Page images
PDF
EPUB

that the map of Leon gives us no complete picture of the Brazos situation.

The great benefits we anticipate, and the thing we are vitally interested in, are the floods that occur on the Little River and the Brazos, even below the junction of the Little River with the Brazos. The water that comes out of the Leon accounts for a large part of the crest on the floods on the Little River, which do destroy tremendous amounts of crop land farther down, not technically in the Leon Valley, but in the Little River Valley, and later in the Brazos Valley. It is the people who live in the Little River and the Brazos Valley being ruined by the water of the Leon River. Obviously, a dam at the lower end of the Leon Valley itself is not going to protect the people in the Leon Valley, except to a very, very limited degree. There is a tremendous amount of damage that occurs below there.

We are told that in 1913 that Little River carried one-third of the amount of water that the Mississippi carries at flood stage.

The CHAIRMAN. Would you mind repeating that?

Mr. POAGE. In 1913 the Little River carried one-third of the amount of water that the Mississippi carries. It seems incredible.

We are faced with a terrible situation down there. This is one of the streams that contributes materially to our aggravation. So we are primarily interested in flood control. Colonel Herb made the statement that they were reserving a lot of space for flood control. We are very happy about that, because we want to keep water off those lands below us. We are interested in all that the Department of the Interior may do in providing reclamation, but reclamation is of no value in the world in that lower valley until we have some way of keeping the floods back. The water in the summer will not help us if before you gather your crops you have 6 or 8 feet of water over the crops. In other words, there is no profit in irrigating your land if before you take the crop away the floods carry it off.

So, our trouble is floods, and we must do something to mitigate these floods.

We

We think that this offers us the greatest opportunity that has been held out to central Texas to alleviate a terrible flood situation. think the Army has done a good job in making the recommendation for a large storage of flood water there.

Now, the upper-stream proposals are desirable, I am sure, from the standpoint of the city of Eastland. I do not want to speak for Mr. Russell, but I am sure the people are glad to have it, having a little familiarity with the town of Eastland.

Primarly, what we want is a flood-control dam to protect, not the Leon Valley, but the valley far below. We think those things are extremely important.

Now, I am embarrassed to come before this committee this morning, when everyone here has cooperated so splendidly to get this report up here. As I understand it, everybody has passed on this report except the Governor of Texas. I confess my embarrassment that the Governor of my home State has not sent this up here. I can only say that in behalf of the Governor, we were assured as early as last December that the report would be approved the minute it got down to the Gov

ernor's office. This must be said in his behalf. It has been the practice of the Governor of Texas to send these reports out to El Paso. Just about the time this report came down there they changed the system. The reports now go to the Board of Water Engineers in Texas. The board of water engineers were holding hearings last week at Fort Stockton. They got the report down there, and it has never gotten to the board of water engineers. I talked to Texas yesterday, and they have assured me the report will be back up here, and we trust we will be able to have the Governor's recommendation on this report and have it by tomorrow or the next day for you.

We sincerely hope there will not be a delay. This thing is absolutely essential if we are going to protect the Little River and Brazos Valley. You cannot give protection to the Little River Valley without storing water on the Leon. We do know enough about the situation to know there must be water stored on the Leon, just as you folks down in the lower Mississippi realize there must be water retarded up in the Ohio and Missouri Valleys. It will be absolutely destructive to us if we wait until all the decisions in regard to the Brazos Valley are decided before we determine what we are going to do in regard to storing this. I think Colonel Herb well expressed it when he said that the engineers recognized that this project would be helpful in connection with any plan that is finally decided on for the entire Brazos Valley. We cannot build all of the Brazos dams at one time. We have a project comparable to the Tennessee. You recognize you cannot build all of those dams at one time. You cannot decide at one time what you are going to do for all of them. There is one we know must be built. We know we must have this dam on the Leon. We would feel very badly if this project were deferred for any reason. The project was about to come up in 1941 when it was thought desirable to consider further the entire Brazos Valley project. We have postponed it for a long period of years. We feel that it cannot be postponed any longer.

So, I hope very much we may go ahead with it.

The CHAIRMAN. Any questions by members of the committee? If not, we are glad to have had your statement. If you desire to submit a further statement on the day set aside for Congressmen, we will be glad to have it.

General Crawford, is there any further matter you have to bring to our attention today?

Colonel HERB. I think it might be well to put the letter from the Interior Department pertaining to the Leon River report in the record with my earlier remarks.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the date of that letter?

Colonel HERB. April 12, 1946.

The CHAIRMAN. That may be included in the record at that point. If there is nothing further to come before the committee, the committee stands adjourned until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning.

(Thereupon, at 11:30 a. m., the committee adjourned to Tuesday, April 16, 1946, at 10 a. m.)

[blocks in formation]

The committee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to adjournment, Hon. Will M. Whittington (chairman) presiding.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will be in order.

We have under consideration for today the matter of additional authorizations for approved plans for the Los Angeles River and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Rivers. There were two local protective projects mentioned in the schedule, one for Salinas River, the other for Santa Clara River, but these two projects have not been reported on and have not been submitted to the Budget. So there will be no hearings on those projects.

General Crawford, in the Los Angeles area-you or Colonel Herb, as you desire, may answer-there have been approved projects at an estimated cost, as I recall, of approximately $273,500,000; is that correct?

STATEMENT OF COL. E. G. HERB, EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO THE DIRECTOR OF CIVIL WORKS, OFFICE, CHIEF OF ENGINEERS

Colonel HERB. Yes, sir, and there has been authorized for the partial accomplishment or the construction of those projects, $132,541,000.

The CHAIRMAN. Projects are under way for what amount?

Colonel HERB. The total Federal cost of projects completed and under way amounts to about $100,000,000.

The CHAIRMAN. That leaves approximately $32,000,000 remaining of the monetary authorization not yet committed; is that right? Colonel HERB. Yes, sir; that is correct. The approved comprehensive plan includes the following items:

[blocks in formation]

Project unit

Status

Los Angeles River Basin-Continued

Los Angeles River channel-Continued

Stewart and Gray Road to Santa Ana branch,
Pacific Electric R. R. bridge__

Santa Ana branch, Pacific Electric R. R. bridge
to Pacific Ocean__.

Long Beach Boulevard_
Baines Canyon

Sycamore Wash

Verdugo Wash, Upper Canada bridge to debris
basin

Verdugo Wash, Concord to Upper Canada bridge.
Compton Creek, Alameda Street to Hooper Ave-
nue storm drain___.

Compton Creek, Hooper Avenue storm drain to
Main Street__

Lopez flood-control basin_

Caballero Creek

Wilson Canyon and Manfield Street channel...

Lopez Canyon diversion_.

Pacoima Wash channel__.

Blue Gum Canyon---

Tujunga Wash channel_

Burbank western system (lower).

Burbank western system (upper).

Burbank eastern system__.

Blanchard channel__.

Dead Horse Canyon and Royal Blvd. channel_.

Winery Canyon__.

San Gabriel River Basin:

Santa Fe flood control basin__.

San Gabriel River Channel:

San Gabriel Canyon to Santa Fe flood control
basin___.

Under construction.

Not in progress.
Completed.
Do.

Do.

Not in progress.
Completed.

Do.

Not in progress.
Planning under way.
Not in progress.

Do.
Do.

Planning under way.
Not in progress.
Planning under way.
Partly complete.
Planning under way.
Not in progress.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Partly completed.

Under construction.

Santa Fe flood control basin to Walnut Creek--. Planning under way.

Walnut Creek to Pacific Ocean.__.

Whittier Narrows flood control basin.

Walnut Creek system---

Walnut Creek Inlet channel_

Marshall Creek_-

Emerald Wash and Liveoak Wash_-_

Thompson Creek and San Jose Wash, Coyote Creek_

Rio Hondo Basin:

Alhambra Wash.

Rio Hondo channel_.

Sawpit Wash_

Sierra Madre Villa channel_

Santa Anita Wash__.

Arcadia Wash system..

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

The CHAIRMAN. So that substantially the situation is that in the Los Angeles area there is a situation comparable to the New England area, where we have about $50,000,000 in the Connecticut Basin that would be available for initiation of work on other units of the plan.

Colonel HERB. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Whereas, in the other areas of the country there are only small amounts, for instance, $7,000,000 along the Arkansas, and about $5,000,000 along the White and substantially none along other rivers. When you answered the question with respect to Los Angeles did you embrace in the Los Angeles area the authorizations for the Sacramento-San Joaquin and other streams?

Colonel HERB. No, sir; just the Los Angeles and San Gabriel River basins.

The CHAIRMAN. Will you please give us the authorizations for the other California projects; their approvals first?

Colonel HERB. The schedule refers to those projects that were approved in the 1944 Flood Control Act with the exception of the Big Dry Creek Reservoir which was authorized in the Flood Control Act of 1941. Those two bills authorized the construction of some 16 reservoirs and dams and several local protection projects.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the total amount of the approved projects? Colonel HERB. The total present estimated cost of those projects that have been approved is about $230,000,000.

The CHAIRMAN. Is that in addition to the $273,000,000 for the Los Angeles area?

Colonel HERB. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. In other words, that includes all projects in the State of California outside of the Los Angeles area?

Colonel HERB. No, sir. There is the Santa Ana River Basin which is south of Los Angeles and a few other authorized projects in the State of California.

The CHAIRMAN. Are they included in this figure you have just given me?

Colonel HERB. No, sir; they are not.

The CHAIRMAN. What projects generally are included in the figure of $230,000,000 that you have just given the committee?

Colonel HERB. Sixteen dams and reservoirs and several local protection projects on the Sacramento River and its tributaries, the San Joaquin and its tributaries. The individual item comprising the approved plan is as follows:

PROJECTS AUTHORIZED OR IN APPROVED PLAN IN SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN BASIN SACRAMENTO RIVER

[blocks in formation]
« PreviousContinue »