr. ANGELL. What contributions do local interests make toward it? General TYLER. They will furnish the rights-of-way, the soil disposal areas. They have agreed to build a terminal if it is required for municipal purposes; furnish the land.

Mr. ANGELL. Will it be open for all interests in competition with one another, or restricted?

General TYLER. The public terminal will be opened to all on equal

terms.

Mr. PITTENGER. Why do not the people now down in New Orleans object to it? Does it help them?

General TYLER. It certainly does not hurt them.

Mr. PITTENGER. I just want the record to show it. I am concerned about those folks.

Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. Thank you very much, General.
General TYLER. Thank you, sir.

Mr. LARCADE. I do not think it is necessary for him to state that Baton Rouge is the State capital of Louisiana. The Standard Oil Co. has one of the largest oil refineries in the world which contributes a considerable amount of tonnage referred to by General Tyler. That is all, Mr. Chairman.

(Thereupon the committee adjourned.)
(Proceedings of May 3, 1946, continued:)

ILLINOIS RIVER, BOAT BASIN AT PEORIA, ILL.

Colonel FERINGA. The next project, Mr. Chairman, is a boat basin at Peoria, Ill.

We recommend favorably that this boat basin be provided because the Illinois River, which flows through Peoria-Peoria is on the banks of the river-at Peoria Lake-is congested. There is no provision for taking care of the light pleasure craft that congest the waters and

interfere with the heavier commercial boating. Commercial boating can be taken care of under the existing authorization.

What local interests request is that a small basin be provided for light pleasure craft, but they will insure that the basin be made available to all comers at equal terms.

The cost of the project would be $64,000, but we provide that local interests must pay one-half thereof.

The basin would be 510 feet long by 250 feet wide, by 7 feet deep. I would like to read and put in the record at this point a quotation from chapter 26 of an act to amend section 3 of the Rivers and Harbors Act, approved June 13, 1902, as amended and supplemented, approved February 10, 1932, which states [reading]:

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the first paragraph of section 3 of the act entitled "An act making appropriations for the construction, repair, and preservation of certain public works on rivers and harbors, and for other purposes," approved June 13, 1902, as amended and supplemented, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new sentence: "As used in this section the term 'commerce' shall include the use of waterways by seasonal passenger craft, yachts, houseboats, fishing boats, motorboats, and other similar water craft, whether or not operated for hire.'

Although, therefore, we can by law give full cognizance and should by law give full cognizance to the requirements of pleasure boating, the Board feels that there should be a large measure of local cooperation, and that this project should be authorized only provided the local interests pay one-half of the costs.

Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. Have you any estimate of the costs and benefits?

Colonel FERINGA. We did not try to do it. The benefits largely are imponderable.

Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. This is a project very similar to one we had a few days ago in Minnesota.

Colonel FERINGA. Yes, sir. But in that case in Minnesota there were benefits to the commercial craft that went up and down the upper Mississippi River.

The benefits to commercial craft are sort of left-handed in this instance. They will benefit because you take all these lighter craft out of their way.

Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. There is a tremendous amount of commercial travel on that main channel, is there not?

Colonel FERINGA. Yes, sir. But the commercial craft will be taken.

care of at other points rather than this boat basin.

Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. Is that pretty thickly populated?

Colonel FERINGA. Yes, sir.

Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. What city is it?

Colonel FERINGA. Peoria.

Mr. PETERSOFN of Georgia. Right at Peoria?

Colonel FERINGA. Yes; the boat basin is right in Peoria.

Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. That is on the river?

Colonel FERINGA. The Illinois waterway; yes, sir. These are pools,. locks, and dams. The waterway carries 5,000,000 tons of traffic.

The population of Peoria is 105,100. It is the second city of Illinois. Its industries include distilleries and the plants of the Caterpillar Tractor and the Tournier Cos. Its tributaries include the Illinois. waterway, the southern part of Lake Michigan, and the Mississippi

River. That is one reason, of course, the Illinois waterway connects the waterway at Chicago, that is the Great Lakes system, with the Mississippi River system.

The transient recreational craft will benefit.

Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. What do you mean by that?

Colonel FERINGA. Suppose a yacht owner in Chicago wanted to go down to Florida. He would go by means of the Illinois waterway and by the Mississippi River, and Mr. Rankin's Tombigbee might go across the Tennessee and down this one, and finally find their way to Miami. I have seen many of the Great Lakes yachts in southern Florida.

Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. Then I gather that this would be what you might term a stopping-off place for this craft, a place to put in.

Colonel FERINGA. Yes, sir; and to service them also. The benefits to the Nation as a whole will be the industry made possible by the building of boats of that type and the servicing.

Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. Do you have any other projects of this nature on the waterways now?

Colonel FERINGA. We have many of that nature on Long Island Sound, and in New England. In these projects which I have explained before the committee so far the only one which I think is closely similar is that on at Mission Bay, Calif., which Mr. Izac just testified to, where we also required a large measure of local cooperation.

Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. Then it is not unusual for you to bring in a project of this kind. I mean, you have brought in other similar projects.

Colonel FERINGA. Well, this would be one or two out of a total of 56. Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. What I wanted you to bring out, you have built projects of this kind in other sections and other waterways? Colonel FERINGA. Yes, sir; and in each of those cases we always require a large measure of local cooperation.

Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. Has there been any opposition to this project?

Colonel FERINGA. No, sir. I did want to point out to the committee though, that it is for pleasure boating, and that is why we have that large amount of local cooperation.

Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. We will insert your statement at this point.

(The statement is as follows:)

ILLINOIS RIVER AT PEORIA, ILL

The report on Illinois River at Peoria, Ill., is in response to a resolution adopted October 16, 1944, by the Rivers and Harbors Committee.

The Illinois River is a portion of the Illinois waterway, which connects the Mississippi River with the Great Lakes. Illinois River flows southwesterly to the Mississippi River at Grafton, Ill., a total distance of 273 miles. Peoria is located at about mile 162.

The existing project on the Illinois waterway provides for a channel 9 feet deep and 300 feet wide from the Mississippi River to Lockport, Ill. There is no Federal project for the improvement of harbor facilities on the Illinois River. Barge traffic on the Illinois waterway in the vicinity of Peoria in 1944 amounted to more than 5,000,000 tons, of which 4,600,000 tons was up-bound.

Recreational boating is increasing rapidly at and in the vicinity of Peoria. Fifty recreational craft are presently owned locally and about 100 transient boats visit Peoria during the summer.

Peoria, with a population of 105,100, is the second city of Illinois. Its industries include distilleries, and the plants of the Caterpillar Tractor and Le Tourneau

Cos. Tributary areas for recreational craft include the Illinois waterway, the southern part of Lake Michigan, and the Mississippi River between St. Louis and Davenport, Iowa.

Recreational interests desire a small-boat harbor providing a safe anchorage at the site now being used. They claim that this site is a convenient stopping place for recreational traffic moving between Chicago and St. Louis, that boating is a growing activity, requiring additional facilities, and that a boat harbor would shelter such craft from dangerous exposure to commercial tows in the present anchorage and thus be an advantage to both commercial and pleasure interests.

The Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors finds that safe and adequate mooring for recreational craft may be provided by construction of a basin 510 feet by 250, dredged to a depth of 7 feet and protected by an earth embankment riprapped on the lakeside. This would provide anchorage for about 100 craft.

The Board accordingly recommends that the existing project for the Illinois waterway be modified to provide for construction of a small-boat harbor in the vicinity of Peoria, Ill., at mile 168 of the Illinois waterway.

The improvement is recommended subject to the condition that local interests contribute 50 percent of the first cost of the dredging and of the breakwater construction and furnish assurances satisfactory to the Secretary of War that they will (a) make provision for operation of the harbor and for the construction of the necessary bulkheads and of a public landing with servicing facilities for small boats available to all users on equal terms, (b) hold and save the United States free from damages due to the construction and maintenance of the works, and (c) provide, without cost to the United States, all lands, easements, and rights-of-way necessary for the construction of the project.

Cost to United States for new work____
Cash contribution by local interests‒‒‒‒‒

Cost of construction__.

Cost to local interests for land and construction of river wall.

Annual Federal cost for maintenance__
Federal amortization and interest___

Total Federal annual carrying charges....

$32, 100 32,000

64, 100 5, 900

1,000 1, 200

2,200

Monetary benefits have not been evaluated. The present anchorage used by recreational craft is dangerous to the small craft and a menace to the commercial commerce using the channel. The project is justified by the increased safety and convenience to existing small boat traffic and by general benefits from the manufacture and repair of boats and the sale of supplies.

HONOLULU HARBOR, T. H.

Colonel FERINGA. We have one other project, Mr. Chairman, and that is for Honolulu Harbor. This is in addition to the one for the Columbia River, in which Mr. Angell is interested.

I again have complete notes on this project, but in brief I might invite the attention of the committee to the fact that the commerce of Honolulu Harbor increased from 2,113,000 tons in 1935 to 3,354,000 tons in 1940, and averaged 2,532,000 tons for the 6-year period.

We recommend that the portion of Honolulu Harbor which is indicated on the chart in pink, and which has been provided as a war

measure

Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. You mean on this chart?

Colonel FERINGA. Yes, sir; on your chart. The one that you and Mr. Angell have before you.

It is similar to other projects which we have explained heretofore, that it was found necessary during the war, as a wartime measure, to deepen, to enlarge the existing harbor. The enlargement is complete. We are without authority to maintain it.