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. Mr. GRIFFITHS. Mr. Gary has a brief statement.

The CHAIRMAN. What connection have you with this project?

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.

8711646--22

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 Licking 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. It goes on up from Zanesville.

The CHAIRMAN. This is a tributary and comes down?

Mr. GARY. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Which is the reservoir you have in mind?

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.

The most important point is that the B. & O. Railroad runs up through this valley, and if the proposed Dillon Dam is put in, that entire B. & O. track from here all the way up to Marr would have to be relocated, about 20 miles of relocation, which is estimated, or was estimated in 1939 at $4,000,000, and I believe that under current labor and material cost it will have to be revised upward substantially.

That would be entirely eliminated. In other words, the B. & O. tracks could be left right where they are, that responsibility would be done away with and these smaller dams would give additional flood protection to the people of this valley, so that in addition to providing the same protection for the Muskingum River and Licking River, because of the same water area which would be held back they would also have that additional protection for the people of Licking Valley and also the people of the town of Newark, since Raccoon Creek and these other places would be held back.

The CHAIRMAN. The railways and the highways both, in the other 13 dams, have been relocated and the highways and particularly the railways have been relocated in practically all of the reservoirs and dams above you in the so-called Pittsburgh area, and I have known of few dams in any improved country where there has not been a railway relocation or highway relocation.

Now, any other matters that you have in mind we can discuss now. What sort of a conservation pool do they have in this reservoir?

Mr. GARY. There will be a conserving pool which will extend from 700 feet elevation to 734 feet elevation, and will take in a large part of this area right here. The remainder of the pool is this flood-control pool, which would take in the entire amount shown.

The CHAIRMAN. Would you say the lands along the Licking River were more highly improved than the lands along the other streams where the other 14 reservoirs are built, in the New Philadelphia country?

Mr. GARY. I am not too familiar with that.

The CHAIRMAN. One final question, if you will permit, Mr. Griffiths. Who is here representing, now, the landowners, who live along these tributaries of the Licking River above the proposed 13 alternate dams?

Mr. GARY. Mr. Brailer is the postmaster at Nashport, but that is not above the dam

The CHAIRMAN. I am not asking about "above."

Mr. GARY. There is no one here representing those but I believe Mr. Brailer has talked the matter over with some of them.

The CHAIRMAN. The reason I asked, probably the greatest protest we have had during these hearings for the last 10 days was from residents along the upper stretches of tributaries of the Green River in Kentucky where, instead of building the dam along the Green River they proposed to build along the tributary and those folks came in and protested probably more vigorously than they have down the

stream.

Are there any further questions, Mr. Griffiths?

Mr. GRIFFITHS. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Gary is granted permission to extend his remarks for the record.

(Extension of remarks of Holland M. Gary :)

STATEMENT OF HOLLAND M. GARY, ATTORNEY FOR THE LICKING VALLEY PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION, BEFORE THE FLOOD CONTROL COMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, THURSDAY, APRIL 18, 1946

I am appearing here today in behalf of the Licking Valley Protective Association, to place before you a modification of the proposed Dillon Dam on the Licking River, near Zanesville, Ohio. I believe that a substantial saving can be accomplished by this proposal, at the same time retaining all the flood-control benefits and eliminating some of the disadvantages of the Dillon Dam.

The plan I am submitting was suggested, and the map depicting it, which was placed in the record by Representative Griffiths, was prepared by William Nash Ellis, chief research engineer for the Simplex Engineering Co., of Zanesville, Ohio, and formerly engineer with the Muskingum Conservancy District. Mr. Ellis is here with me to answer any questions of a technical nature which may arise. The plan is briefly, to construct a series of 13 or more, smaller dams on the tributaries of the Licking, in a similar manner to the construction of the 14 conservancy dams on the tributaries of the Muskingum.

The advantages of this proposal are

(1) The relocation of the B. & O. Railroad, which has been estimated to cost from $4,000,000 to $6,000,000 would not be necessary.

(2) The villages of Nashport, Irville, Toboso, Pleasant Valley, Hanover would not have to be condemned and moved.

(3) The valuable farm land in the Licking Valley would not be destroyed. (4) Additional flood protection would be provided to the villages in the Licking Valley, and also to Newark, Ohio.

(5) The taxpayers of Muskingum and Licking Counties would not have to assume additional burdens due to removing valuable property from the tax duplicate.

(6) The program of soil conservation which is sponsored by the Ohio Conservation Department, would be aided, and the water table of the surrounding area would be raised through percolation from the reservoirs.

It has been mentioned that a smilar amount of land would be needed for the alternative dams, but it should be remembered that these lands are in the headwaters, and would not be as valuable for agricultural purposes as would the bottom lands in the Licking Valley. Also there would be no populated communities, except for an occasional farmhouse, that would be involved under the multiple dam system, and this would reduce both the cost and inconvenience, without diminishing the benefits.

The last survey of this watershed made by the Army engineers with respect to a multiple dam system was made in 1934, at the time the Muskingum Conservancy District was organized. This survey, however, included only the watershed above Newark, and no account was taken of the tributaries flowing into the Licking below Newark. At the time this survey was made, the entire Licking Valley program, single dam as well as multiple, was rejected by the engineers as being more costly than was justified by the benefits. If, during the past 12 years, conditions have so changed as to make the single Dillon Dam practical, might they not also have changed so as to make the multiple system practical? We are asking the committee to have a new survey of the entire program made by the Army engineers, with a view to determining which program will be more economical and beneficial, both to the communities on the Muskingum and Ohio Rivers, and to those of the Licking Valley.

It should be borne in mind that the proposal we hereby submit is not a detailed and specific plan. The Licking Valley Protective Association has neither money or personnel to make such a detailed survey. The Army engineers, acting on directions of this committee, should properly make such a survey. If, as we firmly believe, the results of such a detailed survey indicate that the benefits of the multiple system would be as great or greater than those of the single dam, and the costs of the multiple system would be substantially lower, than we will ask that the committee reconsider the type of dams to be placed on the Licking River, and modify the project to the extent of adopting the proposal here made.

I greatly appreciate the courtesy shown by the chairman and members of the committee in allowing us time this morning to present this proposal, and I feel that the keen insight of the members on the problems of soil conservation and flood control, as evidenced by their questions and remarks, assures us that the proper decision will be reached, not solely from the standpoint of our own community, but from that of the entire Nation.

Thank you for your attention.

The CHAIRMAN. Your next witness, please.

Mr. GRIFFITHS. Mr. W. N. Ellis, of Zanesville, Ohio. He is an engineer, formerly from the Muskingum Conservancy District. The CHAIRMAN. Whom do you represent?

STATEMENT OF W. N. ELLIS, APPEARING FOR THE LICKING VALLEY CONSERVANCY DISTRICT

Mr. ELLIS. I represent the Licking Valley Conservancy District. The CHAIRMAN. Are you connected with the Ohio Conservancy District?

Mr. ELLIS. No, I am not, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Did you help to perfect those plans for the construction of those 13 reservoirs?

Mr. ELLIS. I did.

The CHAIRMAN. And were you interested in the Government subsequently taking over and reimbursing that conservancy district? Mr. ELLIS. I was acquainted with that feature.

The CHAIRMAN. So that was what happened, that the Government is now putting the conservancy district reservoirs in the Muskingum on a par with the reservoirs all over the country.

Mr. ELLIS. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. And there have been highway relocations and railway relocations.

Mr. ELLIS. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. And there have been valuable lands taken for the construction of those reservoirs.

Mr. ELLIS. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. And you are familiar with the fact that we have had many complaints before this committee of residents whose cellars and homes have been overflowed and damaged.

Mr. ELLIS. That is true.

The CHAIRMAN. Your point is what? Do you have a brief as an engineer representing these people?

Mr. ELLIS. I am going briefly into that.

The CHAIRMAN, Go ahead.

Do you have a prepared brief?

Mr. ELLIS. Yes.

The Muskingum district has 14 dams.

The CHAIRMAN. We have gone into that.

Mr. ELLIS. We wish to propose that we do the same thing on the Licking River. If a series of dams is suitable on the upper reaches of the Muskingum, why is it not applicable to that of the Licking, Mr. Chairman, when the cost will be less, and the benefits derived will be even greater than one dam, and safer? It will conserve; it will offer flood protection.

It will conserve the water above the dam the same as one single dam, and if the Licking Valley Reservoir, the little dam, is the only system to employ construction of flood control and conservancy, would not that same thing apply to the Muskingum River, and one larger dam could have been constructed at or near Dresden, Ohio, just above Zanesville, rather than the 14 dams in the surrounding area in the vicinity of Akron? That is what we are driving at.