of our American civilization will properly have been served. I realize that this conception of flood control and of multiple-purpose projects is the conception held by your committee, and I congratulate you upon this viewpoint.

I was deeply impressed with some figures which were released the other day by the Bureau of Reclamation, covering the Republican Valley. There may be comparable figures for other streams which traverse Nebraska, including the Missouri, but I have never seen them. These figures show how fearfully flood losses combined with intermittent drought can wreck the agricultural stability of an area. During the period from 1923 to 1930, when the Republican Valley was relatively free of floods, the average annual gross crop values for the watershed were $74,417,000. In the ensuing decade, from 1930 to 1940, when floods again hit us, causing great loss of lives, as well as damaging extensively our farm production, the average annual gross crop values dropped to $28,513,000. Think what this means. With the total crop returns in a 25,000-square-mile area reduced to one-third of the former decade, it is easy to understand the agricultural instability of that rich farming area. How fortunate that a sufficient supply of water exists within a basin such as the Republican with which to correct that situation. Instead of permitting flood losses to run on perpetually, the very water which has been our enemy may be converted into a tremendous asset, simply by storing it behind reservoirs, and letting it out in the late summer and fall when thirsty crops can be trebled in yield as compared with surrounding dry farm practices.

When one relatively small watershed shall suffer reduced income totaling nearly $50,000,000 in a single year, and that situation continue for a decade, who may say that flood control is not an economic matter, no matter what the cost. I hope that the day may not be far distant when such sections of Nebraska, and other Great Plains States, where agriculture is always a hazardous enterprise at best, may be made as stable as possible through the prevention for all time to come of continued flood losses. I assure you that our entire Nebraska delegation, in both Houses, will want to assist your committee in any way we can, and we assure you of our deep gratitude for the sympathetic attitude you have always manifested toward our Nebraska problems.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Burton, of Ohio, is the next witness. Senator, we are glad to have you with us and will be glad to hear such statement as you desire to make at this time.

STATEMENT OF HON. HAROLD H. BURTON, A UNITED STATES SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF OHIO

Senator BURTON. Mr. Chairman, I appear this morning particularly in support of the flood-control improvements on the Scioto River. There has been testimony given as to the need for this improvement and it has, of course, been examined by the Corps of Engineers.

There will be at this hearing today not only Representative Jenkins but perhaps others from Ohio who are deeply concerned in this matter. What I wish to emphasize especially in connection with the importance of flood control in both the Mississippi and Ohio valleys, is the fact that we already have had demonstrated the great value that has come from the establishment of the conservancy district protection on the Muskingum River, which is a little higher up in the Ohio Valley. As I understand it, the improvements on the Scioto River might well have been put into operation and been built at the same time as those on the Muskingum. However, it was delayed for various reasons at that time, but the reasons have not by any means diminished; in fact, they have been shown to be even more necessary since we have had serious floods since that time.

There are under consideration, as I understand, four projects for reservoirs on the Ohio and Hocking River in Athens County, five reservoirs on the Scioto River, two on the Little Miami River at Ceasar Creek and East Fork of the Little Miami.

There are also a number of protective projects proposed on the south side of the river, and they are equally important to us as those on the northern side.

But it is our judgment that the most important of those remaining to be constructed in Ohio are those on the Scioto River, all five of the reservoirs on the river, two at Delaware, one at Bellepoint, one at Deer Creek, one at Paint Creek and one at Rocky Fork. They are all parts of a project to protect the Scioto River, which runs directly into the Ohio a little distance below Portsmouth.

The one at Delaware is a vital necessity. As I understand the judg ment of the Corps of Engineers is that there is no question about the need for establishing a reservoir at Delaware. Therefore, I am urging at this time that we do proceed with at least these five reservoirs on this river which will serve as a contribution toward the protection of the general Ohio Valley area.

This project has received a great deal of enthusiastic support in Ohio. There has been organized some time ago, and is in existence, the Scioto Sandusky Conservatory District, indicating the interest of the people in this project.

We are glad to cooperate in any way we can. I think the evidence will show that we need not only the reservoir at Delaware but the other four on the same river, to insure the control of the Ohio River.

The CHAIRMAN. We are glad to have your statement, and as you have indicated, and are aware, all those projects to which you have referred, including the reservoirs you have mentioned as well as the local protective works on the south bank of the river, or the left bank of the river, as it is sometimes referred to, have been favorably reported by the Chief of Engineers in documents that are available to the committee, and each of those localities, as disclosed by the hearings during the present consideration of projects, for the past 2 weeks, floods have occurred since August 18, 1941, the date of the last national Flood Control Act, and they have been covered rather in detail by the engineers, and there are available approved projects by the Corps of Engineers for further authorization many projects, including those you mentioned in the Scioto and the upper Ohio Rivers.

Senator BURTON. In this last flood that occurred, at Portsmouth the Ohio came within eight-tenths of a foot of the protective works there, which called the attention of the people to that.

The CHAIRMAN. I have gone into that matter. That is the last flood you have had. They have had one on the Arkansas River since then and this new one was 9 feet higher than in all the history of the country, and already they have had two floods and have another one along on the Missouri River. Your floods were back in December and January.

Senator BURTON. At the first opportunity we have to do any construction work the plans and specifications and every preparatory step will have been taken with regard to the Scioto project so the entire project may be proceeded with promptly. That was the idea when it was originally recommended.

The CHAIRMAN. That is very true, and as you so well stated it is important now when we are undertaking to plan for post-war work that we have available authorizations that will enable these constructive public works such as you have referred to to be resumed, because

as you stated, flood-control work for the duration merely has been stopped, except where they are imperative for national defense. We are very glad to have had your statement Senator. The next witness is Representative Jenkins, of Ohio.

STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS A. JENKINS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO

Mr. JENKINS. Mr. Chairman, I should like to develop what I have to say in three parts. At least one part may not be worthy of the record, but it will relieve me and may be of some edification to you.

The CHAIRMAN. If it will do that we will make that the first part. Mr. JENKINS. You and I, Mr. Chairman, have been pioneers in this Ohio River improvement, but we never could get anywhere without the Army engineers.

On next Thursday, at Akron, Ohio, they will dedicate the first floodwall which has been finally completed in the wonderful Muskingum Valley that may control the Ohio River waters. You had a very important part in that, Mr. Chairman, and I am proud of what I did, and we are doubly proud of what the Army engineers did, and if you want to see a magnificent piece of engineering that has already paid for itself, which cost the Government $5,000,000 and the citizens $700,000. This year we have seen some big floods in the Ohio Valley, and they have all passed us by and did not cost us a dime and we are proud of the work of this committee and the Army engineers. That is No. 1, and if there is any edification in that you are entitled to it.

As to No. 2, those are the projects that Senator Burton spoke so accurately about in the Scioto Valley, and the Senator only omitted one thing that you have to do to meet that condition.

We always stress the wonderful fertility of that section. There are some projects that are proposed that will not result in any special acceleration of food production, but the Scioto Valley is, beyond any question, one of the richest if not the richest corn-producing section in the United States. There are thousands of acres in the valley that every year produce a magnificent crop of corn, and if anybody here is familiar with the food shortage he knows that today the corn shortage is one of the most threatening shortages we have to contend with.

Let me proceed with a project in which my district is very vitally interested, and which no other district that I know of represented by any Congressman here today is interested.

I want to devote myself to a discussion of the Burr Oak Dam, which is located on the headwaters of the Hocking River. The Army engineers are very familiar with it because they have made a report on it and have recommended it.

The CHAIRMAN. We have had hearings on it.

Mr. JENKINS. I will not bother you with a further statement. I have prepared a statement which I will file with the committee, with a copy of the bill which I introduced.

It is a very important project, and I promise you as the proceedings progress I will be here ahead of everybody else because it is a matter which can be carried through without regard to any other big program. It is very deserving in every way, as the Army engineers have recommended.

The CHAIRMAN. We are glad to have your statement, and we will be glad to hear from you at any time. We will be delighted to include the statement to which you refer in the record.

(Mr. Jenkins submitted the following statement:)

REMARKS OF HON. THOMAS A. JENKINS, MEMBER OF CONGRESS, TENTH OHIO DISTRICT, BEFORE THE FLOOD CONTROL COMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JUNE 11, 1943

Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, I appear before your committee today in behalf of the project known as the Burr Oak Dam project, which is located on the headwaters of Sunday Creek, which is a tributary of the Hocking River. This project is located a short distance above Glouster, Ohio, and is a lake and dam project. It is both a flood-control project and a conservancy project. It will impound about 730 acres of water and is estimated by the Army engineers to cost $695,000; $400,000 of this is to be provided by the United States Government and the remainder provided by the municipalities which will be using the water. After the project is constructed the United States Government will supervise and maintain the project as it applies to flood control. The State and local agencies will have supervision over certain features of the activities.

The sponsors of this program have felt that the amount to be contributed by the municipalities is entirely too large. Previous tentative estimates made by engineers indicated that this contribution should be $52,000. An effort will be made to compose these differences and it is hoped that the State conservation department might be induced to assume some of this obligation and also to assume some of the expense of management and control because the project, if and when completed, will probably be the largest and most attractive conservation project in the State of Ohio. I feel sure that the State and local authorities will assume their portion of the expense of the construction and management of this project because it will be a very popular recreational spot as well as a very serviceable one, both from the standpoint of water supply and flood control.

HISTORY OF THE PROJECT

Eight or ten years ago the citizens of Glouster and of the other municipalities below Glouster or Sunday Creek started a movement to develop the possibilities of the Burr Oak section. By reason of their activities I arranged a hearing for them before the United States Engineers at Huntington, W. Va. I had previously requested and secured a survey for portions of the lower Hocking River from its mouth upward into Athens County approximately 50 miles. At the Huntington meeting, the citizens developed their case largely from the standpoint of the recreational value of the construction of a dam and lake. Following that meeting the Army engineers made a survey and found that the advantages of the project were largely recreational as presented by the citizens. At that time the citizens had not stressed the flood-control or water-service advantages of the project as strongly as they might have done. It took considerable time before a final report was made by reason of these activities of the citizens and myself and the Army engineers.

Later it was decided that the committee should again present the case from the standpoint of flood control and water supply, together with conservation. Other meetings were arranged with the Army engineers and more complete and exhaustive surveys were made by these engineers.

An exhaustive hearing was held in Washington early in 1942. The Army engineers at that time made a finding which has been certified to this committee and which is a part of the records of this committee. That recommendation was to the effect that the Burr Oak Dam and Reservoir be constructed at a cost of $400,000 to the Government and $295,000 to other interests.

In order that no delay might be experienced in connection with this matter I introduced a bill in the Seventy-seventh Congress. I also introduced H. R. 354 in the Seventy-eighth Congress. This bill authorizes the construction of Burr Oak Dam and Reservoir at an estimated cost to the United States of $400,000. Attached herewith is a copy of H. R. 354.

[H. R. 354, 78th Cong., 1st sess.]

A BILL Authorizing the construction of certain public works in the basin of the Hocking River, Ohio, for flood control

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Burr Oak Reservoir on the East Branch of Sunday Creek, Ohio, is hereby authorized to be constructed substantially in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in House Document Numbered 762, Seventy-seventh Congress, second session, at an estimated cost to the United States of $400,000.

STATEMENT OF HON. BERTRAND W. GEARHART, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

The CHAIRMAN. The next witness is Mr. Gearhart, of California, and we will be very glad to have a statement from him at this time. Mr. GEARHART. Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen of the committee, if I may, I would like to take you back across the Rocky Mountains again and down to the central basin of California, known in the north as the Sacramento Valley and in the south as the San Joaquin Valley, the two together now becoming increasingly better known as the Central Valley of California.

As you might have surmised from the fact that we are here today, the people in my part of Central Valley, that part known as the San Joaquin Valley, are now and for many years last past have been suffering tremendously either from the lack of water control against floods or the lack of water-control facilities in the times of scarcity.

As the Representative of the nothern half of the San Joaquin Valley, I am primarily interested in the streams that run through my district, but because my district is so intimately affected by the flow of water in streams that have their source beyond the borders of my district my concern must, of necessity, extend beyond by own baliwick.

Heretofore I have introduced bills for the authorization of survey investigations by the Army engineers of streams in Merced, Kern, Kings, Modera, and Fresno Countries, among them bills which, had they been enacted, would have authorized the construction of the so-called Kings River project by either the Army engineers or the Bureau of Reclamation.

The CHAIRMAN. This committee reported the Army engineer's bill during the last session, but no further action was taken.

Mr. GEARHART. Since that time a reapportionment has occurred in California, and one of the affected counties, Kings County, then in my district, has been taken from my district and placed in the district now represented by Mr. Elliott, a member of this committee.

The CHAIRMAN. That bill was introduced by you, as shown by the hearings, and was reported by Mr. Elliott of the committee, but was not considered by Congress because of the war.

Mr. GEARHART. Whatever the reason, it was not considered. I want to point out that even though the Kings River project has become largely a Tenth Congressional District problem, my interest in the project has not waned in the slightest degree. I am here today to express the hope that some legislation for the relief of the people