Page images

Mr. BUTZNER. That was the severest. In 1937 there was flood that approached the 1942 flood. I think that went up to 122,000. There was considerable damage done.

What interests us is that it has been stated unequivocably that a flood of 200,000 feet could be cut down to 75,000 feet, and that would be a boom to Fredericksburg and a boom to that whole country.

In 1942 our public utilities were disrupted, the city was without power and light. There was a great danger of an epidemic. Practi. cally everybody in town found it necessary to be vaccinated. People were homeless. The churches on the high ground were used to house those people who were homeless. The hospital was endangered and partially flooded. Under this project the 1942 flood, according to the report of the Army engineers, would have been cut in half. It would have been cut to 70,000 feet had the Salem Church project existed at that time.

There are a lot of other features. It would assist in sewerage disposal. At the present time the sewage is put in the river untreated. It will not be long before, under the Virginia law, sewage will have to be treated. Under the Salem Church plan the minimum flow would be 770 cubic feet per second. Now it drops down to 5 cubic feet per second. You can understand what a difference that makes and how much less the sewage would have to be treated for its disposal in order that it would not injure plant life and fish life in the river. It has the feature of providing additional water for fire protection in the city. The main thing is the flood control.

After studying it the members of the Fredericksburg Council who are here today, the city manager, and the other representatives

The CHAIRMAN. Will you give us the names ?
Mr. BUTZNER. I think the mayor will introduce them.
The CHAIRMAN. We are glad to have had your statement.

The committee is in receipt of a letter from Governor Tuck, of Virginia, dated April 5, in which he states,

I enclose herewith a copy of my letter to the Chief of Engineers in reference to the construction of the Salem Church dam. I was compelled to answer the Governor's letter and advised him that he omitted to enclose the copy of the letter. Mayor King. I have one, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. We also have a telegram from Mr. Camp, executive secretary of the Virginia Chamber of Commerce, requesting that we postpone hearings on Rappahannock flood-control bill pending report of Governor's committee on all Virginia flood-control proposals.

We also have a telegram from Mr. Opie, newspaper publisher, Staunton, Va., requesting that we postpone hearings on Virginia dam projects until State government and public can study over-all river development.

We also have a telegram from Mr. C. P. McCue, of Waynesboro, requesting that the hearings be postponed pending report by Gov. ernor's committee investigating proposed hydroelectric projects on all rivers in Virginia.

I assume, of course, that the project under consideration was submitted to the Governor of Virginia and his comments are available to the committee.

It just occurred to me it was fair to read these statements before you left the stand.

If you have any further statement we will be glad to have it. Any questions by Mr. Allen? Mr. ALLEN. You started out talking about a dam two-hundred-andsome feet high. You wound up talking about the Salem Church dam 36 feet high.

Mr. BUTZNER. No, sir. The Salem Church Dam is a dam 208 feet high. The dam I mentioned being 36 feet high is known as the Fredericksburg project.

Mr. ALLEN. You are not advocating that? Mr. BUTZNER. No, sir. We are advocating the Salem Church project, which is just upstream from Fredericksburg.

Mr. ÁLLEN. I judge from your statement that the flood damage listed by the engineers is confined almost solely to the city of Fredericksburg?

Mr. BUTZNER. The city of Fredericksburg and the town of Falmouth suffered the greatest urban damage. There was damage to highway bridges. There was damage to the railroad. There was damage to farms. There is one gentleman who is here with us who suffered damage to his farm road.

Mr. ALLEN. How much agricultural damage was there in this 1942 flood ?

Mr. BUTZNER. I do not have the break-down of figures between urban and agricultural damages. I know those figures exist.

Mr. ALLEN. Now one further question. After the precipitation takes place how long does it take the flood to reach the city of Fredericksburg? In other words, the 1942 flood was caused by unprecedented rain ? Mr. BUTZNER. Yes, sir. Mr. ALLEN. After that rain took place how long did it take the water to get down to the city of Fredericksburg ? Mayor KING. We do not have over 24 hours' warning. Mr. ALLEN. The amount of warning was what I was trying to get. That is all. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Jackson, any questions? Mr. JACKSON. No questions. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. McCowen? Mr. McCOWEN. No, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Adams? Mr. ADAMS. No, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Davis ? Mr. Davis. No questions. The CHAIRMAN. We are glad to have had your statement. Mayor King. I would like to present Mr. L. J. Houston, Jr., the city manager of Fredericksburg.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Houston, you may come around. We will be glad to have any additional facts you desire to emphasize. STATEMENT BY L. J. HOUSTON, JR., CITY MANAGER,

FREDERICKSBURG, VA. Mr. HOUSTON. Mr. Chairman, I will be glad to answer questions. Of course, I corroborate everything Mr. Butzner has said. I will not repeat that. The CHAIRMAN. I will ask you one or two questions.

87116_46_ 0

What, generally, according to your knowledge, is the character of the reservoir lands that would be condemned for this proposed reservoir dam site?

Mr. Houston. Most of the territory that would be covered by this lake consists of cut-over woods. Of course, there is included a small: amount of tillable land.

The CIAIRMÀn. What percentage would you say is at present till. able that would be required for this site? Mr. Houston. Personally, I think there is a very small proportion.

The CHAIRMAN. Something has been said about the Fredericksburg Reservoir 36 feet high. I assume that would not be a power reservoir?

Mr. HOUSTON. The Fredericksburg Dam is a power reservoir.

The CHAIRMAN. And the Salem Dam would be a power reservoir, too? Mr. Houston. The Salem Dam would be a multiple-purpose dam. The CHAIRMAN. The 36-foot dam, would that generate power? Mr. HOUSTON. Yes, sir. The CTIAIRMAN. Nothing like as much as the other? Mr. HOUSTON. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. What is your view as to the public opinion respecting the desirability and feasibility of the project under consideration?

Mr. HOUSTON. So far as the citizens of Fredericksburg are concerned, I have only heard of one man in town opposed to it.

The CHAIRMAN. What about the citizens above, are they opposed or for?

Mr. Houston. I have not discussed it with the people above the city. I think probably it would be divided opinion.

The CHAIRMAN. Any questions by Mr. Allen? Mr. ALLEN. I would like to know how many people live in this area that would be covered by the water?

Mr. Houston. I think there are very few people who live in the actual flooded area.

Mr. ALLEN. The number of people that would be flooded, do you have that information, General?

General CRAWFORD. We do not have that information available. We can supply that for the record.

(The following statement is inserted for the record:)

The total area inundated by the reservoir at the top of the power pool is 21,300 acres of which 17,600 acres are wooded lands, and 3,700 acres are cultivated, pasture or open land. Included in this area there are approximately 1,050 acres of cultivated land along the Rapidan River from Racoon Ford downstream for approximately 7 miles. In general, however, the lands within the Salem Church Reservoir are mostly steep and sparsely settled. A total of 55 groups of buildings are located within the reservoir area.

Mr. ALLEN. I wish you would supply that information for the record.

Mr. JACKSON. Would it cause any hardship, to your knowledge, to these people in the area that would be flooded ?

Mr. HOUSTON. I do not think so.
Mr. Jackson. Generally, it is not going to affect many people?
Mr. Houston. In those cases they would be paid fair prices.

Mr. JACKSON. They would be compensated, of course. Are there very many people, to your knowledge ?

Mr. Houston. I don't think so. Of course, the damage that was done in Fredericksburg cannot be compensated.

The CHAIRMAN. How long did the water stay up there? Mr. HOUSTON. I would say about 24 hours. It stayed there long enough to do the damage. I believe in Stafford that one or two people drowned.

The CHAIRMAN. Any questions by Mr. Robertson? .
Mr. ROBERTSON. As I understand it, there are two projects.
Mr. Houston. That is right.

Mr. ROBERTSON. But you are concentrating your effort on the high dam? Mr. Houston. That is right. Mr. ROBERTSON. What do you call that dam? Mr. HOUSTON. Salem Church. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Adams? Mr. ADAMS. No questions. Mr. HOUSTON. There is one thing I would like to mention. Mr. Butzner referred to the low water in the river of 5 second-feet. In 1930 we had a drought in which that flow of 5 second-feet occurred, and during that time the water supply of the city was so endangered that we 'had to shut down the power plant there for 2 or 3 months. With this multiple-purpose dam that conditions would never exist, again, because in the drought periods they would let water through this dam to keep up a certain minimum flow in the river, which, of course, is a very vital thing to the city of Fredericksburg.

The CHAIRMAN. We are glad to have had your statement. Mr. Mayor, any other additional facts you desire to present by other witnesses?

Mayor King. I would like to present very briefly Mr. James Ashby, the clerk of the county of Stafford in the Eighth Congressional District, in which the town of Falmouth, just across the river, was vitally affected.

The CHAIRMAN. All right, Mr. Ashby.

STATEMENT BY JAMES ASHBY, STAFFORD COUNTY, VA. Mr. ASHBY. I have very few facts and know very little about flood control. I come from Stafford County across the river from Fredericksburg. We have a very large settlement of Stafford people who live in Falmouth and around Falmouth. We are very seriously affected by the floods. One of the school buildings was washed away in the flood of 1942.

I have lived through two floods. People in my county are very much interested in this project. They want this Salem Church project built.

Mr. BLAND. I think it would be well to bring out the fact that Mr. Ashby is clerk of the court and has been for a number of years.

The CHAIRMAN. Clerk of what court? Mr. ASHBY. I am clerk of the circuit court of Stafford County and also a member of the conservation commission. I have been a clerk for 28 years.

The CHAIRMAN. We are delighted to have had your statement.
Any questions by any members of the committee?
Mr. Mayor, you may present your next witness.
Mayor King. I would like to present Mr. John L. Pratt.


The CHAIRMAN. We are glad to have a farmer and will be delighted to have any statement you desire to make.

Mr. PRATT. I live below Falmouth. I live in the suburb of Falmouth.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the population of Falmouth according to the census?

Mr. PRATT. It is not incorporated. It takes in a large territory that has approximately 5 or 6 hundred people.

I have heard no one in our part of the county object to this project. In my lifetime we have had three bad floods. All have done considerable damage.

There may be some people there who oppose it. I do not know. But I cannot see why they would.

The CHAIRMAN. În your opinion, it will protect the cities of Fredericksburg and Falmouth and the territory below?

Mr. PRATT. I will take the judgment of the engineers. I have some farms below Fredericksburg that have suffered a good deal of damage. I have never been asked for any figures and I have never given any figures as to the damage. I would say in 1942 my farm suffered several thousand dollars' worth of damage.

The CHAIRMAN. Any questions?
Mr. ALLEN. What size farm do you have?
Mr. PRATT. I really have three farms.
Mr. ALLEN. How much acreage?
Mr. PRATT. I have 500 acres in one and 1,400 acres in another.
Mr. ALLEN. How many acres did you have flooded in 1942 ?
Mr. PRATT. In 1942 I judge about 800 acres.
The CHAIRMAN. Any questions by Mr. Jackson?

Mr. JACKSON. Are you familiar with the land that is to be flooded by the reservoir dam?

Mr. PRATT. I am familiar in general. I have been over most of this land. But I should think the engineers would have the facts. Anything I would give you would be just opinion. I do not think the land is very valuable. Of course, the other fellow's land is always more valuable to him than you think it is.

Mr. JACKSON. I understand there is a lot of cut-over timberland ?

Mr. Pratt. That is the nature of it. It is a narrow valley, as you can see by the map.

Mr. JACKSON. It is not as fertile as the land that will be protected by the dam ? Mr. PRATT. No; I would say not. The CHAIRMAN. Any questions by the members of the committee? Mr. ADAMS. How much permanent damage to your farm?

Mr. PRATT. I suppose about 10 acres. There was considerable sand deposit on about 10 acres.

Mr. Adams. Is that generally true of the other land in the river bottom below the projected dam site? Mr. PRATT. Yes; I would think so. The CHAIRMAN. The next witness. Mr. BLAND. Mr. Chairman, I think it well to state that Mr. Pratt was formerly connected with General Motors and he owns one of the

[ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]
« PreviousContinue »