Mr. ALLEN. I am inserting for the record statements presented to the chairman of this committee by the Honorable Clyde Doyle, Representative in Congress from the Eighteenth District of California: HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D. C., April 18, 1946. Whittier Narrows Dam, Authorization therefor, Los Angeles County, Calif. House Office Building. (Attention: Hon. William Whittington, chairman.) MY DEAR COLLEAGUE: By express authorization of the undersigned members of the House, from Los Angeles County, Calif., I communicate to you as follows, to wit: We respectfully request that you do not withdraw authorization for the aboveindicated flood-control project. We are informed that the board of supervisors of Los Angeles County has just wired you to the same effect. All Members of this House from Los Angeles County-with the exception of one has heretofore registered approval of this project when the funds therefor were available. We now emphatically request that the authorization be not withdrawn. Signed by Clyde Doyle for the following members of the House from Los Angeles County: Hon. Cecil King, Hon. John Philips, Hon. Gordon L. McDonough, Hon. Ned R. Healy, Hon. Ellis E. Patterson, Hon. Chet Holifield. Sincerely yours, CLYDE DOYLE, M. C. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D. C., April 18, 1946. The FLOOD CONTROL COMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE, House Office Building. (Attention: Hon. William Whittington, chairman.) MY DEAR COLLEAGUE: On behalf of the Board of Water Commissioners of Long Beach, Calif., who have just telegraphed me, I now register protest against any withdrawal of authorization for the Whittier Narrows Dam project as follows: Mr. Chairman: I now emphatically request that if there is any thought on the part of the committee of withdrawing this authorization that you allow opportunities for hearing of witnesses against such proposed withdrawal. I thank you. Sincerely yours, CLYDE DOYLE, M. C. P. S.-Heretofore I have filed with you a protest on any such action, in which I was joined by Congressmen Healy, Patterson, McDonough, King, Phillips, and Holifield. Enclosed you will find copy of telegram I just received from the board of water commissioners. I am also inserting for the record a telegram received by the chairman of this committee from Mr. M. R. Bowen, president, San Gabriel Valley Protector Association; a telegram from Mr. H. E. Hedger, chief engineer, Los Angeles County flood-control district; and a telegram from Mr. George M. Winstead, president, board of water commissioners: HON. CLYDE DOYLE, LONG BEACH, CALIF., April 18. House of Representatives, House Office Building, Washington, D. C.: Los Angeles Herald reports that Congressman Jerry Voorhis has requested House Flood Control Committee to withdraw authorization of Whittier Narrows Dam. We are wiring our protest to Congressman Whittington, and request that you and Congressman Chet Holifield appear before the committee and back our protest as strongly as possible. We cannot understand how the city of Elmonte with a population of 6,500 or even the so-called Greater Elmonte area which claims a population of 43,000 can continue to block flood protection for a population of half a million people lying below the site of the proposed dam, nor why the value of 3,100 acres in the reservoir site with an assessed valuation of about $2,000,000 should outweigh the value of 50,000 acres with an assessed valuation of more than $75,000,000 subject to extreme flood hazard if the dam is not built. The elimination of flood control at the Whittier Narrows will wreck the entire remaining flood-control program on the San Gabriel River, including proposed work on Rio Rondo and Los Angeles River below its junction with Rio Rondo. Hon. WILLIAM M. WHITTINGTON, BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS, WHITTIER, CALIF., April 17, 1946. Chairman, Flood Control Committee, House of Representatives, Understand Congressman Voorhis requests Whittier Narrows project be withdrawn. Protest this on grounds would deprive several thousand people of necessary flood protection. M. R. BOWEN, President, San Gabriel Valley Protector Association. LOS ANGELES, CALIF., April 17, 1946. Hon. WILLIAM M. WHITTINGTON, Chairman, Flood Control Committee, House of Representatives, House Office Building, Washington, D. C.: News items today indicate Congressman Voorhis has requested that House Flood Control Committee withdraw authorization for Whittier Narrows project. The Los Angeles County Flood Control District protests this proposal on grounds that it would prejudice necessary flood protection for several hundred thousand people. All reasonable alternative plans have been studied by Army engineers and found not economically justified. Delay resulting from temporary withdrawal of authorization would be very expensive due to continuing encroachment of private development in the reservoir area. Request committee take no action on Voorhis suggestion unless all interested parties are given full hearing. H. E. HEDGER, Chief Engineer, Los Angeles County Flood Control District. Hon. W. M. WHITTINGTON, LONG BEACH, CALIF., April 18, 1946. Chairman of Flood Control Committee, House of Representatives, House Office Building, Washington, D. C.: According to a news item in Los Angeles paper, Congressman Jerry Voorhis has requested your committee to recommend withdrawal of authorization of Whittier Narrows Dam, as contained in House Document No. 838, Seventy-sixth Congress, third session. On behalf of the city of Long Beach, with more than 250,000 population, we protest any such withdrawal, which would disrupt the entire remaining flood-control program in the San Gabriel River and the lower reaches of the Los Angeles River and expose 250,000 people living between the Whittier Narrows and Long Beach to the extreme hazard of uncontrolled floods from an area of 316 square miles lying above the Narrows. BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS, The committee will stand in recess until 9:30 tomorrow morning. (Whereupon, at 10: 30 a. m., the committee adjourned to Wednesday, April 17, 1946, at 9:30 a. m.) (April 19, 1946) The CHAIRMAN. In connection with the Whittier-Narrows project, there has been transmitted to the committee for the record the following telegrams which I am inserting: Hon. WILLIAM M. WHITTINGTON, LOS ANGELES, CALIF., April 18, 1946. Chairman, Flood Control Committee, House of Representatives, House Office Building, Washington, D. C.: Understand from press Congressman Voorhis has urged withdrawal of authorization for Whittier Narrows project. Cancellation of this authorization would leave millions of dollars of property and several hundred thousand people without flood protection. Even if action was temporary, delay would be extremely expensive, because of rising land values in reservoir area. Request committee delay action until those interested can be heard. No need for hasty decision since Congress has made no appropriation for construction. W. S. ROSECRANS, President, Conservation Association. Congressman WILLIAM M. WHITTINGTON, LOS ANGELES, CALIF., April 18, 1946. House of Representatives, House Office Building, Washington, D. C.: Have tried 2 days to reach you regarding news stories pertaining to Whittier Narrows Dam. Stories indicate possibility dam authorization may be rescinded; urge that no action adverse to Whittier Narrows Dam construction be taken before all sides have opportunity to be heard. WM. A. SMITH, Board of Supervisors, County of Los Angeles. LONG BEACH, CALIF., April 18, 1946. Hon. WILLIAM M. WHITTINGTON, Chairman of Flood Control Committee, House Office Building, Washington, D. C.: Informed Congressman Voorhis has requested your committee to recommend withdrawal of authorization of Whittier Narrows Dam, House Document 838. We protest any such withdrawal and must have adequate flood-control facilities to protect lives and property of approximately one-fourth million people. SAMUEL E. VICKERS, City Manager, Long Beach, Calif. (May 3, 1946) SALINAS RIVER The CHAIRMAN. We have before us, General Wheeler, the report of the Chief of Engineers on the Salinas River, Calif. Will you make a statement or do you desire Colonel Herb to do so? General WHEELER. I would like Colonel Herb to make the statement, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Colonel Herb, give us the authority for this report, the flood problems involved, the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers, and your report as to the character of the improvements, requirements of the local interests, and the benefits as compared with the costs? Where is the Salinas River located? STATEMENT OF COL. E. G. HERB, ASSISTANT CIVIL WORKS DIVISION, OFFICE, CHIEF OF ENGINEERS Colonel HERB. The Salinas River rises in the Coast Range mountains in San Luis Obispo County, Calif., and flows 168 miles northwesterly through San Luis Obispo and Monterey Counties to Monterey Bay. The CHAIRMAN. What flood problem is there generally along that river? Colonel HERB. There have been 21 floods since 1900. The largest flood of record occurred in 1938 and had a peak discharge of about 75,000 cubic feet per second. The Salinas River has a drainage area of about 4,200 square miles. The river channel within the valley is wide and shallow with poorly defined, generally unstable banks, and its capacity varies from about 20,000 to 42,000 cubic feet per second. Agriculture and processing of agricultural products are the predominant occupations in the basin, with the farming concentrated in the alluvial valleys along the river. The CHAIRMAN. Does it debouch into a plain? Colonel HERB. No, sir, the river sort of meanders through the valley between the Santa Lucia Range and the Diablo Range to Monterey Bay. The CHAIRMAN. What is the average width of the valley? Colonel HERB. It varies in width from about 10 miles near Monterey Bay to approximately 2 miles at San Ardo about 85 miles above its mouth. The CHAIRMAN. What local improvements have been made by the local people for their own protection? Colonel HERB. Local interests have spent over $1,000,000 in constructing retaining walls, jetties, revetments and other types of bank protection works on the river. There are no Federal flood-control projects in this basin. The annual flood damage in the basin is estimated at $164,000. The plan of improvement provides for the correction and stabilization of the lower 93 miles of the river channel, and about 1 mile of the channel of Arroyo Seco which enters Salinas River at mile 45. There are five prominent tributaries of this river, three coming in from the west and two from the east. This Arroyo Seco comes in from the west. The plan provides for clearing the channels of vegetation; protective planting of willows, baccharis and other native vegetation on the banks and along the back of the training works; and constructing about 80 bank miles of channel training works, 60 bank miles of bankprotection works, 12 bank miles of light bank revetment, and about 10 miles of earth dikes; excavation of about 1.5 miles of pilot channel. The entire project is one of channel stabilization and rectification to increase the capacity of the channel. The CHAIRMAN. What is the estimated cost? Colonel HERB. The estimated Federal cost is $1,905,000, and the non-Federal cost for providing easements is estimated at $55,000, making a total first cost of $1,960,000, sir. The CHAIRMAN. What is the requirement of the local interest? Colonel HERB. The usual local requirement, sir; that is provided without cost to the United States, all lands, easements, and rights-ofway necessary for completion of the works; hold and save the United States free from damages due to the construction works; and maintain and operate all the works after completion in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of War. The ratio of costs to benefits is 1 to 1.14. The CHAIRMAN. And you say that project is one primarily of channel stabilization and of local protective works? Colonel HERB. That is correct. The CHAIRMAN. Do you have anything else? Colonel HERB. Reservoirs were considered in this plan too, but no recommendation was made because it takes further study by the Bureau of Reclamation. If the reservoirs are ultimately built the plan that we propose here will fit into the ultimate development of this basin. The CHAIRMAN, What are the principal products in this valley? Colonel HERB. Agriculture is the principal industry. In the lower part of the valley lettuce, sugar beets, beans, carrots, and artichokes, are grown, while almonds, walnuts, and deciduous fruit orchards predominate in the upper valley. They also raise some truck produce and livestock. The CHAIRMAN. What cities, if any? Colonel HERB. Salinas is the most important city, sir. It had a population in 1940 of about 11,500. The CHAIRMAN. What is the population of the valley? Colonel HERB. The population of the entire valley in 1940 was estimated at 53,000. One other statement might be of interest to the committee. The Governor of California, by letter dated April 6, 1946, recommended that the improvements as proposed by the Chief of Engineers be approved and be authorized by the Congress for immediate construction; and at the appropriate time, full consideration be given the matter of classification of costs for maintenance incurred after the 5-year period of construction, properly chargeable to experimental work, as a Federal obligation. The Secretary of the Interior, in a letter dated April 12, 1946, commenting on the Salinas River report, recommended that the proposed plan be authorized, recognizing that it is only a part of an ultimate plan, in which the irrigation reservoirs and conservation works of that Department will play an important role. (The report of the Chief of Engineers, together with the comments of the Department of the Interior, are as follows:) Subject: Salinas River, Calif. WAR DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS. 1. I submit for transmission to Congress, my interim report with accompaning papers and illustrations on premilinary examination and survey of "Salinas River in Monterey County," authorized by the Flood Control Act approved June 22, |