« PreviousContinue »
14. In conclusion, I do not wish you or any member of the committee to think that I am opposed to the Summit Reservoir project. It is only my thought, as a member of this committee, to present to the other members some of the things which are of importance and which should be considered in determining the value to the city of Columbus of the proposed Summit Reservoir project and before any commitment is made by the city of Columbus to spend considerable sums of money for benefits until the same are definitely established and proven. This can be done only by proper engineering study of the many features involved. Very truly yours,
PHILIP BURGESS. Copies to Allen N. Pretzman and Joseph C. Goodman.
The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much for your statement, sir. The reporter will attach the statements that you are passing to him in connection with your summary, and the statement of the final witness in behalf of the Ohio Valley authorized in the project under consideration.
(April 18, 1946)
DILLON DAM · The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Griffiths, we will be glad to have your statement.
We will return now to the Muskingum Valley, and these records will be inserted in the hearings on the Ohio Valley and its tributaries.
Mr. Griffiths has been a valuable member of the committee through the years.
STATEMENT OF HON. P. W. GRIFFITHS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO
Mr. GRIFFITHS. Thank you, Mr. Chairmán. I thank you for your kindness in allowing us to come back to this project now.
The people from the Licking Valley Protective Association were interested in a modification of the Dillon Dam on the Licking River. This is a project which was adopted about 6 or 7 years ago. Our main connection with it is due to the fact that it takes about 10,000 acres of most valuable bottom land and productive farms in that region, and we are hoping for a modification of it, and I have a statement which is short and I will put in the record with your permission, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. We will be glad to have that. (The statement is as follows:)
STATEMENT OF P. W. GRIFFITHS, MEMBER OF CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO,
BEFORE THE HOUSE FLOOD CONTROL COMMITTEE, APRIL 18, 1946 Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I have with me three representatives from my congressional district: Mr. Holland Gary, an attorney representing the Licking Valley Protective Association ; Mr. William Brailer, member of the association and present postmaster at Nashport, Ohio; and Mr. William Ellis, Zanesville, Ohio, an engineer formerly with the Muskingum Conservancy District. These gentlemen will explain to you a plan in lieu of the present proposed Dillon Dam, and I wish to protest against the present proposed plan for this dam at Dillon Falls on the Licking River.
This project was selected in the comprehensive flood-control plan of the Ohio River authorized by the Flood Control Act, June 28, 1938, which calls for a reservoir covering 10,400 acres. The proposed plan would work a hardship on the people owning homes in this area because it would result in the elimination of 6 villages and remove 600 families of 2,000 persons; the dislocation of the entire
community; destroy ties built up through generations; and the abandonment of schools, churches, and other community organizations. In view of the fact that the present plans involve the relocation of 19 miles of Baltimore & Ohio Railroad, the construction of this dam, in the light of present-day costs, would seem to me to be prohibitive for the benefits received. Mr. Ellis has prepared a plan which I am enclosing with this statement which I believe merits the closest attention of this committee and Board of Army Engineers. It involves the erection of 13 smaller dams at the headwaters of the creeks which flow into the Licking River, and, in addition to an advantage of over-all costs, it would provide flood control for the areas such as Newark, Marne, Hanover, Nashport, and also the areas which would be protected by the proposed Dillon Dam. It appears to me most feasible that we have a complete report on this project which I believe, as I said before, will result in an enormous saving of money to the taxpayers of the country, as well as provide the flood control which is so well desired by the people in the lower valley.
It is my earnest hope that the Board of Army Engineers, by action of this committee, will hold up any tentative construction, purchasing of rights-of-way, or easements, or relocation of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad until this plan which I am submitting with these remarks is reported on in detail by the Board of Army Engineers. Thank you for your courtesy.
The CHAIRMAN. Congressman McGregor, of the Seventeenth Congressional District, Ohio.
We would be very glad to have your statement, Mr. McGregor,
STATEMENT OF HON. J. HARRY MCGREGOR, A REPRESENTATIVE
IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO Mr. McGregor. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the privilege of appearing before your committee and the courtesy extended to us on this particular hour.
I am not going to take the time to do other than say that I hope the committee will carefully investigate this project.
The enabling legislation was passed back in 1939, possibly there was no objection to it at that time. But I feel at this time, when the critical materials are so short as they are, so critical, that we should give careful consideration owing to the fact that we are going to be compelled to move between 650 and 700 families in this area, that is going to cost approximately $10,000,000.
Some of you boys who need flood control so badly at this time, if you will help us delay this project, that will help you get yours. Mr. Chairman, I ask consent to place my statement in the record.
The CHAIRMAN. We will be glad to have your statement, Mr. McGregor.
(The statement is as follows:)
STATEMENT OF Hon. J. HARRY MCGREGOR, SEVENTEENTH DISTRICT OF OHIO, BEFORE
THE FLOOD CONTROL COMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ON APRIL 18, 1946, ON THE DILLON DAM, LICKING COUNTY, OHIO
Mr. Chairman and members of the Flood Control Committee, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before your committee and cite to you information that I have relative to the contemplated construction of a dam-known as the Dillon Dam, in Licking County, Ohio.
The authorization for this construction was given in your report No. 2353 of the Seventy-fifth Congress, third session, May 13, 1938, and incorporated in your chart on page 11 of your report known as Comprehensive Flood Control Plans and Works for Reservoir, Levees, and Flood Walls. Final authorization was contained in Public Law 396, Seventy-sixth Congress (out of H. R. 6634), dated August 11, 1939.
Mr. Chairman, this authorization was granted before I became a Member of Congress, but I am unable to find where hearings were held on this particular project. Some appropriations for this construction were contained in appropriations bills of the Seventy-ninth Congress,
I am advised, Mr. Chairman, that a large percent of the people of this area are opposed to this construction at this time. At the time of the authorizationin 1939-possibly there was no opposition, but, Mr. Chairman, times have changed and I am certain, knowing your fairness and the fairness of your committee, you are willing to hear the people from the affected district on this proposa)
I believe I am correct in saying that no work has been started on this project and they are only now ready to advertise for bids on the relocation of the B. & 0. Railroad tracks. May I again impress upon your minds that no active work has been started-only planning has been done. As soon as the people in the affected areas knew what this dam meant to them and their holdings they entered protests. An organization was formed, known as The Licking Valley Protective Association with Mr. E. R. Cunningham as secretary, to protest against the construction of this dam. Mr. Chairman, I ask your consent to incorporate here the resolution adopted by that organization.
(Received March 3, 1946, in letter from E. R. Cunningham to J. Harry McGregor)
“Whereas Congress has appropriated certain funds for construction of a dam in the Licking River, such dam being known as Dillon Dam and located in Muskingum County approximately 4 miles west of Zanesville, Ohio; and
"Whereas surveys and plans are now being made by the United States Government under the direction of the Army engineers, for the acquiring of lands and easements, relocation of B. & O. and construction of said Dillon Dam,at taxpayers' expense, such land purchases and easements involving approximately 10,000 or more acres of valuable river bottom lands as well as the villages of Pleasant Valley, Irville, Nashport, Toboso, Hanover, and Clay Lick, Ohio, and necessitating the relocation or directly affecting approximately 600 families of 2,000 persons; and
"Whereas the relocation of this number of persons would present a serious problem, especially so at this period of land inflation and lack of building materials, and where a serious housing shortage already exists; and
"Whereas such relocation of peoples of a community tears people apart and necessitates abandonment of schools, churches, and organizations banded together for common welfare at a time when we have suffered much in a great World War; and
"Whereas the relocation of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad for a distance of approximately 20 miles and the construction of Dillon Dam invite bids for construction work at exorbitantly high costs for construction at this time; and
“Whereas Congress has proceeded with the appropriation of funds and the United States engineers have drawn plans for the construction of Dillon Dam project without the citizens of this community having been given an opportunity of a public hearing before such appropriations and authorization were made; and
• Whereas we believe that measures to alleviate floods in the Licking Valley could be achieved in great part by the expenditure of the funds proposed to be expended in the construction of Dillon Dam, in a water-conservation program, whereby excess waters would be retained on the lands on which it falls by the construction of a small lake on each farm and other methods of conservation as recommended by our conservation set-up in Ohio, the estimated cost of Dillon Dam so divided among the 10,000 farms in this valley area would make available approximately $1,000 per farm for such construction work: Therefore be it
"Resolved, That the Licking Valley Protective Association, whose membership consists of those interested in the welfare of the Licking River Valley hereby vigorously opposes the construction of Dillon Dam in the Licking River and hereby petitions the Congress of the United States to abandon this project and demands a hearing on such petition, such hearing to be held in the area so affected by the Licking River.”
Various meetings of interested parties have been held and engineers hired to submit to your committee for consideration and for the consideration of the Army engineers, a program somewhat different from the original program as authorized by Congress back in 1939.
After numerous meetings a program was decided upon and it will be presented to you in detail today by the representatives of the Licking Valley Protective Association of Ohio. May I say, Mr. Chairman, that I have gone over this program carefully and certainly am in accord, and firmly believe that if this flood-control program is necessary at all, it can be handled by a group of smaller dams at a much less cost and in this manner would not be a detriment to the local area, as would the present program outlined by the Army engineers, which constitutes one large dam. I am of the firm conviction that a multiple system of smaller dams offers every advantage. It will guarantee adequate protection from flood waters and will not destroy large areas, and certainly will not make necessary the elimination of two villages and will not make approximately 700 families homeless.
May I call your attention, Mr. Chairman, to the Muskingum River which is now controlled by a series of dams in the upper tributaries, rather than by one large dam. I am wondering if the flood waters from the Muskingum watershed are controlled by a series of small dams, rather than by one large dam, why is not the same system applicable to the Licking River watershed.
I hope, Mr. Chairman, in addition to the argument I have presented, that you will carefully consider what the construction of this dam means at this time in the face of the shortage of 'critical building materials.
In addition to the actual materials needed for the construction of the dam, we are faced with the destruction of 600 to 700 houses, which means these residents will have to find homes elsewhere and houses are not to be found, and certainly the building materials are not available for them to construct new ones. It seems to me this program could definitely be deferred until such time as building materials are available, and at such time when we have sufficient food, not only to meet our needs but the needs of other countries. If this dam is constructed, it means taking from the production list thousands of acres of fertile farming ground.
Mr. Chairman, knowing your fairness and the fairness and efficiency of your committee, I am certain you will carefully analyze, not only my remarks, but the remarks of those who are interested in this project and you will render a decision which you know to be reasonable and fair. I thank you for the privilege of appearing before you.
Mr. 'GRIFFITHS. I wish to present a gentleman from Zanesville, Ohio, Mr. Holland Gary.
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Gary, we will be glad to have your statement.
STATEMENT OF HOLLAND GARY, APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE
LICKING VALLEY PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION Mr. Gary. I am an attorney at Zanesville and represent the Licking Valley Protective Association.
The CHAIRMAN. You may proceed, sir.
The Licking Valley Protective Association is interested in this proposed reservoir on what stream? Mr. Gary. On the Licking River. The.CHAIRMAN. That is a tributary of what? Mr. Gary. Muskingum River.
The CHAIRMAN. And that has a series of how many reservoirs already constructed ? Mr. Gary. Fourteen. The CHAIRMAN. Go ahead. This one has been authorized and is under way, is that right? Mr. GARY. There is no construction started as yet.
The CHAIRMAN. But authorized and the appropriation has been made initially? Mr. GARY. Yes, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. What is the matter that you want to bring to our attention?
Mr. Gary. The position of the Licking Valley Protective Association is not to block flood control as such, but to present an alternative proposal to give an additional flood control to the people in the Lick. ing Valley.
Licking River commences at Zanesville, and runs up to Newark, through this valley which is mostly shown in red on the map. The red on the map is the proposed reservoir of the proposed Dillon Dam.
The CHAIRMAN. Where is the Muskingum River?
Mr. Gary. The Dillon Dam Reservoir is shown in red, and the dam would be at this point.
The CHAIRMAN. What is the other red outline? Mr. GARY. This is all part of the reservoir and would extend back to a few miles of Newark.
The alternate proposal which we are asking, modification of the original proposal is to construct 13 smaller dams on tributaries of the Licking, in the areas marked in black. This has been prepared by William N. Ellis, engineer, formerly with the Muskingum Conservancy District, and he will present the more technical aspects.
The CHAIRMAN. When you had the hearings out in the field, was that view presented to the district engineer?
Mr. Gary. That was presented, I believe, by Mr. Ellis to Colonel Arthur, and it was dismissed at that time as not practical. That was in 1939, and I was not at that the meeting, so Mr. Ellis can instruct you more fully on that proposal.
The chief advantage to the modification is that this Licking Valley is a rich farming territory. You have had some other speakers · here this morning, too, who referred to protecting valuable farm
lands, and we need them all at this time, and these farms will have to be abandoned and taken over in order to form this reservoir project.
If the alternate proposal is adopted, the smaller dams will affect only little land in ravines and places of that sort which are not nearly as valuable and not nearly as populated as the lower areas.
There are three or four towns, Nashport, Irwin, Hanover, Bono, and Pleasant Valley, which will all have to be relocated if the Dillon Dam is put in as presently proposed.
The CHAIRMAN. Has there been any similar relocation in the other 14 dams?
Mr. Gary. Yes; there were some, I believe, around Holmes County, near Millersburg.
The CHAIRMAN. Do you know of any dams constructed anywhere where something of that problem has not been involved except in canyon and waste country?
Mr. Gary. No, sir; but it will undoubtedly help some homes moved under the alternate proposal, but the cost will be so much less because of the fact that you will save the valuable land and use the least valuable land that I think it is well worth while.