and one of the processes is developing the necessity for additional works so such additional works could be undertaken Mr. SPENCE (interposing). Now, Mr. Chairman, I have no criticism to make of the National Resources and Planning Board, but there is a legislative declaration that the Congress desires the Army engineers to be supreme in this, and of course the Army engineers are the only people that could carry it on. They are better qualified to proceed with it than any other governmental body could ever be, and I hope your committee will find some way to let them start work on this much-needed project. The CHAIRMAN. I am sure this committee and the Corps of Engineers are in accordance with your statement. Mr. SPENCE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I desire to file a telegram which I received from A. K. Andrews of Newport, Ky., dated April 20, 1940. The CHAIRMAN. You may have that permission. (The telegram referred to is as follows:) Hon. BRENT SPENCE, House of Representatives. NEWPORT, KY., April 20, 1940. The Ohio River is fast reaching flood state. The water is at the door of our steel plant and if the rain continues 2,500 men will be out of employment to say nothing of the damage to our plant. This hazard would be avoided if the Wilder project was in operation. We urge you to place these facts at this crucial time before the proper party to get immediate approval of the Wilder project. A. K. ANDREWS, President. STATEMENT OF HON. ANDREW J. MAY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF KENTUCKY Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, may I volunteer some information on this project in which Mr. Spence, my colleague, is appearing, for about 2 minutes? The CHAIRMAN. You may speak as to this project as well as your own, Mr. May. Mr. MAY. I am not concerned in his (Mr. Spence's) project except in connection with his steel plant. That steel plant hires 3,500 men. They have in addition to that a coal mine in my district which operates with 1,000 men, and when it is down my coal miners are unemployed, and they have a pay roll of $200,000 there. The CHAIRMAN. We are glad to have that statement, and now you may proceed with your own statement. Mr. SPENCE. I did not call Mr. May as a witness, but I desire to adopt him as a witness. The CHAIRMAN. You may proceed, Mr. May; we are glad to have you again, and we are now down the Ohio at Maysville and beyond. Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, I am particularly interested in certain projects in the Big Sandy River area, and more directly at this time those projects lying in the State of Virginia beyond the Kentucky border, in the district of my colleague, Mr. John Flannagan, of Virginia. And in order that I may get this matter clearly before the committee I would like to make a brief statement giving you a description of the topography of that country and the condition in which it is found in relation to about 35 years ago and now, and I have lived on that river all of my life. The CHAIRMAN. That is the Big Sandy River? Mr. MAY. Yes sir: And without telling my exact age, I have been there long enough to know a great deal about it. Prior to the building of the railroad up the Big Sandy in 1904 and 1905, steamboats plied that stream for 160 miles, and about 20 of them were large steamers. And by reason of the constant washing of the water from the operation of tow boats and passenger boats the stream was widened until it was sufficiently wide to have a carrying capacity without very many overflows. Immediately following the construction of the railroad at Elkhorn City, where it makes a junction with the Clinchfield Railroad, which runs on into Charleston, S. C., trees began to grow on both sides of the stream, and the channel has been absorbed by the growth of trees until the channel has just about been half taken up, so that the carrying capacity of the stream therefore is about 50 percent of what it was 35 years ago, yet there is the same drainage area there, plus the denuding of the mountainsides and the soil and constant coming in of water. The stream originates in the State of Virginia, the main body of it. There are some 900 to 1,000 square miles in the State of Virginia where it flows through the Breaks, as we call them, from the Big Sandy Pine Mountain area down into the main river. And from my earliest recollection when rainfalls came and were dreaded down the streams and valleys the question always was, What is the flow of the water through the Breaks? That area there affords a supply of water sufficient if turned loose for a flood, but under any ordinary condition of rainfall we have a flood in that valley and it affects Elkhorn City, Pikeville, Betsy Lane, a mining town, Prestonburg, Paintsville, Louisa, Allen, and several other smaller towns. They are all flooded I would say on an average of twice and sometimes four times a year. There are projects there which have been considered, and in fact one of them authorized, and I am going to talk about them now. Beginning at the lower end, one in which I am interested is, first, Dewey on Johns Creek in Floyd County. That dam has been authorized and in fact is ready for the contract of construction. The next one above that would be Fish Trap on the left fork of the river above Pikeville. That has not been authorized, as I understand it, but is in contemplation of recommendation by the Board of Engineers. Now, then, after you leave that place you go to what is known as the Breaks of the Sandy and this area of 900 square miles in the State of Virginia. There are a number of projects being considered, and data has been gathered on them by the Board of Engineers, and I have them listed by name, and there are five of them in one group. I will take first the State Line project, which is near the Breaks, and it is to be constructed of earth-and-rock-filled dam 110 feet high and 300 feet long. Second is Cranesnest project, strictly a storage project, to be constructed of earth-and-rock-filled dam, 170 feet high and 600 feet long. Third is Pound project. Earth-and-rock-filled dam, 175 feet high and 600 feet long. Then they group together what they call the Towers, five other small dams, to be constructed of earth-and-rock-filled dams, creating reservoirs of various sizes, and the reservoir capacity is 701,850 acrefeet, and the usable capacity 468,450 feet. The first cost (excluding interest during construction): Dams and appurtenances, $14,894,250; land and buildings, $1,698,750; highway relocation, $642,000-a total of $17,235,000. As to the annual cost, the annual miantenance is $493,770, and an annual finance cost at 4 percent, making $689,400, totaling $1,183,170, with annual power benefits of $1,909,875, or a net of $726,705 over and above the cost of construction and maintenance. I am not urging any power dams in connection with this. What I want is flood control, and I have always believed and always will believe until I die that it takes an empty dam to have flood control and a full dam for power and other purposes. The CHAIRMAN. What about Clintwood and Haysi? Mr. MAY. That is Haysi. They are in the same area back there. I just do not happen to have them in this list furnished to me by Major Herman, the district engineer. But those are two that ought to be considered. The CHAIRMAN. They are authorized. What you need is addi The CHAIRMAN. In other words, the Dewey, Fish Trap, Clintwood, and Haysi are already authorized. Mr. MAY. That is fine. I have been looking for them in the documents, and I could not find the document that contained them. The CHAIRMAN. You have found one which has never gotten to us. Go ahead. Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to make this general statement; I would like to say that my colleague, Mr. Flannagan, of the Ninth Virginia District, has a convention on in his district today and I do not blame him for not being here, and under the same circumstances I guess I would be in my district; but the floods are constantly washing away the soil and substance of the little valleys. that are in the Big Sandy district in this area. And either one of two things are going to happen: You either have to provide flood-control dams to control this waterfall, or you will have to provide a resettlement system for the people of that section of the country, or they perish, because they are hemmed in between those mountains and they cannot get out. The floods which come down constantly are washing away the crops and the soil, and I would say this happens at least one out of three seasons. That is about all I want to say about it. The CHAIRMAN. We are glad to have your statement. As I understand what you and the others in the lower Ohio Valley want is additional authorizations for construction. We authorized $50,000,000 for local protective works, and we authorized $75,000,000 for reservoirs, and under the hearings of the Chief Engineer very shortly I understand no more work can be done unless we have additional authorizations. We are glad to have your statement, sir. Mr. MAY. Thank you, sir, and I would like very much that Mr. Flannagan, who is quite familiar with this situation be permitted to either appear in person or file a statement for the record. The CHAIRMAN. He may file a statement. The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other gentlemen to be heard from the lower Ohio Valley? (No response.) The CHAIRMAN. Are there any from the Mississippi Valley? (No response.) The CHAIRMAN. Are there any from the Missouri River? Mr. Stefan? STATEMENT OF HON. KARL STEFAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEBRASKA Mr. STEFAN. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee: I am appearing here on behalf of the people who live along the upper Missouri River, above Sioux City, Iowa, bordering my district the entire length, and I am also appearing on behalf of the members of the Upper Missouri Valley Association, especially for the purpose of urging your committee to include some authorization for erosion control projects, which are so badly needed on the river above Sioux City. You will recall, Mr. Chairman, that I took this matter up with your committee sometime ago, and that on August 2 last year your committee passed a resolution asking for a review of the report on the Missouri River, which is published as House Document 238, Seventy-third Congress, second session, with a view of determining what improvement is advisable of the river at this time for flood prevention. I have a mass of evidence here indicating the considerable damage that has been done along the river from floods. I will not take your time to present all of it, but I merely wish to touch on some of the damage that has been done, especially to the lands on the Nebraska side in my district, which produced an unusual amount of corn, as compared with no corn at all on the dry lands, and much of which was destroyed by erosion, with the result that hundreds of thousands of dollars of damage was done to valuable agricultural land. We have along that river tremendously rich manganese deposits. I have also information indicating that future floods may result in tremendous amounts of damage to industrial sections in my district along the Missouri River, and also additional valuable farm land. I submit the letter regarding the resolution taken by your committee, which is as follows: The Honorable KARL STEFAN, Norfolk, Nebr. WAR DEPARTMENT, UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE, MY DEAR MR. STEFAN: This office has received a resolution of the Committee on Flood Control of the House of Representatives requesting a review report of the Missouri River for flood protection and prevention of bank erosion from Sioux City, Iowa, to the point where the river lies wholly within the State of South Dakota. The investigation and report have been assigned to this office. It is understood that you are the author of this resolution and I wish to let you know what steps we are taking to initiate the necessary investigations. As you may know, we have previously been authorized to make a review report on the feasibility of extending the navigation improvement upstream from Sioux City to Chamberlain, S. Dak., and we are also investigating other projects which bear on the question of flood control of the Missouri River in Nebraska. A public hearing was held at Yankton several months ago in accordance with the first of these authorizations, and at that time various local interests gave their views on the desirability of controlling this section of the river. For this reason, I believe it is unnecessary to hold a further public hearing, and we will simply expand the scope of the previously authorized investigation to consider the matters covered by your resolution. If there are any special problems which have not previously been called to our attention or any information which you may wish to submit, we would be more than pleased to hear from you. Very truly yours, W. M. HOGE, Lieutenant Colonel, Corps of Engineers, District Engineer. I call your attention, Mr. Chairman, to the resolution passed by your committee, which reads as follows: Resolved by the Committee on Flood Control of the House of Representatives, United States, That the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, created under section 3 of the River and Harbor Act, approved June 13, 1902, be, and is hereby, requested to review the reports on the Missouri River contained in House Document No. 238, Seventy-third Congress, second session, with a view to determining what improvement of said river is advisable at this time for flood protection and prevention of bank erosion on the main stem of the river from Sioux City, Iowa, to the point above Niobrara, Nebr., where the course of the Missouri River is wholly within the State of South Dakota. Adopted August 2, 1939. H. E. WILKINSON, Jr., Clerk, Following that I received the letter heretofore mentioned from Lieutenant Colonel Hoge, district engineer, and other documentary information, indicating that the survey was being made. I wish to take this opportunity, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, of thanking you for the interest you have shown in this necessary work along the Missouri River, and especially I want to thank the Army engineers for the unusual amount of cooperation that they have given to me and to the people in my district who appealed to them for some aid when the erosion was so prevalent last year. It is my understanding that this survey has been made. I know every foot of that river. I have gone all over it in my district, and I am optimistic enough to feel perhaps these Army Engineers have made some favorable recommendation for erosion control, and hope that it will result in approval on the part of the Chief of Engineers, General Schley. And I appeal to this committee, if it is at all possible to include some authorization for erosion control projects in the district to which I refer. I especially call your attention to an organization known as the Upper Missouri Valley Association, which meets frequently, and which has taken up this problem with the Army engineers, and has gone into the question of details. They are composed of county commissioners, interested citizens, industrialists, and people generally interested in river navigation, erosion and flood control. This organization passed a resolution some time ago. I will not take up your time by going into too much detail, although I wish to submit this resolution for the record, and will read one section of the resolution they passed recently. It reads: |