cooperation necessary for such a project, the plan was not finally recommended in the report.

The CHAIRMAN. That is, for the evacuation of the present community or its relocation?

Colonel GOETHALS. Its relocation.

The CHAIRMAN. But that community would receive benefits from the channelization work recommended in this report for Bear Creek. Colonel GOETHALS. No; it would receive no benefit from the channel work in Morrison.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you any further statement in connection with the project?

Colonel GOETHALS. Only to mention that conditions of local cooperation are standard, except that local interests are required to establish to the satisfaction of the Secretary of War that the flood channel will be protected to assure that its flood-carrying capacity will be adequate for flows up to any of previous record.

The CHAIRMAN. In connection with this project we are glad to have with us Representative Hill who is from the district in which the project is located.

Mr. Hill, do you wish at this point to make a statement? If so, we will be glad to have you do so.

STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM S. HILL, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF COLORADO

Mr. HILL. Mr. Chairman, I do not have any prepared statement. I am very much appreciative of the attitude of the Army engineers and the consideration they have given this project. I know it quite well; I have been over it many, many times. I think I might say one thing that will only take a few minutes, about the power of these mountain floods. It is terrific. The slope is terrific and nothing can stand up against this terrific push of water. I know how the water rushes down Bear Creek, and unless they have some protection, of course everything in the way of the stream goes out. This flood I refer to was terrific. I remember driving over the district immediately after the flood you spoke about, which happened back in 1935, and I want to read to you some of the figures.

On September 2, 1935, just imagine it, 10 inches of water fell in 2 hours' time, and then with the terrific speed that that water hit as it came down the mountain slopes-it knocked out rocks almost as large as this building from the sides of mountains, coming down the hills, and of course any house or any road or anything in the way of that water was crushed.

By straightening up this bend in the river and building up on either side with cement, we can protect this particular place in the

stream.

I appreciate the attitude of the Army engineers and I hope the project will be approved.

The CHAIRMAN. We are glad to have had your statement, Mr. Hill. What is the ratio of cost to benefit in this particular project, Colonel?

Colonel GOETHALS. It is 1 to 1.79.

The CHAIRMAN. It is an excellent ratio.

Colonel GOETHALS. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. As ratios go. In connection with this project I understand the Chief of Engineers concurs in the report of the Board of Engineers on Rivers and Harbors and recommend favorably this project.

Colonel GOETHALS. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. I might say in this connection that we are glad to have with us the Chief of Engineers, General Reybold, and also General Kingman, senior member of the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors.

Are there any further statements or suggestions you wish to make on this project, Colonel?

Colonel GOETHALS. No.

NISHNABOTNA RIVER, IOWA AND MO.

The CHAIRMAN. The next project is contained in the report of the Chief of Engineers, covering the Nishnabotna River, Iowa and Mo., found in House Document 253, Seventy-eighth Congress, first session.

Colonel Goethals, we will be glad to have your statement in connection with this project.

Colonel GOETHALS. The report cited is under authority of the Flood Control Act, approved August 28, 1937. In following the map, you will note that it is oriented so the north is to the left-hand margin and south is to the right, and so on.

The main river is formed by the junction of two streams, known as East and West Nishnabotna Rivers, which come to their confluence just about at the town of Hamburg, Iowa. They rise in Carroll County, Iowa, with a total stream and basin length of approximately 100 miles. Their junction is just 12 miles from the mouth of the main stream where it empties into the Missouri River.

It drains 3,000 square miles and various small towns are in the basin. There is a population of 100,000 with about one-fifth of that amount urban residents. The principal industries are agriculture, livestock raising, dairying, poultry raising, and manufacturing on a relatively minor scale. Five principal railroads, 5 United States highways, and 9 State highways cross the basin, making it important as a transportation center.

Local interests have done a great deal in this region for local improvement, although at the present time there is no existing floodcontrol project.

The CHAIRMAN. No Federal project, you mean?

Colonel GOETHALS. No Federal project. The local people have spent over two and a half million dollars for flood control in the way of reclaiming swamp lands.

The desire on the part of local interests is devoted not only to channel improvement but also to a system of small check dams for flood control and water conservation and the construction of a large storage reservoir on the main stream.

The reservoir and check dams in no way justify themselves under any kind of economic balance. The report finally recommends a plan of improvement to consist of eliminating three very sharp bends just

below the town of Hamburg by straightaway cut-offs, raising and enlarging existing levees, and construction of new levees.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the estimated cost to the Government? Colonel GOETHALS. The Federal Government's estimated cost is $226,000, with local interests performing customary elements of local cooperation and the necessary alterations to the bridge approaches. The CHAIRMAN. What is the ratio of benefit to cost?

Colonel GOETHALS. The ratio of cost to benefit is 1 to 1.05, just justifying it.

The CHAIRMAN. Local interests are required to provide necessary railroad relocations in connection with the project?

Colonel GOETHALS. Yes; any necessary railroad alterations.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any questions in connection with this project?

MISSOURI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES AT KANSAS CITYS, MO. AND KANS.

The CHAIRMAN. The next and final of the individual flood-control projects on the calendar today, is the project at the Kansas Citys, Mo. and Kans., contained in House Document 342, Seventy-eighth Congress, first session. It is rather a considerable project and I will ask you to give the committee full information with respect to previous authorizations in this area, and proposals and the discussion with reference thereto.

Colonel GOETHALS. The document referred to is authorized under the Flood Control Act of the 22d of June 1936; also Senate Commerce Committee resolution of the 29th of April 1941, requesting a review of House Document 238, Seventy-third Congress, second session, with a view to determining whether any modification should be made therein at this time with respect to protection at Kansas Citys and adjacent areas from floods on the Missouri and Kansas Rivers and tributaries entering the Missouri River between approximate Missouri River mile 386 and approximate Missouri River mile 356 on the basis of the 1932 mileage.

This project, Mr. Chairman, was considered briefly in connection with testimony given at the June hearing. The instant report was under may at that time and since it would be available for these hearings request was made in June that the details would be taken

up now.

The CHAIRMAN. And that report was submitted to the House on October 18, 1943, given a document number, and, as a matter of fact, so far as I know, has not been published.

Colonel GOETHALS. On account of its length it is still in the hands of the printer.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee has available the advance sheets. And, as we proceed, I will ask you to give us for the record any project that has been previously authorized at this point so we may have in mind any modifications or changes proposed in the report under consideration.

Colonel GOETHALS. First on navigation: There is a navigation project for the Missouri River which provides for a 6-foot channel from Sioux City to the mouth. While the reach of the river between Sioux City and Kansas City is used to some extent by commercial

navigation the full project dimensions, are only generally available now on the river between Kansas City and the mouth.

A general comprehensive plan for the control of floods in the Missouri River Basin was authorized in the Flood Control Act of 1938 and modified later by that of 1941, to include the Harlan County Reservoir on the Republican River, Nebr., and such other supplemental flood-control works on the Republican River as the Secretary of War and the Chief of Engineers may find advisable. Included in the comprehensive plan are the Harlan County Reservoir, the Tuttle Creek Reservoir on the Big Blue River, and the Kanopolis Reservoir on the Smoke Hill River, which will contribute to the reduction of flood stages at Kansas City.

Of these, the Kanopolis Reservoir was 60-percent completed when further work on the project was deferred on account of a directive of the War Production Board late in 1942. This reservoir is about 375 miles above the Kansas Citys and, when completed, will provide flood control along Smoky Hill and Kansas Rivers with substantial floodcontrol benefits at the Kansas Citys.

The existing project for the control of floods at the Kansas Citys was authorized in the Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, at the estimated construction cost of not to exceed $10,000,000 and estimated cost of lands and damages of $8,000,000, and the general plans for improvements in the various districts of the project are very similar. I will describe them as I proceed.

The CHAIRMAN. Without interrupting you, has any work been done under the authorization of June 22, 1936?

Colonel GOETHALS. Yes. In the district known as the Fairfax-Jersey Creek district, which is now being indicated to you on the map, along that bend of the river, just before the Kansas River comes in to join the Missouri River. That work was under construction when the War Production Board issued its general stop order at the end of 1942, but the work was allowed to proceed to substantial completion so that now it has all been done with the exception of providing some of the pumps for drainage.

The CHAIRMAN. And that is located within the metropolitan area? Colonel GOETHALS. A good deal of it is in the metropolitan area. The CHAIRMAN. And what type of work is that?

Colonel GOETHALS. Levee raising and levee grading.

The CHAIRMAN. And local interests were required to furnish rightsof-way?

Colonel GOETHALS. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. While you are proceeding: What was the desire of local interests-there is a local interest resolution in this report, in the present report which is submitted with respect to the authorized project of 1936 or any modification of that project?

Colonel GOETHALS. The local interests desired that improvements for greater flood protection to the Kansas Citys be constructed. They favored the same plan of reservoirs that has just been described, and they also generally favored the introduction of the so-called Liberty Bend cut-off, which is now being indicated to you.

The CHAIRMAN. Is the Liberty Bend cut-off in the metropolitan area or below it?

Colonel GOETHALS. It is downstream from the metropolitan area of the two cities. The town of Liberty is just off the map above the corner where you will note the bend. Liberty is a separate, small

town.

The CHAIRMAN. Is the Liberty Bend cut-off embraced in this report? Colonel GOETHALS. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. And is provided for?

Colonel GOETHALS. It is provided for in the recommended work.
The CHAIRMAN. Had it been previously provided for?

Colonel GOETHALS. It has been recommended in a report, and authorization has been provided by Congress.

The CHAIRMAN. You may proceed.

Colonel GOETHALS. At this point, Mr. Chairman, I would like to bring out what local interests have done for themselves in this region, and under various other Federal appropriations, because I think it is quite important to state these items.

Some work was undertaken by the Works Progress Administration, with the cooperation of the War Department, acting in a consultant capacity in the Kaw Valley drainage district. The cost of this work in the Argentine, the Armourdale and central industrial districts was about $2,000,000. The Works Progress Administration, in cooperation with the city of Kansas City, Mo., has also done some channel improvement work on the Big Blue River and Brush Creek, at a total cost of $10,100,000.

Most of the previous flood protection work in the vicinity of the Kansas Citys, however, has been done by local interests. The work was started after the disastrous flood of 1903, and the degree of protection afforded by these works varies a great deal, due to the fact that they were not controlled by any sort of a coordinated plan. Nevertheless they made valuable investments totaling some $7,000,000, consisting primarily of levees, flood walls, and highway and railway embankments along both the Kansas River and the Missouri River.

There is another thing that I would like to say about the flood situation: The highest flood stage was in 1844, although lacking any reliable measurement; the highest of accurate record was in 1903. In 1903 the flood caused damage estimated at $23,000,000 with a loss of 19 lives. The flood situation at the Kansas Citys is more serious than any other in the Missouri River Basin in this respect.

I might add to that that there are 13 railroads, 3 airlines, 2 barge lines, 7 Federal highways, and 7 State highways serving the Kansas Citys and all the transportation systems are essentially vulnerable to floods.

Out of the study that has been made comes the plan of improvement for which the report gives a complete financial distribution break-down. With the exception of the work already referred to in the Fairfax-Jersey Creek area, it will be essentially new and it contains rectification of levees in all the principal urban and levee districts on both rivers, and also provides for a cut-off through the Liberty Bend, which is now being indicated to you on the map.

The valley of Big Blue River was carefully investigated but it was found economically unfeasible to provide for any major flood control in that valley with the exception of giving levee protection to the area occupied by the Union Wire Rope Corporation.