« PreviousContinue »
that observation of the Board of Engineers in reviewing this projectand I read from paragraph 6, of House Document No. 765, Seventy. eighth Congress, second session. [Reading:]
6. The Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors concurring in general with the division engineer finds that the most suitable plan for the construction of Barren No. 2 Reservoir, or the advisability of building a hydroelectric-power project, cannot be determined with accuracy at this time. It, therefore, recommends that the Chief of Engineers be authorized to modify the storage allocation of the proposed Barren No. 2 Reservoir and to install facilities for power in the dam at an estimated cost of $9,700,000, provided that such modifications are found advisable at the time of construction.
That is a statement that rather disturbs some members of the committee in connection with this project, and I would like to have any statement that you or the Chief of Engineers care to make.
Colonel HERB. The recommendation to include power, Judge, comes from the Federal Power Commission, which I can give you. [Reading:]
· FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION,
Washington, D. C., January 25, 1944. Subject: Barren River, Ky. and Tenn, Maj. Gen. E. REYBOLD, Chief of Engineers, War Department,
Washington, D. C. DEAR GENERAL REYBOLD: Reference is made to your letter dated September 2, 1943, transmitting copies of the reports of the district and division engineers and of the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors on your Department's authorized survey of the Barren River, Ky. and Tenn. You request the comments of the Commission with respect to these reports at the earliest practicable date in order that the report of your Department may be completed and submitted to the Congress.
The district engineer recommended the construction of a multiple-purpose flood control and power project at the Port Oliver site on the Barren River, Ky., the project being known as the Barren No. 2 project. The dam would be a combination earth-fill and concrete gravity structure with gated spillways. The aggregate storage capacity below the top of the crest gates would be 1,748,000 acre-feet of which 482,000 acre-feet would be utilized for flood control, and 653,000 acre-feet of usable storage for stream-flow regulation and the development of power. The estimated cost of the project is $17,100,000 of which $9,700,000 would be allocated to power. The proposed installation is 50,000 kilowatts, and the district engineer estimates the average annual output at 105,500,000 kilowatt-hours.
The division engineer does not believe that the final determination with respect to the construction and use of the Barren No. 2 Reservoir should be made until further study has been made of the entire Green River Basin. He recommends, however, that the authorization to construct a project at the Barren No. 2 site be broadened to permit the construction of a multiple-purpose project which would include power. The Board concurs generally with the division engineer and recommends that the Chief of Engineers be authorized to modify the storage allocation of the proposed Barren No. 2 Reservoir and to install facilities for power, provided that such modifications are found advisable at the time of construction.
The Commission has caused its staff to review the reports of your Department and the staff believes that a dam constructed substantially to the height proposed by the district engineer would permit the development of the potenialities of the site. The flood-control storage proposed in the project appears to be unusually large in comparison with other similar projects in the region. The staff believes, with respect to both flood control and power, that it would not be desirable to make final determinations with respect to the use of storage at this project until further study is made of the entire Green River Basin.
The district engineer, in his study of the economic feasibility of power at the Barren No. 2 project, used values of $12.50 per kilowatt for dependable capacity and 1.50' mills per kilowatt-hour for energy. Power from this project would be utilized in the same general region that the power from Wolf Creek would be marketed. Reference is made to the power-market study on the Wolf Creek project which was transmitted to your Department on September 29, 1941. In that report
it was recommended that $15.25 be used as the value per kilowatt of dependable capacity at the Wolf Creek project, and that 1.5 mills per kilowatt-hour be used for energy. The use of the Wolf Creek power values would be appropriate in the consideration of the economic feasibility of other hydroelectric projects proposed to be constructed in this region.
The Wolf Creek, Dale Hollow, and Center Hill projects are already under construction in this region by your Department. It is not possible, under present circumstances, to estimate accurately when the power from the proposed Barren No. 2 project could be utilized.
The staff is of the opinion that if it becomes desirable to construct the project for flood control prior to the time at which power-generating equipment should be installed, the dam should be built to the height required for its multiple-purpose use, with penstocks and other facilities that will permit the installation later of power-generating equipment. Under this plan, the crest gates would not be installed in the initial construction.
Based upon the reports of your Department and upon studies by the Commission staff, the Commisison believes that the Barren No. 2 project should, when constructed, be built for multiple-purpose use including power and, under this circumstance, would be a desirable unit in the multiple-purpose development of the basin. The Commission believes, therefore, that the present authorization of the project for flood control should be broadened to permit its construction and use substantially as proposed in the reports under consideration.
The Commission concurs in the view that further studies of the Green River Basin should be made prior to the final determination with respect to the details of the project, including the allocation of storage. Sincerely,
LELAND OLDS, Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. So the Chief of Engineers is following the recommendation of the Federal Power Commission?
Colonel HERB. Yes, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. And the benefits, this additional power is selfliquidating, so the project as a whole is a favorable one?
Colonel HERB. Yes, sir. The ratio of cost to benefits is 1 to 1.50.
Mr. CHELF. I do not want to take up any additional time, but at this time I would like to call on Mr. Wilson Burks, who is the county superintendent of Barren County.
The CHAIRMAN. Give us your name and your business and your place of residence.
STATEMENT OF WILSON BURKS, SUPERINTENDENT OF BARREN
COUNTY SCHOOLS Mr. BÚRKS. My name is Wilson Burks. I am superintendent of the Barren County schools. My address is Glasgow, Ky.
The CHAIRMAN. Are you familiar with the document under consideration with respect to this project ? Mr. BURKS. I am. The CHAIRMAN. That has been made available to you? Mr. BURKS. That is right.
The CHAIRMAN. Are you speaking in behalf of or against this project? Mr. Burks. I speak against this project.
The CHAIRMAN. Do you represent the people and area above or below the proposed reservoir? Mr. BURKS. Above.
The CHAIRMAN. You represent the people above the reservoir.
Mr. BURKS. I have here a representation from the Barren County Fiscal Court and from the City Council of Glasgow and the Glasgow Chamber of Commerce authorizing me to make the statements that I shall make.
The CHAIRMAN. You may pass those authorizations to the reporter, and they will be printed in connection with your statement. (The referred to documents are as follows:)
GLASGOW CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,
Glasgow, Ky., April 6, 1946. To Whom It May Concern:
At a meeting of the Glasgow Chamber of Commerce held at its office on September 13, 1945, it was voted by the membership that a resolution be drawn opposing the proposed building of Port Oliver Dam on Barren River at a point a few miles west of Pageville, Ky., and a committee was appointed by the President to draft such a resolution and forward same to Senators and Representatives in Washington, the Governor of Kentucky, and to the Federal engineers in Louisville, Ky.
On October 11, 1945, the board of directors of the Glasgow Chamber of Commerce as per above order met and adopted said resolution and forwarded same as per instructions of membership.
Having received notice that a hearing on the proposed dam would be held in Washington, D. C., on April 10, 1946, a meeting of the Glasgow Chamber of Commerce directors was held at the office of its president on April 3, 1946, and by unanimous vote selected the following: Messrs. George H. Akers, W. H. Jones, Jr., and N. Wilson Burks to represent the chamber of commerce at the hearing on April 10, and present the reasons why said proposed dam should not be built. Very truly yours,
GLASGOW CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,
CITY OF GLASGOW,
April 2, 1946. Mr. WILSON BURKS, Superintendent, Barren County Schools,
Glasgow, Barren County, Ky. The City Councel of the City of Glasgow, Ky., met in regular monthly session in the city courtroom in the city of Glasgow, Ky., on April 2, 1946, and during this meeting of the council an open discussion was held relative to Port Oliver Dam in Barren County, Ky.
The city council being thoroughly convinced that a large majority of the citizens of Glasgow, Ky., are opposed to any construction or dam that would destroy our better agriculture territory in Barran and adjoining counties do, on motion by J. H. Webb and seconded by Chris Grinstead go on record as being opposed to the building of said Port Oliver Dam in Barren County, Ky.
H. C. BIGGERS, City Clerk.
BARREN COUNTY FISCAL COURT
April terms, April 2, 1946
Whereas heretofore the Barren fiscal court has gone on record as opposing the construction of the Port Oliver Dam and whereas it has more forcibly been brought to the attention of the court that if this dam is constructed same will take 21,000 acres of land from Barren County and whereas the proposed construction of this dam will necessarily take from Barren County all of its bottom land and whereas said land that will be taken will destroy the most productive land of the county and whereas the actual operating expense of Barren County is now being carried on with a minimum of expense and the revenue derived by way of taxation including all of Barren County is barely sufficient to operate the county and whereas it has been brought to the attention of the court that if said dam is constructed its generating capacity per year will be less than
$1,000,000 in value and that it will cost more than $60,000 to produce said
BARREN FISCAL COURT,
County Judge. A true copy, attest: [SEAL]
PETITION OF PROTEST ON THE PROPOSED BARREN RIVER DAM No. 2
GENTLEMEN: I am part of the delegation appearing to protest the erection of a dam on Barren River at Port Oliver. We have made a partial survey, as nearly complete as possible, to determine our economic, educational and cultural losses. Here is a petition of 1,800 names from Barren County. These are voters, landowners, tenants, professionel leaders, officeholders. There is nothing hidden in our objections. We are not striking out against progressive planning. Our chief motive is to register an effective protest against this dam, believing that a dam at Port Oliver would be disastrous to the culture of Barren and Allen County, and that in simple dollars and cents it would ruin our people. Here, too, is a list of 155 farm surveys of this area. Some are inaccurate, and some were made by those whose farms were not actually covered by the Government survey. Frankly, we contend that every farm and land owner in Barren could have filled out a survey report of his losses, for our county government and our road building program and policing must continue, and so must qur cost of education. A case to the point: an owner of 300 acres of good land in northern Barren would find his school tax increased by 50 cents per hundred dollars assessment should the dam be erected. So would his other taxes increase as he assumes the burden on tax loss which results from the building of the dam.
There would have been many other names on these petitions had not incorrect reports been spread about the purpose of these petitions. We gave everyone an opportunity to sign these protests. Tales were spread that those opposed flood control, cheap power, and the benefits of a good farm program. This is incorrect. It was reported that those who signed these petitions would find that the Government would give them lower price per acre for their land. We know this could not be true, but many believed this. There are a number of people in this and other areas where dams are proposed who would object, but say that no amount of objecting would stop Congress from accepting the Army engineer's reports. I cannot believe that our Congress has a deaf ear to the people who pay the taxes and who form the backbone of our land. I know that a fair committee will deal honestly with this issue, and I am confident that you shall listen to the cry of the voiceless people. I frankly feel that 90 percent of the people of Barren County oppose this dam, and that a vote of the people, in a fair election, would condemn it overwhelmingly. The greatest obstacle we have faced is not active support of the building of the dam, and is not mere indifference regarding the issues. Our chief hurdle in obtaining a voice objection has been a feeling that no force can prevent a Government engineer's report from being accepted. We feel that you as a committee can refute this fallacy by rejecting this report when you have all the facts in your hands.
When a county like Barren has progressed during the past 50 years until she ranks as one of the 15 wealthier counties in a State of 120 counties, with one of the most prosperous inland towns in the entire South, for Glasgow is a State leader among towns in civic enterprise and health and community improvements, we feel that a fair, impartial survey of the losses is due us both as a county and as a trade center,
By way of an added explanation of the purpose of this protest, let as show you that this is not a protest regarding the establishing of power facilities in our region. Already we are well served by REA and KU, and within a few miles of us are dams being completed that shall furnish more power than can be imagined. We are not opposed to flood control, for we do not wish evil for our neighbors down the river. However, it becomes a question of moving thousands of our area because some down below us will not move from the low areas. Many of them would move back every few years, if you should build them mansions on the hills. In our section soil erosion is a chief curse, and this dam cannot conceivably prevent soil erosion in our hills, especially if you force the bottom farmers to move to the hills to cultivate their crops. It takes contour farming reforesting, grasslands to stop this serious waste. In Barren you would merely aggravate this condition.
However, here is the sense of our case. We feel that we have planned for fairly settled rural prosperity. We have a rural planning council that is set to aid the rural areas in a more prosperous way of life. Factories are being built at Glasgow to absorb farm products. But the most fertile of our county is threatened. We have 220,000 acres, and 21,000 acres are to be corered by water, or taken over by the Government. When you take one-tenth of our land, and that the best land, you take our birthright for a poor mess of pottage that comes in a fisherman's paradise. It seems to me the Lord gave us Wisconsin and Minnesota as our lake country, and planned Kentucky as a State for agricultural pursuits. Should we cover this rich land, we would be guilty of burying our talent without cause. Those lower valleys of our county, and the rich land of Allen and Monroe counties are not wild and desolate. There you'll find families who have been there for generations. of the pure Anglo-Saxon stock, whose ancestry wrestled this land from the Indian tribes. The land is in their blood. I find on our surveys that almost all are cut off from market, by the dam. Glasgow is their second home, where America's best tradition, the Saturday afternoon social visit in town is the practice. I feel that I can speak of their culture, for my Grandfather White moved from this region into Hart County 100 years ago. He left his people there, many of whom are buried there in regions that shall be water-covered when Port Oliver becomes our county's enigma. Can you cut a man from his people, his cemetery, or his church and call such an act a move for the general welfare. Take these people and their homes-a man's home is his, and a castle it is, though it might not value a thousand dollars. This immeasurable and intangible American tradition cannot be treated lightly.
In our survey sheets we feel that we are reporting perhaps one-third of the Barren County land that shall be lost. On these reports 6,744 acres are reported as covered land. This makes our finding at least legitimate for one-third the acreage of 21,000. Therefore our figures may be times 3 each time.
Every farm report states the road to market shall be cut off-many shall have to travel 15 miles greater distance to reach Glasgow. The average family visits Glasgow 100 times each year.
There were 272 families to be displaced, and none of them knew where they would move. Had we had a full report, there would have been no less than 600 families in this predicament.
There were 1.076 persons living on this land. A full report would have created a moving problem for perhaps 2,500, assuming some should stay or sell part of their remaining land to other stranded neighbors.
We estimate from 600 to 1.000 school children who may have to move. On this assumption we lose at least 600 children who would become leaders for tomorrow.
On the report, 313,950 family trips to Glasgow were made by these 272 families per year. This means perhaps a loss of 500,000 family trips to Glasgow per year.
Going back to the statement made in the engineer's report, that 36,000 acres shall be taken over. If Allen and Monroe take the 15,000 acres, we then have a loss at, conservatively, $100 per acre-totaling $2,100,000 in land values for our county. Our tax assessor states that our entire country has a potential tax assessment of $3,000,000. You can compare this to see how much will be our wealth loss. Assuming that this land brings the farmers 10-percent income yearly, we have a farmer's loss of $210,000.